The Globe Independent

EDITORIAL
RATIONING

When food rationing was eliminated last September, except for a few items, the opinion was freely expressed by many who are opposed to the present administration (ourselves included), that it was nothing more or less than a political move and that, when the election was over, rationing of all foods would again be enforced.

The nation's Christmas present from its government, through the OPA, was the announcement that, not only was full rationing to be restored as of midnight, December 25, but that, in addition, all ration coupons made valid before December I were cancelled as of the same date.

This means that not only are most meats, fruits and vegetables again to be rationed, but in addition, several ration coupons have been canceled-coupons that the OPA has been dinning into the housewives' ears had been made valid for an indefinite period so that the housewife need only purchase her day-to-day needs, instead of having to use all her coupons (if she needed the rationed items) within a thirty-day period. The OPA further emphasized that in the event it was found necessary to cancel any valid stamps, ample warning would be given.

We don't know whether or not the easing of the food rationing last September was a political move, but we do know that there has been a bad mix-up somewhere.

We just cannot believe that, if food supplies were in such good shape just four months ago that it was possible to practically eliminate rationing, those same food supplies have now dwindled down to such a point that, not only has full rationing again been enforced, but it has been found necessary to deprive housewives—without notice—of the opportunity to purchase rationed foods with ration coupons that they legally held when the new order was put into effect.

We have always said, and still say, that the men and women of these United States will gladly make any sacrifice necessary in order to win the war and win it decisively and quickly, but we maintain that when drastic regulations are suddenly enforced-regulations that effect their daily lives-they have the right to expect an adequate explanation from their government.

If the OPA made a mistake in easing the rationing regulations last September, why don't they admit it?

If the OPA was opposed to easing the regulations but was overruled by a higher authority, why doesn't that higher authority explain its action?

If the recent counter offensive of the Nazis has so completely changed the overseas food picture as to make strict rationing again necessary, why doesn't the government say so?

In other words, there must be, at least there should be, a very definite and valid reason for this overnight change in our rationing system and the American people have the right to know what it is.