ustxtxb_obs_1956_05_16_50_00008-00000_000.pdf

Slum Projects, Integration-Backed Young Democrats in State Convention Also Support Federal Aid to Education, More Welfare Spending, AUSTIN Young Democrats in state convention herejubilant over the new loyalist primacy in Texasadopted a series of startling resolutions endorsing everything from integration of.the schools to slum clearance and state-financed viimaries. They censured “certain gubernatorial candidates” for “political cowardice” in failing to take sides in the Johnson-Shivers precinct contestan obvious slap at Senator Price Daniel and possibly at othersand they censured Lt. Gov. Ben Ramsey and Mrs. H. H. Weinert, national committeeman and woman from Texas, and George Sandlin of the Shivers-held Democratic executive committee for failing to sign their group’s credentials to a recept national convention. They called this “lack of trust in performance of their duties.” , At a banquet Saturday night, at which Sen. Mike Mansfield \(D.crats; Senator Johnson, and Speaker Rayburn on their victory over th,,e Shivers forces, Byron Skelton, chairman of the Democratic Advisory Council, and a. candidate for Demo 7 cratic national committeeman to replace Ramsey, also took a dig at “certam officers of the party” for their failure to sign the young loyalists’ credentials. Resolutions adopted by the convention Sunday morning reflected a thoroughly liberal approach to state and national problems. In national affairs, the delegates endorsed the “Jeffersonian principle that all men are created equal” and urged compliance with the Supreme Court decisions as to integration in the public schools and public facilities as quickly as possible and supported fair emplOyment practices legislation, “Truman policies” of foreign economic aid, the 18-year-old vote, more federal public power projects like .TVA, and 90 percent of farm parity. They denounced “favoritism to certain large corporations.” They took a sidewise di g the 271/2 percent oil depletion a b llowance-olong a sacred cow in Texas politicsby charging that it “encourages the excessive with”if continued will lead to the premature exhaustion of that mineral in its underground deposits.” They urged federal aid to education as a means of financing higher teacher salaries, more school facilities, and free lunches for the needy. On the state level, in addition-to the censures mentioned, they “condemned and censured” Shivers for “his malicious and demagogic campaign of intimidation and vilification against the loyal ‘a n d patriotic leadership of Speaker -. Sam Rayburn and other Democrats of known integrity.” They did not take action on Johnson’s favorite sonship. They advocated ,repeal of the.”right to work” laws; elimination of the poll tax ; legislative investigation of state scandals ; passage of state enabling legislation to permit Texas cities with areas of substandard dwellings to get federal funds for slum clearance and public housing; and payment of the costs of county and state primaries by the state. They .criticized social services provided by the state government for elderly citizens and those in eleemosynary institutions and urged the Legislature to appropriate funds to insure them “the services to which they as persons ,of dignity and integrity are entitled.” The convention also agreed to take steps to form a “Democratic ‘Youth League” for young Democrats in high schools between the ages of 15 and 18. Edgar Berlin of Port Neches, former state representative, was elected state president, replacing Dean Johnston of Houston. Houston Clinton, Jr., of Austin also sought the post. Dusty Rhodes .of Abilene was elected vicepresident, Jack Matthews of Houston secretary, Roger Daley. of Austina campaign aide of Ralph Yarborough the national committeeman of the group, and Sassy Hodson of Fort Worth the national committeewoman. The convention heard various candidates for office, including Yarborough, Will Wilson and Tom Moore Harding made a hit with the group when he told them he was ‘running for treasurer because his wife likes pretty clothes, the job pays more than any *other job he., ever had before, and he just needs the money. His .opponent is the ‘incumbent, Jesse James. A T A PANEL Saturday af. ternoon, Dr. Fred Meyers, economics profegsor from the University of Texas, speaking as an individual, said that about half of the state’s revenue comes from selective sales taxes or taxes “that oddly resemble them” and observed that they are paid by people “who can least afford them.” He said he favors a state income tax that would include a progressivepersonal income tax. While this may not be politically feasible, he said, a “corporation profits or net income tax,.is within the bounds of expediency.” , Ralph Yarborough, who was in the audience, rose and responded : “I am strongly opposed to a state income tax..We have tremendous resources in Texas.” He said that in the income tax, the person who pays is “the person. earning_ the money , There’s no depreciation on a man’s sweat and blood. If you have a ,27 1h, percent depreciation allowance’ you can get by. I do ‘not criticize. the allowance, because those fellows are taking tremendous gambles. \(In this article, Willie Morris, crusading editor of The Daily Texan and a Rhodes Scholar from Texas this year, discusses for Observer readers the decision of the University, faculty last week to defend the right of its members to take stands for any AUSTIN A suddenly outspoken faculty at the University of Texas has repudiated a proposed regulation which would have prohibited professors from “public advocacy of, or opposition to, candidates for governor, lieutenant governor, and legisla ture.” The General Faculty voted down the administrative backed proposal and passed one of its own. The adopted recommendation, offered by Dr. Frederic Meyers, associate professor of economics, maintains the present University, political rule “as it has been interpreted in practice,” which “includes the right publicly to support candidates for any political office.” The pre-existing rule states that a staff.member “should refrain from involving the University in partisan ‘politics.” The Meyers clause will go to the Regents for approval. It is expected, however, that the Regents will not risk the campus controversy which w\( uld,be caused by a veto. Most University observers consider the action a significant victory for academic freedom and professorial rights. _ The sequence of events was marked heavily with irony, for. the restrictive clause was being pushed not only by the Faculty Councila smaller group of faculty representativesbut also by the Committee on Academic Freedom and Responsibility, which normally “But,” Yarborough went on, “this natural gas is leaving Texas virtually untaxed. Neighboring states like Louisiana are taxing that gas far more than we are. We should increase this natural resources tax here.” Meyers said he believed he could,, draft a state income tax that would meet Yarborough’s objections and that it would be deductible from gross federal income tax. He said that Legislatures for years have debated a false opposition between sales and natural resources taxes. “Where is the peculiarity of oil and gas?” he asked. He said aircraft, chemicals, aluminum, and other industrial concerns in the state are not paying enough state taxes. “Even as between corporations the tax structure is extremely discriminatory,”he said. Mrs. R. D. Randolph of Harris County was asked what liberals could do to solidify convention gains. “Work for a strong liberal organization, which can be done only by’setting up liberal organizations’ in each precinct in your county,” she replied. :Questioned on the Democratic Advisory Council, Mrs. Randolph observed: “We all know that the D.A.C. as it was first brought about was not from the bottom up, . it was’ from the top and meant to go to the top. Some peo. plc felt it should repreSent the people in the state. There were several battles …. “A steering committee was set up a year ago in Waco . to -do some organiz ing. We thought we would take some of our young men experienced in or , ganization and give. them areas to or ganiie. A great deal of time was lost and a lot of good was accomplished.” She thought the need for Ii.A.C. would have been expected to be highly vocal against any restrictions upon faculty political participation.. President Wilson had requeSted a “clarification” of the old rule. When the Faculty Council and the Committee on Academic Freedom complied by naming the offices of governor, lieutenant governor, and the legislature as “sensitive areas,” there was a flurry of vociferous protest from the faculty at large. MANY CONTENDED the faculty was going out of its way to restrict itself. One, Dr. R. C. Stephenson, associate professor of English, described the proposal. as “self-emasculation.” Another, Charles Alan Wright, visiting associate piofessor of law, said he thought it “incomprehensible that a faculty should itself impose” addi Willie Morris tional restrictions on faculty freedom. A third, Dr. Daniel Kading, assistant professor of philosophy, said, “If indeed we do wish to place concern for the public relations of the University above concern for our political rights,” and if “open and public” pronountements by faculty members did constitute a threat to our public relations, then “let us go as far as rigorous logic dictates and deny ourselves the right to engage in any political activity whatever.” At the general faculty meeting, Dr. Meyers said : The proposed rule is more dangerous than it appears. Where will we stop? Will we in the future be gagged from talking about oil and gas,beef, integration, taxation, tariffs, or wage and hOur laws, because, if we say what we think, it might offend an influential legislator? would cease -if the loyalists take over the party organization in Texas. Chris Dixie, Houston lawyer and another member of the panel,. interposition is not a legal doctrine “counterfeit like, a $3 bill”and said he couldn’t understand how Governor Shivers could argue that he “had a right to use constitutional rights to destroy some rights of other citizens under the same constitution.” At another point. in the discussion, Yarborough, ‘questioned on his , plan for valley development through selfliquidating dams, said that while some of the funds for the Lower Colorado River Authority had been borrowed from the federal government, they were being repaid. “I propose we ,get all the federal money set up in a federal program for. our area. I see no need to secede from the federal government,” he said. R.D, Convention Rspercussioni may teach some people a lesson about pretending to be a Democrat and not being one,” said Rayburn. ,, Porter said indireCtly that Senator Johnson implied “that he .will still vote the Democratic ticket even though his party is controlled by people of social istic philosophies.” 1 “. I appreciate the invitation [replied the governor at his press conference late in the week], but it’s a matter of individual choice and conscience. I still consider myself a Texas Democrat and a Wilsonian liberal. Asked whether it is “conceivable” that he might campaign for Eisenhower in 1956 as he cjjd in 1952, Shivers said, “Yes, yes, sure. I have alStevenson. You figure the answer to ,that one.” He again predicted that Eisenhower would defeat Stevenson in a re-match in Texas in 1956, Said Dr. Dan Stanislawski, professor of geography : The committee recommendation does honor to no one. Let us speak from our feet when we can, and plead from our knees when we must. Said Dr. George Sanchez, professor of education : Were this proposal to be enacted into University regulations, I would be tempted to say, like some of my antecedents said at times when dealing with the Spanish crown, `Obedezo pero no cumplo,’ I obey, but I do not comply. A campus mystery has been produced by actions during the controversy of Dr. Clarence Ayres, professor of economics, whose occasional -runins with legislatures some years ago were standard University lore. Ayres, spokesman for the Academic Freedom committee, advocated the restrictive clause. “The committee,” he told the faculty, “in pinpointing the area of political responsibility, drew a little .circle around the offices of governor, lieu-. tenant governor, and the legislature.” Dr. John Silber, assistant professor of philosophy, replied that “the little circle” to which Ayres referred “happens to comprise 95 percent of my political concern.” BOTH VOTES in favor of the Meyers proposal and against the restrictive rulewere overwhelming. As a result, the administration took a sound defeat and at least two members of the academic freedom committee may lose their committee positions, The Daily Texan commented: The action was a remarkable victory for the University community. On the heels of Saturday’s precinct conventions, it gives occasion for hopeful speculation on the part of those Texans who have kept faith in the philosophy of free expression and of higher education untrammeled by politics and economics. UT Faculty Rejects Proscription