The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

6 o Thursday, February 24,1966 THE McHENBY PLAINDEALER Section Two -- Page Three dapitot Report One of the most enticing proposals before the Congress te'that of "tax sharing." If such a- "tax-sharing" bill is passed, an amount equal to 2 percent of total federal, revenues will be returned to the states to be used as the state governments shall determine. The pending t a x-sharing plan, sometimes referred to as the Heller plan, was first developed by Walter Heller, former chairman of the President's Council of Economic Advisors. It is backed by the Governors' Conference, an influential body with which to contend. In recent years, leaders in both political parties have advocated tax sharing. The present proposal is new only in the sense that it proposes a sharing of federal revenues--with no strings attiifihed. It also presupposes a surplus in the federal Treasury. Federal grants to the states originated in 1836 when the surplus remaining from the sale of public lands was "loaned" to the states. However, modern dny grants to the states began in 1916 with the appropriation of funds for highway purposes, requiring approval of a federal agency as a condition to receiving art allocation of federal monies. Existing sharing of federal revenues may be found in more than 80 Federal grant-inaid programs which earmark Federal funds for specific purposes. Also, most of the present programs require matching funds by the state governments. During the current fiscal year, federal appropriations for state grant-in-aid programs will total more than $13 billion. The proposed "no strings attached" allocation of federal revenues to the states is predicated upon a continuing increase in federal tax receipts. The pressure upon state governments for additional services encourages state officials to explore this as well as other possible sources of additional revenue. The tax-sharing proposal appeals particularly to those who find nothing objectionable in federal handouts, prgvided they do not include Federal "controls." On the surface, the tax-sharing measure is most attractive. It purfxjrts to strengthen state gQVernments by providing the states with added revenues. Also, it is intended to relieve state and local officials of bureaucratic controls from Washington. These arguments in behalf of (a) decentralization, and (b) reduction of bureaucratic controls, are nigh onto irresistible. . Howevef, as one contemplates such a proposal, several questions come to mind. It would seem well to be reminded that under the Articles of Confederation (which preceded our federal Constitution) the governments of the thirteen states operated a sort of taxsharing plan under which the sole federal revenues were those which the states contributed to it from their tax collections. Few would deny that our federal system began to operate more effectively when the national government obtained its independent sources of revenue as provided in the federal Constitution. The present proposal (the converse of the situation prevailing whpn our Republic was founded) suggests that the 50 states may be incapable of producing their own revenues. A close examination of the relative positions of the federal and state treasuries discloses that the federal debt has increased steadily since 1960. A modest surplus was recorded in the last fiscal year of President Eisenhower's Admini s t r a t i o n . S i n c e t h e n , t h e Treasury has reported' annual deficits of from $3.5 billion to $6 billion during the six fiscal years of 1961 to J.966. Where, then, is the "federal tax surplus" in which the states would share? A number of the states have demonstrated a far better record of fiscal management. Michigan is reported to have an accumulated surplus of more than $122 million. Pennsylvania finished its last fiscal year with a surplus of $105 m i 11 i a n. Illinois, Wisconsin, Ohio and Texas have all reported surpluses of revenues over expenditures. It is expected that the measure for "tax sharing" will be a major issue before the 2nu session of the 89th Congress. Among the important work of a member of the United States Congress is to serve at international conferences. During the final days of January, this member of Congress had the opportunity to participate in two such international meetings. On Jan. 27 and 28, the writer represented the United Sates Inter-Parliameritary group at a meeting in Paris, France, with officials of the United Nation's Educational, Social and Cultural organization (Unesco) relative to problems of education in the underdeveloped nations of the world. The Paris conference represents a forward step in inter* national cooperation enabling Unesco officials and representatives of national legislatures to share views on problems of common interest. The conference considered plans for establishing pilot and experimental projects in behalf of literacy training in the developing countries of Africa, Asia and South America. In addition, the participants at this T ARRIVED! Another §ig Shipment /Mi Vt*<< j \ • • j ri V ABB SSie Teen-afp Ha®e Zippor Bach Slips On Easily Cowe®g@-Bmo[pllirmd 6®°©© B< At dances! school! th© coffee shop! White vinyl boots are the latest! Tricot lining, 8©atle heel. Sizes 5-10. meeting considered a resolution sponsored by this member of Congress recommending the greater use of scientific and technical knowledge in promoting economic development in these same emerging countries. Many international meetings occurring these days are concerned with the problems of armed Conflict. Therefore, it is heartening that substantial and serious attention is being given by responsible individuals in nations throughout the world as well as in such reputable international organizations as the Inter-Parliamentary Union and Unesco to imprbve educational opportunities and provide literacy training in helping establish greater understanding between the peoples of the world. Then, on Jan. 29 to 31, members of the United States Senate and House of Representatives (including this member) gathered for a conference near London, England, with British members of Parliament and various educational, religious and business leaders of the United Kingdom. The conference, sponsored and financed by the Ditchley foundation, a private organization, was aimed at strengthening British- U. S. relations. Several knotty problems affecting relationships between our two countries were on the agenda of the Diotchley Foundation conference, including (a) the war , in Vietnam, (b) trade with the Soviet bloc, (c) mutual aid to the developing countries, and (d) questions relating to balance of payments. It is to be doubted that any definite agreements resulted. On the other hand, it is certain that greater understanding of the respective points of view prevalent in England and in the United States were clarified from this exchange of views. This is the third ye^r that the Ditchley Foundation conference has been held. The benefactor, David Wills, head of the British tobacco company that bears his name, has been asked many times the reason for endowing this activity between two nations which are already drawn together naturally by a common language, a common legal heritage and many other points of similarity. As Mr. Wills explains it, he endowed the foundation "be cause the special relationship b e t w e e n B r i t a i n a n d t h e United States is too important to be left to develop by chance." The threfe-day session at Oxfordshire, near London, was a memorable and productive event. A State of the Union message such as President Johnson delivered recently to a joint session of the Congress is nothing new. These messages have been delivered since the foundation of our Republic. Indeed, the federal Constitution provided that the President 'shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient." The practice of the President appearing personally before joint sessions of the House and Senate commenced with our first President, George Washington, in 1790, and continued with our second President, John Adams. Thereafter, commencing with Thomas Jefferson and for more than 100 years, no President came . in person to the Capitol to ;jddi •ess any sessions of the Congress. It was not until 1913 that President Woodrow Wilson again established the precedent of coming to a joint session of the Congresss and delivering the "State of the Union message" in person. This caused some consternation at that time. However, the practice was continued by President Harding and President Coolidge. In fact, President Coolidge added radio transmission to his two annual messages-- enabling the entire nation to hear his oral addresses to the United States Senators and Representatives Most students of government agree that appearances "in person" by the Presidents have enhanced their x-oles as legislative leaders. In the earliest days of the Republic, Alexander Hamilton helped President Washington gain executive domination of legislative activity. After the term of President John Adams, Congress took over, and initiated most of the important legislative measures until the time of President Theodore Roosevelt in 1901. A steady dimunition of congressional initiative occurred under President Franklin to the present time. In fact, D. Roosevelt and has continued in recent years many important legislative measures recommended by the President have «<been delivered to the Congress in the form in which the Administration desired to have them enacted. Today, of course, the State of the Union message with full color television coverage is an event of the greatest importance in promoting popular support of the person and of the program of the President. This, in turn, has the inevitable effect of further diminishing the congressional role in legislative initiative and control. The development this year of a Sate of the Union program by the minority (Repulican) leadership, coupled with the pending proposals to televise sessions of the Congress, is. evidence of a determination on the part of many members of Congress to reassert a more influential role on the part of the Congress on legislative matters. The contest for legislative leadership between the President and the Congress continues, and is an important' element bearing upon the State of the Union. Read the Classifieds . ytp WEEK Knitting Course Complete isfiissers Kit -- $5.00 Purchase of Kit Required REGISTRATION FROM FEB. 24 to MAR. 3 £ at the YARN BARN For Further Information Call 385-1631 or 385-2746 1804 N. Riverside Drive >IcHenry, Illinois | 53 KLIN" McHenry, 111. CHOICE OF: Reg. $1.29 -- Fine Quality Gaberdine (Size 3 - 6X) Boxer Shorts Is \ Infant Crawler (Size 9 - 2 4 m o . ) 3 DUST PAN Red, turquoise, pink A or yellow plastic. MQ Vinyl-coated metal. Asst. colors. 5%-in. Res. 15c OUR FIRST Reg. 29c Yi 6IRLS' PANTIES PLASTIC BIBS E MAT FREEZE 2/69• WOMEN'S Durable plastic. VA? pt, size. With cover. Wg Res. 15c Square or. round. Metal over asbestos. . S9c With crumb catcher. Infants' designs. Double crotch. Acetate tricot Printed Eiderlon. Elastic leg. S9S3 , n ring, ftfam sale! INSULATED MUG Asst. colors lined in 4ft white. 12-07. size. £ [LACE SCARFS 8 dripless spouts. Plastic. 8-oz. size. Rag. 19c Embossed. Asst. colors. Big 15xl0-inch. Reg. 25e SrlGAL! CEREAL Women's Terry Scuffs 79c , Men's Sport & Casual Socks 2/89c Boys' Crew Socks 4/89c Purse-Size Hair Brush 19c Women's Print Handkerchiefs reg. 39c 3/69c Embossed Rayon Head Scarfs Reg. 59c .. 44c Reg. 15c Flashlight Battery 6/49c Flower Pot or Water Can Reg. 49c .... 2/49c Ekco Kitchen Tools Reg. to 69c 2/49c 5 Qt. Pail with Cover Reg. 39c 29c Reg. 39c Bath Bowl Brush 19c Reg. 29c Perfumed Deodorants 19c Reg. 59c Ironing Board Cover 39c Reg. 49c 70 oz. Utility Pitcher 29c Reg. $1.00 3-1 Photo Frame. 69c Reg. $1.19-$1.29 16x20 Framed Pictures 79c Reg. $1.79 Stackable Cutlery Tray .... $1.19 Reg. 98c Storage Boxes 10Vfexl3V2x3Vfe 69c Reg. 29c Plastic Bread Basket 19c Reg. 98c Condycote Scatter Rug 18x30 .. 69c Reg. $1.49 Corn Broom 99c Reg. 98c Texturef Nylon Hose 2/99c Reg. 59c Cosmetic Bag 39c Poly lid seals it tight. 22-oz. size. Reg. 19c Will not chip, break, 4%. crack, 6%-in. size. Jfv Reg. 25c " W, • SERVBNG !©WL ' A. 9-inch plastic. Yel- ft low, blue, pink, turq. Ml Reg. 19c w Reg. $3.59 SWING - TOP WASTE BASKET $1 m&m PSasUsc Boxed Select from tfivo different assort* ments, oacfr containing 21 cards. All-occasion or birthday/got-well. 5' AREA it!G Non-skid Isaefc TEEiASKIET 99 ! I Rigid linear plas tic. Decorator colors. Holds 28-qts. Reg. $1.59 irsg. FrUngodi " ' ends. Nine dee orator colors^ Oo& §2»9G mmm LOOK WHAT 9c WILL BUY • 15c Metal Ashtrays • 19c Butter Dish 15c Pie Container • 19c Measuring Cup • 15c Note Paper • 15d Crayola Crayons 15c Sprinkle Top SAVE 60c I Reg. $2.49 WESTERN JEA^ Regular or slims, * Boys' sizes 4 to 16.I Manway® BOYS' UNDERWEAR 2/$1.39 T-Shirts 2/$1.19 Shorts Aluminum. 6rmuffin tin, 9- in. round cake, 1-qt. sauce. White and gold jp*stNl looks like onyx. 15 Women's Terry Softs •••••••••••••••••••••A 79c Man's Sp@rt & 6asaaa8 Socks2/89r Beys' Grow Sect's.. - * 4/89c PfiBg-SQoSize C2&3? Jrush •. 19c ON SALE THURSDAY --FRIDAY -- SATURDAY McHenry, Illinois