anaheim-bulletin 1959-04-29

The Bulletin Editorial Page Wednesday, April 29, 1959 Anaheim (Col.) Bulletin—C-3 Depressed, But Why? Certain elements in Congress are hard at work promoting a multi-million dollar federal handout for States having depressed areas. The theory seems to be that the Cripple Creeks of America have become ghost towns, and along with some less spectral neighbors who are suffering only from bad cases of labor anemia, need a stiff transfusion of taxpayers' blood. As usual, the trouble is that the suggested remedy is a habit-forming brew, and is being prescribed for patients that deserve it the least. As the Council of State Chambers of Commerce pointed out the other day, the federal Area Redevelopment Bill, which was passed by the Senate last month, makes "funds from general tax revenues available for the sole benefit of certain favored areas selected on the basis of arbitrary criteria." Twenty-four States, including California, would receive nothing, although they would contribute to its cost. (California's contribution could reach an estimated $230 millions.) Of the 26 States that would be eligible for aid, only 11 would receive more in benefits than they would pay as their tax share. Of these lucky 11, Michigan and Pennsylvania—two major industrial States—would rake in more than half the total benefits. There is no denying that Michigan is a depressed Twenty-four States, including California, would receive nothing, although they would contribute to its cost. (California's contribution could reach an estimated $230 millions.) Of the 26 States that would be eligible for aid, only 11 would receive more in benefits than they would pay as their tax share. Of these lucky 11, Michigan and Pennsylvania—two major industrial States—would rake in more than half the total benefits. There is no denying that Michigan is a depressed State. Governor Soapy Williams and Walter Reuther have seen to that. Michigan has unemployment not because industry hasn't the money to invest there, but because Soapy's ideological suds have washed it clean of all semblance of fiscal reliability. If the Congressional Depressed Area bleeding hearts have their way, California could well be taken to Soapy's cleaners, too. ROM The Mail Box Dear Sir: A correction to your lead editorial of April 16, 1959 castigating Richard Hanna, 75th Assembly District representative in the California Legislature, should be brought to your attention and to the attention of your readers. Your editorial points out that Assemblyman Hanna voted for a bill that has not yet passed before him. Senate bill ACA No. 8 by O'Connell on Loyalty oath is in committee and has not started its path to the floor of the Assembly. Assemblyman Hanna is not on the committee to which it has been assigned. He is not a co-author of the bill. The error of following the partisan charges in the Orange County Republican Central Committee chairman's attacks on Mr. Hanna voting on the several Loyalty Oath bills now before the legislature is certainly heightened by the technical error appearing in your editorial. Assemblyman Hanna should be praised for his votes to remove from the statute books two acts declared unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court — Section 32 of the Revenue and Taxation Code which required churches to file a loyalty oath in order to obtain a property tax exemption, and Section 23705 of the same code which required civic organizations and veterans to file a loyalty oath for the same exemptions. To quote Mr. Hanna, "We voted to remove some deadwood from our already overloaded statute books. To claim that anyone who so votes is disloyal or commits a 'breach of faith' amounts to the United States Supreme Court is disloyal or has committed a 'breach of faith'. I would like to take this opportunity to challenge my esteemed Republican critic to charge that Earl Warren or any member of the Supreme Court is guilty of disloyalty or has committed a 'breach of faith' in ruling that this act is unconstitutional." Mr. Hanna pointed out that the Legislature almost automatically passes bills repealing statutes which have been declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. Assemblyman Hanna has been a distinguished legislator. In active service in the Assembly since the 1956 Primary Election, Assemblyman Hanna has been returned to Sacramento in two General Elections since that time. A very likeable and congenial Legislator, Assemblyman Hanna now finds himself on the Assembly Rules and Steering Committees. He has served on Education, Agriculture, and the Judiciary Committees and much legislation going through Sacramento has the stamp of Assemblyman Hanna as author, co-author, or sponsor. It behooves those of us in Orange County who are genuinely interested in creative legislation as the means of adapting ourselves to the needs of a rapidly changing population and economic growth picture to support Assemblyman Hanna in his work in Sacramento. Just think! We might have elected a retreater instead of a challenger! Sincerely yours W. Earl Calhoun, chairman Orange County Democratic WEDNESDAY, APRIL today, you have an clear mind. Your men be excellent and you called a "quick study" able to store up information knowledge, making use right time. You are an versationalist and u something important. Speak with authority, who listen to you but your lead are apt to You are impatient with people and rarely bother a second time. You enjoy the beautiful thing and, if a woman of fine clothes, and if fine food and wines, have a romantic tee you enjoy the company posite sex. You men a spot a pretty face and ing your feminine comly dressed and attracti you are fond of home enjoy making your house of social activity in your hood. You should find ness in marriage. Although you appear hard-boiled executive acquaintance, you are ferent at home or when people socially. You sensitive, although you it. Among those born are: Sir Thomas Beechdorner; Thomas Addis physician and scientist worth, U. S. Chief Just Taft, sculptor; the Duington. To find what the store for you tomorrow birthday star and re U.S. Supreme Court — Section 32 of the Revenue and Taxation Code which required churches to file a loyalty oath in order to obtain a property tax exemption, and Section 21705 of the same code which required civic organizations and veterans to file a loyalty oath for the same exemptions. To quote Mr. Hanna: "We voted to remove some deadwood from our already overloaded statute books. To claim that anyone who so votes is disloyal or commits a 'breach of faith' amounts to the same thing as claiming that the author, or sponsor. It behooves those of us in Orange County who are genuinely interested in creative legislation as the means of adapting ourselves to the needs of a rapidly changing population and economic growth picture to support Assemblyman Hanna in his work in Sacramento. Just think! We might have elected a retreater instead of a challenger!" Sincerely yours W. Earl Calhoun, chairman Orange County Democratic Council Strange As It Seems By Elsie Hix SPORTING EVENT SAVED BRITAIN FROM DESTRUCTION! THE SPITFIRE, FAMED FIGHTER PLANE WHICH PROVED SUPERIOR TO NAZI CRAFT IN THE BATTLE OF BRITAIN, 1940, WAS ORIGINALLY DEVELOPED TO COMPETE IN THE SCHNEIDER TROPHY AIR RACE, 1951! CORTEZ DOUBLED THE SPANISH EMPIRE WITH HIS CONQUEST OF MEXICO BUT, BECAUSE OF JEALOUSY, CHARLES LATER REFUSED HIM ADMISSION TO HIS COURT... WHEN HE DIED HE WAS BURIED IN A PAUPER'S GRAVE! THE PROCESS OF MAKING POWDERED MILK WAS PERFORMED BY THE WONGOLS BACK IN THE 15TH CENTury! TAURUS (Apr. 21) Combine business and in a pleasureable happy, social day for GEMINI (May 22-June looking for a new job find exactly what you day. Go after it. CANCER (June 22-June Handle business affairs All technical matters be especially favored. LEO (July 24-Aug. 25 against a health up you will be ready and new business venture. VIRGO (Aug. 24-Sept. friendly, social en month, but don't ove and put a nervous st health. LIBRA (Sept. 24-Oct. some phase of me selling or advertise important new acco. SCORPIO (Oct. 24-Novice care of domestic morning. Spend t socially in pleasant o SAGITTARIUS (Nov. — Make the most of own personal atti things will determ gree of success. CAPRICORN (Dec. 2 This could be a good bargains in the sh necessary purchasing tage. AQUARIUS (Jan. 21—A forward-looking b Make an importan The Profaned Temple Red China was here! TIBET Farmer McCabe Wash Legislation to education around the M Senator Murray of Montana, Metcalf is al One of the ne launch a new izing the e sums of the th to provide i little or no o of operation, ating expendi forward. The is no exception of "play no same psycho individual co home because is so low. Net is signed, and be met. The Murri vides for an over a billion year 1960. T ment, and d cost will ha mately five b you, the taxp California, w year, with n year of that buted among States of the ly be consid relations. F wealthy State ceive over $50 than they c My heart bl Montana, wit mineral wee about $6 mil tributes, so Metcalf aren Your Birthday by Stella WEDNESDAY, APRIL 29 — Born today, you have an active and clear mind. Your memory should be excellent and you are what is called a "quick study." You are able to store up information and knowledge, making use of it at the right time. You are an adroit conversationalist and usually say something important. You usually speak with authority, and those who listen to you but don't follow your lead are apt to regret it. You are impatient with those people and rarely bother with them a second time. You enjoy the beautiful in everything and, if a woman, are fond of fine clothes, and if a man, of fine food and wines. Since you have a romantic temperament, you enjoy the company of the opposite sex. You men are quick to spot a pretty face and like having your feminine company smarter dressed and attractive. Both of you are fond of home life and will enjoy making your house the center of social activity in your neighborhood. You should find great happiness in marriage. Although you appear to be the hard-boiled executive to a casual acquaintance, you are quite different at home or when out among people socially. You are rather sensitive, although you rarely show it. Among those born on this date are: Sir Thomas Beecham, conductor; Thomas Addis Emmet, physician and scientist; Olive Ellsworth, U. S. Chief Justice; Lorado Taft, sculptor; the Duke of Wellington. To find what the stars have in store for you tomorrow, select your birthday star and read the corollary. Farmer McCabe Income taxes are over — thank goodness—however, the threat of upward prices is still present. Naturally this upward swing causes inflation and Congress is giving a lot of thought as to what is the best way to combat this inflation spiral. One New England lawmaker has suggested more new taxes—explaining the more the tax, the less there is to spend, and the less spent, the less sold. Well, this may be right, but, Dog-Gonit, most of us have had our pocket books leached by taxes already... what we need is more money and less taxes. Farler McCabe (all rights reserved) Assignment: Washington by Ed Koterba WASHINGTON—All the Supreme Court justices want to do is shock those old birds. They voted 9 to 0 for segregation. They want to segregate all starlings, English sparrows and owls from their marble pillars on Capitol Hill. The wise old men brought a similar decision to the House Appropriations Committee last year, but our lawmakers turned them down on the grounds that the birds would start playing musical roosts over the remaining buildings on The Hill. Capitol architect George Stewart, for instance, suggested at that time that if those starlings were chased from the Supreme Court Building, they'd likely make the dome their home. Well, things are different this year. Those dirty birds have come over the Capitol anyway. So, it appears that the justices' request for $35,000 will be approved, together with Stewart's request to shock them off his dome. For years, the starlings have been making a mess in Washington, even before what the Republicans called the Truman era. Those things smack in the middle, is a modern-day mystery. I wouldn't know what the answer is, unless maybe it's that they've heard our lawmakers already have another species of bird around there—the kind our taxpayers have been giving 'em. (Copyright, 1959, by United Feature Syndicate, Inc.) THE Family Scrapbook Big Ears Aren't Funny! From the time he was a small baby, Johnny Jones' ears stuck straight out from his head. Following common practice, his parents clapped a cap over his ears or taped them to the side of his head. But this did no good. His ears still "flapped in the breeze," as one not-too-tactful uncle remarked in Johnny's hearing. When he started to school, Johnny was very self-conscious, and though the teachers tried to protect him from the jibes of the other youngsters, they were only parental stakes. Now even for a formula receive it contributed it not raise own system without a crat looking dictating to and where Even the Secu-ducation and federal control visible with it. Like a po-ter the Murray-things for that some e- to increase something independent "goody" in authors than in my Disc- and have Parent-Teach to me demi-this legislation. In order for NEA Association truthful "fairy-beds to use," the hardy system to exporting Washington amount of m-forma with taxes paid for forma to th-as if mon- would come taxes, rather of federal tax Thus the f-a-nalance. Cal- of the nation it pays near total federal difference o-dollars. Another NEA makes agents are coming other States is proper California lars spent national stand- acquaintance, you are quite different at home or when out among people socially. You are rather sensitive, although you rarely show it. Among those born on this date are: Sir Thomas Beecham, conductor; Thomas Addis Emmet, physician and scientist; Olive Ellsworth, U.S. Chief Justice; Lorado Taft, sculptor; the Duke of Wellington. To find what the stars have in store for you tomorrow, select your birthday star and read the corresponding paragraph. Let your birthday star be your daily guide. Thursday, April 30 TAURUS (Apr. 21 - May 21) — Combine business and romance in a pleasureable fashion. A happy, social day for you. GEMINI (May 22-June 21) — If looking for a new job, you could find exactly what you want today. Go after it. CANCER (June 22-July 23) — Handle business affairs adroitly. All technical matters appear to be especially favored. LEO (July 24-Aug. 23) — Guard against a health upset so that you will be ready and fit for a new business venture. VIRGO (Aug. 24-Sept. 23) — A friendly, social ending to the month, but don't overdo things and put a nervous strain on your health. LIBRA (Sept. 24-Oct. 23) — If in some phase of merchandising, selling or advertising, get an important new account today. SCORPIO (Oct. 24-Nov. 22) — Take care of domestic duties this morning. Spend the evening socially in pleasant company. SAGITTARIUS (Nov. 23-Dec. 22) — Make the most of today. Your own personal attitude toward things will determine your degree of success. CAPRICORN (Dec. 23-Jan. 20)—This could be a good day to find bargains in the shops. Do the necessary purchasing to advantage. AQUARIUS (Jan. 21-Feb. 19)—A forward-looking business day. Make an important advance in time that if those starlings were chased from the Supreme Court Building, they'd likely make the dome their home. Well, things, are different this year. Those dirty birds have come over the Capitol anyway. So, it appears that the justices' request for $35,000 will be approved, together with Stewart's request to shock them off his dome. For years, the starlings have been making a mess in Washington, even before what the Republicans called the Truman era. Those winged bombers cluttered up the Treasury Building and tourists' autos with their precision handiwork. Then the General Services Administration administered the electronics skiddoo to them down there, so those feathered friends took their grievance, to the highest law in the land. They carried that grievance so heavily—that it looked like right there in the official testimony—that they had sprained their backs. The testimony, prepared by our justices, read: "The columns at the front and rear of the Supreme Court Building are composed of a light colored marble subject to spraining from the birds." Associate Justice Hugo Black came before the Appropriations Committee the other day to correct the misapprehension. "That," he said soberly, "should be 'staining'." Last year, the justices asked for only $33,000 for the bird-proofing. This year they want $35,000. The increase, it was pointed out, wasn't because of healthier birds, but because the cost of labor went up. Our starlings are 365 times more faithful than those swallows that keep coming back to Capistrano. Our birds return every night. Daytimes they fly out to the Virginia and Maryland suburbs. Just why those birds have ignored the buildings occupied by our Senators and Congressmen, around the outside of the Plaza perimeter, to descend upon the Supreme Court and Capitol Build- baby, Johnny Jones' ears stuck straight out from his head. Following common practice, his parents clapped a cap over his ears or taped them to the side of his head. But this did no good. His ears still "flapped in the breeze," as one not-too-tactful uncle remarked in Johnny's hearing. When he started to school, Johnny was very self-conscious, and though the teachers tried to protect him from the jibes of the other youngsters, they were only partially successful. Gradually, he seemed to get used to his large ears, but it was clear that they were a source of real unhappiness to him. Most parents would do anything possible to correct some physical abnormality that interfered with a child's physical functioning. Club feet, hare' lips and other malformations get early attention. But such a thing as abnormal ears may be almost as disturbing to the child. And since according to the American Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, simple surgery can usually correct the condition, there seems to be every reason to have the job done. There's surely no merit in having to adjust to the joking and ridicule that are sure to come with "flapping" ears. (Copyright, 1959, by United Feature Syndicate, Inc.) Washington Report by James B. Utt Legislation involving federal aid to education this year centers around the Murray-Metcalf Bill. Senator Murray is from the State of Montana, and Congressman Metcalf is also from that State. One of the gimmicks used to launch a new program authorizing the expenditure of vast sums of the taxpayers' money, is to provide in the authorization little or no cost for the first year of operation, with rapidly accelerating expenditures from that point forward. The Murray-Metcalf Bill is no exception. It has the appeal of "play now - pay later," the same psychology that makes an individual contract for a $30,000 home because the down payment is so low. Nevertheless, a contract is signed, and the obligation must be met. The Murray-Metcalf Bill provides for an expenditure of a little over a billion dollars for fiscal year 1960. That's the down payment, and by 1963 the annual cost will have risen to approximately five billion dollars, of which you, the taxpayers of the State of California, will pay $550 million a year, with nearly $100 million a year of that money being distributed among thirty-three other States of the Union who can hardly be considered to be our poor relations. For example, the wealthy State of Texas would receive over $80 million a year more than they contribute to the fund. My heart bleeds for them. Even Montana, with its great timber and mineral wealth, would receive about $6 million more than it contributes, so Messrs. Murray and Metcalf aren't doing so badly. States. The truth is that California should improve its own educational standards. For example, each year I have the applicants for West Point and Annapolis take a qualifying Civil Service examination before I make the appointments. In 1955, 24 high school graduates from my District, who felt they were qualified for the academies, took the examinations. Of these, 13 made a grade of 70 or above; 11 had a grade of under 70, with a low of 44. In 1956, 19 took the examination, and only 6 had a passing grade of over 70, and 13 were below 70. In 1957, 25 took the examination, and 8 had a grade of 70 or above. In 1958, 43 took the examination and only 16 had a grade of 70 or above. You will see that on an average, only about one-third had a passing grade. Of course, among these there were some exceptional students making grades as high as 91 and 93. I checked with my Colleague from the Fifth District of Texas, whose applicants took exactly the same examination, and taking the results from the year 1958, 52 took the examination and only 18 had a grade of 70 or above. This ratio is not much different from our own. The students are less at fault than the teachers. A political science teacher in one of our California high schools, while talking to his Congressman, made the remark that he was happy the Congressman would not have to run for re-election in 1960, as he had just been elected in 1958 for a six-year term. Surely, a political science instructor in a high school should be faithful to his duties. now even if the State of California received back as much as it contributed, why, oh why, should it not raise this money under its own system of taxation and spend it without a Washington bureaucrat looking over its shoulder and dictating to our State how, when and where to spend this money? Even the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare admits that federal control of curricula is quite visible within the approximate future. Like a political party platform, the Murray-Metcalf Bill has something for everybody. It provides that some of this money shall go to increase teachers' salaries, something that each State can do independently. But this little "goody" in the bill assures the authors that every school teacher in my District will write to me and have the members of the Parent-Teachers Association write to me demanding the passage of this legislation. In order to confuse the public, the NEA (National Educational Association) has provided an untruthful "fact-sheet" for its members to use. In order to disillusion the hardy souls who are opposed to exporting California dollars to Washington, they compare the amount of money returning to California with the amount of income taxes paid by the State of California to the federal government, as if money spent for schools would come solely out of income taxes, rather than out of the total of federal taxes paid by California. Thus the figure is brought into balance. California pays 8 per cent of the national income taxes, but it pays nearly 11 per cent of the total federal tax revenue—a slight difference of more than two billion dollars. Another argument which the NEA makes to me through its agents is that so many children are coming to California from other States with low IQ's that it is proper that the taxpayers in California should have their dollars spent to improve the educational standards of these other year, with nearly $100 million a year of that money being distributed among thirty-three other States of the Union who can hardly be considered to be our poor relations. For example, the wealthy State of Texas would receive over $90 million a year more than they contribute to the fund. My heart bleeds for them. Even Montana, with its great timber and mineral wealth, would receive about $6 million more than it contributes, so Messrs. Murray and Metcalf aren't doing so badly. Now even if the State of California received back as much as it contributed, why, oh why, should it not raise this money under its own system of taxation and spend it without a Washington bureaucrat looking over its shoulder and dictating to our State how, when and where to spend this money? Even the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare admits that federal control of curricula is quite visible within the approximate future. Like a political party platform, the Murray-Metcalf Bill has something for everybody. It provides that some of this money shall go to increase teachers' salaries, something that each State can do independently. But this little "goody" in the bill assures the authors that every school teacher in my District will write to me and have the members of the Parent-Teachers Association write to me demanding the passage of this legislation. In order to confuse the public, the NEA (National Educational Association) has provided an untruthful "fact-sheet" for its members to use. In order to disillusion the hardy souls who are opposed to exporting California dollars to Washington, they compare the amount of money returning to California with the amount of income taxes paid by the State of California to the federal government, as if money spent for schools would come solely out of income taxes, rather than out of the total of federal taxes paid by California. Thus the figure is brought into balance. California pays 8 per cent of the national income taxes, but it pays nearly 11 per cent of the total federal tax revenue—a slight difference of more than two billion dollars. Another argument which the NEA makes to me through its agents is that so many children are coming to California from other States with low IQ's that it is proper that the taxpayers in California should have their dollars spent to improve the educational standards of these other year, with nearly $100 million a year of that money being distributed among thirty-three other States of the Union who can hardly be considered to be our poor relations. For example, the wealthy State of Texas would receive over $90 million a year more than they contribute to the fund. My heart bleeds for them. Even Montana, with its great timber and mineral wealth, would receive about $6 million more than it contributes, so Messrs. Murray and Metcalf aren’t doing so badly. Now even if the State of California received back as much as it contributed, why, oh why, should it not raise this money under its own system of taxation and spend it without a Washington bureaucrat looking over its shoulder and dictating to our State how, when and where to spend this money? Even the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare admits that federal control of curricula is quite visible within the approximate future. Like a political party platform, the Murray-Metcalf Bill has something for everybody. It provides that some of this money shall go to increase teachers' salaries, something that each State can do independently. But this little "goody" in the bill assures the authors that every school teacher in my District will write to me and have the members of the Parent-Teachers Association write to me demanding the passage of this legislation. In order to confuse the public, the NEA (National Educational Association) has provided an untruthful "fact-sheet" for its members to use. In order to disillusion the hardy souls who are opposed to exporting California dollars to Washington, they compare the amount of money returning to California with the amount of income taxes paid by the State of California to the federal government, as if money spent for schools would come solely out of income taxes, rather than out of the total of federal taxes paid by California. Thus the figure is brought into balance. California pays 8 per cent of the national income taxes, but it pays nearly 11 per cent of the total federal tax revenue—a slight difference of more than two billion dollars. Another argument which the NEA makes to me through its agents is that so many children are coming to California from other States with low IQ's that it is proper that the taxpayers in California should have their dollars spent to improve the educational standards of these other year, with nearly $100 million a year of that money being distributed among thirty-three other States of the Union who can hardly be considered to be our poor relations. For example, the wealthy State of Texas would receive over $90 million a year more than they contribute to the fund. My heart bleeds for them. Even Montana, with its great timber and mineral wealth, would receive about $6 million more than it contributes, so Messrs. Murray and Metcalf aren’t doing so badly. Now even if the State of California received back as much as it contributed, why, oh why, should it not raise this money under its own system of taxation and spend it without a Washington bureaucrat looking over its shoulder and dictating to our State how, when and where to spend this money? Even the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare admits that federal control of curricula is quite visible within the approximate future. Like a political party platform, the Murray-Metcalf Bill has something for everybody. It provides that some of this money shall go to increase teachers' salaries, something that each State can do independently. But this little "goody" in the bill assures the authors that every school teacher in my District will write to me and have the members of the Parent-Teachers Association write to me demanding the passage of this legislation. In order to confuse the public, the NEA (National Educational Association) has provided an untruthful "fact-sheet" for its members to use. In order to disillusion the hardy souls who are opposed to exporting California dollars to Washington, they compare the amount of money returning to California with the amount of income taxes paid by the State of California to the federal government, as if money spent for schools would come solely out of income taxes, rather than out of the total of federal taxes paid by California. Thus the figure is brought into balance. California pays 8 per cent of the national income taxes, but it pays nearly 11 per cent of the total federal tax revenue—a slight difference of more than two billion dollars. Another argument which the NEA makes to me through its agents is that so many children are coming to California from other States with low IQ's that it is proper that the taxpayers in California should have their dollars spent to improve the educational standards of these other year, with nearly $100 million a year of that money being distributed among thirty-three other States of the Union who can hardly be considered to be our poor relations. For example, the wealthy State of Texas would receive over $90 million a year more than they contribute to the fund. My heart bleeds for them. Even Montana, with its great timber and mineral wealth, would receive about $6 million more than it contributes, so Messrs. Murray and Metcalf aren’t doing so badly. Now even if the State of California received back as much as it contributed, why, oh why, should it not raise this money under its own system of taxation and spend it without a Washington bureaucrat looking over its shoulder and dictating to our State how, when and where to spend this money? Even the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare admits that federal control of curricula is quite visible within the approximate future. Like a political party platform, the Murray-Metcalf Bill has something for everybody. It provides that some of this money shall go to increase teachers' salaries, something that each State can do independently. But this little "goody" in the bill assures the authors that every school teacher in my District will write to me and have the members of the Parent-Teachers Association write to me demanding the passage of this legislation. In order to confuse the public, the NEA (National Educational Association) has provided an untruthful "fact-sheet" for its members to use. In order to disillusion the hardy souls who are opposed to exporting California dollars to Washington, they compare the amount of money returning to California with the amount of income taxes paid by the State of California to the federal government, as if money spent for schools would come solely out of income taxes, rather than out of the total of federal taxes paid by California. Thus the figure is brought into balance. California pays 8 per cent of the national income taxes, but it pays nearly 11 per cent of the total federal tax revenue—a slight difference of more than two billion dollars. Another argument which the NEA makes to me through its agents is that so many children are coming to California from other States with low IQ's that it is proper that the taxpayers in California should have their dollars spent to improve the educational standards of these other year, with nearly $100 million a year of that money being distributed among thirty-three other States of the Union who can hardly be considered to be our poor relations. For example, the wealthy State of Texas would receive over $90 million a year more than they contribute to the fund. My heart bleeds for them. Even Montana, with its great timber and mineral wealth, would receive about $6 million more than it contributes, so Messrs. Murray and Metcalf aren’t doing so badly. Now even if the State of California received back as much as it contributed, why, oh why, should it not raise this money under its own system of taxation and spend it without a Washington bureaucrat looking over its shoulder and dictating to our State how, when and where to spend this money? Even the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare admits that federal control of curricula is quite visible within the approximate future. Like a political party platform, the Murray-Metcalf Bill has something for everybody. It provides that some of this money shall go to increase teachers' salaries, something that each State can do independently. But this little "goody" in the bill assures the authors that every school teacher in my District will write to me and have the members of the Parent-Teachers Association write to me demandingthe passageofthislegislation. In order to confusethepublic,theNEA(NationalEducationalAssociation)hasprovidedanuntruthful“fact-sheet”foritsmemberstouse.inothersystemoftaxationandspenditwithoutaWashingtonbureaucratlookingoveritsshoulderanddictatingtoourStatehow，whenandwheretocspenditspecificbills.allofwhichwerependingintheLegislatureisfarremovedfromtheTax-payer.Everytimethefederalgovernmentattemptstoimposefederalstandardsupontheactivitiesoftheseveralstates.itisactuallyaninsulttothepeopleofthosestates,becauseitissimplysayingtothemthattheydonotknowwhattheywantorhowgetit.IffonlytheAmericantaxpayerwillrealizethatthefederaltaxdollarcomesfromexactlythesamepeoplethatpaythecity,countyandstatetaxdollar,theywouldstopaskingfor“free”federalmoney.Abbewall all,thecitizensofthisRepublicmustrememberthataGovernmentwhichisbigenoughtogivethemeverythingisalsobigenoughtogakefromthemeverythingtheyhave. VISITORS:It wasapleasuretowelcomethefollowingvisitorstotheWashingtonOffice:Mrs.MerwinWagner,Plaacentia;Mr.andMrs.RobertS.Barnes,新portBeach;Mr.JamesH.Kindel,jr.,MissMaryJoCoombs,Mr.EdwardP.Barrett,Mrs.ErnestC.Phillips,SantaAna;Mr.R.B.Dick)PhillipsAnnandale,Virginia(formerlyofLemonHeights);Mr.WalterB.Chaffee,Mr.andMrs.Z.M.(Dusty)Rhodes,Fullerton;andMr.PhilipH.Powers.Oceanside. CROSSWORD PUZZLE Answer to Yesterday's Puzzle ACROSS 1-Deface 2-Shut notisly 3-Kill 4-Number 5-Domesticate 6-Conceal 7-Unit of Siamese currency 8-Those who have forsaken their faith 9-Late 10-Vessel 11-Direction 12-Lifting device 13-Level 14-Leave out 15-Dutch town 16-Tardy 17-Irried 18-Glue's name 19-Hall 20-Depression 21-Meat of calf 22-Man's packname 23-Above 24-Communists 25-Arabia (poet.) 26-Remedies to counteract potions 27-Insect 28-Leak through 29-Actuate 30-Owthance 31-Middle seeds 32-Female sheep (nL) 33-Abstract being DOWN 1-Protective fitch 2-Pilester 2-Pell back 4-Remains 5-Once around track 4-Mane's name 5-Interface MAG COMA SHAW IDE OVAL IOTA TENEMENT GLEN EVEN ERNEST EGRET TREE DEBAR SWEETENS ANIT WEURS LOO MEETINGS VETO ERAS MAVEN GARNET COLA ANAAS ODOMETER POSE RITE ERA SAPS SEERR DEW 47-Edible seed 50-Born 51-Afternoon party 52-Girl's name