Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1923-03-01
;;1Fu0GRAPHIC PROCEEDINGS
,r.,.inued from Page Nine)

Continued rr0" '~s' ""e'
,,.horn. baby is $50. On this
newH ~ we could have saved 40 per
bass - the babies who died in this
cen. n 1920. the saving would have
state TO about $4,000. Ia, same
annuity estimates that at five years
au'"o child represents oil invest
OF o. ~ $3.50. You can do your own
me men. for the total saving rep
mai.nd as most deaths of children
resent the first year OF life. 1t
occu. almost insulting to put the
gems This level and l shall not
case cast any estimate of the value of
a'ahar | think most of you had
ID ones sometime.
goouording to the two drafts report
~, your committee the question
ca p.rrowed itself down to whether
mas ;sh TO accept Federal aid and
we rotion or whether we wish to
co-op; :. on our on initiative. The ma
90 w ranort favors the first plan for
i"f,llowing reasons: First-W c
Tue "a have about $4,000 a year more
"oa the Federal plan. Second-It
unu, cost the taxpayers of the State
N voonO 70 $4,000 year less. and Third
sS rSu state Department of Health
IA have a five-Near program on
S eu 10 work. These three reasons
WIZ. ~ me rather important. and in
se ,i.;on personally feel that coop
au U.;on with the Federal Board would
el"a ~orv GOOD thing. In the AZ states
uu.;,b have accepted the act | am
Nn VIA there has been no criticism of
lo'' nov II is being worked out. In
he a n
.ha state has been accepted. In
those two cases the states proposed
.nO use some of the money to subsid-
;vs private institutions. thlns
E s;,h was contrary TO the provisions
y the Act and new plans were pre-
o4.aa and approved. The Chief of
Tho Chidrcn's Bureau states that II
Inv .hoir conception Of their duty in
rosnect to the administration OF the
,hat they are to see that the
Money is spent for the purpose FOR
rbich it is appropriated. An auditor
,s employed for that purpose. The
thor five members of the division
ora two physicians. a public health
rurse-who at the request of the diff
farent states, are consulting with
them, also clerk and stenogra-
pher a
.he objections l have heard to ac-
can,ing the Federal Act. First-The
cons,itutionality Of the Act has been
Questioned by Massachusetts,. Their
ro,son no doubt. for this attitude, IS
that any Federal aid act takes from
them about dollar for every SOC
thew receive. In the case of Maine
his Is lust reversed. We get about a
dollar for every Soc we contribute in
tayes for these Federal aid purposes.
# seems very unlikely that the law
will he declared unconstitutional be-
cause so many appropriations have
been made under the general welfare
clause of the constitution. During
the long debate in Congress this ques-
tion was discussed at great length.
and among those who voted in favor
of the bill were all of the Maine DEL
egation. And l rather think they eN-
pected Maine to get some of the bcne-
fiji. In the final votes in Congress only
seven senator's and 50 representative
voted against the measure. You have
all noticed in the papers recently the
ruling of Justice of the Supreme
Court of the District of Columbia
pointing to the constitutionality of
the act If it is constitutional to
look after the education of the child
why is it not equally constitutional
10 see that he lives to the educational
age If you are so inclined YOU can
work up quite an argument against
public education. 1t would be just
about as sensible as an argument
against public health work which
must necessarily be largely educa-
tonal.
The doctrine of states rights. the
fear of paternaism and OF the i'll
effects Of Federal aid are more po-
tent arguments. l have tried to show
that in the administration of the act
there is no meddling interference.
The purpose Of the act was to Stimu-
late states where little or no work
had been done along these lines. And
properly-because surely a high
phase OF governmental activity is
legislation for the purpose Of better
Ing the conditions of human life and
giving every child an equal chance.
state rights should be carefully
guarded but there are even greater
rights the right of every child to be
Nell-born and to have a mother, liv-
ING and we'll. | believe that local
interest would be SO stimulated by
pubic health work in these lines that
after the fivc-year period over which
the act extends, the work would 20
oh through voluntary organi3a ions
una the death-rate continue 10 de-
crease.
Federal aid as q bucboar would bel
u
ei.ihg 1t in 50 many departments
ana without many objections. Very
reasonably it is said that perhaps the
FEDERAL Government has gone far
enough in that direction. But the
pace to stop that is in Congress,
"nich has taxed us for this appro-
p.'a,'oh ana our proportionate share
W, Inc tax amounts to about $500.
ihey will give us sl5.179 a year. The
uansef OF gifts may be a real one,
a''hough the AZ states which have
a'.epteo the act seem to be willing to
.'Ne the risk. If we can accept over
million and a half of Federal aid
a' we old last year in eight depart
'ehts why will this additional sum,
.e'S thah one per cent of that amount,
'"ase us to lose our Self-respect and
""S dutl TURN us all INTO DOL
'ks: Nobody who knows the tenn
~, Vi our people need fear that we
wa. lose our sense of sclf-reliance
ae our me freCd dom from such a
,l. or from any cause. Why is it
NO, as when Federal aid is given to
,,. OF forests. or agricultural or
,iohal education--in other words
=. s'.! .he Improvement of economic con-
, .n.vn nobody cries Social
s,n. Did anybody object to our
;na department of Health rcceiv-
ABOUT $4,000 in 1920 for COM
NV .'ng social diseases? Why pick on
~h;., small Federal appropriation
w. Is evidently so much needed?
val. should realize that health is
fth Just as much as forests and
jmnn no, try as 1 may. | find it
paa pVssibie to shudder over the dan
ala IN this small amount of Federal