Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Source Description
This file contains mostly copies of his Reagan's newspaper columns with some later materials relating to his presidential campaign.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
324358995
label
Reagan, Ronald (2)
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
324358995
contentType
document
title
Reagan, Ronald (2)
description
This file contains mostly copies of his Reagan's newspaper columns with some later materials relating to his presidential campaign.
citationUrl
collections
Gerald L. Warren and Margita E. White Files
Gerald Warren's and Margita White's Subject Files
subjects
Press
Presidential campaign, 1976
International relations
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
324358995
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1976-01-31
month
1
year
1976
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1975-02-01
month
2
year
1975
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
0ea05b19803b639e
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box 22, folder "Reagan, Ronald (2)" of the Gerald R.
Warren and Margita E. White Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Copyright Notice
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of
photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald R. Ford donated to the United
States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.
Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public
domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to
remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid
copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
f
Sandi
then file
THE RONALD REAGAN COLUMN
(For Release In Papers Of Friday, June 13, And Thereafter)
By RONALD REAGAN
Copley News Service
Enough U.S. senators are so worried about Henry
Kissinger's apparent determination to play "let's make a
deal" over the Panama Canal that a Senate resolution (No.
301) by Sen. Strom Thurmond, reaffirming U.S. sovereignty
over the canal, now has 35 co-sponsors, enough to block
ratification of any new treaty.
Here's the background: in 1903, shortly after
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
Panama declared itself a republic, the United States
entered into a treaty, acquiring sovereignty over the land
through which the Panama Canal was to be dug and operated.
In exchange, the United States agreed to pay Panama an
annuity for its loss of revenue from the Panama Railroad.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 2
In a 1907 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court reaffirmed
U.S. sovereignty over the zone.
On Oct. 11, 1968, the Marxist-dominated military of
Panama overthrew the government of anti-Communist President
Arnulfo Arias and prevented newly elected President Max Del
Valle from taking office.
The next day, the military (working closely with the
Communist Party of Panama) shut down Congress, abolished all
political parties except the Communist, began censoring news
media and removed the peoples' civil rights.
That done, they began a steady drumbeat of
propaganda (abetted by the Soviet press) to achieve their
aim of "Panamanianization" of the canal. This, too, was in
line with Soviet objectives: disruption of U.S. maritime
supply lines and ultimate Soviet control of the world's
waterways.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 3
The de facto dictatorship of Gen. Omar Torrijos has
tried, in recent years, to implant the ideas that the
Canal Zone is really Panamanian territory and the U.S.
presence represents "colonialism."
Torrijos & Co. have clamored for a new treaty
whose aim would be surrender of U.S. sovereignty. They
overlook the fact that Panama's own constitution makes
their ratification of such a treaty illegal.
On June 23 last year, the de facto envoy of Panama
to Washington told a U.S. television audience that if
treaty negotiations were not successful "there will be no
canal for nobody, not for us, not for the United States,
not for the world.' "
Kissinger apparently took the sabotage threat
seriously.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 4
Though he isn't talking about it, he is reported
to be studying plans to turn over the Canal Zone's police
and fire protection and postal service to Panama, the
idea being that this will somehow damp down the anti-U.S.
campaign.
Though transfer of police, fire and postal services
alone may seem like a mild move, it has serious
implications for the future operation of the canal. Police
and fire protection would be essential in the event of
civil disturbances or sabotage. In the matter of postal
services U.S. citizens in the zone would have their mail
subjected to monitoring by Marxist Lt. Col. Manuel
Noreiga, Panama's G-2.
If Kissinger were to put together such a deal as a
prelude to a new treaty, it's likely U.S. citizens rapidly
would leave the zone.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 5
Their presence there is vital. Keeping the canal
open and operating is a difficult and exacting job as it is.
It is hard to believe that partial Panamanianization
of the Canal Zone wouldn't lead to its loss to the United
States, for both commerce and military security purposes.
The U.S. Department of Commerce estimates that the loss of
the canal would mean a 71 per cent increase in average
annual consumption of fuel by carriers of U.S. foreign
trade; a 31-day increase in average shipping time; a $923
million annual increase in the total delivered price of
exports; and a $583 million annual increase in the total
delivered price of all imports.
Our treaty with Panama granted us the Canal Zone in
perpetuity. Giving that up would make about as much sense
for us as it would for the USSR to invite the U.S. 6th Fleet
to roam at will around the Black Sea.
6/9/75
-30-
mc
Jerry waven
THE RONALD REAGAN COLUMN
(For Release In Papers Of Friday, June 6, And Thereafter)
By RONALD REAGAN
Copley News Service
Despite the economic slump of recent months, the
federal "boondoggle" business is still booming.
Awhile back, the federal government gave a grant
to some researchers to study something called "The
Demography of Happiness." They wanted to find out
why some people lead happier lives than others. They
discovered that younger people were happier than older
people. Those with money were happier than those who
GERALD ? FORD
were broke; and healthy people were happier than ill
people. The cost: $249,000. Nearly a quarter of a million
dollars to find out that it's better to be young, rich
and healthy than old, sick and poor!
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 2
In another case, a magazine receiving funds from
the National Foundation on the Arts published a
one-word poem, for which it paid the author $500. The
word was "Lighght." That would be hilarious if it
weren't for the fact that some Americans go to bed
hungry or without jobs while the federal arbiters of
taste hand out frivolous gifts from the public purse.
The Food and Drug Administration paid a Buffalo,
N.Y., firm to study why children fall off tricycles.
The research engineers made these profound conclusions:
children fall off tricycles because they lose
their balance or collide with an object! They also
learned that children's legs grow longer as they grow
older, thus complicating tricycle riding.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 3
The purpose behind the study was to help the
FDA
decide if it should issue safety design
standards for tricycles. If the government has any
business considering such things, it should only be
after someone has shown that a lot of kids are injured
riding tricycles. No word of such a problem preceded
the study.
The venerable Smithsonian Institution (federally
funded, of course) puts in for some of the most exotic
boondoggles. One shopping list it sent Congress
included the following research projects: Reproductive
Rhythms of Catfish in India; How Fishing Boat Crews
Cause Conflicts in Yugoslavian Peasant Towns; and a
study of Polish Bisexual Frogs.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 4
Such studies may serve a larger, more serious
purpose, but one can only wonder why private research
sources, colleges and universities aren't taking these
projects on for themselves. The frog study, for
example, was intended to test some new methods of
distinguishing between one species of animal and
another. That seems like a legitimate objective of
scientific research, but is that what we have a federal
government for?
While the auto and housing industries decline,
there is a relatively new cottage industry that is
thriving. It takes advantage of federal boondoggles
in the name of science and culture.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 5
It consists of a small army of bright wordsmiths
who will - - for a fee--help prospective grantees dream
up serious-sounding titles and rationale for their
projects in order to impress Congress and federal
agencies.
That Congress takes such stuff seriously at all
is a measure of how far we have strayed from the original
purposes of federal government. There are a few
congressmen who battle the boondoggles, who say, in
effect, "Hey, wait a minute- what business does government
have paying for this? Where's the benefit to the
taxpayers?" If only we had a few hundred more like
them.
-30-
6/2/75
js
THE RONALD REAGAN COLUMN
(For Release In Papers Of Friday, May 16, And Thereafter)
By RONALD REAGAN
Copley News Service
When the Socialists came out ahead in Portugal
elections, many in the West breathed a sigh of relief that
the "moderates" had won. Everything seemed rosy, but it's
turned out rosy Red.
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
The Communist Party ran a poor third--about 12 per
cent of the vote- behind the Socialists and the Popular
Democratic Party (PDP), but all are essentially different
denominations of the same religion--socialism. The young
officers of the ruling Armed Forces Movement (AFM) had
already outlawed the potentially most effective centrists
and conservatives (and a few Maoists).
MAY 19 1975
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 2
The AFM allowed the election to take place only after
extracting promises from the remaining parties to abide by
its forthcoming constitution, and to enforce AFM rules for
at least five years. In other words, the AFM made sure the
election would be meaningless. It was, instead, a sort of
pacifier for the people; a nationwide public opinion poll.
No doubt some supporters of the banned center-to-right
parties voted for the Socialists or the PDP over the
Communists on the grounds they were "least worst. "
The Soviet Union has been pouring an estimated $10
million a month into Portugal to support its small but
well-organized Communist Party. With this horn of plenty
the Communists hired brigades of street fighters to
intimidate non-Communist voters and break up their rallies
and meetings.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- - 3
The Soviet investment is paying off: the Communist
Party has gained control of the press and the labor union
movement--classic Red strategy.
As if to further nullify the election (the results
of which they must surely have been able to predict) the
Soviets have had their local party sonorously warn the
Socialists to heed the word of the AFM. The AFM, in turn,
they hope to dominate from within, using their supporters
among its 200 or SO members as stalking horses.
Recently in London, one well-placed observer of the
Portuguese scene told me that the NATO nations should
ençourage the more moderate members of the AFM to assert
themselves. Give them a chance to let democracy flower,
he seemed to be saying, it's been a long time coming. But,
it's probably too late.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 4
Already, the banks and insurance companies have been
nationalized and more businesses are likely to follow. The
United States has been told its base in the Azores may not
be used to resupply the Israelis in the event of Mideast
conflict. The Soviets have gained permission for their
"fishing trawler" fleet to use a Madeira seaport. Can
Soviet naval base rights be far behind?
Perhaps all this is part of a national intoxication
following last year's coup against the decade-old
dictatorship, but the Portuguese seem to be heading, perhaps
unwittingly, toward another one--a Red one.
Looking ahead, two likely scenarios add up to a bad
news-bad news version of the good news-bad news story. In
one, the USSR does a Czechoslovakia-type takeover, through
subversion, to make Portugal a satellite.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 5
That would be bad, but the second scenario is
even worse, and current evidence suggests it's the more
probable one. In it, Portugal remains ostensibly
independent, with a left-wing military dictatorship, but
with the USSR acting as stage manager. Communists already
hold several key government posts. On stage, Portugal,
appearing independent, would remain in NATO--our first line
of defense--but in reality an ally not of the West but of
the USSR.
This would have a profound effect among NATO allies.
Italy is shaking already, with a large, powerful Communist
Party. Spain would face the prospect of internal strife
with guerrillas infiltrating from Portugal.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 6
Meanwhile, the United States does nothing to
encourage the majority of Portuguese who don't want to be
Communists. Indeed, the climate in the United States seems
to be dominated by "liberals" who find American support of
right-wing dictators intolerable but have yet to utter a
peep about the left-wing military dictators in Portugal.
-30-
5/12/75
mc
THE RONALD REAGAN COLUMN
(For Release In Papers Of Friday, April 25, And Thereafter)
By RONALD REAGAN
Copley News Service
The bureaucrats, aided by Ralph Nader and a few
determined liberal senators, are out to fleece the
taxpayers by creating yet another federal bureaucracy.
This one will be called the Agency for Consumer
Advocacy if Senate Bill 200 goes all the way through
Congress and is signed by the President. It is a rehash
of the Consumer Protection Agency bill defeated last year
--and that one might as well have been named the Consumer
Ripoff Bill.
FRED 67V836 LIBRARY
There are existing federal agencies with the
responsibility for preventing consumers from being harmed
by bad products or trade practices.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 2
These range from the Federal Drug Administration to
the Consumer Product Safety Commission. Congress has it
within its power to pass corrective legislation to improve
the workings of these agencies any time it wants to.
Why then a new agency which, in effect, would
compete with existing agencies, challenging their actions
and causing a great deal of heat but generating very little
light? One thing is certain: it would spawn a large new
bureaucracy and it would set its own rules and regulations.
It would have the ability to harass businesses large
and small, something that will inevitably cost you more
money in the form of increased prices for goods and services.
It is doubtful that even the bill's sponsors think
the new agency, if created, would do much real good, since
it won't plow any really new ground.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 3
What it will do is please some left-liberal
constituents here and there, as well as the professional
consumerists who thrive on finding more and more ways to
tighten the federal vise on your life. These are the folks
who are obsessed with the need to control every aspect of
the marketplace, leaving little or nothing to the cycles of
supply and demand which, till now at least, have served us
best when left pretty much alone.
There is scant evidence of public clamor for the
agency. In fact, a recent poll showed a majority of
Americans believe they have ample access to redress of
market grievances now.
Since consumers don't speak with a single voice,
critics of the bill ask how can a federal agency develop a
consensus? The answer is, it can't.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 4
It will, instead, reflect the opinions of the
bureaucrats, the more strident consumerists and the
politicians who created it.
Creating a new Agency for Consumer Advocacy, when
already there are many of them but under different names, is
a little like the situation a retail chain might find
itself in if one of its own stores began to do poorly. In
that case, it would take a good look at pricing, inventory,
displays, advertising and personnel, and then make changes.
What it certainly wouldn't do is open a competing store
across the street.
Yet, that's just what Congress is about to do--all
at your expense.
-30-
4/21/75
pg
APR 18 1975
THE RONALD REAGAN COLUMN
(For Release In Papers Of Friday, April 18, And Thereafter)
By RONALD REAGAN
Copley News Service
LONDON -- While U.S. congressmen are reporting
"overwhelming" voter opposition to further military aid to
South Vietnam and Cambodia, British political leaders and
press are expressing mounting concern that the United
States has created a serious credibility gap for itself among
its Western allies.
American voter reaction to the rapid collapse of our
Southeast Asian allies is not surprising, considering the
deep war weariness throughout the country and the aggravated,
breathless and often distorted reports from the battle zone
itself.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 2
The American people have been given a steady diet of
misinformation with very few actual facts for a decade or
more. Now, Congress, being by nature more eager to follow
than to lead, is probably happy to have at least what appears
to be definitive voter response to the issue, whatever it is.
Congressmen tend not to like to cast votes on the floor when
they are uncertain about their constituents.
But there is no mistaking the fact that here America's
Southeast Asia policy is viewed as a failure and the
American visitor is asked constantly if the Asian debacle
means that America might not continue to honor its commitments
in Europe.
The undercurrent is one of questioning American
leadership which has been taken for granted for so long by
the British and the Western Europeans.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 3
Our failure to provide the South Vietnamese with the
replacement arms, ammunition and fuel they have needed and
now need amounts to a bad case of American myopia and a
cause of celebration in Moscow and Peking.
Considering past patterns of behavior, the Soviets are
likely to put pressure on the United States and its allies
elsewhere now, since they are determined to nudge their
perimeter of influence ever further away from their home
territory. Our mettle having been tested and found wanting
in Indochina, the Soviets may be encouraged to try
us
again soon.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 4
Although it's probably fair to say that the British
have no specific interest in South Vietnam and Cambodia per
se, they are very worried about the possibility of one of
their oldest allies, Portugal, drifting into the Soviet
orbit, and American failure to aid the Southeast Asian
allies has symbolic importance here that cannot yet be
fully measured.
Our abandonment of our allies and our failure to
honor the assurances we gave them in signing the Paris
accords already have influenced the collapse of the recent
Israeli-Egyptian talks, and yet may prove to be the most
haunting mistake the United States has made in nearly 200
years.
-30-
4/14/75
mc
APR 14 1975
THE RONALD REAGAN COLUMN
(For Release In Papers On Friday, April 11, Or Thereafter)
By RONALD REAGAN
Copley News Service
LISEASE GERALD FORD
Most Americans are conservationists and
environmentalists to some extent. Few want to see our
scenic wonders spoiled, our waters polluted, our natural
resources wasted.
Yet, from time to time, some environmentalists go
overboard in efforts to protect a view, preserve a
recreational area or save the natural habitat of the native
American mosquito.
Take, for instance, the case of the Trident base at
Bangor, Wash.
Trident is the follow-on to the Polaris and Poseidon
missile systems.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 2
Basically, it consists of a multiwarhead, 4,000-mile
(eventually 6,000-mile) missile launched from a nuclear
submarine cruising beneath the surface of the ocean.
The Navy Department declares that a Trident base
must be located in the Pacific because it "gives the Soviets
another whole ocean to worry about." It goes on to say
that strategically there is no alternative in the Pacific
to the Bangor location.
For most Americans that would be enough. Few would
object to construction of a desperately needed national
defense base anywhere, especially when every effort is
made (as it is in the case of Trident) to minimize its
impact on the surrounding environment. And especially,
also, when such a base will provide much-needed jobs in a
state where joblessness is high.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 3
Yet, an organization called Concerned About Trident
(CAT) has been formed specifically for the purpose of
halting construction of the Trident base on the grounds
that the Navy has failed to comply with the National
Environmental Policy Act.
To this end CAT has brought suit in federal court.
Its avowed aim is to preserve the pristine beauty of the
Bangor area at all costs, including the defense of the
United States.
Well, fortunately, it looks as if CAT is not going to
be successful. A major reason is the involvement in the
suit on the side of the Navy of a small, relatively new
public interest law firm, the Pacific Legal Foundation
(PLF).
PLF has made some devastating points against CAT.
Among them are these:
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 4
1. That CAT is merely a corporate shell founded
solely for the purpose of stopping in the courts the
construction of the base.
2. That the actual people behind the suit have
yet to be disclosed.
3. That undisclosed persons or organizations are
funding the suit "by laundering funds to plaintiffs'
attorneys through various tax exempt charitable
organizations in possible violation of Internal Revenue
Service guidelines. "
4. That there are serious legal questions regarding
CAT's right to sue.
Although the suit is still in the courts, federal
Judge George L. Hart has already denied a motion for a
preliminary injunction to stop construction, largely on
points made by PLF.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 5
PLF lawyers are now confident of final victory for
the Navy. This, alone, will be good enough reason to cheer
for Americans who worry, with much justification, that
America is falling behind the Soviet Union in defense
capabilities.
Another good reason is the discovery that at
least one public interest law firm is working on behalf of
the public instead of, as so often is the case with such
firms, working for left-wing special interest groups at
the expense of the public.
I will come back to the subject of the Pacific Legal
Foundation in other columns. It is chalking up quite a
record.
-30-
4/7/75
pg
APR 7 1975
THE RONALD REAGAN COLUMN
(For Release In Papers On Friday, April 4, Or Thereafter)
By RONALD REAGAN
BEHALD FORD
Copley News Service
"He's an amateur crank." It was Paul Samuelson
talking, professor of economics at the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology and winner of the Nobel Prize. He
was talking to Mike Wallace on "60 Minutes" about a
self-taught San Francisco economist who wants to make
every American worker a capitalist: Louis Kelso.
Kelso had been swimming upstream in the rarefied
world of economics for nearly 20 years, until the last two
years or so when some journalists and politicians began to
listen and found he had something to say.
According to Kelso, "America's official policy is to
have a 'full employment' economy.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 2
"This is irrational when technology and automation
are destroying jobs faster than new ones can be created.
What we need to do is develop a way for the workers to own
'a share of the action --a share of the machines that
actually produce the wealth. "
He points out that only about 6 per cent of the U.S.
population derives a significant portion of its income
from capital. The rest of the people must rely entirely
on wages, salaries and commissions. No job, no money.
What if most of the workers also owned some of the
capital and began to derive a healthy portion of
their income from this source, he asks. In time, he says,
the boom-and-bust cycle, wild stock speculation and the
wage-and-price spiral of inflation would be a thing of the
past.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 3
Kelso points out that American industry has a steady
need for fresh capital to update and expand itself. If,
instead of turning to traditional sources for this capital,
a company created instead an Employe Stock Ownership Plan
for its workers, that "ESOP" could go to a bank, borrow the
money to buy the new stock of the company, and pay it back
out of dividends from the stock. After all, he says,
industry now pays off its capital borrowings out of profits.
As soon as the loan was paid (typically in three to
five years), the workers could begin to get their own
dividends. And, it wouldn't cost them a cent out-of-pocket
to become shareholders. Nor would it require present
shareholders to give up any ownership. No "redistribution"
scheme. All the while, industry would have its fresh
capital at a cost less than it now pays.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 4
That's Kelso's plan in brief. There's more to it,
of course. Sen. Russell Long, D-La., chairman of the Senate
Finance Committee, is seriously interested in Kelso's
visionary solutions to some of our economic problems, and
the energetic Kelso (who has put a version of his plan to
work in several score private firms) is beginning to get a
full hearing for his ideas in Washington. Those ideas may
not be perfect, but they offer some real hope that the
fraternity of ruling economists--captives of Keynesian
orthodoxy who have held sway for four decades- may be near
the end of the road.
Kelso's challenges to debate Samuelson (or any other
orthodox economist) have gone unchallenged.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 5
But no wonder Mr. Samuelson was so tight-lipped
when he dismissed Kelso out-of-hand on the television
program. Kelso, after all, hasn't been annointed by the
priesthood. Neither was Louis Pasteur.
-30-
3/31/75
pg
MAR 29 1975
G.Warren
THE RONALD REAGAN COLUMN
(For Release In Papers On Friday, March 28, Or Thereafter)
GERALD FORD
By RONALD REAGAN
Copley News Service
Last fall, Yasir Arafat came to the United Nations in
New York. As head of the Palestine Liberation Organization
(PLO), the guerrilla group that wants everyone to believe it
represents all the Arabs on the West Bank of the Jordan,
Arafat spoke to an enthusiastic, cheering General Assembly.
The enthusiasm stemmed from the fact that body is now
dominated by so-called Third World members.
Curiously, for one who claims to have gone straight,
Arafat wore a gun throughout his appearance on stage. Most
in the audience ignored this, commenting instead on his
colorful burnoose.
The Ronald Reagan Column 2
Enthralled by his performance, the United
Nations granted the PLO the right to have a "permanent
observer" stationed at its East River enclave. This
gentleman, Sadat Hassan, is urbane and courtly and is now
traveling about the nation visiting with a variety of
public figures. Politely, he states the case for the PLO
in particular and for Arab historical claims to Palestine
in general.
I'm not sure history supports the latter contention,
but there is some truth in what someone has said about the
difficulties in the Middle East: "There is so much right
on both sides." Believing that, it would seem that men
of good will could find a peaceful solution.
Hassan would have Americans believe that the days of
terrorism are a thing of the past for the PLO.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 3
If so, there could be reason for optimism, but once
the fox has gotten inside the chicken coop, does he ever
lose his taste for blood until he's cleaned the place out?
Tragically, we may have the answer to that already. If so,
there's little room for optimism at all.
Early in March, PLO guerrillas attacked a Tel Aviv
hotel in a savage raid that left 18 persons dead, including
all but one of the attackers.
Now, one Zouheir Mohsen, head of the "military section"
of the PLO, threatens to attack "Israeli targets" in the
United States.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 4
"We will strike at any Israeli strategic target
wherever we can reach it, in Israel, or in Japan or in the
United States," he said in an interview recently.
He also admitted that the hotel attack in Tel Aviv
was aimed at sabotaging Secretary of State Henry Kissinger's
delicate peacemaking negotiations between Arabs and
Israelis. Mohsen described Kissinger as a "joker and a
charlatan." So much for the PLO's peaceful intentions.
Clearly, the bandit group's actions belie its
soothing words in international forums. Since this is so,
any American leaders who are scheduled to hear the
blandishments of the suave Mr. Hassan might just as well
tell him to stay at the United Nations as waste their
time.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 5
And, our counterintelligence people should take
Mohsen's saber-rattling talk seriously, with appropriate
steps to prevent his murderous cohorts from ever landing
here.
Mr. Hassan, meet Mr. Mohsen.
-30-
3/24/75
pg
to
THE RONALD REAGAN COLUMN
(For Release In Papers On Friday, March 21, Or Thereafter)
By RONALD REAGAN
Copley News Service
The press called it a fetus.
The defense lawyer called it a fetus.
GERALD R.FORD LIBRARY
The jury called it a baby.
And, after they did, they convicted Dr. Kenneth C.
Edelin of Boston of manslaughter. He had delivered, by
Cesarean section, a male child to a patient with whom he
had agreed to perform a legal abortion. The jury ruled,
after lengthy deliberation, that the baby was alive when
it was removed from the mother.
The press had described it as "a fetus of 20-24
weeks." The jury was shown photos and described it as a
6-month-old baby.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 2
The juror who held out longest against conviction
said - after the verdict that most of the jurors believed
that the baby "was alive during the operation when it was
taken out of the mother and that the doctor was negligent
for not checking for a heartbeat. They thought his
examination was too short. "
Dr. Edelin was frustrated and angry at the outcome,
not surprisingly. That he momentarily charged the jury
with racial prejudice (he is black) can be
attributed to the heat of the moment. There is no evidence
to suggest that the jury based its decision on anything
other than the charge put to them and the facts presented.
In fact, most of them expressed personal sympathy toward
the doctor.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 3
One can give Dr. Edelin the benefit of the doubt and
suppose that he harbored no malice toward the baby; he only
performed his duty to abort the birth, both earnestly and
professionally. He's now appealing the case and the final
outcome cannot be predicted.
Meanwhile, it has given the right-to-life forces
a great deal of encouragement. And, according to reports
in the media, the verdict seems to have discouraged (at
least temporarily) medical research into abortion and
related life-control measures.
While we await the appeal and its decision, I have
become increasingly concerned that there is a subtle, but
nonetheless effective, move afoot to dehumanize babies
unwanted by their mothers.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 4
The latest chilling symptom: Dr. Edelin's lawyer
says that he will argue in his appeal that a women's legal
right to an abortion presumes that the aborted baby will
be dead. If it isn't, as in the Edelin case, then it
would have no right to live, under the law. What next?
Euthanasia on a grand scale? Or, putting mentally retarded
infants "to sleep?"
Before, during and after the Dr. Edelin case there
has been- with increasing frequency- the use of the term
"fetus" to describe a baby the mother wanted to abort.
Fetuses, after all, aren't people, they're "things." If
it's inconvenient to convert one into a "baby," then dispose
of it.
Babies, on the other hand, are warm, lovable and
cuddly. Altogether human. A fetus becomes a baby when it
leaves the mother's womb alive.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 5
Even if it doesn't, it certainly looks like a baby
when it is 6 months old.
One is reminded of all the pejorative terms applied
to various enemies to rob them of human qualities, in order
to make belittling them, ostracizing them or killing them
more easy: wops, frogs, spics, micks, polacks, gooks and
slopes, to name a few. Add now the "fetus." No human
qualities. A faintly repulsive sound to the word. Easily
disposed of by serious-looking physicians and their patients.
What can be done to combat the growing tendency to
dehumanize infants in the womb?
If you're pregnant and thinking of abortion, think of
adoption instead. If you're not in that situation, write a
letter to the editor every time he publishes a story
describing a baby as a fetus.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 6
It is time to say to all the world: we are not
talking about a slug or a snail or a salamander. We are
talking about a real, live baby, whatever the shortness of
its life. Write that letter. The squeaky wheel gets the
grease.
-30-
3/17/75
pg
THE RONALD REAGAN COLUMN
(For Release In Papers On Friday, March 14, Or Thereafter)
FORD is LIBRARY
By RONALD REAGAN
Copley News Service
"No one cant rite hardly anytime." That was the
headline. The story left little doubt about the matter.
If you think your youngster is the only one in school who
uses sentence fragments, run-ons, poor spelling and misplaced
punctuation, you may find some consolation in knowing that
this problem is more than an individual one; it's national.
In a recent survey of 436 colleges, the Association
of Departments of English found that students are leaving
high school with a much poorer training in fundamentals
than before. The survey also showed that problems aren't
exclusively those of students from lower-income families.
Middle-class kids are apparently affected just as much.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 2
Nearly half the entering freshmen at the University
of California in Berkeley last fall had to take a
remedial English course called "bonehead" because they
failed a qualifying grammar and essay test.
Most teachers seem to agree that the problem isn't
a new one. It's always been there, but it's more intense
and widespread than ever before and it's probably being
diagnosed more energetically. Some teachers think too
much television viewing is the main cause. It's probably
true that young people aren't being encouraged to read,
either at school or at home. One educator summed up the
importance of reading this way: "Students must read well
to write well."
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 3
If you'll think back to your own high school days,
you probably dreaded those endless grammar drills, plotting
out subjects, predicates and objects; stuffing your head
with rules and exceptions-to-rules until you could reel
them off from memory. This was interspersed by singsong
recitations of "Evangeline" or "The Rhyme of the Ancient
Mariner," the purpose for which you never could divine. Well,
it now appears that such rigorous drills, as part of
compulsory courses and coupled with a well-planned and
supervised reading program, are really the key to one's
ability to write clearly.
During the 1960s the ferment in education didn't
leave the English departments unscathed. In many states and
communities compulsory English classes were reduced in
number. More became "electives."
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 4
And, for many who did choose to take these courses,
the choice was between such things as Creative Writing,
Film Making, Mythology and Detective Story Writing. These
may be perfectly legitimate subjects to study, but they
should be offered after the student has a strong
foundation of reading and grammatical writing- not before,
or there may never be an "after." One has only to
remember the standard, "Like I mean ya know, man"
monosyllables of the youth of just a few seasons ago to
see that the need for change is obvious.
One metropolitan curriculum director surveyed
recently was concerned that students "don't zero in on a
real, solid academic core. " But, a representative of the
Modern Language Association- an organization of college
English teachers sees some hopeful signs.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 5
She observes that all over the country English
professors are reporting that students are becoming
goal-oriented again and that they're asking for English
courses that focus on essential writing skills. As she
puts it, there is a shift away from "the touch-feely stage,
the love-everybody-and-good-writing-will-result" days.
Amen to that! Maybe the advocates of plain old
"readin" and writin'" were correct after all. In another
decade or so we may finally be turning out more students who
can organize a sentence properly than cannot. And, with
plenty of nudging from concerned parents and teachers, they
may begin reading again, too.
-30-
3/10/75
pg
Copy
file
THE RONALD REAGAN COLUMN
(For Release In Papers On Friday, March 7, And Thereafter)
By RONALD REAGAN
Copley News Service
Salty tuna boat skippers bellowing in outrage at the
seizure of their boats by a small South American navy year
after year might seem slightly comic if it weren't a problem
that this year will cost the American taxpayers more than $2
million.
The nearly annual Tuna Boat War has been going on for
two decades between U.S. tuna fishermen and the government
of Ecuador.
In the early 1950s, Ecuador, Peru and Chile declared
their territorial limits to be 200 miles out to sea, rather
than the 12 miles recognized by international law.
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 2
Those 200 watery miles are the favored feeding
grounds for huge schools of tuna during the first three
months of the year.
Since the U.S. tuna fleet (based largely in San
Diego) descends on the area each year for its lucrative
catch, the South American coastal nations no doubt saw in
their new 200-mile limit a rich source of revenue. They
didn't waste any time proving the point.
With monotonous regularity, the Ecuadorians seize the
U.S. boats, impound them in the nearest port and release
them only when the fishermen pay hefty fines. They sometimes
confiscate the catch, too.
Back when the Tuna Boat War began, the fishermen were
instrumental in lobbying a bill through Congress called
the Fishermen's Protective Act.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 3
It provides that the federal government will
reimburse the fishermen for their fines and confiscated
catches. To date, the cost to the taxpayers has been
more than $50 million.
When the "war" was renewed a few weeks ago, the
Ecuadorians, using gunboats on loan from the
United States, seized seven tuna boats and their catches.
The Ecuadorians had instituted a system of license
fees, but rules out licenses for boats of more than 600
tons. Most U.S. boats exceed 600 tons--not a coincidence.
Using their "Catch-22" rules, the Ecuadorians agreed to let
the U.S. boats go only after they collected fines and
cargoes amounting to more than $3 million. The State
Department will reimburse about 70 per cent of that to
the fishermen.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 4
While the U.S. government has chosen all these years
not to solve the recurring problem, preferring instead to
muddle along with it, there are indications that later
this year Uncle Sam will have to decide whether to fish
or cut bait over the issue.
Pressure from lobster and salmon fishermen and
oil companies is growing to extend our own territorial
limits to 200 miles. A bill to do this will be before
Congress this year. If it passes, the 200-mile limit
might soon become the international rule rather than
the exception.
If that is the case, Congress should, for the sake
of consistency, rescind the Fishermen's Protective Act
and let the tuna fishermen solve their own problem off
the shores of South America.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 5
With the extended limit we might even recoup
some of that $50 million by fining Russian and Japanese
trawlers caught fishing in our waters.
If Congress fails to pass the extended limit,
however, and the 12-mile limit continues to be the
international standard, the U.S. government next winter
should send along a destroyer with the tuna boats to
cruise, say, 13 miles off the shore of Ecuador in an
updated version of Teddy Roosevelt's dictum to "talk
softly, but carry a big stick." Ecuadorian
aggressiveness might rapidly melt under such circumstances.
Taking back those gunboats we loaned them wouldn' t
hurt, either.
-30-
3/3/75
jy
Copy
THE RONALD REAGAN COLUMN
(For Release In Papers On Friday, Feb. 28, And Thereafter)
By RONALD REAGAN
Copley News Service
It was Christmas Eve. The Great Depression had
begun and unemployment was spreading across the land. There
in our small town in Illinois, though, we thought things
were going to be all right. All right, that is, until my
father opened the envelope he thought was a Christmas
greeting from his employer. I can never forget the long
silence as he sat there holding that greeting, or his
half-audible whisper: "That's a h--1 of a Christmas
present." He had just learned that, as of that Christmas
Eve, he was one of the unemployed.
GERALD R.FORD LIBRARY
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 2
Today, or any time, if you have a family to feed and
you're laid off work through no fault of your own,
unemployment- with all its anxieties- becomes the central
fact of your life. If you can't find another job and,
unlike the auto workers, you aren't protected by a guarantee
of 95 per cent of your wages during layoff periods, you
have to turn to unemployment insurance or other public
assistance to tide you over. And, that's why we have such
programs, to help those who need it when they need it.
On the other hand, if you're an economist, you look
for trends in the economy that will affect people by the
millions. Both perspectives are valid. The economist knows
that inflation, recession and unemployment can have a
snowball effect and that a recession is, in part,
psychological (not to discount such factors as federal
deficit spending and too-easy consumer credit).
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 3
The very way in which unemployment statistics are
reported contributes sharply to the psychological part of
the problem. They are presented by the media as a sort
of statistical fright wig: carifying headlines, with little
analysis. In fact, the method of reporting such data by
the Bureau of Labor Statistics is misleading, if not
downright phony.
What the statistics provide is a reasonably good
estimate (not an accurate count) of housewives who don't
need but would like part-time work; young people still
fully supported by their parents, but who are seeking their
first jobs; and even teen-agers wanting paper routes or
other after-school work.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 4
What the statistics don't provide is a sharp focus
on the actual number of breadwinners involuntarily
unemployed, looking for a job to support a family, and
drawing unemployment benefits if they are eligible.
That number would be a true measure of our economic
situtaion. This is how England counts its unemployed. If
we did it that way our rate would be about 1 per cent or
less instead of the 8 per cent the federal government is
talking about (or the 10 per cent George Meany is
predicting). An official high in England's Labor government
asked a friend of mine the other day if we were
masochists. He said, "We know your figures are phony, and
so do you. "
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 5
The Bureau of Labor Statistics makes 50,000 random
phone calls each month, and from that tells us our rate
of unemployment as if they'd made an accurate nose count.
In addition to those out of work because of economic
trouble, their telephone "net" catches thousands in the
other categories mentioned. Yet, as reported, all are
lumped together as "unemployed," thus conjuring a picture of
millions huddled in bread lines. Actually, more than half
the unemployed will find jobs in five weeks or less (at
any given time); the average for all is 10 weeks; and less
than 7 per cent have been without work for 26 weeks or
longer.
Why does the BLS lump the actually employed with the
like-to-be-employed and others?
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 6
Part of the answer may lie in the fact that certain
federal programs are triggered into action when the
so-called unemployment rate rises to a certain level. When
it does, of course, it "proves" that all those bureaucrats
are essential, for they must administer such programs.
Full reporting of the true unemployment picture is
essential if we're going to avoid "psyching" ourselves into
a depression. It's time the secretary of labor overhauled
the reporting system. The telephone survey may have value,
but only if the results tell the public how many people
are looking for part-time work, how many are teen-agers, how
many are new entrants in the labor force and, finally but
most important, how many are breadwinners out of a job
through no fault of their own.
The Ronald Reagan Column -- 7
The reports should also tell something else:
what job skills are in surplus in some localities and in
short supply in others. The National Federation of
Independent Business recently surveyed its members and
found almost one-quarter looking for workers to fill job
openings. The BLS could perform a real service by tallying
such job skill needs so the truly unemployed can find them.
It makes more sense than spending billions to create new
public jobs which add little to national productivity.
-30-
2/24/75
jg