Kallace would do the Job the way it should be don e. I don't thin ~ he'd back up for anybody. I don 't t h ink he ' d be keepinr, everybody happy by sayin rs one thin ~ and do in g soMeth in g else. Fe would do vhat he says he would do. One t h in ~ he ' d strair,hten out is this bussing business. It doesn't nake any sense a t all. I don't know how he ' d handle this war thin g -- but I thin.~ he ' d do the ri fh t thin e to en d t:ii s stupid 1-rar. I'd like to see our boys cone hor.e -- and I think he'd be the one to do it. ;;I don

it

think :ie' s a racist to a lar e e de~ree. I think he's out to do what's ri ~h t for t he people--re gardless of race. As far a s this assassination atte:-,pt, I think it's a d is g race thet p eo pl e can't run for public office without be in R shot."

Anon ym ous, m ale, cook, a ge 56

"I b elieve t ha t Walla ce is a r ac ist and I wouldn't vote for him. I feel pity for a man who hes b een shot, but I wouldn't vote for him because he's a racist. He's chanaed a lot. Fe 's not as much of a racist as before, but I be lieve that's just a cover-up . "

Anon ymo us, female, age 60

"I think that as a man he 's had a grea t deal of courage to go out ~ains t the vreat odds 8.lleinst him, and the alleged conspiracy" to smear him. ... I don't believe I'd vo te for hin beca use I'm no t a DeMO rat- but I believe he ' s tryinf to ri~ht many facets of our society that have been i~nored by many of our neonle in gene ral.

Anonymou s , female, office worker, a ge 41

"I honestly think he's P:OOd -and

elfare for the ealthy

Page Two

it's a terrible thin ~ the y they d id to hi . I think he's s,;o the ansver and I think he'd nake a ~ood P resi dent. I think he's ?"lOre for the people than the other po litici ans . I think he uets ri ~ht to the po int. " I think he's ri Rh t abou t the school bussin g issue, and I think he doesn't believe in demonstrations. M ost of t h e thin ~ s that he tal ks about, in gen eral, I think he's ri 1,th . I think that when -l ge ts in there he's go in ~ to pu sh for thin~s and I don't t h ink

we

1

11

have so many troubles . I think the laws will be stricter and this bussing business will be taken care of. I think that if 1e really runs, I will vote for him . ' '

C.B., female, assistant teacher, age 18

"I don't thin.: I'd vote for him because he's too nrejudiced. I vouldn 't s uppo rt him.''

Anonymous, male, shopkeeper, age 49

"I would have voted for hi ' re g ardless of h is being sho t or not. I a ls o think he's about the only man who w o uld stop t he ~u ssian conquest of s~aller countries. I think that geys like Fullbrir;l:t, •~cGovern , and >.fuskie -- they're jellyfish . ~ost of

rey

friends in

cy

SP,e bracket would support Goldwater because he would  n 't ta.'i<e any thi ne- fro n any bod y. "I like ,?allace because he doesn 't want to

~iv

a'1tlesty to the boys who ran out on t:ie country and above all he wants a ~ood national defense . ':'his is very i~l"ortant to ~e. Pis fo r ei'"Tl JOlicv is beau  tiful . I think t:iat nost of ~y friends at the American Le~ion would ditto what I'M sa_vin~. I like what he ' s sayin~ about taxes also . Some of these nillionaires P.r~ ~etti~p away with not pa :vi n~ their fair share. I also t hi n k he would put an end to the se violent p rotests. I'm not t alk in p about ~eece ful pro  tests."

11 lford Haywood, groundskeep er, age

74

"~;'allace would llake chan ge s bet ter than the othe rs. He'd eive us more work. I think he'd ra ise pens ion. I would vote for him for President. I think h e reight stop the var. "

M. V., female, student, age 17, and J.D . , female, student, age 18

"I think that Wa lace is better than many of the other politicians. I thin k he'd do a lot bet ter job. I like him because of the

wa:y

he is. I think Walla ce would have ended the war ri ght awa:y. I like him because he 's honest . I would trust him mo re than Nixon . Why even after he was shot, and in pa in, he acted nice. He comes ri rht out and says what he feels. He doesn 't care what anybody else thinks. I'm not as fam i lia r with the issues as nuch as I should be but I like Wallace. You can trust a

uy

without even liste nin~ to what he h9.s to say . "

Anonymous, male , UVM student, age 20

' 'Wallace' s support ca:ies oostly from the 'l ittle ~an • . I think it's a reaction apainst politicians like Humphrey,

i

1

cGovern, and • - ~uskie. I think the common man is disgusted with anti-war demonstrations so he turns to ~lallace or Hixon . I think Wallace has sor:e 11;ood ideas. ~e doesn 't seem to be a man who would back down in a ti~ht situation. I don 't think I'd ever v ote for him because he's a little too conserva  tive. I think t he assassination at - (From

The Progressive,

April

1972)

"Congress today com pleted action on the final part of a revolutionary welfare program that reverses the usual pattern and gives huge welfare payments to the super - rich but only pennies per week to the very poor. Under the program , welfare payments averaging some

$720,000

a year will go to the nation ' s wealthiest families (those with annual incomes of more than a million dollars). For the poorest families (those earning

$3,000

a year or less) , the welfare allowance will average

$16

a year, or roughly thirty cents a

week .

Without exception, every candidate for the Democrati c Presidential nomination is publicly committed to the need for reforming the loophole - ridden and inequitable Federal tax structure. No Democratic politician makes a speech these days without paying his respects to the topic of tax reform. Hardly a release emanates from the D emocrat  ic National Committee that does not assail the Adminis  tration for fa i ling to submit a fair tax program . As In  come Tax Day approaches, the drumfire of rhe toric is sure to rise. Why is it , then , that no one seriously expects Con  gress --w hich is, after all , under Democratic control--to mount an earnest effort at tax reform this year? Repre  sentative Henry S. Reuss of Wisconsin, one of the House ' s most knowledgeable Democrats on tax legislation , believes that it would be "no trick at all" to close tax loopholes yielding

$4

bi llion or more -- enough revenue to relieve unempl~yment by financing a comprehensiv e public service job program--and that a thorough program of loophole  plugging could produce at least

$20

billion . Other ex  perts place the potential ga i n much higher, suggesting that tax reform could yield the Treasury up to

$70

bil lion, while easing the burden on taxpayers in the lower brackets. One of the country ' s leading tax reform crusaders , Philip M Stern , testifying recently before the Joint Congressional Committee on the Economic Report , drama  tized the issue by asking members to imagine a news story, datelined Washington, that opened like this :

The cost of this rich Welfare Program;' as Stern iden - tified it in his ima.gined news story, comes to $77 . 3 bil- lion a year. The program does exist now, he said, in the form of our present Federal income tax law which, as structured by Congress over the years, provides more than $2.2 billion in yearly tax benefits to be shared by about 3 , 000 fami lie s , each with incomes g r eater than one mil - lion do llars a year, while doling out about $92 million to be shared by the six million poorest families in the country.

(Italics ours) . Stern , author of

The Great Trea s ury Raid,

a best sel  ling

1964

book on tax loopholes , and of the forthcoming b ook ,

T he Rape of the Taxpayer,

told the Joint Committee that just one of the major loopholes , the preferential tax treatment of "capital ga i ns ," provides tax "welfare" ~lowances totaling nearly

$14

billion a year, nearly six times the federal outlay for environment al protection. In spite of the powerful case made by Stern, Reuss, and others for a thorough overhaul of the nation's cruel ly unjust tax laws, the re is no reason to expect the Nixon Administrat i on , with i ts profound commitment to the nation's privileged i nterests, to do anything about tax re form . It is casting about , instead, for ways to insti  tute a

new ,

re gressive sales tax. But why won 't the Dem ocrats translate their fine words into deeds? Is it that they are equally committed to the same privileged inter ests?