ustxtxb_obs_1984_03_09_50_00004-00000_000.pdf

popular predecessor used to campaign as the only man in Congress with a zero rating by the ADA. Ronnie Dugger belittles Krueger’s vanguard support of extending the Voting Rights Act to embrace Mexican-Americans. But Mark White, then Dolph Briscoe’s Secretary of State, thought enough of the Anglo breach of faith to launch a tirade against Krueger almost as vituperative as the one we read from Geoffrey Rips. Krueger in Congress was a favorite of Carter, though his statements and votes reflected belief that the fiscal ineptitude of that administration would bring the country and the Democratic party to ruin, which is exactly what happened in 1980. Colleagues like Jim Wright and Bob Eckhardt did not think all that poorly of him, as I recall. Observer tirades notwithstanding, Krueger’s congressional record, campaign against Tower, and subsequent work on behalf of local Democratic candidates place him square in the middle between Doggett and Kent Hance. For Rips to claim otherwise its intellectually dishonest. When I read an endorsement in a publication with the distinguished history of the Observer’s, I expect more than a cynical play to the conservative readerships of Texas Monthly and Texas Business followed by nothing but column after column of attack of the chosen son’s opponent, on grounds of that opponent’s conservatism. Doggett seems to have determined that his best chance lies in taking the low road against Krueger. That’s hard-nosed politics, I suppose. But if there’s no place for balance and fairness in elective campaigning, there damn sure ought to be in journalism. Rips alludes to young Abe Lincoln and the union mineworkers, but his focus in history is far-fetched. In the zeal of his hatchetwork and certainty that the end justifies the means, he recalls the mentality of Haldeman and Erlichman. If Doggett and the Democratic voters prove me wrong, I will support him gladly in November. But will the Observer’s “loyalist Democrats” take another walk if they fail to get their way? This is the publication, recall, that once endorsed John Tower on grounds of ideological purity. Tower, in fact, is the only candidate that the Observer wing of the party can claim to have elected to statewide office. Keep it up, gang. You’re going to love Phil Gramm. Jan Reid, Austin. It is a shocking experience to be confronted by Bob Krueger’s voting record. For more information, see my source that other “hatchet job,” the Congressional Quarterly. G.R. UNESCO Concerns The article by Ruperto Garcia “The U.S. and Unesco” disturbs me; Mr. Garcia alibis for all the dictators that walk out every time an Israeli speaks at the UN. I agree with the New York Times .. . that the UN is ruled by a third-world ethos. President Reagan did the right thing A. S. Robbins, Lubbock. I just read your T. Observer article/interview about UNESCO. I would very much like to see the U.S. continue its membership who should I write to express my views & what about starting a petition perhaps w/the aid of nationwide magazine? Pete Sanford, Nacogdoches. The Real Disaster Your Page Two analysis of the South Texas agricultural disaster \(TO, account I’ve seen that examines how deficiencies in federal and state emergency aid programs led to the massive private-sector appeal for relief on behalf of jobless farmworkers. But neither this article nor the press in general seems to be probing the more basic issue of why an appeal of any kind, public or private, is necessary at all. Against a backdrop of almost total cessation of employment and unquestionable economic need brought on by the protracted freeze in the waning days of 1983, the Austin American-Statesman reports in late January the commitment to the Lower Rio Grande Valley of almost $2.5 million in state funds for emergency jobs and home repair, substantial quantities of USDA surplus canned goods, cheese and butter, and $10,000 from the Catholic archdiocese of San Antonio. A February 5 story in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram announces the donation of 30 tons of food by Episcopal parishes in southern and western Texas, followed a week later by an American-Statesman article on the airlift to the Valley of 24,000 tortillas, 3,000 pounds of pinto beans, and 102,000 pounds of potatoes. On February 25, thanks in large part to an appeal from the pulpit by Governor Mark White, the Baptist Church sends $50,000 in cash. When farmworkers lose their jobs, it seems, public assistance and private charity are the only games in town. Yet when Levi Strauss or Texas Instruments closes its doors and thousands of employees are sent packing, there are no appeals by the governor, no collections, no airlifts of potatoes and beans. For 49 years, factory workers have been protected by unemployment insurance, and when joblessness strikes they can count on that income for at least six months. The farmworkers of our state, on the other hand, only a handful of whom are covered by unemployment insurance, must depend on community benevolence for survival. Nor is unemployment compensation the only missing link in the chain of security that keeps most of the rest of us from ever having to be on the receiving end of a food or clothing drive. The nation’s first minimum wage law was enacted in 1938, but it wasn’t until 1966 that it was amended to apply at all to farm employment, and even then only to the very largest agricultural’ establishments. Eighteen years later, many of the state’s farmworkers are still earning less than the federal minimum wage and none of them are legislatively entitled to overtime pay. With average hourly earnings only 42 percent of the wage level in manufacturing, and employment only 30 to 40 weeks out of the year, hired field workers in Texas can hardly be expected to salt away much in the way of savings to fall back on when they’re out of work. Likewise, the fact that auto workers, shipwrights and so many other industrial laborers are not forced into poverty and dependence when they find themselves displaced from their jobs is very likely to be the result of income security provisions in a union contract, since workers in those industries have lived within the shelter of the National Labor Relations Act since 1935. Alas again, however, agriculture was excepted by that piece of legislation, and to this day Texas farmworkers still have no statutory guarantee of the right to collectively negotiate terms and conditions of their employment, and no federal or state administrative mechanism for resolving questions of representation and disputes over unfair labor practices. So while it’s encouraging that Texans are demonstrating a growing awareness of the extraordinary economic handicaps that beset the farmworker population 4 MARCH 9, 1984