The Daily Alaska empire., 1941-10-23
The Ban on New Building
CNew York Times


 The decision of the SPAB to prohibit mon essential" public private construction projects requiring apprecable quantities of critical ma erials" has the great merit that it does recognize the absolute priinacy of national defense. The Administration has in deed advanced far from the day when the President declared that the country should not be "discomboomerated" by the defense program With the basic principle that underes the SPABs decision there can be no possible quarrel This is that the nations resources of time, l. terials and skilled labor limited, production for defense needs can be expanded only if production for nondefense needs is contracted to it's minimum.
 The chief source for regret here is that other policies of the Federal Government have violated this principle The principle would dictate stringent economies in nondefense expenditures-not primar- fly for economizing in the time, materials and man power that these expenditures divert from defense. The principle would dictate the elimination of every pork barre' item, no matter how shrewdly lit may camouflage itself as a defense" item. It would dictate abandonment of instead of agitation for the St. Lawrence seaway project-of dubious value even in peacetime and a dangerously costly diversion of materiass labor and time needed for immediate defense. It would dictate reeonsidera- tion of the whole WPA program in the light of todays situation. When the Government is going to deny to citizens the right to build their own houses with their own money, how can it possibly continue nondefense construction and other pro- { but to provide employment?
 But though the basic aim of the SPAB decision is sound the particular method employed may be properly open to criticism Many important prac- Etical considerations are involved. When a decision taken by a democratic government is that may bring hardship and deprivation to consumers, bank ruptcy to contractors and unemployment to thou sands of workers it is primary duty of the Gov to make plain the unavoidable necessity for that decision. It must show that there is nothing arbitrary about it. MT. Ickes failure to do this regarding the oil situation has had unfortunate results conservation campaign the fundamen- tai purpose of which was undoubtedly sound The error is one that the Government cannot afford to repeat Above all, the public must be convinced that the governmental authorities are absolutely impartial in their decisions. Favoritism in admin stration or insistence on exempting pet pro- ject like the St. Lawrence scheme from the general rule, would be disastrous to the unified public sup port that suchl program requires. e .,
 A final question must be raised concerning whether the chief object sought by the SPABs new order could not be achieved with less disturbance to the national economy by attacking the problem from the other end The civilian demand for housing is increasing today mainly because the armament boom has put more purchasing power in the hands of many people. If the Government could sphon off this purchasing power either by taxation or compulsory savings plan that really reached the bulk of the population, it could re- move most of the abnormal demand for housing. This would make it less necessary for some board to decide the particular merits of each project
 But if the Government lacks the courage to take this fiscal step, then even the SPABs present decision may fail of it's basic intent. Forced to economize housing, the public would have just that much spending power to increase the demand for all other nondefense products While some direct control of new housing may be neces- sary therefore, the new SPAB decision can only increase the distortions in economy, unless the basic difficulty is boldly attacked at it's source.