The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1962-11-01

Gus nations of Western Europe, in
stead of getting aid from us, should
be carrying large part of the
worldwide aid burden.
There has been serious criticism
Of the poncy Of sending Foreign
Aid dollars to the Communist gov
ernments of Yugoslavia and Poland.
1t is said that the American dol
lars are used, not to benefit the
poor people of those countries
whom we assume are our friends,
but actually to strengthen the OPP
pressive hand against them. The
Administration has taken the posi-
ton that by withdrawing our aid
to those countries we would be
virtually surrendering them to
Communism.
And so, the debate RACES hot,
and will no doubt continue to do
so for years to come-for there is
an honest difference of opinion
on the subject The debate has not
been on cutting Foreign Aid out
! entirely Very few would want
that nowD, but rather, on cutting
it down.
There is a by-product to Foreign
Aid which is sometimes forgotten.
1t creates business and jobs for
Americans. About 500 of the For
eign Aid money is spent here in
this country. Should we cut off
all Foreign Aid suddenly, Ameri-
can industries would suffer, and
jobs would be wiped out, possibly
half a million.
Then too, some of our Foreign
Aid is doing a good job for US
giving us even more than our
moneys worth in certain areas
Christmas Spirit: New Frontier
|Style-The Postmaster General has
announced open competition for
the best design for special Christ
mas Stamp-intended to encourage
the public to send Christmas cards
this year by first class mail, there
by relieving the deficit-ridden Post
Office Department of little of
its deficit. There's one thing wrong:
According to the instructions of the
Postmaster General, the design for
this special stamp, marking the
day celebrating the birth of Christ.
cannot contain anything "of religi
Gus significance"
Big Jump In Spending, Not Mill
tary-Incrcases in Federal spending
have been principally on civilian
programs. not SO much on military.
Last years spending on military
was 1870 more than in 1860, while
spending by the Interior Depart
ment went up 49el and spending
On welfare programs went up 52et.
This years spending on farm sub
sidy ,800O00,000). topping that
of any other civil benefit program,
is ten times as much as it was in
1947. Among the many silly eX-
penditures under the farm sub
Isidy program is the payment to
the City of St. Louis for not plant
ing feed grains.) During 15-year
period, the Federal governments
spending for education has in
creased 22-fold-from S64 100000 to
81 ,5OC000,OOO.
Looking back over the last 8
years, while the increase in mill
tary spending went up only 146
the spending on civil benefits more
than doubled-an increase of 1850.
That's not all If Social Security
and other civil-benefit programs
not in the budget but paid for out
of special trust funds, were in
cluded, the increase in cost of
civil benefits would be 1870, bring
ing it to nearly three times what it
was in 1854.
The other night / heard a TV
debate in which one of the speak
ers said the Federal government
simply had to" provide certain
educational benefits because "thc
States cannot afford it,. This line
of reasoning shows either ignor-
ance or avoidance of the truth,
which is: The Federal government
| is worse off financially than any