00:00:07.140 - 00:00:40.480

Big One. Take 1 10 88 mapping We present at this time an informal discussion with Senator George Smathers from the nation's capital. Now here is the first question. Well, senators matters. This past week, there was voted a compromise reapportionment bill. Now you voted for the original Dirksen Mansfield Amendment, which put off the power of the Supreme Court to exercise reapportionment.

00:00:40.490 - 00:00:58.560

Tell us how you voted on the one that came up this week and why you voted the way you did. Because there are two different types of amendments. First bills. It might say the original Mansfield Dirksen compromises with respect to reapportionment had the effect of law.

00:00:59.540 - 00:01:24.830

In other words, were it passed and the Supreme Court could not force states and do hastily and ill conceived and ill considered reapportionment, they could in time, of course, get apportionment reapportionment. And they should. However, the most recent Mansfield compromise was merely a sense of the Congress, which doesn't It does not have the effect of law.

00:01:24.830 - 00:01:41.600

It doesn't really mean anything. It's about as effective as writing a Supreme Court, a letter, and I think, as a matter of fact, the Supreme Court should have In some respects, it's powers curtailed with respect to what they can do. In so far, state legislatures are concerned.

00:01:41.600 - 00:01:58.060

Therefore, I favored the stronger position. Senator, this past Thursday, you're in a conference with the House, One of the Senate conferees on the Social Security bill which had attached to it as a part of it. The Medicare bill. You voted against the Medicare bill in the Senate?

00:01:58.140 - 00:02:25.520

I wish you'd straighten us out on why you then voted for the whole bill because the whole bill has three parts in it. First it had the Medicare, which was adopted by a vote of 49 to 45. That was added to the House bill. But the original House bill had two other provisions, and both of which are very beneficial to all elderly citizens and certainly a lot of people in our state who are Social Security recipients.

00:02:26.240 - 00:02:41.960

This provision, these provisions would provide an increase in Social Security payments of the minimum of $7 a month, and it goes high as $127 a month for some people, depending upon how long they'd been in the Social Security program and how much money they have paid in.

00:02:43.010 - 00:03:01.290

Now, what was added to that was the Medicare. So I voted against the Medicare as an amendment. But when that was adopted, then we had the whole package in which to decide what to do with it. Now, I wanted it to go to conference because I'm on the on the conference.

00:03:01.600 - 00:03:18.530

In addition to that, I think that whether we get the Medicare or not, we still should have the Social Security increased, benefits you and benefits your payments. Therefore, I voted to for the whole package and descended into conference where it now is. Well, now it's still stalled.

00:03:18.530 - 00:03:37.250

As of Thursday afternoon in conference, do you foresee the house refusing to accept the Medicare provisions? Well, the thus far, yes, the Senate has, of course, adopted Medicare. The house has Wilbur Mills, particularly as the spokesman for the House in this regard, and he has stood against it.

00:03:37.940 - 00:03:59.630

There is an effort to work out some kind of a compromise. Now the middle ground would be, in some respects, the river cough amendment, which would allow people voluntarily to choose whether or not they wish to take their additional increased payments for a health program. However, that still puts it under the Social Security financing system.

00:03:59.630 - 00:04:18.750

And there are the medical profession and others who are opposed to that. And there's another compromise being discussed, which would have the state's run a program of this nature. Just like we run unemployment insurance, where the states themselves would collect the tax and it would be matched by the federal government.

00:04:19.340 - 00:04:40.040

This is similar, as I say to the state unemployment insurance program, and there's a third matter that's being considered, which would have to do with catastrophic illnesses that it would. Only you could only get government medical care when you had catastrophic illnesses. These things are all being kicked around at the moment.

00:04:40.050 - 00:04:54.700

From my own part, I don't really believe that that any of them that have thus far been offered with the possible one where the states would run it similar to unemployment insurance has much merit what we're finally going to do. I don't know. Thank you very much.

00:04:54.700 - 00:05:16.160

Senator George Smathers. Well, Senator Smathers first, I'd like to ask you a little bit about another subject that has to do with the economy of the country one of the larger automobile manufacturers, has agreed to go along with its current price structure and in view of the settlement with the unions.

00:05:16.180 - 00:05:38.680

This bodes well for the country, does it not? I think it does. I think that it demonstrates first responsibility on the part of management. I think it demonstrates further than that they have been making a sufficient profit. Uhh. Thirdly, I think that it was good for all of us because it will not set off an inflationary spiral.

00:05:38.690 - 00:05:57.660

Obviously, if price of automobiles, which are basic to our economy if they were substantially increased, just as if the price of steel were substantially increased, why then? Of course, the price of everything has to go up and you get in an inflationary spiral, which, of course, depreciates the value of the dollar to everyone.

00:05:58.140 - 00:06:16.630

So this is good for the country. General Motors having now taken this position, they have 55% of the automobile market, so it's rather inevitable. So it seems that Chrysler and Ford and the other independent automobile concerns will hold the Priceline now, another question As to economy.

00:06:16.690 - 00:06:31.090

I'm sure that by this time you've had a chance to evaluate the tremendous damage that was done in Florida in the past few weeks. What does that stack up to is, the federal government is going to be able to assist us in getting back to normal again.

00:06:31.240 - 00:07:03.350

Well, the federal government already is doing a great deal. As you know, the president was down in the area of Jacksonville. Subsequently, he talked to buy long distance telephone to the officials of Sawani County, which is at Live Oak, Florida This county seats at Live Oak, Florida He talked to the People of Colombia County at the courthouse in Lake City, Florida They had very severe damage, strangely enough, in that area, but all by flooding, and the roads are terribly damaged in that area.

00:07:03.680 - 00:07:19.030

The cattle are all mixed up. You know, we don't have old fashioned branding, as they used to have in the movies that we see way out west. And so when the water began to rise and it took the cattle to the high ground, they got all these roughly 15 head of cattle all mixed up.

00:07:19.040 - 00:07:52.790

And it's a big argument as to whose cattle or who now. But in any event, the president has already allocated something the neighborhood of $3 million to start the rebuilding of the area. In addition to that, now he's, I understand they're going to recommend in the neighborhood of some 30 million additional be set aside for the rebuilding of roads and city waterworks and things of that character now, with respect to the losses of private individuals, have suffered.

00:07:52.790 - 00:08:08.890

Of course, those private individuals will have to make loans from the Small Business Administration from the Farm Home Administration and other agencies of the government. But these are long term loans and practically no interest rates. And so the government can be and will be very helpful to them in that area.

00:08:08.920 - 00:08:28.920

I'd like to ask you a question relative to the countries to the south of us. I'm wondering whether the proposed visit of de Gaulle to these 10 Latin American countries is going to disturb the relatively calm waters were now enjoying. I don't think that it would materially upset any conditions which now obtained in those areas.

00:08:28.920 - 00:08:51.870

I think that DeGaulle he's making this triumphal tour. Of course, the French do have some islands in the Caribbean. He starts there and I think he's in trying to increase their trade. Francis trade with those areas. But I don't believe that in any way it's going to lessen the United States influence in that area or in any effect, have any adverse effects on us.

00:08:51.870 - 00:09:08.280

As a matter of fact, I hope that the French leader, after having seen it, will join with us in some of the building programs that we're now engaged in, in which they're not very heavily engaged in helping those areas to get on their economic and political feet back up in our own backyard.

00:09:08.280 - 00:09:35.660

There seems to be some disturbance relative to the starting of these NASA Havana flights. Is there anything that can be done to alleviate that situation? Well, I think the Nassau people are reacting in a very commendable fashion. They are protesting these flights. The reason they can make the flights actually is a treaty which was entered into 1958 between the British government and then the government of Cuba.

00:09:36.240 - 00:10:01.940

Castro is using that treaty as an excuse now to say he has the right to land in Nassau. But when they ran the first a dry run flight in there. The other day, there was some 500 Nassau citizens who protested. And then the Nassau government said that they would not permit there was planes to either discharge or take on passengers so they can only use it as a stopping off point from Moscow.

00:10:02.260 - 00:10:09.060

The plane on their trip from Moscow to Havana. Thank you very much, Senator George Smathers. I'll return you now to your station announcer.