Pane 18

The Herald and The Lantern

Wednesday, January 9,1980

editorial

The Year Of The Coast The designalion of 1980 as •'The Year Of The Coast,'' has an abvioas significance for the residents of Cape May County ' Who knows better than we the virtues and vagaries of the seashore environment Cape May County looks to its miles of beaches and the sea that laps at its borders for its very livelihood in many cases The seashore is a very special environment. The sea is awesome in its power and delightful in its pleasures and beauty The peace and purity of the beach are un-

surpassed

The shore provides an ideal setting for quiet reflection and grateful enjoyment of nature's gift to man And, in its starkest days a searing sense of isolation against which one must,strive to acclimate himself. Only those who truly love the beach community can survive, be happy and appreciate it. True compatriots of the shore are a special breed They understand the fragility as well as the strengths of the shore and give their all jo its preservation. Cape May County is especially fortunate to have a more than competent county Planning Board which shows unusual insight and foresight into the features and problems of the shore community and how to maintain or correct them

But, as the Year Of The Coast indicates, we must all

—KCS

Letters To The Editor

No Ash Trays At CM Cancer Society

Dear Sir: The following was published in the December 19 issue of The HeraldLantern. i "Rev. Carl Mclntire permits no ash trays in his Cape hotels. But they can be found in offices of American Cancer Society.” This is not true, at least not in the Cape May County Chapter offices*. We are not responsible for other county divisions and we resent being 'grouped'. Not only is it untrue, but the moment you enter our Chapter offices at #15 Delsea Drive, Rio Grande, your eye is assailed by large 'No Smoking’ signs, banks of pamphlets on the subject and large posters depicting the ugliness of the habit. One picture is worth a thousand words. We are working very hard on 'this project and you have ’gifted’ us with one GIANT step backward - a low ►blow, to say the least. It would be interesting to

know who provided such erroneous inforrfiation since anyone who has ever visited us would know it was so much hog-wash. We would appreciate some sort of retraction. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely Kathryn P. Hutt (Mrs.) Volunteer coordinator for "Reach to Recovery", a program for rehabilitation of Mastectomees. Editor’s Note: We thank Mrs. Hutt for pointing out this Inaccuracy. We intended no disservice to ACS or the cause for which it stands, as evidenced by our past coverage of ACS activities and anti-smoking editorial stance. The net of generality ought Indeed not be cast so broadly, and we apologize for the inaccuracy. We commend the county chapter -and all other society offices that hoM a similar position- for the consistency of their stand, for "practicing whet they preach."

President Proclaims Jan, Blood Donor Month

COURT HOIJSE President, Jimmy Carter has proclaimed Jan 1980 as National Volunteer • Blood Donor Month, according lo Mrs. Jeannine Koknar. Chairman, Cape May County Chapter. American Red Cross In a statement issued from the White House. President Carter asked. "Every American, who possibly can to donate a f^pt of blood ' The President said. "Even though this nation has the finest blood banking system in the world, critical shortages exist every day. We continue to rely on the willingness of

our citizens to fulfill our traditional compassion for others " President Carter expressed his thanks to those who regularly donate blood, and he invited those who have never given to do so and "experience the unparalleled satisfaction that comes from offering the gift of life to another human being." The President who has donated over 51 pints of blood through the Red Cross, urged more Americans to become donors during national blood donor month so that an adequate supply of blood is always available for those who need it

Dear Sir: The following is a copy of a letter I sent to U.S. Senator Harrison A. Williams: t Dear Senator Williams: Thank you for your letter of Dec 4. With all due respect to your insinuation that opponents of socialized medicine and socilaized energy plans do not care if people have decent health care or freeze to death, I would like to point out that if it were not for you and your fellow "liberals" voting for whopping big deficits year after year after year, most of^hese problems you are trying to "solve" wouldn't have existed in the first place What good are all of your socialistic schemes going to be in the long run if you succeed in destroying our Republic? And unless inflation, our number one enemy caused by government i|nd only by government,’is brought under control, our country could very well go down the tubes. I've studied your record over the years and in only one case when there was a clear cut choice between left and right did you ever vote right — that is when you voted to seat Otto Otepka on the Subversive Activities Control Board If America does go down the drain, history will record you. Senator Williams, as one of the culprits. Your silence on the really important issues has been

deafening. Let me name just a few: Where were you while America was fighting in Vietnam and both Johnson and Nixon were busy supplying the Communists who were killing our boys? Where were you when the so-called peace was arranged which eventually led to the slaughter of onethird of the population of Cambodia? Where were you when it was arranged to build Russia the world's largest truck plaqt 500 miles east of Moscow on the Kama River? what did you do to stop it? \ Why did you vote to pay the Marxists in Panama over $4 billion to take our Panama Canal? Where were you when Nicaragua was , quietly pushed into Communist hands by "our" .government? Why didn't you point out the phoniness of Jimmy Carter’s human rights position instead of hiding behind it? What are you doing now to stop Carter from giving support to the Communist terrorists trying to take over in Rhodesia? Where were you when Lyndon Johnson was spending us down the tubes with his Great Society nonsense? I hope I've made my point, Senator, and please - no more platitudes Sincerely, Robert H. Barron. Ph D Avalon

Takes Senator Williams To Task

the SOVEREIGN STATE of AFFAIRS

BOYD & WOOD

CAPS MAY COUNTY

Weralit

Largnt (irralation In The Connty

OMe«l Free Weekly In Tit* County

OMfPowrt—wfiiY—rMrHet Capa County F.O. Boa* Phono 947-3312 FuMInhad Ivory Wadn—day By tha Saawava Corporation Dorr«H Kopp ........ Editor and Publldutr Kathlenn ^°*. *<ha»Hwr '.ftoporter . Sport! Editor

■III

, °V d T r'« Hilling Columnl.t J. A. Cunningham Eoaturo Writer Owy' «*•••« Feature Writer Refer Dunne Columnlit Chariot p - Columnlit Chary! Crawl Oraphlci Contributor Oall Carina Advertising Graphic!

AdvarlMrtp CloMlflad AdvarlMitB •

. Friday. 3 p.m.

ta e4tt any lattar or at

Capitol

Comments By Assembly Minority Loodor Jamofl R. Hurley

In what is clearly one of the most outrageous moves in the history of the Byrne Administration, the Executive has proposed that the outgoing Legislature enact a major $340 million tax program during three lame duck sessions, the first of which is scheduled for today. The program is built around the enactment of two new taxes and an increase in an existing levy to produce $340 million — $310 million to cover an anticipated budget deficit; $27 million to fund a 10 percent increase in the homestead rebate program; $10 million for programs for the elderly, and $19 million to help those counties with a high welfare caseload. This would leave approximately $84 million unspent and no plans have been revealed for these funds. I am absolutely appalled that the Governor, and his chief fiscal advisers, and his party's legislative leadership would even suggest that the lame duck Legislature address a program of this magnitude The two new taxes being proposed are a five percent levy on fees charged by attorneys. architects, engineers, accountants and lobbyists, and a one percent oil refinery levy on the value of products refined in the state. These two taxes would be supplemented by a 1.5 percent increase in the state's corporate business tax, currently set at 7.5 percent. In the past, lame duck sessions have been utilized solely to consider minor proposals and essentially house cleaning details. The reason is quite simple: These sessions following an election but preceding the convening of the next term are hardly conducive to extensive, thoughtful and reasoned debate And. when the issue at hand involves taxes, such debate is clearly required. It is inescapable thq£

charges of political payoffs will fill the air if the tax program is considered during a lame duck Legislature. Those legislators who will not be a part of the new Legislature will be subjected to charges that their vote was secured in return for the promise of a position in government once thtfir term of office expires. And, such charges and allegations can only serve to taint the entire program and bring down discredit on the Legislature and the legislative process. The proposed tax program itself is, in its practical application, a tax on the people of New Jersey. # It is a virtual certainty that the five percent tax on the professions listed earlier will be passed on to the clients in the form of higher fees, just it is a virtual certainty that the proposed corporate tax increase will be met by the consumer in the form of the higher prices for goods and services. A great many of us in the minority party in the Legislature warned time and again that a substantial deficit loomed and we prooosed stern austerity measures to deal with it. Unfortunately, both warnings and suggestions fell on deaf ears and now the state faces the consequences of a large deficit and the imposition of major new taxes to deal with it. It is equally as unfortunate that the Administration has decided that those new taxes should be imposed without the benefit of public hearings and without the benefit of full public and official dialogue. Should the Administration succeed in its stated efforts, it will be a black *mark, indeed, against the Legislature and a clear sign that the legislative branch has given up all its prerogatives to the Executive.