editorial
0Oll
Potential problem
The effects of the Nixon Administration's
budget cuts for social welfare programs will
not be confined to the big city battlefields of
the War on Poverty. Under changes proposed
by the Department of Health, Education and
Welfare (HEW), Nebraska's welfrre system
mcy have to be re-adjusted.
Earlier this year HEW announced what it
called p "redefinition of potential." The
redefinition would eliminate federal support
for programs aiding persons now classified as
potential welfare recipients. Nebraska Wel?re
Department Director Lawrence Grahom hrs
predicted that this redefinition of potential
will work to eventually put more pe ople on
the welfare rolls h Nebraska, because there
will be no federal rmney available to finance
programs for persons who need help but who
do not qualify as regular welfare candidates.
More locally, the redefinition of potential
will force the closing out of the Lancaster
Office of Mental Retardation (LOMR) social
services for retarded children. In Nebraska,
the Welfare Department contracts with
regional organizations, such as LOMR, to
provide education and job training for the
mentally retarded.
Fifty-five of the 62 children currently
enrolled in LOMR's Humrn Developmsnt
Program would be ineligible to receive federal
funds under the redefinition of potentirl.
LOMR's residential services,
five-and-seven-day hostel program', W'uld be
eliminated. The foster children's program
would have to end. In other words, the
budget cutbacks included in HEW's
redefinition will effectively elimlnrte all of
LOMR's children's program", since irrre thn
four-fifths of the children currently enrolled
are "potential" rather than actud public
welfare recipients. They would not qualify for '
welfare" 'money" under the new guidelines and""
LOMR cannot afford to continue the
programs for such a small number of children.
If the LOMR programs are eliminated, the
children they now serve would have to go to
one of two places to their family home, or to
the Beatrice State Home. For a significant
portion of the children, home is a place,
possibly in a rural area, that has no special
schools or programs for the mentally
retarded. And the Beatrice State Home has
neither the personnel nor the facilities to
accomodate children.
-The children currently enrolled in LOMR
programs are not the only people effected by
the redefinition of potential. Many persons
have gone through the training programs for
greater independence and now hold full-time
jobs and are no longer on welfare. If these
people still needed LOMR social service
assistance the proposed changes would require
them to take a step backward onto welfare,
because the LOMR services would have been
financially eliminated.
LOMR and similar regional programs
throughout the state have earned Nebraska
national praise for having the best and most
projects to aid the mentally retarded, of any
state in the'union. With the financial support
of federal, state and local funds, these services
have been made available at no charge to the
parents of retarded children, who in most
cases would be unable to afford such
programs on their own.
But now the LOMR services to children
will be eliminated by administrative
redefinitions. Apparently there is little
consideration being given to the merit and
success of individual programs by the
Washington budget trimmers.
LOMR officials say the new regulations
will become law on March 14. They have
launched a desperate attempt to change the
HEW decision or to get an exemption for
LOMR. A petition opposing the redefinition
has been drafted and may be signed by
concerned citizens at a booth near the north
entrance to the Nebraska Union. Letters of
protest should be sent to the office of Social
and Rehabilitation Services, Washington D.C.
Tom Lansworth
S&'tf.fn
"You are tyipcal American housewives ... Do
you think food prices are too high?"
"Reporters are always dragging in r?d
herrings!"
Liberals, conservatives oppose aid to North
Indicative of the isolationist mood
now prevalent from Congress down to
the local citizenry is the growing
opposition to the Nixon
Administration's proposals for
reconstruction aid to North Vietnam
($2.5 billion over five years, plus an
additional $5 billion for the rest of
Indochina).
Liberals are out to torpedo the plan
for a number of reasons. Some
contend that domestic programs have
a greater priority than does Indochina.
While the President subjects social
welfare projects to either total
dismemberment or "ruthless"
cutbacks, it seems distorted to send
money so badly needed at horno
thousands of miles away to Southeast
Asia. Others claim that Indochina aid
could be used as economic blackmail
by the United States to influence the
Jin. "f n
"I think it's called a policy of peace with honorarium."
region for political purposes.
Conservatives argue against aid to
North Vietnam on grounds of "fiscal
responsibility." As Congressman
Charles Thone indignantly exclaimed,
"It's inconceivable to me that they're
going to shovel out tax money over
there."
Furthermore, it is not outrageous
to help rebuild a country whose men
and material just two months ago were
slaughtering American soldiers? Would
we not be, id effect, rewarding North
Vietnam for her military crusrde and
strengthening her capacity to renew
the conflict?
But let us pursue this topic further.
Does the United States not have a
moral obligation to help put back
together the country that wo have
ripped apart, and to help the people of
Indochina to reconstruct their own
lives after years of suffering in a cruel
and dubious conflict? Certainly those
quarters which saw our destructive
role in the war as immoral must now
agree that reconstruction is the only
moral path. Justice requires at least a
minimum of restitution.
Henry Kissinger last week made
several good arguments for the
administration's policy. He reminded
us that the leaders of North Vietnam
have spent almost all their lives either
in prison or in fighting. "At no time in
their lives have they had an
opportunity to participate in a normal
diplomatic relationship with other
countries, or to concentrate on the
peaceful evolution of their country.
Now, for whatever reason, they have
indicated some interest in at least
exploring the possibility of a more
constructive relationship and of a.
more peaceful evolution," he said.
Kissinger added that assistance,
therefore, should not be looked upot
as a handout but as an attempt "to
build peace in Indochina aid therefore
to contribute to peace in the world."
In addition, aid to the North will
contribute, to its self-sufficiency,
making the country less beholden to
the USSR and China, perhaps
increasing its independence to the
point where North Vietnam may
become the Southeast Asian
counterpart of Yugoslavia.
Also, it is hoped that American aid
to Hanoi may soften its (Hanoi's)
territorial ambitions (if there ever were
any beyond unification of the
country) and bend the North towards
moderation and increased respect for
Washington.
Consider that in 1965 Lyndon
Johnson made a personal
john vihstodt
reconstruction commitment once the
war was over. Consider too that
offering help, being an announced
policy of the Nixon administration, no
doubt figured in Hanoi's consent to
the cease-fire.
There It one more
consideration-the syitem under which
the aid is to be extended. In order to
depoliticize the plan, the best
provision seems to be to funnel funds
through the United Nations Or another
appropriate international organization.
This is far preferable to our going it
alone and risking charges of blackmail
and political opportunism. j
page 4
daily nebraskan
thursday, march 1, 1973