ustxtxb_obs_1967_03_17_50_00003-00000_000.pdf

Page 5

by

spiritual values of such drugs remain to be explored; they may not be worth the risk, but it would be a pity if panic legislation discouraged trained investigators, particularly when as yet accurate medical reports or statistics have not been completed about these drugs along the lines of the Surgeon General’s report on lung cancer and cigarette smoking,” Sullivan said. Afterwards he suggested that it is ironic “that they’re trying to pass a bill to legalize drinks and at the same time pass one to put people in jail for two or three years” for possessing LSD. His intention, he added, in appearing before the committee was to protest a bill that would be “far more dangerous than the actual drug.” But after he read his statement, Sullivan was asked a question whose answer overshadowed, in press accounts, the points he said hesought to make. He has taken LSD, he said, answering a commitee member, eight times; he afterwards said he had wanted to “satisfy my curiosity”; it has been a “long time” since he took a trip. He was irritated at the play which his “trips” got in the daily press, at the expense, he believes, of the main point he said he had in testifying. A committee member, after the hearing, praised Sullivan for “having the guts to come up here and put it on the line. We got more good out of his testimony than anyone else’s. We found out some things we needed to know.” The three LSD bills would alsoban possession of amphetamines, barbituates, and other hallucinogens \( such as LSD and bituates was the testimony of C. Dean Davis, general counsel of the State Pharmacy Board, who topped Sullivan’s admission of having taken LSD by disclosing that Tower sniper Charles Whitman used drugs “routinely . . . like candy.” This fact had not been disclosed before. It had been discovered through an investigation by the Pharmacy Board. Davis said it is “a graphic illustration” of drug abuse. He said previous reports, as the one issued by the state about Whitman, were wrong in saying that Whitman was not under the influence of drugs at the time he shot 49 persons. There was insufficient blood to determine the presence of any drugs, Davis said. Musgrove has other plans. He has introduced a variation of a loyalty oath bill: any student of a state-supported college who writes or speaks in favor of overthrowing the government or who claims allegiance to a country with which the U.S. is at war would be expelled. Asked about the bill afterwards, he said “Well, I don’t intend to push it, but we have to please Mr. Hunt.” There is also talk that Musgrove would like to join in, should Sen. Grady Hazlewood, Amarillo, follow through with plans to investigate campus leftists \(see story M EANWHILE, in other developments in the morality field, the House has passed a “code of ethics” bill, strengthing the 1957 act. It would require members to file financial statements, disclosing any interests of 10% or more in a firm that is regulated by a state agency. Legislators would be banned from receiving gifts that “might tend to influence” them in their official duties. The bill was written by Nugent. Rep. Clyde Haynes, Vidor, added an amendment to Nugent’s ethics bill that would require the governor to list his financial resources. Nugent didn’t want the amendment but Haynes had enough support among fellow members. Another amendment, added by Rep. R. H. Cory, Victoria, would require legislators to list the names of relatives who are on the state payroll; a third amendment, that of Rep. Leroy Wieting, Portland, will require legislative candidates, also, to list stateemployed relatives. The bill is expected to die a quiet death in the Senate, which has twice in recent years ignored similar House measures. However, the proviso that would require Gov. John Connally to disclose his holdings might tempt some in the Senate to consider enacting the bill. The “equal shooting rights bill” is with us again, -reintroduced by Rep. Bob Bass, DeKalb, who was unsuccessful with it in 19565 \(Obs., March 19, 1965, The Bass bill holds that a 1911 Texas statute is unfair; it permits aggrieved husbands, As Others See Us Gov. John Connally addressed the New York Chamber of Commerce earlier this month, an appearance which elicited this response from Murray Kempton in his New York Post column: “Gov. Connally has cold eyes and a sulky, self-pitying mouth; one remembered a television program on which he, Sen. John Tower, and State Atty. Gen. Waggoner Carr appeared in succession, each fixing the same basilisk gaze upon the camera and the shattering impact of the recognition that, when the Eyes of Texas Are Upon You, you are in serious trouble. . . . “Texas is not a state nor John Connally a governor to be trusted to house animals at my expense as a taxpayer , without stringent precaution and regulation. . . . He is Texas in parody, at once pitied and overweening.” Another columnist, Joseph Kraft, has recently written, in the Washington Post: “The chief feature of Texas politics is that for decades a state with all the ingredients of a two-party system remained a one-party state. Under that condition, Lyndon Johnson did not learn the politics of rallying majorities. He learned the politics of confusing, dividing, and routing the opposition.” but not wives, to shoot at interlopers in the boudoir. It is suspected that, in truth, what Bass really wants is for the 1911 law to be struck down. Some attorneys have conjectured that, even if it was, “the unwritten law” would still make it difficult to convict of murder or manslaughter any aggrieved husband who had caught one of his wife’s boy friends, shall we say, red-handed. Liquor by the drink may be making a comeback. Counted out as dead a. few weeks ago, after a tide of mail had rolled in, the issue now is picking up support as tourism interests are putting on the pressure. As now written, the bill would take automatic effect in all or part of 122 counties that permit sale in package stores and on-premises consumption of beer and wine. A local option provision would enable enactment in other counties and precincts.. Sen. V. E. Berry has introduced two proposed constitutional amendments, making the state entirely wet or all dry. “If the preachers want the state dry, they ought to be willing to vote to dry it up,” Berry said. “We haven’t had a vote on this issue for 33 years. Maybe the state wants to go dry.” Parimutuel betting on horse racing is still considered unlikely to pass. T HERE ARE AT least two “obscenity” bills pending. One would permit .local officials to ban movies, books, magazines, and pictures that violate “Texas standards of decency.” The other bill would punish publishers and sellers of “obscene” books. The seller would be presumed to know the material in question was obscene. The House has sent to the Senate a bill closing the loophole in the “Sunday closing law.” It would remove the provision that permits a buyer to declare the purchase of certain items an emergency on either Saturday or Sunday, whichever day the store has chosen not to sell the banned items. This is generally recognized now as not a moral or religious issue \(“keepmatter, to limit weekend competition, particularly that of discount stores. But Rep. Don Gladden, Fort Worth, said there are religious implications, in that the law presumes that people worship on either Saturdays or Sundays only. In ‘the Senate, Jim Bates, Edinburg, has introduced a bill to repeal the entire Sunday closing law. Another retail sales bill is that of Rep. Elmer Tarbox, Lubbock. It would require stores to mark their prices up at least 8% above cost. Sen. George Parkhouse, Dallas, has a bill that would legalize abortions to preserve the life or physical health of a mother, or in cases where the unborn child might be defective, and in instances of rape or incest. Delwin Jones, Lubbock, has introduced a measure that would set standards of dress and grooming for students at statesupported colleges. He says it’s sort of a beautification bill. G.O. March 17, 1967 3