Ask the Scholar

{
    "localId": "118564794",
    "label": "Issue Papers - Busing",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/118564794"
}

{
    "id": "118564794",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/118564794",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "Issue Papers - Busing",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/118564794",
    "identifierLocal": "840",
    "collections": [
        "Ronald Reagan's Governor's Papers of the Press Unit",
        "Issue Files"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/reagan/7408628/40-840-7408628-P30-004-2017.pdf",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/reagan/7408628/40-840-7408628-P30-004-2017.pdf",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/reagan/7408628/40-840-7408628-P30-004-2017.pdf",
    "imageCount": 1,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/118564794",
    "naId": 118564794,
    "coverageEndDate": {
        "logicalDate": "1975-12-31",
        "year": 1975
    },
    "coverageStartDate": {
        "logicalDate": "1967-01-01",
        "year": 1967
    },
    "levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}

{
    "seq": 1,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "document",
    "url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/reagan/7408628/40-840-7408628-P30-004-2017.pdf",
    "mediaId": "f6824b8031a007e1",
    "ocrText": "Ronald Reagan Presidential Library\nDigital Library Collections\nThis is a PDF of a folder from our textual collections.\nCollection: Reagan, Ronald: Gubernatorial Papers,\n1966-74: Press Unit\nFolder Title: Issue Papers - Busing\nBox: P30\nTo see more digitized collections visit:\nhttps://reaganlibrary.gov/archives/digital-library\nTo see all Ronald Reagan Presidential Library inventories visit:\nhttps://reaganlibrary.gov/document-collection\nContact a reference archivist at: [email protected]\nCitation Guidelines: https://reaganlibrary.gov/citing\nNational Archives Catalogue: https://catalog.archives.gov/\nBussing\n1. AB 724 creates a statutory mechanism for cooperative\nefforts between local school districts and the State Depart-\nment of Education to develop methods to eliminate a school\ndistrict's racial imbalance problems. Large-scale manda-\ntory busing has occurred only in those areas which have\nimplemented no programs or have no plans. In those districts\nwhich have worked with the Department, and which have actively\nengaged in affirmative planning to solve the problem, the\ncourts have been reluctant to impose their own concepts of\nan adequate integration program.\n2. AB 724 provides flexible guidelines to aid districts to\nformulate acceptable and workable integration plans based on\nthe needs of individual districts with calm planning and\ndiscussion of the fears of concerned parents.\n3. Court mandated busing is generally not required when a\ndistrict is actively pursuing alternatives to eliminate racial\nimbalance. This measure makes local districts aware of non-\nbusing alternatives such as grade structure reorganization\nand new school site selection to eliminate racial imbalance.\n4. AB 724 guidelines are refined to eliminate the arbitrary\n\"15%\" imbalance provision which led to the Gitelson decision\nin Pasadena. Technically, the State Board's \"15%\" guideline\nstill exists (though not effective). Passage of 724 will\neliminate this - and also provide long-run helpful guidelines\nfor the 1150-plus districts of the State.\n5. This measure helps solve the problem of racial imbalance\nby setting out definite legislative state policy for districts\nto work towards. School districts are no longer left direction-\nless or defenseless.\nAB 724 becomes even more necessary because of the\nEmergency School Aid and Quality Integration Education Act\nof 1971 proposed by President Nixon. This measure will pro-\nvide, when adopted, $500 million for 1971 and $1 billion\nfor 1972 to carry out the type of programs set forth in\nAB 724. Of these amounts, California is expected to receive\n$80-$100 million for 1971-72. This will require planning and\nalso cooperation between local districts and the Department of\nEducation. As proposed by President Nixon, these funds may\nnot be used to carry out mandatory busing programs, but are\navailable for any other programs to eliminate racial segrega-\ntion. For instance, the Department has developed several good\nmethods of achieving racial and ethnic balance, (attached is\na copy of such suggested methods which would be eligible for\nfederal assistance as outlined above,) without the chaos\nand confusion which has happened. AB 725 provides a vehicle\nfor using this prospective Federal money for the planning pur-\nposes of AB 724. Together, AB 724 and AB 725 actively carry\nout the intent of President Nixon's proposed legislation,\nand they provide a legal defense against mandatory busing for\na district that is pursuing the administrative mechanism pro-\nvided. Without such mechanism courts will have no alternative\nbut to step in.\nSUGGESTED PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS APPROPRIATE FOR\nTHE USE OF FUNDS PROVIDED IN AB 725\nFunds to be administered by the Department of Education and allocated\nto school districts to implement the intent of AB 724 could be used\neffectively in two general areas.\nA. Planning and Implementing Plans to Correct Racial and Ethnic\nImbalance\n1. Geographic attendance zones: Zone boundaries can be drawn or\nredrawn in a manner promoting maximum racial and ethnic balance\nin each school.\n2. School pairing: Where two or more comparable schools are situa-\nted within a relatively short distance and are imbalanced with\nrespect to each other, their attendance areas can be merged to\nform one larger attendance area, and the assignment or grade\npattern modified so that each facility is shared by a balanced\ngroup of students.\n3. Reorganization of grade structure: In some school systems a\nchange in the basic grade organization will eliminate imbalance.\nFor example, a change to a uniform 6-3-3, 6-2-4, 4-4-4, 3-3-3-3\nor other grade pattern may maximize balance within an entire\ndistrict or within each of several complexes or subdistricts.\n(It also may maximize utilization of space in all facilities.)\n4. Central schools: One or more schools may be converted into cen-\ntral facilities for one or more grades, to serve all or part of\na school district.\n5. School closing and consolidation: Small, inadequate schools, or\nothers in locations that have become impractical to operate and\nmaintain, can be closed and their students reassigned. In some\ncases alternative use can be made of the facility; in others the\nbuilding and/or the site can be sold.\n6. Establishing schools for special services: In the event one or\nmore schools are closed, or to establish supplementary centers for\npart-time attendance on an integrated basis, existing or new struc-\ntures may be designated for educational programs other than regu-\nlar attendance centers.\n7. Education parks and complexes: A park is a very large, consoli-\ndated school plant arranged in the manner of a college campus and\nzoned to serve a number of surrounding neighborhoods or combina-\ntions of communities. The plant may be divided into schools or\nhouses serving integrated student bodies on the basis of grade\nlevel or other criteria. A complex has the same features but is\nhoused on several sites within a relatively short distance.\n8. Controlled open enrollment: Student transfers can be encouraged\non a voluntary basis, when the transfer will improve racial or\nethnic balance in the sending or receiving school. Provisions for\n-2-\ntransportation at no expense to the student make this more feas-\ntble foi may students.\n9. Site selection: When sites are acquired, or then one of several\nsites is selected for construction, racial and othnic balance of\nthe attendance crea may be given the highest priority in making\na choice.\n10. Feeder pattern: In selecting the primary or intermediate schools\nwhose graduates will attend a school at the next higher level,\nracial and ethnic balance of the resulting student body may be\ngiven the highest priority.\n1. Voluntary exchange of students between districts: Children in\nwhite suburbia should also be prepared to live in a world peopled\nby men and WOREH of di Merent national, racial, religious and\neconomic backgrounds, otherwise they teo may be disadvantaged for not\nliving in a more diverse world. Superintendents and boards of edu-\ncation should consider arrangements with urban centers or other\ndistricts having large numbers of minority group children for an\ninterchange of pupils so that both groups could benefit.\nB. Improving Quality of Integrated Education\nOnce school districts have succeeded in achieving racial and ethnic\nbalance, their responsibility has not ended. They have the additional\nduty to lift the level of instructional quality for all students and,\nfurther, to develop programs which will bring about better understanding\namong all groups of children. Such efforts might include:\n1. Providing integrated textbooks and other materials;\n2. Developing an integrated curriculum;\n2. Enriching children's experience through programs in cultural and\nintellectual integrated activities before and after school;\n4. Bringing non-educational professional and highly skilled practi-\ntieners of various races to meet and work with students;\nS. Integrating the professional staff; and\n6. Emphasizing techniques for working with minority group children in\npreservice and inservice education of teachers.\nMony of the above actions, although not all, would entail cost in addition\nto normal expenditures. Funds provided by AB 725 would assist districts\nin meeting these additional costs.\nPAGIDO\n3/14/21\nBussing\nINTRODUCTION\nAB 724 and AB 725\n(as signed by Governor Reagan)\nThe basis of AB 724 and 725 is the irrefutable\nfact that the U.S. Supreme Court and the California State\nSupreme Court have imposed a duty upon local school boards\nto eliminate de jure and de facto segregation. The State\nLegislature cannot alter what the Supreme Court has ruled\nto be the law under the equal protection clause of both\nthe U.S. and California Constitutions. However, the\nLegislature can provide for a mechanism for orderly, long-\nrange planning and implementation, rather than exposing\nour school districts to precipitous court-mandated busing.\nAB 724 and 725 do this, as follows:\n1. AB 724 creates a statutory mechanism for cooperative\nefforts between local school districts and the State Depart-\nment of Education to develop methods to eliminate a school\ndistrict's racial imbalance problems. Large-scale manda-\ntory busing has occurred only in those areas which have\nimplemented no programs or have no plans. In those districts\nwhich have worked with the Department, and which have actively\nengaged in affirmative planning to solve the problem, the\ncourts have been reluctant to impose their own concepts of\nan adequate integration program.\n2. AB 724 provides flexible guidelines to aid districts to\nformulate acceptable and workable integration plans based on\nthe needs of individual districts with calm planning and\ndiscussion of the fears of concerned parents.\n3. Court mandated busing is generally not required when a\ndistrict is actively pursuing alternatives to eliminate racial\nimbalance. This measure makes local districts aware of non-\nbusing alternatives such as grade structure reorganization\nand new school site selection to eliminate racial imbalance.\n4. AB 724 guidelines are refined to eliminate the arbitrary\n\"15%\" imbalance provision which led to the Gitelson decision\nin Pasadena. Technically, the State Board's \"15%\" guideline\nstill exists (though not effective). Passage of 724 will\neliminate this - and also provide long-run helpful guidelines\nfor the 1150-plus districts of the State.\n5. This measure helps solve the problem of racial balance by setting\nout definite legislative state policy for districts to work towards.\nSchool districts are no longer left directionless or defenseless.\nWhile the local school boards submit their plan to the\nDepartment of Education for comment, each local board retains control\nover the plan they ultimately adopt.\nAB 724 becomes even more necessary because of the Emergency\nSchool Aid and Quality Integration Education Act of 1971 proposed\nby President Nixon. This measure will provide, when adopted,\n$500 million for 1971 and $1 billion for 1972 to carry out the type\nof programs set forth in AB 724. Of these amounts, California is\nexpected to receive $80-$100 million for 1972-72. This will require\nplanning and also cooperation between local districts and the\nDepartment of Education. As proposed by President Nixon, these funds\nmay not be used to carry out mandatory busing programs, but are\navailable for any other programs to eliminate racial segregation.\nAB 725 provides a vehicle for using this prospective Federal money\nfor the planning purposes of AB 724.\nTogether, AB 724 and AB 725 actively carry out the intent of\nPresident Nixon's proposed legislation, and they provide a legal defense\nagainst mandatory busing for a district that is pursuing the\nadministrative mechanism provided. Without such mechanism courts will\nhave no alternative but to step in.\nFROM THE OFFICE OF:\nFOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE\nASSEMBLYMAN WILLIAM T. BAGLEY\nSTATE CAPITOL, ROOM 2188\nSACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95814\nDECEMBER 18, 1971\n(916) 445-8492\n\"Governor Reagan has signed Assembly Bill 724 (Bagley),\nthe integration guidelines bill,\" William T. Bagley (R - San\nRafael) announced.\n\"This bill provides the mechanism for long range\nplanning for school boards to meet the goal of an equal and\nintegrated education. At the same time, it will provide a\ndefense against precipitous court-ordered busing. As long as\nschool districts are following the guidelines and planning new\nschool sites, pairing of schools, district boundary changes\nand the like, courts will not step in,\" Bagley said.\n\"This is really a landmark law in a very volatile field.\nI thank and compliment the Governor for signing it.\"\nThe Governor also signed Assembly Bill 725 (Bagley)\nwhich would allot two million dollars of forthcoming federal\nfunds (President Nixon's Emergency Education Act) to assist\nschool districts in the future planning required by Assembly\nBill 724.\n###\nGUIDELINES\nFROM THE OFFICE OF:\nASSEMBLYMAN WILLIAM T. BAGLEY\nRoom 2188, State Capitol\nFOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE\nSacramento, California\n(916) 445-8492\nWednesday, March 3, 1971\nAssemblyman William T. Bagley (R-San Rafael) today\nintroduced two measures to provide legislative and financial\nsupport for the integration guidelines presently in effect\nin California public schools.\n\"One measure will declare the legislative intent to achieve\nracial integration and provide for cooperation between the\nDepartment of Education and local school districts to that end.\n\"The second proposal would appropriate $2 million to offset\nthe costs incurred by local school districts in developing\nplans for school integration. There are many methods of achiev-\ning racial and ethnic balance, but each procedure will inevitably\ncost money which would otherwise have to be diverted from other\nprograms. This appropriation will supply the incentive for\nschool districts which may be hesitant to divert funds from\neducational programs for the purpose of achieving racial and\nethnic balance.\n\"For the nearly 1200 school districts in the State, race\nrelations and integration guidelines have thus far been entirely\ndependent on court decisions; these measures will not only\nserve as guidelines for school districts, but also put the\nLegislature on record as supporting that policy.\n\"If we who proclaim the sanctity of our Constitutional\nguarantees know what we mean and mean what we say, then we\nPRESS RELEASE\nPage 2\n3/2/71\nin our public schools.\n\"I would emphasize most strongly that this approach does\nnot involve so called 'forced bussing'. No one proposes mass\ncross-town bussing of children. What is proposed is uniform\nquidelines to our districts so that they can plan their district\nboundaries, their new schools and their attendance areas to\navoid major bussing controversies. The whole question of 'forced\nbussing' is a political bug-a-boo that can be avoided by a\nrational approach. That is what I propose.\"\n####\nAMENDED IN SENATE AUGUST 3, 1971\nAMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 2, 1971\nCALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE-1971 REGULAR SESSION\nASSEMBLY BILL\nNo. 724\nIntroduced by Assemblyman Bagley\nMarch 3, 1971\nREFERRED TO COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION\nAn act to add Sections 5002 and 5003 to the Education\nCode, relating to pupil enrollment.\nLEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST\nAB 724, as amended, Bagley (Ed.). Pupil enrollment.\nAdds Sec. 5002, 5003, Ed.C.\nDeclares policy of Legislature that persons or agencies responsible\nfor establishment of school attendance centers or assignment of pupils\nshall exert all effort to prevent and eliminate racial and ethnic im-\nbalance in pupil enrollment. Requires that prevention and elimination\nof such imbalance be given high priority in all decisions relating to.\nschool sites, school attendance areas, and school attendance practices.\nRequires consideration of specified factors in carrying out such\npolicy.\nRequires school district governing boards to submit statistics peri-\nodically to Department of Education regarding racial and ethnic\nmakeup of school population in each school.\nProvides that racial or ethnic imbalance is indicated in school if\npercentage of pupils of one or more racial or ethnic groups differs sig-\nnificantly from districtwide percentage. Requires districts to study\nand consider plans for alternative pupil distributions upon a finding\nby Department of Education that percentage so differs and authorizes\ndistrict to consider specified factors among feasibility factors.\nRequires districts to analyze total educational impact of alternate\nplans on pupils of district and submit reports of study and alternative\nplans, with schedules for implementation, to Department of Education\nfor its acceptance or rejection. Requires department to determine\nadequacy of alternative district plans and implementation schedules\nand to report its findings to State Board of Education.\nRequires submission of summary report of findings of the department\nto the Legislature annually.\nAB 724\n2\nRequires State Board of Education to adopt rules and regulations\nto carry out intent of act.\nVote-Majority Appropriation-No; Fiscal Committee-Yes.\nThe people of the State of California do enact as follows:\n1\nSECTION 1. Section 5002 is added to the Education Code,\n2\nto read:\n3\n5002. It is the declared policy of the Legislature that per-\n4 sons or agencies responsible for the establishment of school\n5 attendance centers or the assignment of pupils thereto shall\n6 exert all effort to prevent and eliminate racial and ethnic im-\n7 balance in pupil enrollment. The prevention and elimination\n8 of such imbalance shall be given high priority in all decisions\n9 relating to school sites, school attendance areas, and school\n10 attendance practices.\n11\nSEC. 2. Section 5003 is added to the Education Code, to\n12 read:\n13\n5003. (a) In carrying out the policy of Section 5002, con-\n14 sideration shall be given to the following factors:\n15\n(1) A comparison of the numbers and percentages of pupils\n16 of each racial and ethnic group in the district with their num-\n17 bers and percentages in each school and each grade.\n18\n(2) A comparison of the numbers and percentages of pupils\n19 of each racial and ethnic group in certain schools with those\n20 in other schools in adjacent areas of the district.\n21\n(3) Trends and rates of population change among racial\n22 and ethnic groups within the total district, in each school, and\n23\nin each grade.\n24\n(4) The effects on the racial and ethnic composition of each\n25 school and each grade of alternate plans for selecting or en-\n26 larging school sites, or for establishing or altering school at-\n27 tendance areas and school attendance practices.\n28\n(b) The governing board of each school district shall peri-\n29 odically, at such time and in such form as the Department of\n30 Education shall prescribe, submit statistics sufficient to enable\n31\na determination to be made of the numbers and percentages of\n32 the various racial and ethnic groups in every public school\n33 under the jurisdiction of each such governing board.\n34\n(c) For purposes of Section 5002 and this section, a racial\n36 of pupils of one or more racial or ethnic groups differs sig-\n2222\n35 or ethnic imbalance is indicated in a school if the percentage\n37\nnificantly from the districtwide percentage.\n38\n(d) A district shall study and consider plans which would\n39\nresult in alternative pupil distributions which would remedy\n40 such an imbalance upon a finding by the Department of Educa-\n41 tion that the percentage of pupils of one or more racial or\n42 ethnic groups in a school differs significantly from the district-\n43 wide percentage. A district undertaking such a study may\n44 consider among feasibility factors the following:\n45\n(1) Traditional factors used in site selection, boundary de-\n46 termination, and school organization by grade level.\n- 3\nAB 724\n1\n(2) The factors mentioned in subdivision (a) of this sec-\n2 tion.\n3\n(3) The high priority established in Section 5002.\n4\n(4) The effect of such alternative plans on the educational\n5 programs in that district.\n6\nIn considering such alternative plans the district shall ana-\n7 lyze the total educational impact of such plans on the pupils\n8 of the district. Reports of such a district study and resulting\n9 plans of action, with schedules for implementation, shall be sub-\n10 mitted to the Department of Education, for its acceptance or\n11 rejection, at such time and in such form as the department\n12 shall prescribe. The department shall determine the adequacy\n13 of alternative district plans and implementation schedules and\n14 shall report its findings as to the adequacy of alternative dis-\n15 triet plans and implementation schedules to the State Board of\n16 Education. A summary report of the findings of the depart-\n17 ment pursuant to this section shall be submitted to the Legisla-\n18 ture each year.\n19\n(e) The State Board of Education shall adopt rules and\n20 regulations to carry out the intent of Section 5002 and this\n21 section.\n0\n8 -\nSection 1\nChicago Tribune\nOREATEST NSWSPAPER\nFOUNDED JUNE 10, 1847\nH. F. GRUMHAUS, Chairman\nCLAYTON KIRKPATRICK, Editor\nand Publisher\nHAROLD HUTCHINGS, Executive Editor\nF.A. NICHOLS, President\nMAXWELL McCROHON, Managing Editor\nand Treasurer\nROBERT GOLDSBOROUGH, Sunday Editor\nS. R. Cook, Executire Vice President\nJOHN McCuTcHEON, Editorial\nand General Manager\nPage Editor\nSaturday, March 18, 1972\nTHE NEWSPAPER is an institution developed by modern civilization to\npresent the news of the day, to foster commerce and industry,\nto inform and lead public opinion, and to furnish that check upon\ngovernment which no constitution has ever been able to provide.\n-THE TRIBUNE CREDO\nCall for a Curb on Busing\nPresident Nixon yesterday followed\nout an eventual constitutional amend-\nup Thursday night's speech by calling\nment to prohibit court-ordered busing,\non Congress to impose a curb on fed-\nbut he said that process would take too\neral court orders to bus children from\nlong and meanwhile there would be\nneighborhood schools to achieve a racial\nhundreds of thousands of children or-\nmix. The moratorium would be effective\ndered by the courts to be bused away\nuntil July 1, 1973, during which period\nfrom their neighborhood schools.\nCongress and the Supreme Court would\n\"The great majority of Americans,\npresumably have an opportunity to de-\nblack and white, feel strongly that the\ntermine when busing is permissible and\nbusing of schoolchildren away from\nwhen it is not.\ntheir own neighborhoods for the purpose\nThe President coupled his request with\nof achieving racial balance is wrong,\"\nan appeal for $2.5 billion for improve-\nMr. Nixon said. \"To conclude that 'anti-\nment of the quality of education in de-\nbusing' is simply a code name for\nprived schools which cannot now offer a\nprejudice is a vicious libel on millions\ndecent education.\nof concerned parents.\"\nWhile the proposed court curb was\nThere is little doubt that the President\nimmediately attacked by Roy Wilkins,\nis supported by majority sentiment. The\nexecutive director of the National Asso-\nrecent Florida referendum, where op-\nciation for the Advancement of Colored\nposition to busing was reflected in a\nPeople, and by Clarence Mitchell, its\n3 to 1 vote, is one indication. Gov.\nchief Washington spokesman, as uncon-\nGeorge Wallace, who took the strongest\nstitutional, there would appear to be a\nstand of any candidate against busing,\nconsotitutional warrant for it. Article\nwas a runaway winner in the state's\nIII, section 2, implies that Congress\nDemocratic Presidential primary.\ncan limit the appellate jurisdiction by\nEven more striking was the action\n\"exceptions\" and \"regulations.\"\nof the National Black Convention in\nDuring the existence of the restriction,\nGary last Sunday in adopting a resolu-\nthe President said, the Justice Depart-\ntion apposing busing as a means to\nment would be instructed to intervene\nachieve racial integration. \"Busing is\nin selected cases where the lower federal\nobsolete and dangerous to black people,\"\ncourts have gone beyond the Supreme\nRoy Innis, national director of the Con-\nCourt's requirements in ordering busing.\ngress on Racial Equality, told the\nThese cases would presumably give the\ngathering.\nSupreme Court a chance to clarify its\nRecent court orders, particularly one\nposition.\nin Richmond where a federal District\nMr. Nixon's recommendations are sub-\njudge ordered busing across school dis-\nstantially in accord with anti-busing pro-\ntriet lines, have hardened opposition.\nvisions adopted by the Senate. These\nNevertheless, Mr. Nixon's plan would\nare milder than the stiff bill which has\nnot roll back busing orders already on\npassed the House and which imposes a\nthe books, nor would it prevent com-\nmoratorium on the courts of indefinite\nmunities fro.n voluntarily adopting\nduration. The President did not rule\nbusing.\n3/18/70 DAILY I\nUYDAILY\nNEWS\n220 East 42d $t.\nNEW YORK'S PICTURE NEWSPAPER\n(212) MU 2-1234\nMARCH 10, 1972\nPublished daily except Sunday by New York News Inc., 220 East 42d St., New York,\nN.Y. 10017. F. M. Flynn, Chairman and Publisher; W. H. James, President; Floyd Barger,\nExecutive Editor and Vice Pres.; B G. McCauley, Secretary; and R. J. Rohrbach, Treasufer.\nMell subscription rates per year: U.S. Daily and Sunday $49.00. Daily $33.00. Sunday\n$16.50. Armed Forces Special Rates Daily and Sunday $33.00. Daily $22.00, Sunday $11.00.\nForeign and short term rates upon request.\nMEMBER OF THE ASSOCIATED PRESS\nThe Associated Press is entitled exclusively PU the use for republication of all\nthe local news printed In this newspaper as well as all AP news dispatches.\nTHE PRESIDENT ON BUSING\nPresident Richard M. Nixon went on television Thurs-\nday night and into an 8,000-word message to Congress\nyesterday on the subject of forced school busing for inte-\ngration's sake.\nIn general, the Presi-\ndent is against it, as a big\nmajority of Americans of\nall colors seem to be.\nEspecially does he dis-\napprove of extreme bus-\ndamn you bus rulings by\nsome lower federal courts.\nHe doesn't ask Congress to\nnullify these decisions or\ntry to, but he does want\na congressional morato-\nrium on more of the same.\nUnder the Nixon-pro-\nposed legislation, all school\ndistricts would be required\nto provide equal educational\nPresident Nixon after his\nopportunities for all chil-\nThursday night TV address to\ndren. Nor would matters\nthe nation.\nhalt there:\nThis Administration means what it says about dis-\nmantling racial barriers, about opening up jobs and housing\nand schools and opportunity to all Americans.\nThe President wants to shift $2.5 billion in existing\nfederal funds to inner-city or \"ghetto\" (much-abused word)\nschools for their improvement. That sum wouldn't go far,\nbut it would be a start.\nSo it now is up to Congress, as we see the matter, to\nmeet this White House challenge and legislate on busing\nand related items in ways that will suit most Americans.\nIf Congress can think up better legislation than the\npresident has outlined, fine, and let's have it. The main\nthing, we feel, is to get some broad-visioned statute(s\nin hope of a fair, just and fast solution of this complex\nproblem.\nSen. George McGovern (D-S.D.) made haste to screech\na denunciation of the Nixon proposals as an abandonment\nof the \"moral and political leadership\" of the nation. Mr.\nJustice Roger Mudd, better known as a CBS-TV news-\ncaster, held the Nixon plans unconstitutional, if we heard\nhim aright as we think we did, a couple of minutes after\nthe President wound up his Thursday night speech.\nWith dissenters like these, isn't it fair to assume that\nthe Nixon proposals on busing and related matters must\nhave considerable merit?\nThe Philadelphia Unquirer\nAn Independent Newspaper\nPublished Every Morning by Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc.\n400 N. Broad Street, Philadelphia, Pa, 19101\nFREDERICK CHAIT, President\nSAM S. McKEEL, General Manager\nJOHN McMULLAN\nCREED C. BLACK\nJOHN S. GILLEN\nExecutive Editor\nEditor\nManaging Editor\nSunday, March 19 1972\n*\nPage 4-H\nMr. Nixon Points the Way\nOut of Busing Confusion\nThe question on school busing that\nresult of housing patterns even compa-\nmust be answered sooner or later, we\nrable education is still going to be edu-\nsaid in a recent editorial, is this: \"Is it\ncation in which some schools are largely\nthe national policy to eliminate compul-\nwhite and others are largely black.\nsory segregation SO that every pupil may\nDo we, then, at that point say that\nbe assigned to a school without regard\nthere can be no real equality of educa-\nto his race? Or is it national policy to\ntion unless we bus students out of their\ngo beyond that and set out\nto make\nown normal school districts to achieve\nevery classroom of every school an ac-\nan arbitrary racial mixture? Or that such\ncurate cross section of the makeup of\nbusing is desirable as a tool to promote\nthe total population?\"\nmore integration in American society?\nPresident Nixon's answer, as he told\nThat, it should be understood, is the\nthe country Thursday evening, is that\nissue.\n\"every state or locality must grant equal\neducational opportunity to every person\nWe have already seen one major\nregardless of race, color or national ori-\nbusing decision - in Charlotte, N. C. -\ngin.\" And by equal he means not only\nin which a federal judge held that \"ef-\nthat school doors must be open to all but\nforts should be made to reach a 71-29\nthat the quality of education offered in-\nratio in the various schools so that there\nside those doors must be as good in one\nwill be no basis for contending that one\nschool as in any other.\nschool is racially different from an-\nAs for going beyond that to what we\nother.\" And there are prominent politi-\ncalled the compulsory mixing pot, Mr.\ncal figures who take the position New\nNixon has again stated that he is \"op-\nYork Mayor John Lindsay stated during\nposed to busing for the purpose of\nthe Florida primary: \"I'm for busing be-\nachieving racial balance in our schools.\"\ncause it can bring black and white kids\nto school together, even though their\nWith this expression of his own\nparents still live apart.\"\nviews and the proposals he sent to Con-\nIt does not follow, however, that only\ngress Friday, the President has sharp-\nracists disagree with this balance-by-\nened the question and moved the nation\nbusing concept. On the contrary, we be-\ncloser to the time when it will be an-\nlieve that President Nixon correctly\nswered.\nread the temper of the country when he\nWhile proposing a temporary mora-\nsaid he believes that \"the majority of\ntorium on all court-ordered busing, Mr.\nAmericans of all races want more bus-\nNixon's proposed legislation for the long\ning stopped and better education\nrange would authorize limited busing if\nstarted.\"\nall other steps to break down deliberate\nNeither does it follow, as Sen.\nsegregation were unavailing.\nGeorge McGovern so quickly charged,\nHis major thrust, however, is on\nthat Mr. Nixon \"has asked Congress to\nbringing better education to the children\nset aside the 14th Amendment to the\nwhere they are, not taking the children\nConstitution.\" On the contrary, his pro-\nto where the better education is. \"We all\nposals reflect the doctrine enunciated by\nknow,\" he says, \"that within the central\nthe first Justice John Marshall in his\ncities of our nation there are schools SO\ncelebrated dissent in the Plessy case:\ninferior that it is hypocrisy even to sug-\n\"Our Constitution is color blind.\"\ngest that the poor children who go there\nThe details of his proposals need to\nare getting a decent education, let alone\nbe carefully studied, of course. But in\nan education comparable to that of\ntheir broad outline, we believe, they can\nchildren who go to school in the sub-\nhelp end the confusion which has made\nurbs.\"\nbusing such an unnecessarily divisive\nTrue. And we all also know that as a\nissue."
}