Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue


Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

April 26, 1950 - Image 4

Resource type:
The Michigan Daily, 1950-04-26

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

Aid to Education


this writing the House Committee on
abor and Education is in a deadlock
the Truman-sponsored federal aid to
,tion legislation. To many experienced
iittee members, it looks as if there will
o completed legislation on that issue
g the present session of Congress.
May of 1949, the Senate passed then
Inas bill (S-246), which would give
! million to the states to do as they
sed with the money. However, in.
ch the House committee killed the
Inas bill. Bills that have been intro-
d in the House and remain in comn-
ee include thesBurke bill (HR-5939),
h would allot $300 million to public
ol teachers' salaries, the Kern-Werdel
(HR-7214) which would give $136
ion to the "13 needy states," and the
roversial Barden bill (HR-7160) which
ld give $300' million to the public
ols only.
e House Committee, while voting on
dments, has decided that funds for the
s were not to be used for parochial
I bus service, the least of the services
I by the parochial school supporters,
twice rejected attempts to restrict the
o public schools. The contrary nature
ese two moves being obvious, we should
further into the present state of af-
e segment of the Congress, representa-
of the private and parochial school
rs and those Catholics who use the
:es of parochial schools will not let any
ation pass unless it includes aid to the
te and parochial schools. Another seg-
endorsed by liberal groups and many
stant organizations is equally deter-
I to block any aid to private and paro-
schools. Methodist Bishop G. Bromley
m has been especially outspoken for
'rotestant group. These two groups are
ehard that, coupled with those Con-

gressmen who will vote for no federal aid
to education, either group can defeat any
proposed legislation.
Both proponents and opponents of fed-
eral aid to parochial schools have advanced
arguments to support their stands, many
of which are but rationalizations of reli-
gious and political viewpoints. It is not
necessary to list them at this time. But it
is significant that parochial school spokes-
men have recently modified their claims.
They now ask only for what they term
"auxiliary services," which would include
school bus service, school lunch benefits,
health aids and non-religious text books.
Despite the relative merits of the argu-
ments employed by both sides, the pres-
ent situation is such that no schools are
getting any federal monies. This is un-
fortunate since a large majority of the
Congress desires such aid. But aid will
only be realized if the two disputing groups
compromise. Such a compromise was
roughly outlined at the recent "Michigan
Forum" at which time both Rev. Celestin
Steiner of the University of Detroit and
Priof. Preston Slosson approved of a mea-
sure which would give parochial schools
one minor concession, school bus aid. "At
present, school bus aid is the only thing
separating the two factions," said Rev.
Steiner. The constitutionality of such a
measure has already been decided in the
affirmative in the Ease of Everson vs.
The School Board of the Township of
Ewing. The practicality of such legisla-
tion is obvious.-
The above proposal would not only be the
best way of procuring federal aid to educa-
tion, but it would be the method which would
least displease those currently disputing the
issue. Only through the old American tra-
dition of compromise will our schools be re-
vitalized for their important work.
-Harland Britz


Washington Merry-Go-Round

ASHINGTON-Despite the hue and cry
about friends of the Chinese Commu-
s in the State Department, top-secret
iments in the files of the Joint Chiefs
taff will reveal that major decisions on
ra were made, not by State Department
sers but by hard-headed generals.
Che salty seadog, Admiral William
ihy; the sober military planner, Gen-
,l George C. Marshall, and their asso-
tes on the Joint Chiefs pushed the
st far-reaching decision made by the
ited States on the Far East.
hat decision, argued back and forth in
White Housiaw_d thePentagon,- for
ks, was to admit Soviet Russia to a
,nership in Asia. Back of this were
atening military logistics and a lack of
h in the atomic bomb.
he somber argument given President
sevelt by his most trusted military ad-
rs was, "the invasion of Japan will cost
000 American casualties unless a Rus-
attack across Manchuria pins down
y Jap unit on the Mainland."
Simultaneously there were skeptical re-
rts to the Joint Chiefs from General
Jie Groves, chief of the Manhattan
strict, which said the United States
ild not count on the atomic bomb to
dieve major damage. Leading scien-
s opposed Groves, pleaded that the new
apon could end the war, but Groves'
w prevailed at the Pentagon in 1944-
hat was why the Joint Chiefs were pre-
d to make major concessions to Russia
revent overwhelming loss of life in the
orials published in The Michigan Daily
written by members of The Daily staff
represent the views of the writers only.

proposed invasion of Japan. In fact, they
even agreed to give the USSR Railway ac-
cess to Pacific, Baltic Sea and the Persian
Gulf. This was much further that FDR ever
went at Yalta.
* * *
THERE ARE several points to be empha-
sized about the above.
1-The American public has the right
to know it was fooled in the past, and Bu-
denz deserves credit for bringing it out.
2-Most of this happened during the
war when we were allied with Russia and
When millions of people were praying for
the Red Army's success, not only to hasten
the war's end but in order that American
lives might be saved.
3-One harm accomplished by Senator
McCarthy is to make suspect as a Commu-
nist any public official who sided with the
Russians while we were allies. Mrs. Roose-
velt and Harry Truman are strong enough
to take care of themselves. But there are
many little people, unwittingly used by the
Communists and now on McCarthy's list,
who can hardly sleep at night.
They were gullible, susceptible to flat-
tery, and made the mistake of lending
their names to some "front" organizations.
But they were no more Communist than
Harry Truman. However, a speech on the
Senate floor - and they may be ruined.
Therefore it should be remembered that,
despite the McCarthy witch hunt, to have
been friendly to Russia from 1941-46 does
not necessarily mean one was a Communist.
* * *
Perle Mesta, madame Minister to Lux-
umbourg, is back in town after only six
months overseas - officially for consulta-
tion with Secretary Acheson. Real reason,
however, is to see if she can talk President
Truman out of an ambassadorship. After
all, Eugenie Anderson, of Red Wing, Minn.,
is Ambassador to Denmark.

WASHINGTON-It is evident now that
President Trumap will run in the Con-
gressional elections this year against his
old and familiar friend, Dr. George Gallup,
the pollster, in addition, of course, to all the
Republicans in Congress who are Up for re-
Dr. Gallup is out with a survey showing
that Harry Truman's popularity rating just
now is at a low point, with 37 percent ap-
proving his conduct of our government, 44
against, and 19 undecided.
THE President, who always grins when Dr.
Gallup is mentioned, has accepted the
doctor's challenge and his candidacy, so to
speak. The President, who was in a particu-
larly buoyant and jocular mood, chuckled
and recalled how low he was rated in the
Gallup Poll at this same time before the
1948 election.
President Truman has chosen to par-
ticipate widely- in the campaign as Presi-
dent and party leader on behalf of Dem-
ocratic Congressional candidates. He is,
in short, trying to make this a national
election by exerting all the prestige and
influence of the Presidency in a stumping
campaign which opens with his cross-
country tour next month and calls for
another this fall.
It's a difficult chore he has cut out for
himself. It is almost a precedent that the
party in power suffers the loss of seats in
Congress in such a mid-term election. This
is attributed to the fact that the President,
himself, does not head the ticket and is un-
able therefore to translate his influence into
local contests. In such elections local is-
sues are apt to predominate. A Presidential
election always draws out a bigger vote, too,
than mid-term Congressional elections.
rpl E only time in recent years that a party
in power has gained seats in Congress in
this sort of contest was in the 1934 Con-
gressional elections after Franklin D. Roos-
evelt had been in office two years. His New
Deal reform and recovery program still
carried the momentum of widespread popu-
lar support. This has not happened since,
not even in the war years, and constitutes,
so to speak, the exception to prove the rule.
As now envisaged, President Truman's
Congressional campaign this year comes
closer in the score projected for it to
that of Woodrow Wilson in the 1918 Oon-
gressional elections than anything that has
occurred since. The first World War Presi-
dent was seeking a Democratic Congress
and openly asked it, to support his peace
policies. He was rebuffed, and Republi-
cans captured Congress. Since that time
Presidents have been timid about project-
ing themselves too far and too directly
into strictly Congressional elections.
President Truman's plans this year are
in sharp contrast with those of the last off-
year Congressional elections, those of 1946
when Republicans recaptured Congress for
a brief, two-year interlude. The President's
popularity was obviously at such a low point
then-and this was reflected in a continuous
low Gallup rating that dropped to 32 per-
cent just before the election-that his party
strategists kept him completely out of the
campaign. Most Democratic candidates
would not even mention his name. You
would not have known that he was President
and party leader. Instead they still des-
perately chanted the name of Franklin D.
Roosevelt. But nothing availed.
* * *
THERE is another almost unfailing tradi-
tion that when the party out of power
recaptures Congress in a mid-term election,
as the Republican did in 1946, it then goes
on to win the Presidency two years later.
Harry Truman broke that tradition with
his successful "whistle stop" campaign in
1948. He finally had shaken off cautious ad-
visers who were afraid to let him be him-
self, who tried to "protect" him behind for-
mal and dull prepared speeches, and went
back to the folksy, direct type of off-the-cuff

campaigning that had been successful for
him in Missouri.
Consequently, he does not believe in rules
of decorum or political precedents. He is
out confidently to try to break another this
year. As of now, he seems to carry, a heavy
load, with continued tension with Russia,
continued high taxes and big appropriations
to support the cold war, and the attacks on
his domestic social welfare program and his
foreign policy.
But you can't tell. And Dr. Gallup isn't
sure. In his discussion of his latest poll
showing a low Truman ebb, he took pains
to stress the sudden and steep descents and
ascents peculiar to the Truman popularity
chart. He "coppered" himself for any even-
New Books at the Library .. .
Belin, Jean, Secrets of the Surete, New
York, G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1950
Engstrand, Stuart, Son of the Giant, New
York, Creative Age Press, 1950
Kennedy, Margaret, The Feast, New York,
Rinehart & Company, Inc., 1950
Lederer, William J., All The Ship's At Sea,
New York, William Sloane Associates, Inc.,

Facts A bout Phillips

'HE Lecture Committee could have avoid-
ed the furor they brought on by the
iillips decision if they had taken the
ouble to inquire about him to determine
the Regents bylaw applied to him. But
ey took the easy way out and simply as-
med that by being a Communist he must
,turally advocate violence in modifying
e government.
Had the committee bothered to inquire
bout the political philosophy of Dr. Phil-
ips they would have found that he be-
Leves completely in the ability of our
.emocratic institutions to accomplish any
ecessary social change. And that he con-
emns the use of any extra-parliamentary,
indemocratic methods, which in lieu of
heir decision is more than can be said
or the faith of the members of the com-
nittee in democratic instiutions.
The fact that Dr. Phillips admits to being
member of the Communist Party is no
ason to assume that he believes in every
ctrine ever advanced by the Communists.
here are numerous members of other poli-

are available, which is the case in this
country. He went on to say that only in
countries ruled by dictatorships and where
parliamentary processes were not available
would he consent to the use of other
means. And then only for the purpose of
achieving a democratic society.
Dr. Phillips believes the Communist Party
is the only group that is constantly striving
to protect our democratic institutions against
fascistic tendencies that are manifested by
He believes in the superiority of a planned
economy over a free economy, but the only
way he would attempt to bring about a
planned economy in this country would be
via the ballot box. In general his political
and economic objectives for this country
seem practically identical to those of the ad-
vocates of Democratic or Fabian Socialism.
The assertion that an address by Dr.
Phillips would neessarily urge the destruc-
tion or modification of the government
by violence is completely erroneous. And
there are hundreds of addresses on cam-

Back to Top

© 2021 Regents of the University of Michigan