Page 19


The Written Word . . . isn’t much good if you can’t read it. Our production department is packed with experience ingetting your ideas on paper. From design to full service computer typesetting, we can put the power of the pen to work for you. Call us at 442-7836. Em loyee Owned and Managed COMMUNICATIONS, INC. AUSTIN. TEXAS 1714 S. Congress 442-7836 Data Processing Typesetting Printing Mailing all through the 19th century, despite political rhetoric that would almost certainly outrage Kirk’s proposed board of Guardians. Nor, although Kirk claimed otherwise in his speech, can the results of the 1986 midterm elections be cited as evidence. Senate campaigns in some states that witnessed large turnout declines, such as Pennsylvania or New York, almost certainly were not \\marked by particularly high levels of negative advertising only unusually low levels of any advertising, as liberal Democratic candidates struggled for funds to get on TV at all. And in states like the Dakotas, where negative campaign ads were common, turnouts rose. A case as flimsy and outrageously partial as this inevitably raises misgivings about how seriously it was ever meant to be taken. And, on this point, the record of the DNC is not reassuring. Granted Kirk’s difficult position as ringmaster of a circus in which many of the most ferocious animals have minds of their own, still at no time during this decade has the DNC acted like an ‘organization that was seriously interested in raising voter turnout. First under Charles Manatt, and now under Kirk \(who as DNC Treasurer previously helped pioneer the use of so-called”soft money” to state party coffers as a way around Federal campaign finance regu lxi 0.11Ne xote 0 “A …43 “HILARIOUS” 0,041 e a k ‘f i gol oo _ vps o VON ,,, iov t ete , sesv c ” vl t’Oe eIN t Ole .,.- :,.., ….-:,4 _ _——-Ernesline Al * — Agnus Angst . -Mike McGrady, Newsday REAL PLEASURE” Janie Bernard, New York Post STARTS MAY 8th :….:…:’ vse ,i Es d t i ed th lu Ann n g n Lupe 1 P61111444 2 Fiji Ca414410i # 2 7-13iv Paul Kirk to consolidate control of the party in the hands of a narrow group of business interests. While actively building up the Democratic Business Council, the party has sat on its hands on voter registration even in 1984, when non-party groups literally begged for assistance. \(The party’s unwillingness to help probably sealed the doom of that much publicized effort, whose lackluster outcome is now being cited by party apologists as evidence of the futility of further efforts No wonder Paul Kirk and other party elite want Democratic candidates to send only “positive” messages in 1988! What would happen if in this race where so many candidates are virtual unknowns one of them suddenly started asking awkward questions about the connection between corporate donations and the party’s failure to take clearcut stands against Gramm-Rudman and in favor of progressive taxation and other policy alternatives that would constitute more than Reaganism with a human face? Or about the Democratic Business Council itself, which sometimes refuses even to disclose its members? Or about the burgeoning use of tax-exempt foundations as yet another means to evade laws requiring disclosure of the sources of campaign funds? Or the long-term consequences for members of labor unions \(which are also to be spared criticism under the Kirk tance of vast funds from the government to promote democracy almost anywhere but in the United States? Who indeed knows where such inquiries could lead? The proposed new cartel to regulate free speech in the party “of the people” is designed to make sure that Democratic elites never have to worry about such questions or to confront the rise in voter turnout they now piously claim to favor. , 12 MAY 1, 1987