Semety-Third Year
EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNiVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS
"Where Opinions Are Free STUDENT PUBLICATIONS BLDG., ANN ARBOR, MICH., PHONE NO 2-3241
Truth Will Prevail"''
Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in al reprints.
SUNDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 1964 NIGHT EDITOR: MICHAEL SATTINGER
UNDERSCORE:
Objections to Deficit Spending:
Superficial, Unrealistic

r
l ,.
. .
t
rt .
iuj.
i.,
''. '.:
tJ s!
, ': ~
' ;= ,

WHAT KIND OF WORLD?
American Education
Falls Short of Ideals

.1

MANY SCATHING ATTACKS have been
levelled in recent weeks at the gov-
ernment's program of deficit spending.
With the tax cut bill before Congress, the
major critics of government spending and
the national debt have been much more
vocal than usual.
Judd Arnett of the Detroit Free Press
says, deficit spending is "just another ex-
ample of borrowing from the future. We
are saddling future generations with a
debt that is ours." Henry Hazlitt of News-
week notes that "the coming tax cut is a
fraud. There can be no reduction in taxes
without a cut in spending." Warns Ray-
Mond Moley of Newsweek, "Inflationary
deficits are inflationary deficits. The laws
of economics do not change." And David
Lawrence of U.S. News and World Report
says, "deficits are deficits. They certainly
are not balanced budgets. This lesson (the
wisdom of balanced budgets) governments
throughout the history of the world have
had to learn."
ALL OF THESE comments are either
misleading, misinformed, or meaning-
less.
Mr. Arnett's sentiments, for example,
sidestep a fact that is central to the sit-
uation. Ninety-five per cent of the United
States' national debt is owed to United
States citizens-either to individuals or
through corporations. These are the hold-
ers of government bonds. Thus, the United
States in effect owes its national debt to
itself.
Another fact that Mr. Arnett misses is
that the United States has acquired tre-
mendous assets through government
spending. All the roads, parks, buildings
and trained personnel accumulated
through government spending cannot be
ignored. If we are saddling future genera-
tions with this debt (which, remember,
they will owe to themselves) we are also
"saddling" them with this wealth of fa-
cilities and training.
MR. LAWRENCE says that deficits are
deficits, and are certainly not bal-
anced budgets. Since this statement is
partly tautologous and partly elementary,
one must agree with him.
But he says more. Governments through-
out the history of the world, he says,
have found it wise and necessary to bal-
ance budgets. Mr. Lawrence here ignores
the most fabulously successful govern-
ment in world history-nineteenth cen-
tury Great Britain. For almost 100 years
the government of that country used
tremendous deficits to great advantage.

RAYMOND MOLEY says that infationary
deficits are inflationary deficits, and
that the laws of economics do not change.
The first part of this statement is mean-
ingless: the second is correct. But it is
what Mr. Moley does not say that mat-
ters. He ignores the fact that some defi-
cits are not inflationary, that while the
laws of economics do not change, eco-
nomic situations do.
The program of deficit spending at
present employed by the United States
government is geared to changing eco-
nomic situations. When demand for goods
and services in the economy is not equal
to their supply, this program dictates that
the government buy up the excess sup-
ply, by borrowing the money to do so
from its citizens. Since the government is
borrowing, it is operating on a deficit, but
this deficit is not inflationary. The situa-
tion in which it is to be used is basically
deflationary-an excess of supply over
demand - and the borrowing is just
enough to correct the deflationary effects.
When the demand exceeds supply, this
government program dictates that the
government run up surpluses. In this way
it funnels off the excess demand, and
corrects the basically inflationary effects
of such a situation. Thus the coming tax
cut will not be a fraud, as Mr. Hazlitt
says, but will be an attempt to use taxa-
tion as a balance wheel for the economy.
IN THE COMING YEARS, the American
economic situation in all likelihood will
be one of the supply of goods exceeding
the demand for them. The main factors
yesponsible for this will be the onset of
automation and the arrival on the labor
market of the children of the postwar
baby boom. Automation will speed up
economic production of goods and elimi-
nate jobs. The youths arriving on the
labor market will have a hard time find-
ing jobs because of this, and accordingly
will not be able to create gretat demand
for the tremendous volume of goods be-
ing produced. This is where the govern-
ment will have to enter in and correct the
imbalance in the economy.
THE HARD FACTS of economics indi-
cate the basic fallacies in the opinions
of Messrs. Arnett, Hazlitt, Moley, and
Lawrence. Polls indicate that the major-
ity of the nation's people think either
like this or not at all, and thus do not
appreciate or understand what their gov-
ernment is doing. It is imperative that
their ways of thinking change if the
United States is to survive the crisis years
ahead.-ROBERT HIPPLER

* 4'R
" IT-'S AN ILL eAS-T

By ROBERT M. HUTCHINS
THE ANNUAL shocker has come
out. It is the "Digest of Edu-
cational Statistics," 1963 edition,
published by the United States
Office of Education.
It shows where our failure to
work out, or even think about, a
national policy for education has
landed us. Without regard to the
quality of education, and looking
at quantity atone, we have fallen
far short of the high ideals pro-
claimed as long ago as 1785 and
reiterated with sickening self-ap-
plause ever since.
IT HAS often been said that
America's greatest contribution to
the theory and practice of democ-
racy is universal, free, compulsory
education. The idea did originate
in this country. But we have never
given it reality.
For example, as late as 1900
only one Southern state had alaw
requiring attendance at school
all children.
Elementary and secondary edu-
cation is in the hands of 50 states
and 40,520 local school boards.
Who gets educated, how long and
how are questions determined
partly by local resources and part-
ly by local prejudices about race,
taxes and the importance of edu-
cation.
In looking at the current fig-
ures, we should bear in mind the
remark of Sec. of Labor W. Wil-
lard Wirtz that machines can
now "on the average" do what-
ever a high school graduate can
do.
THERE ARE only seven states
in which more than half the pop-
ulation 25 years old or older has
completed four years of high
school. The only large state is Cal-
ifornia, with 51.5 per cent. The
others, which add up to a trifling
proportion of the American peo-
ple, are Alaska, 54.7 per cent;
Colorado, 52 per cent; Nevada,
53.3 per cent; Utah, 55.8 'per cent;'
Washington, 51.5 per cent, and
Wyoming, 52.1 per cent.
On the other hand, there are
10 states in which fewer than
one-third of the population 25
years old or older has completed
four years of high school. They

range from Kentucky, 27.6 per
cent, through Arkansas, Missis-
sippi, Alabama, Tennessee, South
Carolina, West Virginia and Geor-
gia, to Louisiana and North Caro-
lina, 32.3 per cent.
THE SHOCKER is yet to come.
It is that for the country as a
whole only 41.2 per cent of the
people 25 years old or older have
completed four years of high
school.
On the basis of Sec. Wirtz's re-
mark about the capacity of ma-
chines, we must conclude that the
economic future of 59.9 per cent
of our people is bleak indeed. They
can't compete with the machines
already in existence.
We can't say that we haven't
the money to provide adequate
education or to help students who
are without funds. If we take ex-
penditure on elementary and sec-
ondary education as a fraction of
personal income, it works out at.
4.46 per cent for the country as
a whole.
* * *
HERE IS another shocker. Not
a single one of the North Atlantic
states, including Connect:cut, Del-
aware, Maryland, Massachusetts,
New Jersey, New York and Penn-
sylvania,'comes up to this aver-
age. Neither do Illinois, Indiana,
Missouri, Ohio or Wisconsin.
On the other hand-this is the
final shocker for today - Missis-
sippi, Louisiana and North Caro-
lina are above this average.
Yet because of the greater
wealth of a state like Illinois, and
the smaller proportion of children,
Illinois, which devotes only 3.81
per cent of its personal income to
elementary and secondary educa-
tion, spends $526.04 per child, and
Mississippi spends $230.
Money can't guarantee a good
education, but it can help to sup-
ply one. On this basis, an Illinois
child has a chance to get an edu-
cation more than twice as good
as a Mississippi child. This is so
even though Mississippi is more
willing to spend money on educa-
tion than Illinois.
We had better start trying to
get a national policy. In the
meantime, perhaps we should
think more kindly of Mississippi.
Copyright, 1964, Los Angeles Times

t

I

W1It> TH-AT SLDW N) &oVt>

j A FACE IN THE CROWD:
The Mess in the World
By Ronald Wilton, Editor

SIDELINE ON SGC:
Getting Down to Specifics

IT SEEMS THAT Student Government
Council just can't take a hint. When
SGC invited members of the Student Re-
lations Committee of the University Sen-
ate to the Council table two weeks ago,
the discussion centered around the feasi-
bility and desirability of expanding stu-
dent authority over rule-making.
The SRC frankly told Council that
there was no question about the desirabil-
ity of additional student authority and
responsibility in formulating non-aca-
demic rules and regulations. The faculty
members did, however, question the feas-
ibility of such a proposal since Council
failed to offre any plans for implementing
such power if it were granted.
In addition, the SRC pointed out that
the "public image" of the University is
necessarily taken into account by the
administration in formulating any regu-
lation-a factor which students would
just as soon forget about, or at least mini-
mize.
IN LIGHT OF the two-hour exchange
with the SRC, an enlightened and care-
fully considered "approach" should have
been brought to Council Wednesday.
Yet the discussion, which lasted a scant
45 minutes, was purely "old hat," dealing
chiefly with the desirability question-on
which a consensus had obviously been
reached--and only fleetingly with con-

specific authority SGC is seeking. He
that the authority Council asks over "all
non-academic rules and regulations" ob-
viously encompasses more than the rules
listed in the University publication "Stan-
dards for Students"-which consists of
rules concerning women's hours and
drinkign in living quarters.
IN RESPONSE to his query of whether
SGC was also asking for authority over
such regulations as those concerning who
must live in residence halls, Council mem-
bers, led by President Russ Epker, hedged,
saying that this question was unimpor-
tant at the moment.
They also contended that they shouldn't
tie themselves down to "specifics" be-
cause in doing so, they would automati-
cally limit the scope of their power.
WITH THIS ATTITUDE,.Council has few
prospects of producing proposals which
are sound enough to induce the adminis-
tration to grant the even one iota of
responsibility.
Basically, Council's whole problem re-
volves around this notion of responsibil-
ity, which is so carelessly tossed about in
Council discussions but never really ra-
tionally thought out.
Thus far, Council has failed to identify
the mysterious power it is seeking. Yet,
if it can't be defined, how can it ever be
obtained or utilized?

i

WHEN PRESIDENT JOHNSON
came into office it was ac-
knowledged by most people that
his immediate successes would
come in areas of domestic policy.
As a former Majority Leader of
the Senate, Johnson has many
levers at his disposal with which
to influence recalcitrant Congress-
men. It was thought that in the
area of foreign policy the Presi-
dent would need an introductory
period before he would be able
to deal effectively with this na-
tion's problems.
Now President Johnson has had
this period and it appears to have
depressed him. In a speech to
members of the Internal Revenue
Service he revealed his insecurity
in this area by lashing out at
Americans who question the ad-
ministration's handling of foreign
problems. In addition he strength-
ened the arguments of such people
by his use of superficial state-
ments and cliches.
THE MOST DEPLORABLE
statement Johnson made linked
his domestic critics with our ex-
ternal enemies. After giving a
review of some problem areas he
went on to say that ". . . from
time to time you will hear
alarmists and people who like
to jump on their government,
people who like to criticize,
people who find it quite impos-
sible to be affirmative and con-
structive. They will join with
some of our opponents and they
will be almost as much of a
problem as some of our other
enemies."
Mr. Johnson is President; he
can afford to be magnanimous. So
he went on "But that is no reason
for us to lose hope or be con-
cerned. The best wayto treat them
is to just 'God forgive them, for
they know not what they do'."
What is it that these critics do
that they know not, what are
their motivations? Part of the
criticism springs from Republi-
cans who are out on the campaign
trail seeking their party's Presi-
dential nomination. Political op-
position should not be new to
President Johnson; it should hard-
ly cause him to link Republicans
with our enemies.
Other criticism has come from
those Americans who are con-
cerned with what they think
is a decline in American strength
and influence throughout the
world. These are the people who
call for an invasion of Cuba, sup-
port Chiang Kai Shek's call for
an invasion of Communist China
and want an invasion of North
Viet Nam. Are these the people
who will "join with our oppon-
ents?" None of our opponennts
are calling for such measures.
It is the Formosa regime and
right-wing Cuban revolutionaries
among others who advocate such
action. They are friends of ours,
or at least friends of the Cen-
tral Intelligence Agency.
It appears that Mr. Johnson's
remarks were directed against
moderates and liberals who are

speech. "We are concerned about
Panama-that we should have a
dispute with any of our neighbors.
Our school children made a
mistake in raising the United
States flag without raising the
Panamanian flag, but that does
not warrant or justify shooting our
soldiers or invading the zone."
The President fails to realize
that to the Panamanians this in-
cident was not just the escapade
of a few schoolchildren. They saw
it as one more example of a broken
American agreement and arro-
gance on our part. Panama was a
creation of American "Gunboat
Diplomacy" and its economy' par-
ticularly its exports, has been con-
trolled by the United States com-
panies ever since. The sight of the
modern Canal Zone is enough to
raise the ire of most of. Panama's
poverty stricken nationals. Yet the
administration prefers to believe
that the whole incident was creat-
ed by Castro's agents.
INCIDENTS like this disturb
many Americans. They are not
joining our enemies. They are
speaking out, as is their inalien-
able right, because of a concern
for the country which should be
providing much of the world's
moral leadership but isn't. Their
voices are needed. The foreign
policy of a democratic nation
can only be effective if it is
forged out of free discussion and
controversy. If it is dictated by
any one group, be it private or
the national administration,
then we are abrogating the fun-
damental rights held by citizens
of this nation. We are leaving
ourselves open to the persuance
of policies which will make it
impossible for this country ever
to provide moral leadership in a
divided world.
The President thinks that we
are respected and liked through-
out the world. He claimed that
"..regardless of what you hear
and regardless of what some of
the belly-achers say, we are much

beloved people throughout the
world. We are respected and we
appreciate it."
If we are respected it is through
fear of our military might. Recent
anti-American demonstrations in
many parts of the world show that
we are substantially disliked. In
Ghana, for example, demonstra-
tors tried to haul down the Ameri-
can flag and American professors
at the University of Ghana were
expelled from the country. The
riots have been partially explained
by attributing their leadership to
left-wing extremists.
YET THESE PEOPLE would
not find such popular support
for their efforts unless there
already existedpopular resent-
ment against this country some-
times thinking of Ghana as a
Communist satellite and for our
failure to give substantial sup-
port to independence movements
in existing colonial Africa. We
are disliked because our policies
show that we have failed to
identify with the hopes and as-
pirations of millions of people all
over the globe. We are too busy
fighting Communism to have
time for these people. This is
what the "alarmists" referred to
by the President decry.
When Johnson was Majority
Leader under Eisenhower he often
sided with the President on for-
eign policy even when it was op-
posed by Republicans. He believes
that only through a united front
can foreign policy be effective. Be-
cause of this belief he has trouble
understanding Americans who are
unwilling to play follow the lead-
er with the administration. This
is a great pity and a great danger.
If the President is ever going to
forge a foreign policy which will
restore this nation to its rightful
position of moral prominence he
will have to open his ears to these
criers of dissent. If he refuses,
his irritation and insecurity to-
ward American failures will only
grow.

To the Editor:
IT WAS GOOD to hear of the re-
marks by Judge Francis J.
O'Brien before the Young Demo-
crats. In this speech, Judge O'-
Brien took issue with those ad-
vocating civil disobedience to bring
about social change.
It is most important that all
people of all political parties and
pressure groups heed Judge O'-
Brien's advice that all social
change ". . . must be done within
the democratic process." As he
went on to point out, "this process
broke down in 1860 and produced
war which has given us the in-
heritance we must struggle with
today."
AS THE STRUGGLE for equal-
ity of all men has proceeded, it
has become more and more ap-
parent that many civil liber-
tarians have lost respect for the
very law under which they seek
to gain equality. In their struggle
for justice they have chosen the
weapon of civil disobedience which
by its very; nature undermines law
and man's respect for it.
The readiness of civil liber-
tarians to advocate civil disobe-
dience (i.e. the willful and inten-
tional breach of thelaw to bring
about social change) has become
a dangerous threat to the stability
of our democracy and to the im-
mediate cause of civil rights.
Let us state our thesis clearly.
Civil disobedience cannot be jus-
tified in the name of any cause so
long as the process of democracy
is open to all. And in this country,
each citizen, white or black, does
have access to the democratic
process-regardless of what part
of the country he lives in-through
the federal court system.
The one reason our democracy
has worked so well has been the
willingness of our people to re-
spect democracy's built-in ma-
chinery to bring about all change,
both economic and social. We can-
not allow our respect for peaceful
and orderly change to be sub-
verted by the misguided few who
find civil disobedience a dramatic
and expedient strategy to achieve
a goal.
* * *
IF WE are to allow citizens to
disobey the law to advance Negro
rights, we must allow others the
same opportunity to disobey the
law to advance their causes. We
must allow the same lattitude to
the 18-year-old who yearns for
his "'right to vote" or to the
stifled professional who insists
upon his "right to unionize" or
the downtrodden unemployed who
demnds h~hi"rigxht t sfn ', iror

a law, that child is not able to
make a rational decision of wheth-
er to obey his parents or to obey
the law.
The problem was illustrated by
the unlawful action of Detroit's
teenage pickets who struck a
policeman and forcefully resisted
arrest while picketing a Detroit
food market in the name of civil
liberties.
In short, we appeal to the re-
sponsible leaders in the civil rights
movement. We urge that you re-
consider encouraging your people
to break the law. We urge you
rather to use the constitutional
machinery.
For it would be a Pyrrhic victory
indeed if, in achieving equal jus-
tice under the law, the civil
libertarian destroyed that very
law under which he seeks to gain
justice for all.
-David Croysdale, '66L
Thomas Bissell, '65L
Court...
To the Editor:
MR. HARRAH'S editorial arti-
cle "Not New Amendments
But New Court" begins very saga-
ciously indeed. I too am under the
impression that the Supreme
Court blundered somewhat in its
decision forbidding prayer in the
public classroom. However Mr.
Harrah's sagacity is shortlived. In
his effort to account for the blun-
der of our venerable justices, he
comes to the conclusion that the
fault can be found in the justices
themselves, who he dubs "muddled
thinkers." Whether sucn men as
Whizzer" White, the ex -Rbode~s
scholar, and his associates are
"muddled thinkers" or not, I shall
not debate.
What I would like to contend is
Mr. Harrah's solution to clear
the muddled thinkers ouL of the
court and restore justices who
truly reflect the feelings of the
people and the true spirit of the
Cons' itut'cri.' Although this pre.
sum suius idea reflects *- heLuoltcy
of Franklin Delano Roosevelt dur-
ing his administration, and s thus
somuwhat historically inspired.
neverthrlPejs it leaves a to- to be
desired: mainly un mud dle d
thought.
* * *
BUT furthermore, I would like
to point out to Mr. Harrah that
supreme court justices were not
created by the Constitution to "re-
flect the feelings of the people."
Indeed, such an idea was com-
pletely alien to our bespectacled
founding fathers.
These admirable men did, quite
to the contrary, design the justices

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR:
Civil Disobedience
Destroys Stability

PRO MUSICA:
Concise but Unvaried

NOAH Greenberg conducted a
concise New York Pro Musica
ensemble last night as the group
presented a program of Renais-
sance music from Burgundy, Flan-
ders and Spain. The compositions
came chiefly from the late fif-
teenth and early sixteenth cen-
turies and focused on the pre-
dominant religious, romantic and
social themes of the day.
Most of the works featured a
mixed-voice sextet. Especially not-
able were the lyrical duets by the
sopranos, Sheila Schonbrun and
Elizabeth Humes. The diction and
tone control over wide dynamic
ranges were excellent.
IN ADDITION to the works
which utilized both the instru-
mental and vocal ensembles, there

three regions are characterized by
a complex contrapuntal structure,
those from Spain seemed livelier
and, on the whole, more emotion-
ally oriented. The Fiench music,
on the other hand, was more aus-
tere, contained, and static.
IF ANYONE .thinks Arnold
Schonberg's twelve-tone system is
rigid and mathematical, he should
listen to a two-hour concert of
Renaissance music to discover
what real compositional shackles
are like.
Obviously there are those who
enjoy listening to such a lengthy
and unvaried concert, for Rack-
ham lecture hall was filled to
capacity.
But I think that it is not un-
reasonable to ask why the Con-

'1,