Ask the Scholar
Page 1 of 1
I can add historical knowledge about this page.
Page image
OCR
The original documents are located in Box 1, folder "First Debate: Press Clippings -
General" of the White House Special Files Unit Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential
Library.
Copyright Notice
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of
photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald Ford donated to the United
States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.
Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public
domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to
remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid
copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Digitized from Box 1 of the White House Special Files Unit Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
THE PRESIDENT HAS SEEN
REPUBLICAN AND DEMOCRATIC
PARTY PLATFORMS
WASHINGTON POST ANALYSIS & COMPARISON
Aug. 18,1976
GERALD #
Republicans
Democrats
Party Aims
"The Democrats' platform repeats
"Two Republican administrations
the same thing on every page: more
have both misused and mismanaged
FORD
Covernment, more spending, more in-
the powers of national government,
flation This Republican platform
obstructing the pursuit of economic
says the opposite-less government,
and social opportunity, causing need-
less spending, less inflation. In other
less hardship and despair among mil-
words, we want you to retain more of
lions of our fellow citizens
your own money, money that repre-
"We do pledge a government that
sents the worth of your labors."
has as its guiding concern the needs
Mr.
Carter is firmly attached to
and aspirations of all the people rather
a contract with you to vastly increase
than the perquisites and special privi-
the powers of government
The
leges of the few
We do pledge a
price tag of five major Democrat plat-
government that will be committed to
form promises could add as much as
a fairere distribution of wealth, in-
$100 billion to the annual cost of gov-
come and power."
ernment
The total of all Democrat
preposals could be as high as $200 bil-
lion could raise your taxes by 50
per tent.
We do care about your basic free-
dom to manage your own life
We
do care about encouraging permanent
and meaningful jobs
We do care
about your getting paid in sound dol-
lars."
Watergate
"Your elected officials, their ap-
"Two Republican administrations
pointees, and government workers are
have betrayed the people's trust and
expected to perform their public acts
have created suspicion and distrust of
with honesty, openness, diligence, and
government through illegal and un-
special integrity."
constitutional actions."
Jobs and Inflation
Deficit spending" required by
"During the past 25 years the Amer-
Democratic congressional programs is
ican economy has suffered five major
the -cause of inflation, and this de-
recessions, all under Republican ad-
stroys jobs.
ministrations [and] 10 million peo-
"Wage and price controls
have
ple are unemployed right now."
always been a dismal failure."
"At times direct government in-
Opposes attempts to take away
volvement in wage and price decisions
"independence of the federal reserve
may be required" (but not at this time,
board." Opposes Humphrey-Hawkins
at least not a comprehensive system.)
full employment bill, which will "cost
"The Federal Reserve Board must
billions" and provide only "make-
be made a full partner in national eco-
work," "temporary stimulus."
nomic decisions and become respon-
sive to economic goals of Congress
and the President Need for na-
tional economic planning capability."
Favors use of tax, spending and
credit policies, "accompanied by a
broad range of carefully targeted em-
ployment programs that will reduce
unemployment
low-interest loans
to business and state and local gov.
ernments
(and) domestic develop-
ment bank."
(But no specific mention of the
Humphrey-Hawkins bill as such; the
above is its substance more or less.)
REPUBLICANS
DEMOCRATS
Affirmative Action
"avors "equal treatment but not by
Supports affirmative action, en-
resurrecting the much discredited
forcement of Equal Employment Op-
quota system."
portunity Commission decisions.
Taxes
Favors "a balanced federal budget
"Tax reform at all levels ... 80 that
and reduced tax rates."
high-income citizens pay a reasonable
"Tax credits for college tuition,
tax on all economic income."
postecondary technical training and
Reduce tax shelters [for] oil and
child-care expenses incurred by work-
gas, tax-loss farming, real estate and
ing parents."
movies." Overhaul federal estate and
Also "tax credits for parents mak.
gift taxes, remove incentives for
ing elementary and secondary school
multi-nationals to shift jobs to over-
payments."
seas.
New accelerated depreciation, re-
move burden on equity financing, end
"unfair double taxation of dividends"
when balanced by spending reduc-
tions, raise personal exemption to
$1,000.
Agriculture
Dposes government-controlled
Overhaul federal estate and gift
grain reserves, unrealistic safety and
taxes, aid workers in housing, employ-
environmental rules. Favors increase
ment, health and education.
in estate-tax exemption to $200,000,
Collective bargaining and unions
valuing farmland on current-use basis.
for farm workers.
Labor legislation to help workers but
recognize need to prevent stoppages
during harvest.
Miscellaneous Government
Supports automatic and mandatory
Mandatory sentence for committing
minimum sentences for persons com-
felony with gun.
mating federal offenses using danger-
Backs laws to control manufacture
ous weapons.
and distribution of handguns and Sat-
Supports "right of citizens to keep
urday night specials, but sportsmen
and bear arms
opposes federal
can possess guns for hunting and tar-
registration of fire arms."
get shooting.
Opposes federal postcard registra-
Favors federal postcard registration
tion bill.
bill, D.C. voting in Congress, full
Favors D.C. voting representation
home rule.
in House and Senate and full home
rule over local matters.
Education
Segregated schools are morally
"Mandatory transportation of stu-
waong and unconstitutional." But "we
dents beyond their neighborhoods for
oppose forced busing to achieve racial
the purpose of desegregation remains
asiances" and "favor consideration of
a judicial tool of the last resort for
at amendment to the Constitution for-
the purpose of achieving school deseg.
bidding the assignment of children to
regation."
school on the basis of race."
Favors "federally financed family
Favors a constitutional amendment
centered developmental and educa-
to permit local communities "wishing
tional child-care programs."
to conduct non-sectarian prayers in
Calls school programs "underfunded"
their schools to do so."
at federal level. "With increased fed-
Favors child-care assistance for
eral funds, it is possible to enhance
working parents.
educational opportunity by eliminating
Favors study to find ways to with-
spending disparities within state bor-
draw federal aid to elementary and
ders."
secondary education, provided ways
can be found to return to the states
equivalent revenue (to compensate for
any loss in present levels of federal
funding.)
Republicans
Democrats
Health
"The Republican Party opposes
"We need a comprehensive national
compulsory national health insurance
health insurance system with univer-
[which] will increase federal govern-
sal and mandatory coverage [financed
ment spending by more than $70 bil-
by] employer-employee shared payroll
lion in its first full year [and] require
taxes and general tax revenues."
a personal income tax increase of ap-
Lower costs by government rate-set.
proximately 20 per cent."
ting. "Rates for institutional care and
"We support extension of cata-
physicians' services should be set in
advance
strophic filness protection to all who
cannot obtain it."
Opposes any research on dive fe.
tuses and legislation which sanctions
ending life of the patients.
Lower health care costs by encour-
aging healthier life styles, ending
wasteful duplication of facilities, pre-
ventive care, more out-of-hospital
service but "we oppose excessive in-
trusions from Washington in the de-
livery of health care."
Civil Rights, Discrimination
"There must be vigorous enforce-
"We must insure that all citizens
ment of laws to assure equal treat-
are treated equally before the law,
ment in job recruitment, hiring, pro-
and given the opportunity regardless
of race, color, sex, religion, age, lan-
motion, pay, credit, mortgage access
and housing
We reaffirm our
guage or national origin, to partici-
pledge to work to eliminate discrimi-
pate fully in the economic and social
nation in all areas for reasons of race,
and political processes and to vindi-
color, national origin, age, creed or
cate their legal and constitutional
sex and to enforce vigorously laws
rights."
guaranteeing women equal rights."
"We seek ratification of the Equal
"The Republican Party reaffirms its
Rights Amendment."
support for ratification of the Equal
"We feel that it is undesirable
Rights Amendment" to the Constitu-
to attempt to amend the U.S. Consti-
tion.
tution to overturn the Supreme Court
"The Republican Party favors a con-
decision" permitting abortion.
tinuance of the public dialogue on
"We pledge
to protect citizens'
abortion and supports the efforts of
privacy from bureaucratic and techno-
those who seek enactment of a consti-
logical intrusions, such as wiretapping
tutional amendment to restore protec-
and bugging without judicial scrutiny
tion of the right to life for unborn
and supervision."
children."
"Major changes are needed to main-
tain the confidentiality of tax returns
and Social Security records" and pro-
tect against seizure an individual's
bank records by the government.
REPUBLICANS
DEMOCRATS
Amnesty
"Full and complete pardon for those
who are in legal or financial jeopardy
because of their peaceful opposition
to the Vietnam war, with deserters to
be considered on a case-by-case basis."
Labor
Supports youth differential in mini-
"We will seek repeal of Section 14B,
mum wage law.
which allows states to legislate the
Favors retention of Section 14B of
anti-union open shop."
Taft-Hartley Act, which allows states
Supports legalization of commonsite
to pass open-shop right to work laws.
picketing.
Opposes legalization of commonsite
picketing on construction sites.
Welfare
"We oppose federalizing the welfare
"We should move toward
a
system We also oppose the guaran-
simplified system of income mainte-
teed annual income concept
"
nance, substantially financed by the
federal government It should
provide an income floor both for the
working poor and the poor not in the
labor market."
Arts and Humanities
Support for national endowments,
Support for national endowments,
public broadcasting, copyright and tax
public broadcasting, copyright and tax
law protections."
law protections, also, "special anti-re-
cession employment programs for art-
ists."
Urban Policy
Favors continuation of revenue
Favor continuation of revenue shar-
sharing. Continued deductability of
ing. Also emergency anti-recession aid
property taxes and home mortgage in-
to states and cities.
terest.
"Aggressive enforcement of Fair
Opposes discrimination in housing.
Housing Act." Prohibit "redlining."
Favors reduced direct federal in-
Direct U.S. subsidies for low-and
volvement in housing.
moderate-income housing and housing
for elderly.
Automatic triggering of production
subsidies and mortgage funds when
housing starts fall below acceptable
levels.
Republicans
Democrats
Energy
"Immediately eliminate price con-
"Beyond certain levels, increasing
trols on oil and newly discovered nat-
energy prices simply produces high-
ural gas in order to increase supply."
cost energy, without producing any
Favors "accelerated use of nuclear
additional energy supplies." Increases
energy through processes that have
in 1975 law for oil prices are ade-
been proven safe," with more safety
quate. As for natural gas, favor some
research on nuclear waste disposal.
raises in price ceilings, but not total
"We vigorously oppose
divesti-
removal. Just enough to bring close to
ture of oil companies" and their brea-
equivalent energy price for oil.
kup into separate producting and mar-
"U.S. dependence on nuclear power
keting segments.
should be kept to the minimum neces-
sary to meet our needs. We should
supply stronger safety standards as
we regulate its use. And we must be
honest with our people concerning its
problems and dangers
Supports divestiture of oil compa-
nies.
Bar oil companies from owning
competing types of energy such as
coal.
Environment
Pledges to preserve "clean and
Pledges to preserve environment.
healthy" environment.
"Those who would use the environ-
Public lands to be used for multiple
ment must assume the burden of dem-
use, not "closed to exploration for
onstrating that it will not be abused."
minerals or for mining without an ov-
Economic growth and environmen-
erriding national interest."
tal preservation are compatible.
"Emphasis on environmental con-
cerns must be brought into balance
with the needs for industrial and eco-
nomic growth."
Maximize sustained yield in forests,
including national forests, using
"clear-cutting and replanting where
appropriate."
REPUBLICANS
DEMOCRITS
Our strategic nuclear torees must
provide a strong and credible deter
Foreign and Defense Policy
rent to nuclear attack and nuclear
blackmail" without "undue emphasis"
Calls for "superior national de
Supports "racial peace
urge
all
on the overall size of the defense
Tense" and period of sustained
concerned that the rights of tribal,
budget.
growth in our defense effort." Specifi-
ethnic and racial minorities be guar-
anteed through workable safeguards.
Cut the defense budget of $110 bil-
cally, construction of B-1 bomber. In-
Our policy is to strengthen the forces
lion by $5 billion to $7 billion.
crease Army to 16 divisions.
of moderation." Against external in-
Delay the B-1 bomber until Febru-
Endorses NATO continued strength.
terference, Soviet arms.
ary, 1977.,
Asks Spain be added to NATO.
Does not use of the word detente.
"NATO remains a vital commit-
Reaffirms U.S. commitment to terri-
torial integrity and sovereignty of Re-
Holds it a good idea to "isolate and
ment." (No mention of Spain.)
public of Korea. "U.S. troops will be
develop those areas of our relations
Maintain commitment to Korea but
maintained in Korea so long as there
which would serve to lessen tensions
"we can redeploy and gradually phase
exists the possibility of renewed ag-
and reduced the chance of unwanted
out U.S. ground forces and withdraw
gression from North Korea."
conflict." Favors steps to "limit strate-
the nuclear weapons now stationed in
gic nuclear arms," cites en-going
Korea."
Blames Democrats in part for losing
talks, Vladivostok agreements.
South Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos
Friendship with Japan the
because of "the refusal of the Demo-
Soviets must adhere to their prom-
eornerstone" of Asia policy.
crat-controlled Congress to give sup-
ises of the free flow of people and
"Our relations with China should
ort to presidential requests for mili-
ideas and eased emigration restric-
continue to develop on peaceful lines,
ary aid to the beleaguered nations of
tions, as spelled out in the Helsinki
including early movement toward nor-
South Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos."
agreements, including granting of em-
malizing diplomatic relations in the
Friendship with Japan, the "pillar"
igration rights to Jews, Christians and
context of a peaceful resolution of the
of Asia policy.
Moslems, and must cease imprison-
future of Taiwan."
We seek "expanded network of con-
ment and harassment of those wishing
"Relations with Cuba can only be
to emigrate.
cacts and trade" and "normalization of
normalized if Cuba refrains from in-
relations with Communist China but
Supports the right of the people of
terference with the internal affairs of
"will continue to support the freedom
Central and Eastern Europe to "self-
the U.S. and releases all U.S. citizens
and independence of our friend and
determination," and favors adequate
currently detained in Cuban prisons
lly, the Republic of China (Taiwan)
funding for the Voice of America, Ra-
and labor camps for political reasons.
and will fulfill and keep its commit-
dio Free Europe and Radio Liberty.
We can move toward such relations if
ments, such as the mutual defense
Insists Soviets end microwave trans-
Cuba abandons its provocative inter-
treaty, with the Republic of China."
missions en the U.S. embassy in Mos-
national actions and policies."
"Exporting subversion and violence,
cow.
"We pledge support for a new Pan-
Cuba remains outside the inter-Ameri-
ama Canal treaty, which insures the
can family of nations."
interests of the U.S. in that waterway,
recognizes the principles already
Under the 1903 treaty, the United
agreed upon, takes into account the
States enjoys "jurisdictional rights in
interests of the canal work force, and
the Canal Zone as 'if it were the sov-
which will have wide hemispheric sup-
ereign.' The U.S. intends that the Pan-
port."
ama Canal be preserved as an interna-
tional waterway for the ships of all
"Firm commitment to the independ-
ence and security of the state of Is-
nations in talks with Panama,
rael
however, the U.S. negotiators should
including sufficient military
and economic assistance to maintain
in no way cede, dilute, forfeit, negoti-
Israel's deterrent strength in the re-
ate or transfer any rights, power au-
gion and maintenance of U.S. military
thority, jurisdiction, territory or pro-
force in the Mediterranean adequate
perty that are necessary for the pro-
to deter "Soviet military intervention.
tection and security of the U.S. and
the entire western Hemisphere."
"Free passage of shipping in the
Middle East, especially the Suez Ca-
"Commitment to Israel is funda-
Efforts should be made to normal-
nal."
mental and enduring. We have hon-
Ise relations with Angola."
ored and will continue to honor that
Recognize and support Jerusa-
commitment in every way-politically,
Favors "pursuit of detente," work-
lem as the capital of Israel
U.S.
economically and by providing the
ing toward arms limits, comprehen-
embassy should be moved from Tel
military aid that Israel requires to re-
rive ban on nuclear tests, nuclear ar-
Aviv to Jerusalem."
main strong enough to deter any po-
senal reduction on both sides but we
Must recognize "inevitability of ma.
tential aggression. Forty per cent of
should "not overall limit the U.S. to
jority rule on that continent."
all U.S. aid that Israel has received
levels of intercontinental strategic
"Unequivocal and concrete support of
since
1948 has come as a result of
forces inferior to the limits provided
majority rule in southern Africa."
Republican initiatives."
for the Soviet Union."
No recognition of South Africa an-
"The U.S. has always supported the
"We should continually remind the
nexation of Namibia.
process of self-determination in Af-
Soviet Union
of its commitments
End "Republican administration's
rica."
In Helsinki to the free flow of people
relaxation of arms embargo against
and ideas."
South Africa deny tax advantages
"We do not accept military dom-
to all corporations doing business in
Inance of many Eastern European
South Africa and Rhodesia who sup-
countries" by the U.S.S.R. attempt to
port or participate in apartheid prac-
dominate anyother European country
tices and policies."
like Yugoslavia would pose "a grave
Fully enforce un-ordered Rhodesia
threat to Deace."
senction
and repeal the Byrd
Amendment."
contest, for It was the inter-
Mr. Carter's newness on
why -personalities, not
the national some and
ideas, that really mattered.
of foreign policy experience
This removed in time, It is
are obviously going to be
easy to see how carefully
price Republican issues. But
THE
HAS
the candidates manipulated
if 1960 provides any clues,
their disagreements for maxi-
the debates could give the
THE
mum tactical advantage. The
Georgian an opportunity to
hottest exchanges came on
neutralize them.
Kennedy-Nixon Debates a Key
questions on which their dif-
Round Two
ferences appeared to be nar-
rowest, usually, cold war
Prequmably, Mr. Ford's
aldes hope that Mr. Carter
To What'76 Clashes May Hold
issues.
The first debate was sup-
will crumple under pressure
as Mr. Nixon is sometimes
posed to be confined to
supposed to have done in
By JOSEPH LELYVELD
purses his lips, cranse his
detail-the lighting, the can-
domestic matters. But Mr.
1960. But the Vice President
Special to The New Total Times
neck and, twice simost
are angles and, because of
Kennedy, who got to speak
came back to the second
Mr. Nixon's perspication prob-
first, immediately began a
WASHINGTON, Aug. 29-
seems to ned in agreement.
debate in fighting trim: He
Proud of what they took
Twice also, be is shown wip-
lam, even the temperature.
grim exhortation on "our
was better-tailored: profes-
to be a big advance in the
ing his chin with handker-
Don Howitt, the CBS pro-
struggle for survive! fith Mr.
sionally made-up, more as-
way Americans select their
chief. This Impression is coe
ducer who handled the first
Khrushchev His riyal, who
gressive and obviously intent
of strain.
debate, said that it. would
had made his reputation as a
President. the television net-
on keeping his gaze steady
works promoted the events
Commetic Problem
have been better to k. had
globetrotting Vice President
and his hands from fluttering
as "the Great Debates." But
been performed before an
and militant anti-Communist,
at the time, a number of critics
Mis sult is not dark spough
audience rather than pro-
thus found himself on the de-
In the numerous opinion
asked what was as great
to set him off distinctly from
duced as & television show.
fensive in what was supposed
surveys made at the time,
there is scant evidence that
about the encounters and
the gray background, and his
m 4 memo distributed
in
to be his area of greatest
strength.
he lost support as a result
whether they were even real
face has a chalky look-the
Congress last, week, how-
of the debates. Their most
debates.
result, the press soon dis-
ever, CBS took the opposite
Aim at Same Target
important effect, it appears,
covered, of a last-minute sp
view, contending that "the
"The dialogue was larguly
But while they magnified
was to solidify support for
plication of cosmetic called
studio atmosphere" would be
a paste-up job containing
bits and enippets from cam-
"Lazy Shave" after he bad
"lees of a personal, physical
their differences on for-
Mr. Kennedy among waver-
eign policy, the candidates
ing Democrats who had pre-
refused professional makeup.
end paychic drain on each of
paign rhetoric already used
seemed to mute them on do-
viously been unenthusiastic
many times," wrote a Wash-
So much was eventually
the candidates" than a de-
written about Mr. Nixon's
bate before a live audience.
mestic issues. Mr. Kennedy
about him.
ington journalist, Douglass
This view to Hkely to be
warned of stagnation; Mr.
Of course, the analogy be-
Cater, shortly after be had
makeup problems that the
tested, for Mr. Ford and Mr.
Nixon, of inflation. But they
tween 1976 and 1960 breaks
participated as a. panellst to
biggest surprise in seeing the
were aiming at the same
down in a number of ways:
the third set between John
debate now la that be looks
Carter are negotiating on the
middle-of-the-road voters, so
Mr. Ford is President: also,
F. Kennedy and Richard M.
much better than legend
debates with the nonpartisan
they confined themselves to
he is regarded as the under-
Nixon. "As the series wore
leads one to expect, His dis-
League of Women Voters,
on, the protagonists were
comfort was real: He had
which proposes to stage them
broad generalities, cautiously
dog as Mr. Nixon was not.
like two weary wrestiers
in front of audiences in hired
expressed.
Moreover, neither candidate
come to the debate tired and
Reactions to the first de-
has demonstrated the foren-
who kept trying to get the
III and had then banged &
halls.
bate made it clear that what
sic skills of his 1960 precur-
same holds.
previously infected kneecap
The league also proposes to
Yet no one doubted that
on a car door before entering
have a debate by the Vice-
was said mattered less than
sors. And, finally, the elect-
how it was said. The show
rate may be more volatile
the four debates were the
the studio.
Presidential candidates. It is
opened with the two candi-
and open to impressions.
central campaign events of
But the impression of stress,
a. curious, footnote, but that
idea also dates back to 1960
dates seated in chairs on
In this letter connection,
1960. And after Mr. Kennedy
while distinct, is fleeting.
when It was put forward by
either side of the moderator,
Professor Michael Robinson,
came out ahoud by a tissue-
Most of the time he effective-
Howard K. Smith.
a political scientists at Amen-
Vice President Nizon to coun-
thin margin of fewer than
commands attention.
113,000 votes, it was widely
ter a demand by Mr. Kennedy
Mrs. Kennedy has one leg
ican University, notes that
But Mr. Nixon's problem
crossed over the other; as he
party loyalties have loosened
concluded that what had
In the first debate was more
for a fifth debate.
is introduced, he nods
dramatically in the last 16
happened on television had
than cosmetic. It was finding
gravely.
years.
determined the result:
a way to match his rival's
The Vice President's hands
A major change is in the
sharp and assertive todo
fidget on his lap; his feet
role of the television net-
Estimating the Risks
and to defend the record of
#lide around aimlessly under
works in producing the de-
Now, 16 years later, that
the Elsenhower Administra-
his chair. As he is intro-
bates. The 1960 encounters
televised debates between the
tion without sounding &
duced, he breaks into a sud-
took place in television stu-
two major-party Presidential
den smile and nods, swivel-
dios, with the television con-
feasive.
candidates appear to be an
ing his body awkwardly
sultants of the candidates on
idea whose time has come
Issue of Experience
toward Mr. Smith, then back
hand in the control rooms to
again, looking back at 1960
Also, "experience" had
to the camera.
bargain and badger on every
is one way to estimate the
been one, of Mr. Nixon's
Ignores Rival
risks President Ford and Tim-
campaign selling point;
my Carter will take and the
Instead of spontaneous
Congressman Protests
the suggestion being that it
give-and-take, there is a
benefits they may derive
would be dangerous to turn
when they meet before the
over the country to his
counterpoint of capsulized
Wolf Hunt in Alaska
cameras.
leaser-known rival, But -
statements. Mr. Kennedy
perience did not prove to be
speaks directly into the cam-
WASHINGTON, Aug. 28
A reviewing the
a something that "televised"
era without acknowledging
(UPI)-A Virginia Congress-
A viewing the other day
the presence of his rival. Mr.
man has asked the Depart-
of the first two Kennedy-
well.
Nixon, beads of perspiration
ment of the Interior to inves-
Nixon debates in a CBS stu-
His appoint incomed to
forming on his lower lip,
tigate a planned aerial wolf
dio helped to correct some
know at least as many facts
seems to want to engage both
hunt in Alaska's Brooks
old Impressions and reinforce
is Mr. Nixon did. For Mr.
Mr. Kennedy and the TV
Mountain Range
others. in non way, the ex-
Kennody, selevision was a great
audience. Three times he aska
Representative William G.
perience was similar to that
equalizer. He closed the "ma-
his opponent to acknowledge
Whitehurst, a Republican,
of sitting through an old
turity gap." Mr. Carter errote
that they both are "sincere."
said that the Alaska Fish and
movie that was considered
at the time, by proving him-
The camera switches for
Game Department wanted to
bold and exciting in its day
self "able to stand up to the
"reaction shots" of the Sen-
kill 80 percent of the wolves
but now seems mannered and
man who stood up to Krush-
ator while the Vice President
in a vast area of the range
coy.
chev.' 4 reference to Mr.
is speaking His eyes are
because of . decline In the
The narrow neckties, short
Nixon's Imprompte televised
steady and alert; his face,
population of Western Arctic
haircuts and Armageddos
"debate" with the Soviet
impassive except for & slight
Caribou there.
rhetoric all contribute to this
Prime Minister,
suggestion of amusement,
The area includes land
effect. The Que-
If there is a parralles be-
even disdain, at the corners
proposed for designation as
may and Matsu to whether
(weet) 1960 and 1976, M. only
of his mouth. There is a still-
a major national park and a
President Elsenhower should
serves to underscore the risk
ness about him that gives an
number of wildlife refuges.
have expressed regrets for
President Foed is running as
impression of composure.
Mr. Whitehurst asked Thom-
U-2 flights over the Soviet
the first incumbent to debate
The close-up shots of Mr.
as S. Kleppe, Secretary of
Union longer seem com-
a for A White House side,
Nixon when Mr. Kennedy
the Interior, to review the
pelling. If they ever did.
Richard B. Cheney, said the
speaks show his glance dart-
planned wolf hunts to see if
other day that Mr. would
ing around the studio set. He
Personalities Mattered
they could be stopped.
demonstrate ex-
But that hardly detracts
perience and of
from the fascination of the
the Issues.
THE CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR
Tuesday, September 7, 1976
13
THE PRESIDENT HAS SEEN
financial
Carter economics a clear choice over Ford's
By David R. Francis
their votes. If the jobless blame the govern-
Unit labor costs rose at an annual rate of
ment for their plight, they have no other
Unemployment in the U.S.
only 3.4 percent in the mrst hair of this year.
Beston
real alternative than to vate for Mr. Carter.
Security adjusted
Parcent
That is sharply below increases of 7.5 per-
Democratic presidential candidate
He is clearly somewhat more liberal than
9
cent in 1975 and 13.2 percent in 1974.
Junny Carter is beginning to sing the
the President.
theme song of electoral challengers: "Any-
Unlike in the 1999s and the Great Depres-
:
Business pressure lessened
thing you can do, I can do better.
sion, however, the recent recession has
7
Business is thus under less pressure to
On Saturday. at a news conference in
turned public opinion toward the right
7.9
jack up prices. especially since there is
Plains, Georgia, be stressed the need to
rather than towards the left. That may be
6
more than adequate capacity in most in-
curb inflation and achieve a balanced bud-
because of the high inflation rate that ac-
dustries.
get. These goals, he added, might delay the
companied the recession.
5
So, whether the voters choose Mr. Ford
start of "costly" social and other programs
So Mr. Carter must make sure be appeals
4
or Mr. Carter, the new president's chief
be has promised to introduce if elected.
to the new fiscal and economic conserva-
The shift in Mr. Carter's emphasis un-
tism. This Saturday be emphasized a goal
3
economic problem will be to step up the ex-
pansion slightly without rekindling inflation.
doubledly reflects an economic fact: There
of ending inflation and balancing the federal
2
And that won't be an easy trick.
budget by 1980.
Economic scene
Actually, the economy tends to shape the
Economists at Data Resources, Inc.,
economic positions of presidents more than
headed by Harvard Prof. Otto Eckstein,
their economic ideology. And right now in-
last week recommended devising ways to
are as of August 87 million employed in
1974
1975
1975
flation is probably less of a problem than
solve # part of the unemployment problem
the United States and 7.5 million unem-
the slower pace of the recovery.
by direct methods that do not require stim-
ployed.
Management, Inc a trade group, says that
ulation of the nation's output beyond its pro-
This means that those with work are a
Prices softening
corporate purchasing agents now have low-
ductive capacity.
dominant majority. They are likely to be
Recent price news has been exceptionally
ered their inflation expectations for the rest
somewhat more concerned with rising
good for consumers.
They suggested a tax credit for job devel-
of this now expect price boosts
prices than high unemployment. So Mr.
the month ended August 15, farm
opment in private industries, encouraging
to be moderate or slight, and look for selec-
Carter must avoid being labelled a "big
prices fell by 4 percent - the sharpest de-
employers to use more labor and less capi-
tive markups rather than increases across
spender" if he is to win their political back-
cline since last November. This should put
tal and resources to produce a given output,
the board. Back in May, the corporate buy-
ing.
some restraint on food price increases.
and hiring disadvantaged persons in the sec-
ers expected "a period of tough going on
It was announced Friday that the number
. Wholesale prices fell in August by a
ondary labor force. They also urged special
the price front."
of jobless rose 80,000 in August to 7,504,000,
seasonally adjusted 0.1 percent, reflecting
hiring by state, local, and federal govern-
Wage increase patterns have been rela-
ment.
or from 7.8 percent to 7.9 percent of the la-
declining food prices. However, industrial
tively moderate. During the first half of this
bor force. There now is little chance of the
prices increased 0.7 percent.
Their econometric model shows that the
year, first-year pay raises averaged 8.4 per-
unemployment rate slipping below 7 per-
of Steel producers had to back off from
cent. That compares with 10.2 percent last
use of fiscal and monetary measures alone
cent. as predicted earlier by Ford adminis-
their announced 4.5 percent increase in
could soon push inflation back up to the 8
year and 0.8 percent in 1974.
tration economists
prices of flat-rolled products. Competitive
Moreover productivity has continued to
percent range.
Promises can be moderate
market pressures nullified what economists
increase handsomely. This means that man-
Though candidate Carter now talks fiscal
The Democratic candidate will undoubt-
call "administered prices" decisions.
ufacturers unit Labor costs rise less than the
conservatism. he probably will be more
edly roast President Ford for mismanaging
Alumimm makers are also shaving
wage rates of their employees. At mid-year,
sympathetic to direct methods of trimming
the economy. But he needn't promise
prices from announced price bikes, though
the hourly output of employees in private
the number of jobless than Mr. Ford. De-
grandiose public, works programs, etc.,
they have not rescinded them.
businesses was 4.5 percent higher than a
spite his step right. the voters still have an
In create jobs for the unemployed to get
The National Association of Purchasing
year earlier
economic choice.
We buy
DIAMONDS
INSURANCE
FLAME
PRECIOUS GEMS
Scudder Managed Reserves-
ANNUITIES
GOLD JEWELRY
LIFE INSURANCE
Premium Prices Paid
Complete Appraisal Servic
Information from agency
NOTCHING DRILLING DRILL NCHING TURAL FABRICATION 30 FORMING
an easy way to invest
SILVERWARE
in Swiss francs
in the money market.
Scudder Managed Reserves provides an efficient
way to invest in money-market securities with low risk.
for Individuals Estates
L. AESCHIMANN
without tying up your money.
Insurance Companies
$1,000 minimum initial investment
Member - Appraisers
Association of America
40, rue du Rhône
STRUCTIONS
No minimum holding period
LING
Write-a-check redemption feature
Roy K. Eyges,
ELDING
Invest by mail or phone
1211 Geneva 1
ARC
Inc
Switzerland
MIG
BFI
Telephone redemption option
THE CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR
Tuesday, September 7, 1976
13
THE PRESIDENT HAS SEEN
financial
Carter economics a clear choice over Ford's
By David R. Francis
their votes. If the jobless blame the govern-
Unit labor costs rose at an annual rate of
ment for their plight, they have no other
Unemployment in the U.S.
only 3.4 percent in the first half of this year.
Boston
real alternative than to vote for Mr. Carter.
Seasonally adjusted
Percent
That is sharply below increases of 7.5 per-
Democratic presidential candidate
He is clearly somewhat more liberal than
9
cent in 1975 and 13.2 percent in 1974.
Jimmy Carter is beginning to sing the
the President.
theme song of electoral challengers: "Any-
Unlike in the 1930s and the Great Depres-
8
Business pressure lessened
thing you can do, I can do better."
sion, however, the recent recession has
7
Business is thus under less pressure to
On Saturday. at a news conference in
turned public opinion toward the right
7.9
jack up prices, especially since there is
Plains, Georgia, he stressed the need to
rather than towards the left. That may be
6
more than adequate capacity in most in-
curb inflation and achieve a balanced bud-
because of the high inflation rate that ac-
dustries.
5
get. These goals, he added, might delay the
companied the recession.
So, whether the voters choose Mr. Ford
start of "costly" social and other programs
So Mr. Carter must make sure he appeals
4
or Mr. Carter, the new president's chief
he has promised to introduce if elected.
to the new fiscal and economic conserva-
The shift in Mr. Carter's emphasis un-
tism. Thus Saturday he emphasized a goal
3
economic problem will be to step up the ex-
pansion slightly without rekindling inflation.
doubtedly reflects an economic fact: There
of ending inflation and balancing the federal
2
And that won't be an easy trick.
budget by 1980.
Economic scene
Actually, the economy tends to shape the
1
Economists at Data Resources, Inc.,
economic positions of presidents more than
headed by Harvard Prof. Otto Eckstein,
their economic ideology. And right now in-
last week recommended devising ways to
are as of August 87.9 million employed in
1973-
1974
1975
1976
flation is probably less of a problem than
solve a part of the unemployment problem
the United States and 7.5 million unem-
the slower pace of the recovery.
by direct methods that do not require stim-
ployed.
Management, Inc., a trade group, says that
ulation of the nation's output beyond its pro-
This means that those with work are a
Prices softening
corporate purchasing agents now have low-
ductive capacity.
dominant majority. They are likely to be
Recent price news has been exceptionally
ered their inflation expectations for the rest
They suggested a tax credit for job devel-
somewhat more concerned with rising
good for consumers.
of this year They now expect price boosts
in the month ended August 15, farm
opment in private industries, encouraging
prices than high unemployment. So Mr.
to be moderate or slight, and look for selec-
Carter must avoid being labelled a "big
prices fell by 4 percent - the sharpest de-
employers to use more labor and less capi-
tive markups rather than increases across
spender" if he is to win their political back-
cline since last November. This should put
tal and resources to produce a given output,
the board. Back in May, the corporate buy-
and hiring disadvantaged persons in the sec-
ing.
some restraint on food price increases.
ers expected "a period of tough going on
ondary labor force. They also urged special
It was announced Friday that the number
Wholesale prices fell in August by a
the price front."
hiring by state, local, and federal govern-
of jobless rose 80,000 in August to 7,506,000,
seasonally adjusted 0.1 percent, reflecting
Wage increase patterns have been rela-
ment.
or from 7.8 percent to 7.9 percent of the la-
declining food prices. However, industrial
tively moderate. During the first half of this
bor force There now is little chance of the
prices increased 0.7 percent.
Their econometric model shows that the
year, first-year pay raises averaged 8.4 per-
unemployment rate slipping below 7 per-
Steel producers had to back off from
use of fiscal and monetary measures alone
cent. That compares with 10.2 percent last
cent. as predicted earlier by Ford adminis-
their announced 4.5 percent increase in
year and 9.8 percent in 1974.
could soon push inflation back up to the 8
tration economists.
prices of flat-rolled products. Competitive
Moreover productivity has continued to
percent range.
Promises can be moderate
market pressures nullified what economists
increase handsomely. This means that man-
Though candidate Carter now talks fiscal
The Democratic candidate will undoubt-
call "administered prices" decisions.
ufacturers unit Tabor costs rise less than the
conservatism, ne probably will be more
edly roast President Ford for mismanaging
Aluminum makers are also shaving
wage rates of their employees. At mid-year,
sympathetic to direct methods of trimming
the economy. But he needn't promise
prices from announced price hikes, though
the hourly output of employees in private
the number of jobless than Mr. Ford. De-
grandiose public. works programs, etc.,
they have not rescinded them.
businesses was 4.5 percent higher than a
spite his step right, the voters still have an
to create jobs for the unemployed to get
The National Association of Purchasing
year earlier.
economic choice.
We buy
DIAMONDS
INSURANCE
PRECIOUS GEMS
PRESS TOMATICHING BRAKE AME
N/C
Scudder Managed Reserves-
ANNUITIES
GOLD JEWELRY
LIFE INSURANCE
SILVERWARE
in Swiss francs
COANSLING
FORMING
an easy way to invest
in the money market.
Premium Prices Paid
SAW CUNG
30'
Scudder Managed Reserves provides an efficient
Complete Appraisal Service
Information from agency
for Individuals. Estates.
FABRICATION
way to invest in money-market securities with low risk,
L. AESCHIMANN
without tying up your money.
Insurance Companies. etc.
$1,000 minimum initial investment
Member Appraisers
the
No minimum holding period
Association of America
Write-a-check redemption feature
40, rue du Rhône
Roy K. Eyges,
Invest by mail or phone
1211 Geneva 1
ARC
Switzerland
BEL
Telephone redemption option
Inc.
Additions or withdrawals in any
1901
amount on any business day
ONE BULFINCH PLACE
Since
No purchase or redemption charges
IN THE CAPITOL BANK BUDG 3rd Floor
at Sudbury St.
PAX
Dividends declared daily
BOSTON, MA 02114 617-227-8400
A Swiss Life Insurance Company
BLOOMER BLOOMER.FR BLOOMER BLOOMER steel BLOOMER.538. steel PAINTING INC. 60609 INQUIRY
Broadly diversified investments
in the Government Ctr.
Monthly account statements
No withdrawal penalty
Continuous management by
Scudder, Stevens & Clark
Invest in the money market conveniently with
PENN SQUARE
YOUR
Scudder Managed Reserves and make your money work
harder for you.
P
Mail to:
MUTUAL FUND
Scudder Managed Reserves Dept. #32
10 Post Office Square, Boston, Mass. 02109
a no - load fund
APPRAISERS
Telephone: 617-482-3990 (Call collect)
A prospectus containing more complete infor-
Do You Know Today's Value
mation about Scudder Managed Reserves,
sting in common stocks for capital gains possibilities
of Your Machinery and Equipment?
including all charges and expenses, will be sent
ES COMMISSION TO BUY SHARES
We specialize in appraising and purchasing
upon receipt of this coupon. Read the prospectus
carefully before you invest or send money.
HARGE UPON REDEMPTION
manufacturing plants of all types.
Name
PLANS (including "Keogh Act" Plan
METALWORKING
-Employed) are available
Address
RUBBER AND PLASTIC
Our Specialty
City
State
Zip
76-6771 or Mail Coupon to:
1419, Reading, PA 19603
Occupation
Title
Loeser Associates
SCUDDER
SCUDDER INVESTMENT
Zip
CSM
70 Sanford Street, Fairfield, CT 06430 (203) 259-3321
THE PRESIDENT HAS STIEN
THURSDAY, SEPT. 2, 1976
What Do We Want From the Debates?
By ARTHUR SCHLEEINGHR Ju.
of the debates will help the electorate most
same thing about inflation. Mr. Ford
The debates are indisputably a good
in making its choice? This question is inev.
should break down and confess If he has
thing. The underlying premise of democ-
Itably of secondary Interest to the candi-
been able to think up any other way of con-
racy is an informed and attentive elector-
dates. They are naturally concerned with
taining inflation than by inducing unem-
ate. Voters are confronting a choice that
the design they think will be of greatest po-
playment. Mr. Carter should similarly be
will very possibly make & considerable dit.
litical benefit to themselves. Bo we are in
pressed to explain how he hopes simultane-
ference to their lives. We may not learn a
for a time of negotiation in which the sec.
ously to reduce inflation and unemploy-
lot from watching Messrs. Ford and Carter
onds maneuver for tactical advantage.
ment without resort to controls. Both
grapple with public issues and each other
Thus Mr. Ford's team proposes $0 minute
should be asked why price stability has
on television. But we will learn something.
been abandoned as a national objective.
We will certainly not loss from the expert-
Let them tell us how they differ on en-
ence.
Board of Contributors
ergy policy, on health policy. on tax policy.
At the very worst, the debates will re-
on tariffs. We want to know what they
mind us that an election is taking place. In
1960 the proportion of voters expressing
We need to know
think about the SALT talks. nuclear prolif.
erations, Americans hustling arms sales to
"very much interest" in the campaign rose
whether each candidate is
the world. Does Mr. Ford still think he was
12 percentage points (according to the Ro-
right in his attack on the government of
per pall) after the Kennedy Nixon debates
satisfied with the present
Portugal and his covert intervention in An-
began. Over the same period four years
gola? Does Mr. Carter still want to with.
before, without debates, the Increase was
level of opportunity for
draw American troops from South Korea?
one percentage point.
What would they do about Latin America?
Debates between presidential candi-
minorities. If not, what
Africa? Do we abandon Taiwan and recog.
dates are BQ self-evidently useful that pro-
specific steps would they
nise Peking? What about Communists in
vision should have been made long since to
the Italian government?
incorporate them at least as an option In
take to improve matters?
the quadrennial process. We should not
A Tricky Business, but
have to be struggling in September to
Foreign policy, it must be said, is a
spring them from the clutches of obscure
debates, starting in early September with a
tricky business. A responsible politician
sections of the communications and election
session on national defense. (Can Mr. Ford
might well prefer not to tie. or tip. his
laws. Nor should the League of Women
be so confident that this is his best terrain?
hand in connection with, say. Korea, China
Voters have to be passing the hat in order
One assumes that Mr. Carter's decade at
and Eurocommunism. One cannot promise
to raise the cash to put them on. We ought
Annapolis and with Admiral Rickover's nu-
absolutely what one will do In the unknown
not to have to bribe our television networke
clear submarines was not spent In vain.)
future: crises have a way of presenting
and stations to make prime time available.
Mr. Carter's team likes 60 minute debates,
themselvee in unexpected forms. Still. if
Most Western democracies give their
starting later in the campaign and cover-
this is frankly said, reasonable listeners
parties time during elections as an elemen-
ing a diversity of topics.
will understand. So, in specific. domestic
tary public duty. We should do the same.
policy will probably be more revealing
Television channels do not own the air-
t suppose some sort of panel will be
than foreign policy.
ways. They make immense profits from 11-
necessary to keep the conversation going.
censes granted, as the Communications
But the debate should not be permitted to
What might be most revealing of all is
Act says, when "public convenience, inter-
dwindie into parallel press conferences
the third of the league's proposed sub-
est, or necessity will be served thereby.'
without direct exchange between the two
jects: the presidency. We would like to
What is better calculated to serve the pub-
principals. As for the subjects, It seems to
know to what extent each candidate be
lic interest than to strengthen and en-
me that the original League of Women Vot-
lieves a President can withhold informa-
lighten our democratic process? Why
era proposal has much merit: debates on
tion from Congress and the people by
should we have to pay private corporations
foreign policy, on domestic policy and on
claiming "Executive privilege. How seri-
to put on programs of such indispensable
the presidency itself; to which could be ap-
ously will each take the presidential re-
importance to a free society?
pended a fourth catch-all debate dealing
sponsibility to hold press conferences"
with questions not adequately treated in
What would each do about the CIA? The
To do the networks justice, CBS in 1984
the first three and adding Measrs. McCar.
FBI? How can Mr. Ford, as If It were none
offered free prime time for an extended se-
thy and Maddox to the cast.
of his business, Inveigh against a bureau-
ries of joint appearances by the two major
presidential candidates and, interestingly.
What the country would like to get out
cracy that has been presided over by Re-
for their running mates as well. NBC, I be-
of the debates, I think, are two things in
publicans for the last eight years and for
lieve, has made a similar offer. Congress
particular: a sense of the quality of the
16 of the last 24? Does Mr Carter honestly
ought immediately do whatever is required
men seeking our highest office: and a
believe that the reshuffling of government
sense of their visions of the future of the
bureaus will produce miraculous results In
to make those proposals operational.
Republic. We hope the debates will test the
economy and efficiency? What does each
Minor Party Problem
judgment, intelligence, knowledge and
think are the vital qualities a President
should have? What Presidents does each
poise of the two candidates. We hope the
There is, of course, the troubling quee.
debates will give us a vivid impression of
particularly admire?
tion of minor party candidacy. A case can
what each wants to achieve in the next
A notable opportunity for public enlight-
be made for the appearance in one, say, of
four years.
enment lies ahead. The capacity of each
four sessions of those candidistes-this year
Eugene McCarthy and Laster Maddox-
Our gravest domestic problem remains
candidate to take advantage of that oppor-
who might appeal to more than a minus.
that of racial justice. We need to know
tunity, and forego handing out the usual
cule number of voters. Our lawyers are re-
whether each candidate is satisfied with
mess of cliches and claptrap, will be EA
the present level of opportunity for minori-
measure of their qualifications for the
sourceful enough, I have no doubt, to find
ties. If not, what specific steps would they
presidency.
criteria that distinguish McCarthy and
Maddox from Ford and Carter on the one
take to improve matters? What kind of
hand and from the candidates of the prohi-
priority would they give this issue? Both
Mr. Schlesinger is Albert Schweitzer
bitionist and vegetarian parties on the
should be quizzed, and should quis each
Professor of the Humanities at the City
other. Perhaps one criterion could be the
other. mercilessly about their intentions to-
University of New York and winner of Pu-
number of states in which the candidate
ward the cities.
litzer Prizes in history and biography. He
appears on the ballot.
We need to know what rate of unem-
is also a member of the Journal's Board of
discussion will lie be-
playment each finds acceptable and how
Contributors. live distinguished professors
saño periodic
tenders The next question is: what design
down
that
level
Commodities
Wall Street Journal 9/7/76
Ford-Carter Differences on Farm Policy
Focus on Proper Size of Government Role
THE PRESIDENT HAS SEEN
By KAREN ELLIOTT HOUSE
COMMODITY INDEXES
Staff Referter of Two WALL STREET JOURNAL
WASHINGTON - Jimmy Carter, who
JAN
FEB
MAR
APRIMAY
JUN
JUL
AUGISEP
went through the Democratic primaries ar-
380
guing for less government. favors more gov.
ernment in farming
In speeches and position papers, the
Democratic presidential nominee argues
360
that the government must Insure stable 'con-
sumer food prices by creating a grain re-
1976
serve and at the same time assure profita-
340
ble farm prices by raising federal subsidies
SPOT
to farmers.
Those proposals put him at loggerheads
320
with President Ford And next spring. one of
them will be In the White House to press his
farm policies on Congress, which will be re-
placing the expiring 1973 farm bill with a
300
FUTURES
new one. The key question how big a role
should government have in farm and food
DOW JONES
policies?
280
COMMODITY INDEXES
'Our policy is one of freedom from gov.
1924 26-100
ernment interference for our farmers." says
Earl Buts, Mr. Ford's Agriculture Secre-
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
260
tary. "The Democrats program to just the
Net
Yr
opposite. They talk of a grain reserve and
Close
Che
Ago
higher support prices. Those two add up to
Dew Jenes Patures
342.00
0.73
299.06
Dew Jenes Send
337.43
0.19
316.20
getting government back in the commodity
Router United Kingdom
1466.1
24
1161.8
business
Not so, says P. R (Bobby) Smith of Win-
Ford and Mr. Carter on other 198ues. Both
der. Ga., one of Mr. Carter's chief farm ad.
promise they won't embargo grain sales to
visers. We're not going back to the Kenne-
other nations except in emergencies. such as
dy-Johnson era of big government farm pro-
a massive crop failure here. Both agree that
Frams. were simply talking about giving
the estate-tax exemption for farms should
armers a chance to stay in business.
be increased. President Ford has proposed
Both sides already are blasting away at
raising it to $150,000 from $80,000. Mr.
each other in front of farm audiences. Secre-
Carter hasn't said how high he would like to
tary Butz calls Mr. Carter, who grows pea-
see the exemption but he has said the es
nuts, a "one-crop farmer," and declares he
tate-tax value of the land should be based on
is in the hip pocket of AFL-CIO President
its use for agriculture rather than on its po-
George Meany. "With Carter in the White
tential value for commercial subdivision
House, George Meany will be the shadow
Secretary or ARTICUITURE. Mr. Butz says.
Mr. Carter charges Mr. Butz and President
Ford with "unparalleled incompetence" in
blocking foreign grain sales, which have
been embargoed four times in the past three
years.
Stockpiling Grain
Behind the loud rhetoric are key differ.
ences between Mr. Carter and President
involve the creation of a grain
stockbiling
enom
meat
marreed
satisfy
do-
mestle needs for 60 days roughly 25 million
metric tons based on current use. A metric
ton is 2,201.6 pounds. Buch a reserve, he
says, would insure grain for U.S. needs,
keep food prices stable and make future em-
bargoes unhecessary.
Under the Carter plan half the grain
held by Armera and the rest by
government n tan known how much the
reserve would cost taxpayers, whether the
government would pay storage costs on
grain held by farmers or how farmers would
be prohibited from selling their stored grain
if prices rose.
We looking into the exact mechanism
of how to accumulate and operate
serve." says Oliver Miller, Mr. Carter's co-
ordinator in Atlanta for agricultural issues.
We may have an answer in a few weeks."
President Ford strongly opposes any gov-
ernment grain reserve, which hill mt depress
(Tem prices. Farmers, he says, rare better
when they control surplus grain, selling It as
they do currently when the prices rise
Farmers currently hold about a 79-day sup-
ply of wheat and feed grains, or about 33.3
million metric tons. the Agriculture Depart-
ment estimates. Farmers pay the storage
bill. thereby sparing taxpayers those costs,
which rose to $1 million a day in 1970 before
the Nixon administration sold government-
owned grain to Russia and subsequently
ended farm programs that had created gov.
ernment surpluses.
At the heart of Mr. Carter's farm policy
is a promise of higher price supports the
government loans BIRT aubsidies available to
farmers. Mr. Carter says the support prices,
currently tar below market prices, must be
raised at least to reflect the cost of produc.
ing commodities. But he hasn't said what
the new levels might be in a Carter adminis-
tration.
Robert Lewis of the National Farmers
Union here says, "his statement is poorly
defined and could mean a lot of things But
we're optimistic ne Intends to put prices at
reasonable levels.
Subsidy for Feanuts
One crop that is highly subsidized is pea
nuts, Mr. Carter hasn't announced whether
he favors continuing a New Deal program
that forces the government to buy about
600,000 tons of surplus peanuts each year at
more than double the world market price
That program will cost taxpayers $155 mil-
lion this year. VI don't expect him to take B
position,' Mr. Smith, the Carter adviser
says. He has a vested interest. Although
Mr. Carter hasn't received any federal pay-
ments since 1973. he benefits from the artifi-
cially high price that peanuts bring because
of government controls. Mr. Ford favors
eliminating the peanut program.
There is agreement between President
Commodities
Wall Street Journal 9/7/76
Ford-Carter Differences on Farm Policy
Focus on Proper Size of Government Role
THE PRESIDENT HAS SEEN
By KAREN ELLIOTT HOUSE
COMMODITY INDEXES
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
WASHINGTON Jimmy Carter, who
JAN
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
went through the Democratic primaries ar-
380
guing for less government, favors more gov-
ernment in farming.
In speeches and position papers, the
Democratic presidential nominee argues
360
that the government must insure stable con-
sumer food prices by creating a grain re-
1976
serve and at the same time assure profita-
340
ble farm prices by raising federal subsidies
SPOT
to farmers.
M
Those proposals put him at loggerheads
320
with President Ford And next spring, one of
them will be in the White House to press his
farm policies on Congress, which will be re-
placing the expiring 1973 farm bill with a
300
FUTURES
new one. The key question: how big a role
should government have in farm and food
DOW JONES
policies?
280
COMMODITY INDEXES
"Our policy is one of freedom from gov-
1924 26-100
ernment interference for our farmers," says
Earl Butz, Mr. Ford's Agriculture Secre-
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
260
tary. "The Democrats program is just the
Net
Yr.
opposite. They talk of a grain reserve and
Close
Chg.
Ago
higher support prices. Those two add up to
Dow Jones Futures
342.00
0.73
299.06
Dow Jones Spot
337.43
0.19
316.20
getting government back in the commodity
Reuter United Kingdom
1466.1
+ 2.4
1161.8
business.
Not says P. R. (Bobby) Smith of Win-
Ford and Mr. Carter on other issues. Both
der. Ga., one of Mr. Carter's chief farm ad-
promise they won't embargo grain sales to
visers. We re not going back to the Kenne-
other nations except in emergencies, such as
Johnson era of big government farm pro-
a massive crop failure here. Both agree that
grams. We re simply talking about giving
the estate-tax exemption for farms should
farmers a chance to stay in business.
be increased. President Ford has proposed
Both sides already are blasting away at
raising it to $150,000 from $60,000. Mr.
each other in front of farm audiences. Secre-
Carter hasn't said how high he would like to
tary Butz calls Mr. Carter, who grows pea-
see the exemption but he has said the es-
nuts, a "one-crop farmer, and declares he
tate-tax value of the land should be based on
is in the hip pocket of AFL-CIO President
its use for agriculture rather than on its po-
George Meany. With Carter in the White
tential value for commercial subdivision.
House. George Meany will be the shadow
Secretary of Agriculture.' Mr. Butz says.
Mr. Carter charges Mr. Butz and President
Ford with "unparalleled incompetence" in
blocking foreign grain sales, which have
been embargoed four times in the past three
years.
Stockpiling Grain
Behind the loud rhetoric are key differ-
ences between Mr. Carter and President
Ford. One involves the creation of a grain
reserve. Mr. Carter favors stockpiling
enough wheat and feed grains to satisfy do-
mestic needs for 60 days-roughly 25 million
metric tons based on current use. A metric
ton is 2,204.6 pounds. Such a reserve, he
says, would insure grain for U.S. needs,
keep food prices stable and make future em-
bargoes unnecessary.
Under the Carter plan, half the grain
would be held by farmers and the rest by
government. It isn't known how much the
reserve would cost taxpayers, whether the
government would pay storage costs on
grain held by farmers or how farmers would
be prohibited from selling their stored grain
If prices rose.
We re looking into the exact mechanism
of how to accumulate and operate a re-
serve, says Oliver Miller, Mr. Carter's co-
ordinator in Atlanta for agricultural issues.
'We may have an answer in a few weeks."
President Ford strongly opposes any gov-
ernment grain reserve, which might depress
farm prices. Farmers, he says, fare better
when they control surplus grain, selling It as
they do currently when the prices rise.
Farmers currently hold about a 79-day sup-
ply of wheat and feed grains, or about 33.5
million metric tons, the Agriculture Depart-
ment estimates. Farmers pay the storage
bill, thereby sparing taxpayers those costs,
which rose to $1 million a day in 1970 before
the Nixon administration sold government-
owned grain to Russia and subsequently
ended farm programs that had created gov-
ernment surpluses.
At the heart of Mr. Carter's farm policy
is a promise of higher price supports the
government loans and subsidies available to
farmers. Mr. Carter says the support prices,
currently far below market prices, must be
raised at least to reflect the cost of produc-
ing commodities. But he hasn't said what
the new levels might be in a Carter adminis-
tration.
Robert Lewis of the National Farmers
Union here says, "his statement is poorly
defined and could mean a lot of things. But
we're optimistic he intends to put prices at
reasonable levels.'
Subsidy for Peanuts
One crop that is highly subsidized is pea-
nuts. Mr. Carter hasn't announced whether
he favors continuing a New Deal program
that forces the government to buy about
600,000 tons of surplus peanuts each year at
more than double the world market price.
That program will cost taxpayers $155 mil-
lion this year. VI don't expect him to take a
position,' Mr. Smith, the Carter adviser
says. "He has a vested interest.' Although
Mr. Carter hasn't received any federal pay-
ments since 1973, he benefits from the artifi-
cially high price that peanuts bring because
of government controls. Mr. Ford favors
eliminating the peanut program.
There is agreement between President
John P. Roche
Wodnington Star
Carter has NATO checking the fire esca
That 4.5 tremor on the
neutral Austrians fit into
able response to a Warsaw
would be limited to Europe
He then
Richter Scale about a week
the picture? Finally, where
Pact blitz into Western En-
West and East and it
tation on
ago did not demity another
would the meeting be held
rope.
would be horrible. But it is
clear wes
earthquake in China it
in safety Iceland?
To quiet Soviet fears, we
a false hope to exclude the
wonder N
represented a shudder in
Then came another
went in for ministurization
two superpowers from
surreptitio
the NATO chancelleries
thump on Dulles's bass-
and extraordinary accura-
that."
fire escape
over Jimmy Carter's Intest
drum: "The standoff mu-
cy. The theory was that if
ramblings on limited
clear strength between us
Brezhnev knew our nukes
clear war
and the Soviet Union, where
were small, clean and accu-
Right after the conven-
both of us have substantial
rate, and only targeted on
tion, the candidate met with
overkill capacities, is a
military installations, be
the Hearst Taskforce and
major deterrent to war in
would genially accept the
delivered some remarkable
Europe. "Massive retalia-
military symmetry. His re-
musings on the subject of
tion," Dulles's phrase, rides
ponse, however, was to up-
American reliance on the
again.
date his large, dirty and
nuclear deterrent. To the
Finally, he seemed to be-
relatively inaccurate short-
extent they were Intelligi-
lieve we still have a "pre-
range and intermediate-
ble, they marked - as I
emptive strike" capacity
range ballistic missiles.
noted here a pure "Back
against the Soviets, that we
(Contrary to recent specu-
to Dulles" approach.
could take out their retalia-
lation, the evidence indi-
Since his views went
tory capabilities in one sud-
cates their SRBMs and
largely unreported in the
den salvo.
IRBMs have not been
summer doldrums, let me
The root of Carter's prob.
MIRVed: Moscow is just
again summarize them.
lem is his belief that limited
getting more resonance for
First, he said he would
nuclear war is a fake op-
the ruble.)
use atomic weapons if he
tion. I completely agree.
Given Brezhnev's under-
was "convinced the securi-
Since Henry Kissinger
standable refusal to play by
ty or existence own
first surfaced the concept in
our rules (they have anoth-
1958 (later backing off), I
er manual, by Lenin, out of
Immediately readers in
have inveighed against it in
Clausewitz, which empha-
Tokyo, Seoul and Western
season and out, particularly
sizes that war is not a
Europe went on red alert.
when it almost became part
ballet), only a lunatic would
our own nation."
of our national policy dis-
put his money on a limited
guised as the Multilateral
war staying limited. Jimmy
Second he got into the
Nuclear Force (MLF).
Carter clearly does not fall
European situation, though
Indeed, I like to think I
into this category, but in-
hardly in a reassuring fash-
had a hand in President
stead of advocating the only
ion: 'The use of atomic
Johnson's decision, immedi-
reasonable alternative - a
weapons in Europe would
ately after the 1964 election,
conventional build-up - he
certainly not be contemplat-
to scuttle MLF. I asked if
has again, in an interview
ed by me without agree-
he really thought Moscow
with C.L. Suizberger of the
ment of the nations who
would take seriously a
New York Times, gone
would be most directly af-
statement that the views ex-
drifting off into strategic no
fected by retaliatory ac-
pressed by an MLF nuke
man's land.
tions against the Soviet
hitting Kiev were not neces-
Union
I certainly
sarily those of the govern-
"The Russians,' he said,
couldn't imagine us using
ment of the United States?
"have always gone all-out
nuclear weapons in Europe
In the post-Vietnam run-
in their planning (for a
without Germany and Aus-
down of American
tactical, not limited, nu-
tria and perhaps France ap-
conventional forces, tacti-
clear war). But make the
proving their use."
cal nuclear weapons
distinction that they would
What on earth did this
became a capital-intensive
exclude direct attacks by
mean?
substitute for troops. And
them on the U.S.A. and di-
In the event of a crisis,
whether we admitted it or
rect attacks by us (on
would he call a conference
not, a tactical nuclear first-
them).
and take a vote? How do
strike was the only conceiv-
"For them, a tactical war
John P. Roche
THE PRESIDENT STATE
Wodnington Star
9/3/76
Carter has NATO checking the fire escape
That 4.5 tremor on the
neutral Austrians fit into
able response to a Warsaw
would be limited to Europe
He then advocated a limi-
Richter Scale about a week
the picture? Finally, where
Pact blitz into Western Eu-
- West and East - and it
tation on the spread of nu-
ago did not signify another
would the meeting be held
rope.
would be horrible. But it is
clear weapons! Is it any
earthquake in China - it
in safety? Iceland?
To quiet Soviet fears, we
a false hope to exclude the
wonder NATO powers are
represented a shudder in
Then came another
went in for miniaturization
two superpowers from
surreptitiously checking the
the NATO chancelleries
thump on Dulles's bass-
and extraordinary accura-
that."
fire escape?
over Jimmy Carter's latest
drum: "The standoff nu-
cy. The theory was that if
ramblings on limited nu-
clear strength between us
Brezhnev knew our nukes
clear war.
and the Soviet Union, where
were small, clean and accu-
Right after the conven-
both of us have substantial
rate, and only targeted on
tion, the candidate met with
overkill capacities, is a
military installations, he
the Hearst Taskforce and
major deterrent to war in
would genially accept the
delivered some remarkable
Europe. "Massive retalia-
military symmetry. His re-
musings on the subject of
tion," Dulles's phrase, rides
ponse, however, was to up-
American reliance on the
again.
date his large, dirty and
nuclear deterrent. To the
Finally, he seemed to be-
relatively inaccurate short-
extent they were intelligi-
lieve we still have a "pre-
range and intermediate-
ble, they marked - as I
emptive strike" capacity
range ballistic missiles.
noted here - a pure "Back
against the Soviets, that we
(Contrary to recent specu-
to Dulles" approach.
could take out their retalia-
lation, the evidence indi-
Since his views went
tory capabilities in one sud-
cates their SRBMs and
largely unreported in the
den salvo.
IRBMs have not been
summer doldrums, let me
The root of Carter's prob-
MIRVed: Moscow is just
again summarize them.
lem is his belief that limited
getting more resonance for
First, he said he would
nuclear war is a fake op-
the ruble.)
use atomic weapons if he
tion. I completely agree.
Given Brezhnev's under-
was "convinced the securi-
Since Henry Kissinger
standable refusal to play by
ty or existence of our own
first surfaced the concept in
our rules (they have anoth-
was threatened."
1958 (later backing off), I
er manual, by Lenin, out of
Immediately readers in
have inveighed against it in
Clausewitz, which empha-
Tokyo, Seoul and Western
season and out, particularly
sizes that war is not a
Europe went on red alert.
when it almost became part
ballet), only a lunatic would
our own nation."
of our national policy dis-
put his money on a limited
guised as the Multilateral
war staying limited. Jimmy
Second he got into the
Nuclear Force (MLF).
Carter clearly does not fall
European situation, though
Indeed, I like to think I
into this category, but in-
hardly in a reassuring fash-
had a hand in President
stead of advocating the only
ion: "The use of atomic
Johnson's decision, immedi-
reasonable alternative - a
weapons in Europe would
ately after the 1964 election,
conventional build-up - he
certainly not be contemplat-
to scuttle MLF. I asked if
has again, in an interview
ed by me without agree-
he really thought Moscow
with C.L. Sulzberger of the
ment of the nations who
would take seriously a
New York Times, gone
would be most directly af-
statement that the views ex-
drifting off into strategic no
fected by retaliatory ac-
pressed by an MLF nuke
man's land.
tions against the Soviet
hitting Kiev were not neces-
Union I certainly
sarily those of the govern-
"The Russians,' he said,
couldn't imagine us using
ment of the United States?
"have always gone all-out
nuclear weapons in Europe
In the post-Vietnam run-
in their planning (for a
without Germany and Aus-
down of American
tactical, not limited, nu-
tria and perhaps France ap-
conventional forces, tacti-
clear war). But make the
proving their use."
cal nuclear weapons
distinction that they would
What on earth did this
became a capital-intensive
exclude direct attacks by
mean?
substitute for troops. And
them on the U.S.A. and di-
In the event of a crisis,
whether we admitted it or
rect attacks by us (on
would he call a conference
not, a tactical nuclear first-
them).
and take a vote? How do the
strike was the only conceiv-
"For them, a tactical war
Digitized from Box 1 of the White House Special Files Unit Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
FORD
THE PRESIDENT HAS SEEN
Politics 3
Sensitive Issues: Welfare, Social Security
This is the second of a series of articles detail-
The House Ways and Means Committee, however, is
ing the differences between President Ford's and
expected to consider tacking a smaller rate increase-.1 per
Jimmy Carter's positions on major issues likely to
cent for employer and employees-onto "decoupling"
face the 95th Congress.
legislation (HR 14430), which aims to correct a costly defect
Much as they might like to, President Ford and Jimmy
in the method used to adjust Social Security benefits for in-
Carter cannot easily avoid the Social Security and welfare
flation. While the "decoupling" bill is not likely to pass dur-
reform issues that have been pitfalls for some other
ing 1976, chances are good that the 95th Congress will
presidential nominees of both parties.
approve some form of the legislation.
For example, Sen. Barry Goldwater (R Ariz.) alarmed
Ford has called his proposal to raise payroll taxes essen-
much of the nation in 1964 with his proposal to make Social
tial to the solvency of the Social Security system. "Simple
Security voluntary, a stand Republicans have taken pains
arithmetic warns all of us that the social security trust fund
to repudiate ever since. Then in 1972 Sen. George
is headed for trouble," Ford said in his 1976 State of the
McGovern (D S.D.) floated his plan to guarantee every
Union message. "Unless we act soon to make sure the fund
American an income of $1,000, which proved an easy target
takes in as much as it pays out, there will be no security
for his opponents.
for old or young."
While such experiences might suggest a cautious, low-
profile approach to these issues, certain facts make them
impossible for this year's candidates to ignore.
National Issues
Government reports show the Social Security system
running an annual deficit and forecast depletion of the Old
Age, Survivors and Disability Insurance (OASDI) trust
The President is staunchly opposed to other approaches
funds by the early 1980s, unless additional revenues are
for boosting trust fund revenues. Emphasizing his intention
provided or benefit levels adjusted. In addition, economists
to preserve the contributory nature of the program, Ford es-
warn that demographic factors such as low birth rates com-
pecially objected to proposals to supplement payroll tax
bined with the aging of the "baby boom" generation even-
receipts with general tax revenues, even on a temporary
tually will strain the system even more, requiring a relatively
basis.
smaller work force to support a larger population of retirees.
His administration also has been unsympathetic to
suggestions involving further extensions of the payroll tax
Staggering Caseloads
wage base; under existing law, the ceiling on earnings sub-
Another unsettling trend is the sharp growth of welfare
ject to the tax will rise automatically to $16,500, from
caseloads. The Department of Health, Education and
$15,300, in January. Administration spokesmen, such as
Welfare estimates that Aid to Families with Dependent
Social Security Administration Commissioner James B.
Children (AFDC)-the nation's largest welfare
Cardwell, argued that raising the ceiling on covered earn-
program-now supports 11.5 million persons, compared
ings would simply compound the system's long-range
with 4.4 million in 1965 and 2 million in 1955. And, despite
financial difficulties, because of the link between con-
annual federal outlays exceeding $32-billion for public
tributors' taxable earnings and their eventual benefit levels.
assistance programs (such as AFDC, Medicaid, food
Democratic nominee Jimmy Carter has flatly opposed
stamps), the numbers of poor Americans continue to rise. In
proposals to raise payroll taxes. "Increasing the contribu-
1974 the Census Bureau counted 24.3 million persons as
tion rate as President Ford has suggested would put an
poor-over one million more than the year before.
even greater burden on the average wage earner, would not
In view of such developments, Ford and Carter agree
insure more benefits, and would require everyone to pay
that something must be done to restore public confidence in
more," Carter said.
the Social Security system and to improve the operations of
Blaming Republican economic policies for the current
welfare programs. But there has been little consensus on
shortages of Social Security revenues, Carter claimed that
just what steps to take.
recent periods of high unemployment and inflation had
together deprived the system of tax receipts and
necessitated large increases in benefit costs. Carter said he
Social Security
would concentrate on achieving greater reductions in un-
employment and inflation to bring the system into balance.
Payroll Tax and Wage Base
If the deficits persisted, however, Carter said he would
Ford and Carter sharply disagree on solutions to the
support further increases in the taxable earnings base. And,
Social Security system's short-run financing problems. In
as more of a last resort, he would be willing to use general
his fiscal 1977 budget request, Ford called for an increase in
tax revenues to help finance Social Security.
payroll tax rates, raising both the employer and employee
contributions (currently a flat 5.85 per cent of covered earn-
Benefits Structure
ings) by .3 percentage points apiece. According to ad-
Both candidates have endorsed the types of changes in
ministration estimates, the higher rates would produce an
the benefits structure contained in the "decoupling" bill.
extra $3.5-billion in tax revenues.
Introduced at Ford's request, the bill would end current
Concerned that a tax increase of this size would tend to
techniques of adjusting benefit schedules for both wage and
counteract the stimulative economic effects of the income
price increases-an overcompensation for inflation that
tax cuts initiated in 1975, Congress effectively rejected the
could allow recipients' benefits to exceed their pre-
proposal when it agreed upon spending targets in March.
retirement wages. Carter has proposed a similar reform,
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL OUARTERLY INC.
Reproduction prohibited in whole or in part except by editorial clients
Sept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2467
Politics 4
Politics 5
aimed at guaranteeing current workers the same
proposals to increase the share of federal funds supporting
of congressional action, Ford pressed for administrative
financial situation will be harmed by the breadwinner
relationship between benefits and wages in effect for current
AFDC and medical assistance programs, but few plans
regulations to reduce program costs and participation
remaining with his dependents," Carter told the
retirees.
addressed the issue of converting the existing network of
levels. New Department of Agriculture standards, currently
Democratic Party Platform Committee in June, "and ef-
Beyond the existing financial difficulties, few campaign
state-run public assistance programs (such as AFDC,
under court challenge, would drop from the program an es-
forts should be made to have fathers who abandon their
proposals address longer-run or more permanent concerns.
Medicaid) and federal "in-kind" aid (such as food stamps)
timated 5 million recipients-most with household incomes
family be forced to continue support."
With projections raising doubts about the ability of future
into a single, nationally standard cash payment system.
just above the poverty line. (Details of food stamp con-
Carter also emphasized the need to relate welfare
generations to support the growing population of retired
troversy, Weekly Report pp. 2236, 1118)
reform to changes in existing government employment
persons, for example, the wisdom of maintaining the current
Minimum Income Concept
programs.
"pay-as-you-go" system has been questioned.
Shortly before she retired, Rep. Martha W. Griffiths (D
Carter
As part of broader plans to improve living conditions of
senior citizens, and make retirement life more meaningful,
Mich. 1955-75) broke the ice in December 1974 with a com-
Carter, in contrast, has said that his administration
Outlook
Carter favors some liberalization of the rule requiring
bination cash allowance/tax rebate plan that has served as
would consider "a complete overhaul of our welfare system"
proportionate reductions in Social Security payments to
the model for current proponents of the guaranteed
a high priority matter. "Our welfare system is an insult to
Because Carter is making an issue of welfare reform
beneficiaries earning more than $2,760 a year. "Let them
minimum income concept in both the House and the
those who pay the bill and those who honestly need help,"
during his campaign, the legislative prospects for com-
earn up to $3,600 at most," Carter recommended, claiming
Senate. (1974 Weekly Report p. 3274)
Carter said. "The basic components of a fair and workable
prehensive changes in the system generally are considered
that "it would cost too much" to drop the retirement earn-
Griffiths' plan set the basic benefit for a family of four
program are well known It's time to act."
much brighter under Carter than under Ford. "If Carter's
ings test entirely.
with no income at $4,300 and required that the grants be
Carter has endorsed the guaranteed minimum payment
elected, you'll see new life at HEW," predicted a con-
The Social Security Administration estimates a loss of
reduced 50 cents for each dollar earned. The payments, to
concept, with some modifications. "We should have one
gressional aide to Robert J. Cornell (D Wis.), a main
more than $6-billion from elimination of the earnings
be administered by the Internal Revenue Service, would
fairly uniform standard of payment, adjusted to the extent
organizer of large-scale welfare reform efforts in the House.
test-a drain the agency claims it cannot afford. Its es-
replace the existing AFDC and food stamps programs.
feasible for cost-of-living differences and with strong work
In addition, there are definite plans to revive in the
timate makes allowance for Social Security taxes-but not
(Revisions of Medicaid, however, would await action on
incentives built in," Carter told the National Governors'
95th Congress current congressional proposals for a
income taxes-that beneficiaries would pay if the removal
national health insurance plans.) The additional cost of the
Conference July 6. "In no case should the level of benefits
guaranteed minimum income. These include companion
of the restriction induced more retirement-age individuals
Griffiths-type reforms is estimated in the $13-billion to $15-
make not working more attractive than working."
bills by Cornell (HR 6430), Sens. Jacob K. Javits (R N.Y.)
to continue working.
billion range, if the existing income tax cuts enacted in 1975
To preserve incentives to work, Carter calls for a "two-
and McGovern (S 3000), as well as a separate bill (S 3665)
remain in effect. Without the tax reductions, the cost is
track" system, essentially separating the employable from
by Sen. J. Glenn Beall Jr. (R Md.). In the next Congress,
placed at $22- to $24-billion.
Welfare Reform
the unemployable poor. Under this plan, persons physically
these sponsors generally anticipate more help from a Carter
Politically conservative critics of the welfare system
able to work-except for mothers of pre-school
administration than from a Ford administration.
have focused on reducing the role of the federal government
children-would be considered unemployed. "They should
Some observers also expect Ford, if re-elected, to be
Social Security does not function purely as a pension
and tightening standards of eligibility for relief. One set of
be trained for a job and offered a job," Carter explained,
more receptive to minimum income-type programs in his
plan, of course; it has an income-support component as
proposals advanced by conservatives in both chambers of
adding that public jobs should be created if necessary. "If
next term than he has been in the past. In either case, much
well. Since the first payments of Social Security benefits in
Congress would eliminate aid to strikers and students and
they decline the job, they should be ineligible for further
probably will depend on outside momentum for change.
1940, the benefit schedule has favored workers at the lower
require stricter proof that recipients have sought work.
benefits."
"There's little interest now among members of Congress,"
end of the income scale, "replacing" larger proportions of
Along with the minimum income plans, these proposals
The Carter campaign estimates that about 10 per cent
one welfare reform proponent said. "They think it's too con-
their pre-retirement earnings.
currently are lodged in congressional committees that have
of current welfare recipients would fall in the employable
troversial and costly, and they'd rather not get involved."
Stressing the distinction between social insurance and
taken no action on them.
category. The rest-primarily the aged, the handicapped or
Further, as the McGovern campaign found out, the
welfare, proponents of the Social Security system have firm-
disabled, and persons with dependent children-would
concept of a guaranteed annual income can quickly lose its
ly resisted proposals to make benefits even more directly
Ford
receive a standard payment "adequate to meet the
appeal when numbers and cost figures are identified. A cash
contingent on means. Advocates of welfare reform, on the
President Ford generally has taken the position that
necessities of life." To encourage these individuals to hold
program that aids any significant numbers of the working
other hand, have had somewhat greater success when they
more than piecemeal reform of the welfare system is needed,
part-time jobs if possible, Carter favors increasing the
poor, explained a congressional specialist in welfare reform,
have been able to link their proposals with Social Security.
but not necessarily right away. Maintaining that "complex
amounts they can earn without triggering a reduction of
will not necessarily cost any less than is being spent on
welfare programs cannot be reformed overnight," Ford also
their benefits.
public assistance already-and may cost a great deal more.
SSI
has expressed doubts that the economy could absorb any
Unlike McGovern, Carter has not attempted to attach
"Setting the specific benefit levels will be very difficult,"
In 1974 the Supplemental Security Income (SSI)
major new expenditures for welfare before the end of the
numbers and prices to these proposals. Details such as the
she added, noting that the incomes of about 10 per cent of
program administered by the Social Security Administra-
decade.
specific benefit levels for either group of recipients and the
American families fall just above the poverty line, making
tion became the nation's first guaranteed minimum income
In 1974 a special welfare reform group in HEW
benefit-reduction-or "tax"-rates applied to earnings, his
them eligible for some benefits under such a plan.
program. Replacing more than 1,000 state and local public
developed its own version of the guaranteed minimum in-
campaign explains, are matters to receive careful study
assistance programs, SSI provided uniform federal
come plan, which reportedly met with a cool reception at
from his administration. Similarly, without such
Social Security
allowances, based on financial need, to elderly, blind or dis-
the White House. "I have never believed that a guaranteed
specifications, cost estimates cannot yet be made, though
The debate over how to rescue the Social Security
abled persons. For the very poorest recipients, the program
annual income was the answer to any of our problems,"
Carter has indicated that expenditures in the $20-billion
system will also certainly continue into the next Congress.
now provides monthly payments of $168 per individual and
Ford said during a campaign appearance in Alabama in
range would not be acceptable. In a press conference Sept.
While a Ford administration might renew its request for an
$252 per couple. (Background, Weekly Report p. 1508)
May. But, emphasizing his dissatisfaction with the existing
3, he also stressed the need to balance the federal budget
increase in payroll taxes, its chances in Congress-if un-
The SSI program was the only part of former President
welfare system, he has asked HEW to make new recommen-
during his first term, delaying such programs as welfare
employment rates remain well above 7 per cent-probably
Nixon's Family Assistance Plan (FAP), to aid poor families
dations on welfare reform, including analysis of minimum
reform if necessary.
would be slight.
with children, that survived. The main welfare reform
income possibilities.
Though Carter consistently has characterized the ex-
According to projections in both the Carter and Ford
features of the FAP bill-grants of cash and food stamps
While viewing complete federalization of the system
isting collection of state-run assistance programs as "a crazy
camps, some form of "decoupling" would eliminate about
(totaling $2,400 for a family of four with no other income)
with reservations, Ford has not supported the conservative
quilt of regulations administered by a bloated
half of the long-range deficit in the Social Security system,
combined with a 50 per cent tax on earnings of more than
position that welfare responsibilities be left to state
bureaucracy," he does not favor complete federal spon-
making the need for revenues less pressing.
$720 a year-were dropped by House-Senate conferees in
governments alone. "Surely we cannot simply dump welfare
sorship of welfare. His plans call for the federal government
In the meantime, as the government deliberates on the
October 1972. After passing the House in June 1971, the
into the laps of the 50 states. and just walk away from it,"
to assume a "substantial part" of the funding and, when
issue of Social Security financing, the system itself is in no
plan met fierce opposition from conservatives in the Senate,
Ford said in his State of the Union address. He also would
financially feasible, a phased reduction of the states' shares
danger of "going under." Acknowledging that, unlike a
led by Finance Committee Chairman Russell B. Long (D
like the federal government to assume greater control over
of the cost. Localities would not have to foot any of the bill,
private insurance company, the government can always
La.), who pressed for the inclusion of strict work re-
the eligibility standards, benefit schedules and other
as New York City now does.
stand behind its payment obligations, the Ford administra-
quirements for able-bodied adults. (Background, 1972
organizational aspects of the existing programs. (Weekly
As part of his proposals for uniform national criteria for
tion has said that "the public's benefits are not in jeopar-
Almanac p. 899)
Report p. 135)
welfare benefits, Carter urged the elimination of regulations
dy." And Jimmy Carter would probably add, "You can de-
Comprehensive welfare reform efforts have been essen-
In addition, his administration has made special efforts
that encourage fathers to desert their families. "Family
pend on it."
I
tially stalled since then. There have been subsidiary
to revamp the food stamp program. Impatient with the pace
stability should be encouraged by assuring that no family's
-By Mary Eisner Eccles
PAGE 2468-Sept. 11, 1976
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC.
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
Reproduction prohibited whole in part except by editorial clients
Reproduc whole or in part except by editorial clients,
Sept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2469
Politics 6
Politics 7
Arizona: Steiger
majority of the GOP vote, Steiger was the winner by about
8,500 votes. This was more than enough to cancel Conlan's
Defeats Conlan
edge in southern Arizona and his 1,100 vote majority in
Sikes Renominated:
Pima County (Tucson).
The Democratic primary was largely overshadowed by
A bitter campaign clouded by personal animosity and
the Republican feuding, but DeConcini goes into the
charges of anti-Semitism ended Sept. 7 as Arizona
general election with at least an even chance to win. He
Florida: Grady Wins GOP Senate Nomination
Republicans chose U.S. Rep. Sam Steiger to run for the
carried every county except small Apache in the northeast
Senate seat being vacated by incumbent Republican Paul
corner of the state, winning over Warner by nearly 18,000 in
John L. Grady swamped two other Senate candidates
no political experience in 1974 when he nearly upset Burke.
J. Fannin. Steiger defeated U.S. Rep. John B. Conlan by
Maricopa and by 19,000 in Pima, his home base. Warner
in Florida's Sept. 7 primary to win the Republican nomina-
The runoff could be close.
fewer than 10,000 votes. He faces a difficult contest in the
needed a strong showing in the Phoenix area to have any
tion to oppose Democrat Lawton Chiles in November. All
Democrats also believe their chances are good in the 5th
general election against Democrat Dennis DeConcini, the
chance, but her campaign suffered from a late start and
House incumbents seeking renomination won it, including
District against first-term Republican Rep. Richard Kelly,
former Pima County (Tucson) attorney who resigned to
poor organization.
veteran Democrat Robert L. F. Sikes, who was reprimanded
but first they must have a runoff. JoAnn Saunders, who lost
make the race. DeConcini won the Democratic nomination
The House seats vacated by Steiger and Conlan could
by the House for financial misconduct in July. (Florida out-
to Kelly by 11,300 votes in 1974, came within about 50 votes
by almost 50,000 votes over Carolyn Warner, the state
go to either party. Steiger's 3rd District will have a battle
look, Weekly Report p. 2353)
of winning a majority in the five-candidate Democratic
superintendent of public instruction, and Wade Church, a
between two conservative state senators, Democrat Bob
Grady, who had been expected to win, received two-
primary. Her opponent in the runoff is Miller Newton, who
former state attorney general. (Arizona outlook, Weekly
Stump and Republican Fred Koory. Stump had been the
thirds of the vote against State Sen. Walter Sims and at-
trailed Saunders Sept. 7 by nearly 20,000 votes. Newton
Report p. 2324)
early favorite for his party's nomination, but took less than
torney Helen S. Hansel. A member of the national board of
benefitted in the primary from several newspaper en-
In the Republican contest, the deciding factor may
one-third of the vote in a five-way race. Koory won easily
the John Birch Society, Grady was the American Party can-
dorsements and from the surprising failure of an expensive
have been the endorsement of Steiger by Sen. Barry
over Don Aldridge, a Mohave County commissioner. In the
didate for the Senate in 1974. He received 15.5 per cent that
advertising campaign by Sidney L. Vihlen Jr.
Goldwater, who accused Conlan of trying to make an issue
4th District, Democrat Tony Mason won his primary by a
year against Sen. Richard (Dick) Stone (D) and Republican
of the fact that Steiger is Jewish. Conlan has close ties with
comfortable margin over blind State Rep. Craig E. Davids.
Jack M. Eckerd. Grady is a physician in Belle Glade.
Christian fundamentalist groups and he frequently men-
He will face Republican Eldon Rudd, a Maricopa County
In the 8th District, six Democrats and four Republicans
Close Call
tioned the need to involve Christians actively in politics. He
supervisor who defeated a state corporation commissioner,
competed for the seat of retiring Democratic Rep. James A.
Democratic Rep. Don Fuqua had a close call in the
struck back at the endorsement with statements hinting
Ernest Garfield.
Haley. The Democratic winner, with about 150 votes more
three-man 2nd District primary. Until the absentee ballots
that Goldwater drank too much. The campaign ended with
The two incumbents seeking re-election, Democrat
than the required majority, was Andy Ireland. The wealthy
were counted, giving Fuqua about 200 votes more than a
the GOP badly split and Conlan refusing to concede defeat
Morris K. Udall and Republican House Minority Leader
banker made use of experienced political consultants and
majority, it appeared that he would be in a runoff with
or talk to the press.
John J. Rhodes, were renominated easily over weak op-
extensive advertising. Ireland led his closest rival, conser-
Russell R. Bevis. A former mayor of Tallahassee, Bevis
Steiger and Conlan each carried the small rural coun-
position. Udall is a shoo-in in November, while Rhodes is
vative State Rep. Ray Mattox, by 9,600 votes.
ties in his own congressional district. In Maricopa County
favored in a rematch with Democrat Pat Fullinwider, who
relied heavily on television advertising. Fuqua is assured of
(Phoenix), a constituency they share and one which casts a
gave him a close race in 1974.
Runoff Ahead
his eighth term. He has no Republican opponent.
-By Matt Pinkus
First District Democrats overwhelmingly approved
SENATET
The Republican primary in the 8th resulted in a runoff
Sikes, 70, despite charges by his young opponent, John J.
to be held Sept. 28 between State Rep. Robert Johnson and
Benton Jr., that Sikes would be ineffective in Congress
District
Location
Candidate
Residence
Age
Occupation
Votes
Per Cent
Joe Z. Lovingood. Johnson led by 3,000 votes over
because of the reprimand. The House on July 29 voted 381-3
Lovingood, who ran against Haley three times without
Wade Church (D)
Phoenix
to reprimand Sikes for financial misconduct. Sikes has no
67 Former state attorney general
34,138
15.1
Dennis DeConcini (D)*
Tucson
39 Former Pima County attorney
121,002
53.4
success. Registered Democrats outnumber Republicans
Republican opponent. (Reprimand, Weekly Report, p.
Carolyn Warner (D)
Phoenix
46 Superintendent of public
two-to-one in the district, but voters there frequently sup-
2027)
instruction
71,343
31.5
port GOP candidates in statewide elections.
Rep. L.A. (Skip) Bafalis (R), of the 10th District will
In the 12th District, where Democrats believe they have
John B. Conlan (R)
Paradise Valley
45 U.S. representative
again meet Democrat Bill Sikes, winner of a three-man
92,812
47.5
Sam Steiger (R)*
Prescott
47 U.S. representative
102,506
52.5
a good chance of defeating Republican Rep. J. Herbert
primary. Sikes (no relation to Robert Sikes) ran against
Burke, the field of eight was narrowed to a runoff between
Bafalis in 1972 and drew 38 per cent of the vote. Against
HOUSET
Anne L. Kolb and Charles Friedman. Kolb, who led the
another Democrat in 1974, Bafalis took 73.7 per cent.
1
Southern Phoenix, Tempe,
Democratic primary by about 3,500 votes, is a county com-
Mesa
Pat Fullinwider (D)*
Tempe
35 Housewife
Unopposed
missioner with liberal views. Friedman is a dentist who had
-By James R. Wagner
John J. Rhodes (R)*
Mesa
60 Incumbent
36,962
76.9
Louis E. Stradling (R)
Mesa
59 City councilman
11,121
23.1
SENATE
2
South-Tuscon
Ruben Romero (D)
Tucson
41 City councilman
14,181
21.4
Morris K. Udall (D)*
Tucson
54
Incumbent
52,238
78.6
Candidate
Residence
Age
Occupation
Votes
Per Cent
Laird Guttersen (R)*
Tucson
51 Management consultant
Unopposed
Lawton Chiles (D)*
Lakeland
46
Incumbent
Unopposed
3
Western Phoenix, Glendale,
Tony Gabaldon (D)
Flagstaff
45 State senator
10,573
18.9
Walter Sims (R)
Orlando
53
State senator
70,995
30.2
Yuma
Max Klass (D)
Glendale
49
Former mayor
6,352
11.4
John L. Grady (R)*
Belle Glade
46
Physician
157,846
67.1
Joe Eddie Lopez (D)
Phoenix
36 Maricopa county supervisor
7,297
13.0
Sid Rosen (D)
Phoenix
37
Lawyer
14,193
25.4
Helen S. Hansel (R)
St. Petersburg
54
Lawyer
6,247
2.7
Bob Stump (D)*
Tolleson
49 State senate president
17,524
31.3
HOUSE#
Don Aldridge (R)
Lake Havasu City
38 Mohave County supervisor
18,766
36.5
District
Location
Candidate
Residence
Age
Occupation
Votes
Per Cent
Fred Koory Jr. (R)*
Glendale
36
State senator
32,626
63.5
1
Northwest-Pensacola,
Robert L. F. Sikes (D)*
Crestview
70
Incumbent
84,467
73.7
4
East-Northern Phoenix
Craig E. Davids (D)
Coolidge
57 State representative
26,679
46.6
Panama City
John J. Benton Jr. (D)
Panama City
26
Former Commerce Dept. economist
30,104
26.3
Tony Mason (D)*
Phoenix
37
Lawyer
30,619
53.4
Ernest Garfield (R)
Phoenix
2
North-Tallahassee,
Russell R. Bevis (D)
Tallahassee
50
Insurance executive
41,587
32.4
44 State corporation commissioner
22,273
41.2
Fountain Hills
Gainesville
Don Fuqua (D)*
Altha
43
Incumbent
Arch DiRoberts (R)
64,416
50.2
Former policeman
3,837
7.1
Eldon Rudd (R)*
Scottsdale
Jack Armstrong (D)
Tallahassee
32
Former education official
22,375
17.4
56 Maricopa County supervisor
27,989
51.7
*Nominee
Nearly complete returns
3
Northeast-Jacksonville
Charles E. Bennett (D)*
Jacksonville
66
Incumbent
Unopposed
Nearly complete returns
Nominee
COPYAIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
PAGE 2470-Sept. 11, 1976
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL OUARTERLY INC
Reproduction proh bited whole or part except by editor clients
Sept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2471
Reproduction prohibited whole or except by editorial Clients
Politics 8
Politics 9
District
Location
Candidate
Residence
Age
Occupation
Votes
Per Cent
Georgia Runoff
executive secretary to former Gov. Carl Sanders (D 1963-
4
67), is thought to be more liberal than the incumbent, while
Northeast-Daytona Beach
Bill Chappell Jr. (D)*
Ocala
54
Incumbent
52,890
66.4
J. Townley (D)
Padgett is a conservative and former aide to Lester G. Mad-
Candler
18,992
23.8
Georgia Democrats in three congressional districts
Tommy Boney (D)
dox, the controversial ex-governor and lieutenant governor.
Keystone Heights
39
Park superintendent
7,788
9.8
preferred moderate candidates in the Aug. 31 primary
Padgett depended on rural votes, and carried 14 of the 21
5
West Central-Clearwater,
Don T. Reynolds (D)
Sanford
41
High school principal
7,529
10.7
runoffs as they chose replacements for three retiring House
counties in the district. But Barnard received a 7,000-vote
Orlando
James E. Sursely (D)
Maitland
28
Vietnam veteran
3,094
members. Two of the winners are assured of election in
4.4
margin in Atlanta and Augusta, enough for a 2,799-vote
JoAnn Saunders (D)t
Orlando
42
Former businesswoman
34,982
49.8
November; the third faces a potentially strong Republican
district-wide plurality.
Sidney L. Vihlen Jr. (D)
Altamonte Springs
35
Seminole County commissioner
9,536
13.6
opponent in the general election. (Primary results, Weekly
Barnard has no Republican opposition on the
Miller Newton (D)t
Lutz
37
Pinellas-Pasco Circuit Court clerk
15,053
21.5
Report p. 2199)
November ballot.
In the 8th District (South central-Macon, Waycross)
Richard Kelly (R)*
New Port Richey
52
Incumbent
Unopposed
vacated by five term Rep. W.S. (Bill) Stuckey, the runoff
6
West-St. Petersburg
Gabriel Cazares (D)*
between two Georgia state representatives was won by Billy
Clearwater
56
Mayor
Unopposed
Connecticut Results
Lee Evans, 34, of Macon. He received 54,055 votes (51.7%)
C. W. Bill Young (R)*
St. Petersburg
45
Incumbent
Unopposed
in nearly complete returns to 50,582 (48.3%) for Wash
Geoffrey Peterson won a mild upset victory in Connec-
Larsen, 48, of rural Dublin. The outcome reversed the result
ticut's 4th District Democratic U.S. House primary, Sept. 7,
7
West-Tampa
Sam Gibbons (D)*
Tampa
56
Incumbent
Unopposed
of the primary, in which Larsen had led by several thousand
earning the chance to challenge Republican incumbent
votes with heavy rural support.
Dusty Owens (R)*
Stewart B. McKinney in the fall. The 4th District
Tampa
46
Businessman
Unopposed
In the runoff, however, Evans managed to put together
Democratic race was the only contest in the state primary.
a diverse coalition. He was endorsed by two opponents
8
West Central-Lakeland,
Ray Mattox (D)
Winter Haven
49
State representative
15,710
22.3
There was no primary battle in either party for the Senate or
Sarasota
eliminated in the primary, one of them a conservative
William Willner (D)
Sarasota
50
State consumer official
1,249
1.8
for the other five House seats.
Andy Ireland (D)*
member of the John Birch Society, but he also courted and
Winter Haven
46
Banker
35,326
50.2
Peterson, 30, a former administrative assistant to Sen.
T. David Burns (D)
Lakeland
48
won a majority of the district's black voters. Larsen was
Lawyer
3,338
4.7
Abraham Ribicoff, defeated Charles B. Tisdale by a margin
William A. Hartman (D)
Sarasota
Marketing executive
3,206
4.6
reportedly helped by Stuckey and several of Stuckey's con-
of 1,122 votes. Complete but unofficial returns showed
Jerome Pratt (D)
Palmetto
Lawyer
11,522
16.4
gressional staff aides, but the rural turnout was too low to
Peterson with 8,788 votes (53.4 per cent) to Tisdale's 7,666
overcome an 11,000-vote Evans plurality in Bibb County
David M. Molthrop (R)
votes (46.6 per cent).
Lakeland
61
Business executive
2,037
6.7
(Macon).
Robert Johnson (R)t
Sarasota
41
Tisdale, 43, a black and a former director of
State representative
14,354
47.7
In the general election, Evans will be favored over a
Joe Z. Lovingood (R)t
Sarasota
51
Realtor, building supply dealer
11,348
37.7
Bridgeport's anti-poverty program, had won the support of
well-known Republican candidate, Billy Adams, 48, also
Lex Taylor (R)
Lakeland
2,369
7.9
the party organization at the district convention in July,
from Macon. Adams is a petroleum distributor and a former
making him a slight favorite when the campaign began. But
9
East Central-Melbourne,
Joseph A. Rosier (D)*
Winter Park
state senator.
39
Maitland municipal judge
25,572
69.2
The runoff in the northern 9th District was not much of
Peterson campaigned aggressively and carried most of the
Orlando
Frank J. Dama (D)
Orlando
57
Company president
11,399
30.8
a contest. The Democratic nominee there will be Ed
major communities in the district, including Bridgeport,
Tisdale's home base.
Lou Frey Jr. (R)*
Orlando
42
Incumbent
Unopposed
Jenkins, 43, a former aide to retiring Rep. Phil M. Landrum
McKinney ran unopposed in the Republican primary
and law partner of Landrum's son. He received 58,905 votes
10
South Central-Fort
Robert F. Culpepper (D)
and is seeking his fourth term in the House.
Jupiter
44
County commissioner
21,002
28.9
(55.1%) to 47,963 votes (44.9%) for his runoff opponent.
Pierce, Myers
G. W. Jerry Bowers (D)
Stuart
Sen. Lowell P. Weicker Jr. (R) was unopposed for
47
Writer, photographer
14,400
19.8
Jenkins defeated J. Albert Minish, a conservative dentist
Bill Sikes (D)*
Clewiston
33
Life insurance agent
renomination to the Senate. His Democratic challenger,
37,312
51.3
and former mayor of Commerce, winning 14 of the district's
also unopposed in the primary, will be Secretary of State
L.A. (Skip) Bafalis (R)*
23 counties, including populous Gwinnett in the Atlanta
Ft. Meyers Beach
46
Incumbent
Unopposed
Gloria Schaffer.
suburbs. Minish won his home county of Jackson and
11
Southeast-West Palm
Paul G. Rogers (D)*
West Palm Beach
55
Incumbent
several others in the southeast part of the district. Jenkins
Unopposed
Beach, Pompano Beach
has token opposition in November from Republican Louise
Wofford.
North Dakota Results
12
Southeast-Fort Lauder-
John Lomelo Jr. (D)
Sunrise
48
Mayor-administrator
4,988
11.3
dale, Hollywood
The closest race in the state was in the 10th District,
Frederick Lippman (D)
Hollywood
41
Pharmacist
4,421
10.0
Charles Friedman (D)t
Hollywood
41
Dentist
dominated by the cities of Athens and Augusta, where a
Richard Elkin won a lopsided victory in the Republican
8,694
19.6
Andrew DeGraffenreidt (D)
Ft. Lauderdale
48
Educator
5,044
11.4
successor was chosen for retiring Rep. Robert G. Stephens
gubernatorial primary and Lloyd B. Omdahl triumphed in
Art Barker (D)
Ft. Lauderdale
5,092
11.5
Jr. In final unofficial returns, Doug Barnard, 54, executive
the Democratic U.S. House race-the only two contests in
Joseph K. O'Brien (D)
Ft. Lauderdale
2,204
4.9
vice president of the Georgia Railroad Bank in Augusta,
the Sept. 7 North Dakota primary. Elkin's win matches him
Anne L. Kolb (D)t
Plantation
44
County commissioner
12,139
27.4
received 43,294 votes (51.7%) to 40,495 votes (48.3%) for
against Democratic Gov. Arthur A. Link, who was unop-
Bill Brown (D)
Lauderdale Lakes
1,715
3.9
Mike Padgett, 52, a former state senator. Barnard, former
posed in his party's primary. Omdahl faces the Republican
incumbent, Mark Andrews, who was also unopposed.
J. Herbert Burke (R)*
Hollywood
63
Incumbent
Unopposed
The easy victories recorded by Elkin and Omdahl were
13
Northern Miami and
William Lehman (D)*
Miami
44
anticipated. Both had gained the endorsement of their par-
Incumbent
35,981
71.3
suburbs
Robert Renick (D)
Miami
42
TV production and lighting
ty's state convention and faced nominal primary opposition.
7,653
15.2
Dick Watson (D)
Miami
60
Golf equipment sales
1,175
2.3
Elkin, 43, chairman of the state's public service com-
E.C. (Mike) Ackerman (D)
Miami
5,626
11.2
mission, defeated his lone opponent, Herb Geving, a former
member of the state legislature, by a margin of more than 4-
Lee Arnold Spiegelman (R)*
Miami Shores
49
Attorney-business executive
Unopposed
1. Nearly complete returns showed Elkin with 46,210 votes
(81.9 per cent) to Geving's 10,201 votes (18.1 per cent).
14
Central Miami and suburbs
Claude Pepper (D)*
Miami
76
Incumbent
Unopposed
Omdahl, 45, the state director of accounts and
Herbert J. Hoodwin (R)
Coral Gables
purchases, was drafted by. Democratic leaders who felt his
55
Consulting engineer-general contractor 2,340
42.8
Evelio S. Estrella (R)*
Miami
presence on the ticket would help Gov. Link and the party's
3,133
57.2
legislative candidates. Omdahl won his primary contest
15
Southern Miami, Monroe
Dante B. Fascell (D)*
Miami
59
Incumbent
Unopposed
handily over Torfin A. Teigen. Nearly complete returns
County
gave Omdahl a more than 6-1 lead, with 39,356 votes (86.2
Paul R. Cobb (R)*
Miami
29
*Nominee
Former college instructor
Unopposed
Billy Lee Evans
Doug Barnard
per cent) to Teigen's 6,302 votes (13.8 per cent).
I
+Runoff Sept. 28
PAGE 2472-Sept. 11, 1976
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
COPYRIGHT 1976 QUARTERLY INC
Reproduction prohibited whole or part except by editorial
Reproduction prohibited whole or except by editorial clients
Sept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2473
Politics 10
Politics 11
Jackson Safe:
Wyoming
Washington House Candidates
There is little suspense about the congressional
Washington: Scramble to Succeed Evans
District
Democrats
Republicans
primaries coming up in Wyoming Sept. 14. Both parties will
be nominating candidates for the Senate and for the House,
1
Carl Viking Holman
*Joel Pritchard
but there are certain winners in each case.
The major contest in Washington's Sept. 21 primary is
Dave Wood
amounts of campaign funds. As a scientist and former
Democratic Sen. Gale W. McGee has no primary
2
for the governorship, with close contests expected in both
chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, she has no
Don Lenderman
John Nance Garner
opposition in his bid for a fourth term. State Sen.
major parties. Democratic Sen. Henry M. Jackson, whose
previous involvement in state issues, but her apolitical im-
*Lloyd Meeds
Malcolm Wallop, 43, of Big Horn, is the overwhelming
3
presidential ambitions were shot down in the early
age appears to be a solid asset in a year when voters are
*Don Bonker
Richard F. Dideon
favorite in the Republican primary. His two opponents are
primaries, is certain to be re-nominated and re-elected over
seeking new kinds of candidates. Ray's campaign has
Chuck Elhart
Doyle Henry, 49, a salesman from Casper, and Nels T. Lar-
token opposition. In House races, Democrats are choosing
developed late; she recently shuffled her staff and placed
4
*Mike McCormack
Bruce Cone
son, 63, a Lutheran minister from Casper. Henry was a can-
the likely successor to retiring Rep. Floyd V. Hicks in the
more emphasis on voter contact and mailings, symbols of
Dick Granger
didate in the 1972 Democratic Senate primary and finished
6th District primary, while Republicans are targeting
the more traditional politics she has not practiced up to
James C. May
second in a field of five, drawing 18.6 per cent of the vote.
Democrats Mike McCormack and Lloyd Meeds for defeat in
5
*Thomas S. Foley
now.
#Charles Kimball
On the House side, Democratic Rep. Teno Roncalio has
the general election.
Uhlman, the mayor of Seattle, is hoping to overcome
6
Norman D. Dicks
Jeff G. Prosser
minor primary opposition from Al Hamburg, a 44-year-old
the Ray phenomenon with heavy spending and an appeal to
Gordon N. Johnston
Robert M. Reynolds
Torrington house painter who ran for the Republican
Senate
liberals who dislike Ray's conservative image, advocacy of
Jim O'Donnell
George Van Buskirk
nomination unsuccessfully in 1972 and 1974. The un-
nuclear power and lack of experience in state politics. He
Jim Nicholls
challenged Republican candidate is Larry Hart of Powell,
has worked hard to increase his recognition in the vast ex-
Mike Parker
Incumbent. Henry M. Jackson (D), 64, of Everett, is
who resigned as a Navy lieutenant in order to challenge
panse of eastern Washington where a big city mayor is or-
Eugene W. Wiegman
Roncalio.
seeking a fifth term.
7
dinarily suspect. Despite his liberal image, Uhlman has
*Brock Adams
William M. Champion
Democrats. Jackson; Paul Gumbel of Seattle; Dennis
The fall campaigns will be more exciting. Both Ron-
been tough on municipal unions in labor negotiations. He
Jack May
Raymond Pritchard
(Hitch Hiker) Kelley of Seattle.
calio and McGee begin the campaign as favorites, but
was the target of a recall effort last year sponsored by the
Incumbent
Republicans. George M. Brown of Renton; Will Davis
McGee has a formidable challenger in Wallop, who sought
of Seattle; Warren E. Hanson of Bellingham; Henry C.
city's firemen. His stance was overwhelmingly sustained by
Deceased
the GOP gubernatorial nomination in 1974 and came within
Seattle's voters.
400 votes of winning it with a late-starting campaign keyed
Neilsen of Seattle; Wilbur R. Parkin of Centralia; and
Uhlman is believed to trail Ray by a small margin, but
to environmental protection. Roncalio, the only Democrat
Clarice L.R. Privette of Spokane.
both appear to be well ahead of Durning, a lawyer who has
elected to the House from Wyoming since World War II, was
Outlook. Despite the large field of primary candidates,
been stressing environmental issues. Durning has been cam-
Washington, D.C., job with the Grocery Manufacturers of
the Senate race effectively ended in May, when Jackson
a narrow victor in 1970 and 1972 before winning comfortably
paigning the longest and has been spending heavily, but
America earlier this year to organize a campaign, but is not
two years ago in a strong Democratic year.
abandoned his active pursuit of the Democratic presidential
does not appear to have moved close to the leaders. Durning
given much chance to overtake Granger. The third can-
nomination. Republican Slade Gorton, the popular state at-
was endorsed in August by the Washington Education
didate, Bruce Cone, is an economist from Kennewick.
torney general, and Democratic Rep. Brock Adams of
Association.
Seattle had been waging a shadow campaign for the seat up
6th District (Puget Sound-Bremerton, Tacoma)
Filing Completed
to then. They dropped out to seek re-election to their
The Republican race is an ideological struggle between
current offices.
competing wings of the state party. Spellman represents the
Incumbent Floyd V. Hicks (D), 61, is quitting the
Jackson has token opposition in his own primary, and
moderate Republicanism of Evans, whose faction
House after six terms to seek a seat on the state supreme
Delaware
the Republican field consists of political neophytes and
dominated the party until recently. His reputation is that of
court. The district is heavily Democratic, and Hicks'
There were no primaries for the governorship or con-
perennial office-seekers. Republican sources in Washington
an efficient executive but a colorless campaigner in contrast
probable successor should emerge from a six-man primary.
gressional races in Delaware this year. Democratic Gov.
believe the party's nominee will be either George M. Brown,
with Hoppe, an aggressive and controversial conservative.
If campaign spending decides the race, the winner may
Sherman W. Tribbitt will be opposed by Republican U.S.
40, of Renton, a pilot for United Airlines, or Henry C.
Both hold countywide office in Seattle. The conservatives
be Norman D. Dicks, 35, of Port Orchard, who was the ad-
Rep. Pierre S. (Pete) du Pont and two minor candidates,
Nielsen of Seattle, a life insurance underwriter. Neither one
now control the machinery of the state party, but Spellman
ministrative assistant to Sen. Warren G. Magnuson for
George W. Cripps of the American Party and Harry Conner
has any chance in a general election, and Jackson's victory
is considered the slight favorite. He is also thought to be
three years until he resigned to start a campaign here. Dicks
of the Prohibition Party. In the Senate race, Republican
more electable in a statewide race.
margin may exceed the 82.4 per cent he received in 1970.
is receiving support from labor and many of the special in-
Sen. William V. Roth Jr. faces Democrat Thomas C.
Washington voters do not register by party, 80
terest groups he and Magnuson dealt with over the years.
Maloney, American Party candidate Donald G. Geis and
crossovers could further confuse the outlook in a contest
He raised more than $60,000 through June.
Prohibition candidate John Massimilli. There will be six
Governor
that still appears volatile in both parties.
The other candidates lack Dicks' ability to tap outside
candidates for the state's at-large seat in the House of
contributors, but several have substantial campaign chests
Representatives-Republican Thomas B. Evans Jr.,
Incumbent. Daniel J. Evans (R), 50, is retiring after 12
4th District (Central-Yakima, Vancouver)
of their own and more recent visibility in the district. The
Democratic and GOP nominees will be joined on the
years in office.
Republicans are gearing up for another effort to oust
most aggressive campaign is being waged by Mike Parker,
American Party, Raymond Green of the Prohibition Party,
Republicans. John Spellman, 49, of Seattle, the King
Democratic Rep. Mike McCormack, 54, of Richland, who is
29, a state representative and pharmaceuticals salesman
Joseph B. Hollon of the Socialist Labor Party, and Philip
County executive; Harley Hoppe, 45, of Mercer Island, the
seeking a fourth term. McCormack has never won by large
from Tacoma who contributed nearly $20,000 to his own ef-
Valenti of the U.S. Labor Party.
King County assessor; John (Hugo Frye) Patric of
margins and is not popular with environmental lobbying
fort, announcing that it was an inheritance from his grand-
Snohomish; Carl D. Ricketts of Fall City; Emmett Watson,
groups.
mother. Parker has been an active legislator, but opponents
Hawaii
56, a Seattle restaurant owner.
The candidate who could give McCormack a tough con-
have criticized him as a publicity-seeker who prefers media
A flood of candidates joined the Hawaii Senate race
Democrats. Dixy Lee Ray, 61, of Fox Island, former
test in the general election is Dick Granger, a county com-
attention to legislative success.
before the Aug. 18 filing deadlines, and three minor parties
chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission (1973-74) and
missioner from Clark County (Vancouver) at the southern
Gordon N. Johnson, 58, the mayor of Tacoma for eight
also qualified for the general election.
former U.S. assistant secretary of state (1974-75); Wes
end of the district. Granger, a moderate Republican, spent
years, has not been as active but is expected to benefit from
The major Democratic candidates are U.S. Reps. Patsy
Uhlman, 41, the mayor of Seattle; Marvin Durning, 47, a
over $20,000 in the first half of the year building a campaign
his wide recognition in the district's largest city. However,
T. Mink and Spark M. Matsunaga. Also on the primary
Seattle lawyer; Duke Stockton of Olympia.
organization. He is a solid favorite to take the GOP nomina-
that base vote must be shared with Parker and Eugene W.
ballot are Floyd C. Loving, Nathan N. Napoleon and
Outlook. Both parties have sharply contested
tion over two more conservative challengers. Granger
Wiegman, 46, a former president of Pacific Lutheran
Kamuela Price. On the Republican side, former Gov.
primaries to succeed Evans, but voters are just beginning to
received a $5,000 contribution in June from the League of
University. Wiegman is considered somewhat more conser-
William F. Quinn is opposed by Spencer J. Cabral. The
take notice of the campaign even though the candidates
Conservation Voters Campaign Fund.
vative than the others.
Democratic and GOP nominees will be joined on the
have been on the stump for months. The biggest surprise
One of Granger's opponents, James C. May, 30, is the
The favorite for the Republican nomination in a three-
November ballot by Rockne Johnson of the Libertarian Par-
thus far has been Ray's strong showing in a variety of public
son of former Republican Rep. Catherine May (R 1959-71),
way primary is Robert M. Reynolds, a Tacoma lawyer.
-
ty, James D. Kimmel of the Non-partisan Party and
opinion polls despite her lack of organization or large
who was beaten by McCormack six years ago. He quit his
-By Matt Pinkus
Anthony N. Hodges of the People's Party.
PAGE 2474-Sept. 11, 1976
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
Reproduction prohibited whole part except by editorial clients
Reproduction prohibited whole or part except by editorial clients
Sept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2475
Health/Education/Welfare 2
House Votes Changes
"Pass Through" of Benefit Increases
Health/Education/Welfare
By a 317-52 vote, the House easily adopted the amend-
ment ensuring that federal cost-of-living increases in SSI
In SSI Program Aiding
benefits actually would end up in the pockets of recipients.
The amendment, sponsored by Donald M. Fraser (D Minn.)
Conferees Still Stalled
Aged, Blind, Disabled
and Majority Leader Thomas P. O'Neill Jr. (D Mass.), il-
The House conferees then rejected two proposed com-
lustrated the complexities of the SSI program. (Vote 508,
promises offered by Rep. David R. Obey (D Wis.), again on
Weekly Report p. 2440)
On Abortion Provision
the grounds that they would allow too much leeway for
While sidestepping broader welfare "reform" measures,
Like Social Security payments, basic federal SSI
HEW.
the 94th Congress is moving in its waning days to make life a
benefits are adjusted automatically on July 1 of each year to
Finally the conferees agreed only to meet again, on
Of Labor-HEW Funds Bill
little easier for the more than four million needy aged, blind
reflect cost-of-living increases. On July 1, 1976, the basic
Sept. 13, to take another crack at compromise. In the mean-
and disabled persons qualifying for welfare assistance under
federal SSI payment rose to $167.80 a month from $157.70
time Senate conference chairman Warren G. Magnuson (D
the federal Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program.
for an individual with no offsetting income and to $251.80
The $56.6-billion fiscal 1977 Labor-HEW
Wash.) agreed to poll senators who were absent when the
Legislation (HR 8911) pending before the Senate
from $236.60 for a couple.
appropriations bill (HR 14232) remained hung up on the
vote was taken on the House-backed compromise proposal,
Finance Committee after House passage Aug. 30 would
More than half the states, however, choose to supple-
issue of abortion Sept. 9, as a House-Senate conference
an action not expected to change the outcome of the vote.
make numerous seemingly technical changes in the SSI
ment federal SSI benefits with their own funds, so actual
committee failed for the second time to resolve the impasse.
Despite the seeming obstinacy of both sides, members
program that would make it simpler for many persons to
payments are higher. Rather than "pass through" the
At issue was a House-passed amendment which would
remained confident that some kind of compromise could be
qualify for benefits and guarantee future benefit increases to
federal cost-of-living increase in benefits, many of these
ban the use of federal funds in the bill to pay for or to
reached. Brooke predicted that the House members would
all. Many of the changes were fashioned by the House Ways
states have decided to reduce their state supplements by a
promote abortions. The Senate struck the language from the
agree to soften their language rather than risk killing the en-
and Means Committee, which reported the bill May 27.
corresponding amount. So despite a federal benefit increase,
bill, and when conferees were unable to agree on a middle
tire bill.
(Committee action, provisions, Weekly Report p. 1508)
an elderly SSI recipient would see no increase in his benefit
ground in August, both houses voted to insist on their
The result would present a difficult choice for President
The legislation represents the first congressional fine-
check.
positions and asked the conferees to meet again. (Earlier
Ford, who would then have to decide whether to sign or veto
tuning of the SSI program, begun in 1974 as a federal
The Fraser-O'Neill amendment barred states from
story, Weekly Report p. 2344)
a bill which was $4-billion over his budget but which also
replacement for more than 1,000 state and local assistance
reducing their supplements after July 1977, guaranteeing a
As about 50 anti-abortion demonstrators, carrying
carried an anti-abortion amendment. Ford had made a
programs partially supported by the federal government.
"pass through" of the annual federal increase. Debate
roses, waited outside, the conferees rejected four different
campaign issue out of his opposition to abortion.
The federalized program has been plagued by payment
highlights follow:
compromise proposals.
Brooke and other Republicans predicted that the
errors, delays in processing applications and other ad-
On a 7-2 vote, the Senate conferees turned down a
budget-minded President would nevertheless veto the bill.
ministrative problems, but the Department of Health,
PRO: Supporters of the amendment argued that it was
proposal by the House to retain the anti-abortion amend-
In order to have an opportunity to override the expected
Education and Welfare (HEW) has instituted many correc-
unfair to deny the needy a tiny increase in benefits that
ment with additional language to permit abortions if a birth
veto before its scheduled Oct. 2 adjournment date, Congress
tive steps. (Background, Weekly Report p. 1508)
could make an important difference in their meager
would endanger the life of the mother.
will have to send the bill to the President by Sept. 21. I
HR 8911 also addressed these problems, providing for
budgets.
Sen. Edward W. Brooke (R Mass.), who led the opposi-
-By Thomas P. Southwick
emergency replacement of improperly drawn or lost benefit
"When I voted for the annual cost-of-living increase for
tion to the House proposal, said it did not go far enough.
checks and immediate payment of benefits to some in-
the SSI beneficiaries," noted O'Neill, "I did not intend it to
Brooke argued that the amendment would not permit
dividuals while their applications were being processed. Key
go into the state treasuries
payments for abortions where a birth presented a risk of per-
Ford Signs Bill Increasing
provisions added by the full House offered more federal aid
After reading about the federal increase, added John L.
manent injury to the mother or where the pregnancy had
for rehabilitation of disabled preschool children, guaranteed
Burton (D Calif.), the elderly could not understand why
resulted from rape or incest.
The House conferees then rejected a proposal offered by
Aid to Day Care Centers
that recipients actually would receive federal cost-of-living
their benefit checks remained the same. "They want the ad-
increases in basic SSI benefits and made it easier for
ditional money," he said. "It may be $7 or $10 or $15 but
Sen. Ted Stevens (R Alaska) which would have allowed
recipients owning homes to continue to qualify for benefits.
when they get their paycheck, it is the same old paycheck."
payments for abortions where the "physical or mental
Faced with probable congressional rejection of a second
health" of the mother was in jeopardy or where the
veto, President Ford Sept. 7 signed legislation (HR
The administration generally supported most of the
James C. Corman (D Calif.), acting chairman of the
12455-PL 94-401) providing $240-million in new federal
provisions of the bill. It objected to its extension of the SSI
Ways and Means Public Assistance Subcommittee, con-
pregnancy had resulted from rape or incest.
program to Puerto Rico, Guam and the Virgin Islands, the
ceded that the amendment might be inconsistent with the
Rep. Silvio O. Conte (R Mass.) said such an exemption
support for day care centers for the poor. In May, Congress
most expensive provision of the bill. The administration
philosophy of the SSI program, which eventually was sup-
would provide too much leeway for the Department of
sustained a veto of an earlier version of the bill. (Weekly
Health, Education and Welfare (HEW) to define what was
Report p. 1115)
also had opposed the House-added amendment guarantee-
posed to provide adequate federal benefit levels without
With an eye to Democratic criticism of his long list of
ing that SSI recipients would get federal cost-of-living in-
state supplements. But arguing in favor of the amendment,
likely to endanger the physical or mental health of the
creases.
Corman added, "Of course, SSI recipients cannot eat
vetoes, Ford contended that his first veto had forced
philosophy."
Congress to develop a more responsible bill. "Without this
constitutional check and balance," he said, "the original
House Floor Action
Others contended that the federal government must act
The decision to allow federal
to guarantee receipt of the increases because state
bill might now be law and making day care services more
governments had proved insensitive to the needs of
payments for abortions was made
costly to the taxpayer and increasing the federal intrusion
The House passed the bill on Aug. 30 by a 374-3 vote
recipients.
by "some long-haired, striped-
into family life."
after adopting most floor amendments to the measure on
"These are the people least likely to rally on the steps of
The President opposed the first bill primarily because
Aug. 26. (Vote 509, Weekly Report p. 2440)
pants clerk at HEW."
the state capitol," argued Patsy T. Mink (D Hawaii). "They
it would have imposed federal staffing standards on day
Before approving the bill, the House agreed to a Ways
are among the most likely to have their urgent human needs
-Rep. Daniel J. Flood (D Pa.)
care centers serving children from low-income families. He
and Means Committee substitute (HR 15080) that added
ignored
argued that such standards should be set by the states.
one provision not included by the committee in HR 8911.
HR 12455 postponed imposition of the staffing stan-
The provision, sponsored by Martha Keys (D Kan.),
CON: Opponents of the amendment contended that it
mother. "HEW's interpretation would totally emasculate
dards until Oct. 1, 1977, pending completion of a govern-
allowed persons, such as the mentally retarded, living in
would devastate the basic philosophical underpinnings of a
the amendment," Conte said.
ment study. It also provided the additional $240-million
community-based homes with no more than 16 residents to
federalized SSI program.
And Rep. Daniel J. Flood (D Pa.), chairman of the
through that date to help states make general im-
qualify for SSI benefits.
Congress designed the SSI program to provide a basic
House conferees, charged that the original decision to allow
provements in their day care programs. (Final congressional
In general, the bill won the warm support of both
federal minimum level of benefits, Guy Vander Jagt
federal payments for abortions had been made by "some
action, Weekly Report p. 2345)
Democrats and Republicans on the Ways and Means Com-
(Mich.), ranking Republican on the Public Assistance Sub-
long-haired, striped-pants clerk at HEW."
Ford said he had "serious reservations" about the
mittee. Committee members split, however, over the floor
committee, pointed out. It allowed states to decide for
Flood argued that the issue of pregnancies resulting
amount of extra funding provided by the bill. But heavy
amendments guaranteeing SSI recipients benefit increases
themselves whether they had the resources to supplement
from rape or incent was "so remote that its consideration is
Republican support in Congress for the measure weighed
and increasing federal assistance to disabled preschool
benefits above levels offered under their old programs in
academic."
against a second veto eight weeks before election day.
children.
1973. In contrast to this philosophy, Vander Jagt argued,
PAGE 2476-Sept. 11, 1976
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
Reproduction proh whole or except by editorial clients
Reproduction prohibited part except by editorial clients
Sept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2477
Health/Education/Welfare 3
the amendment would make state supplements a perma-
Ketchum and Herbert E. Harris II (D Va.) argued that
nent feature of the program.
it was unfair to take away SSI benefits just because the
"Please understand, no recipient across the country
house an elderly person may have lived in all his life had in-
Law Enforcement and Judiciary
loses [benefits] if we vote down the Fraser amendment,'
creased in value due to inflation or other real estate factors.
added William A. Steiger (R Wis.). "But the federal govern-
To get around existing law, Ketchum noted, many elderly
ment will lose. The concept of a federalized program will be
people had to give their homes, if only in name, to their
undone if this is adopted."
children.
Specifically, Steiger argued, the amendment, in effect,
At the same time, Ketchum and Harris maintained
would mandate uneven benefit payments across the
that the change would not allow elderly persons living in
House Votes One-Year
plans for use of the funds. "We are limiting the appropriate
country, a return to the old welfare programs for the aged,
"mansions" to qualify for SSI benefits because the income
discretion of the administrator with respect to the expen-
blind and disabled. Because of another quirk in the law, he
they must have to pay property taxes on palatial houses
noted, the federal share of these payments would remain
LEAA Extension, 324-8
diture of discretionary funds he said, "even though the
would disqualify them for the program.
plans are not ready and probably will not be ready for the
disproportionately high in three states-his own,
Republicans raised no objections to the amendment,
prudent expenditure of the funds."
Massachusetts and Hawaii.
which carried an estimated first-year cost of $5-million to
With the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration
Supporting the amendment, Conyers argued that
"The taxpayers of 47 states will be paying dollars to
$7-million. The amendment replaced a section of the com-
(LEAA) slated to expire Sept. 30, the House voted Sept. 2 to
money should be set aside for courts "for the simple reason
solve the problem in those three states...," Vander Jagt
mittee bill that would have allowed HEW to use the
extend the controversial agency, but held to the decision of
that our courts are in trouble and the judges clearly do not
complained.
purchase price of a home as its value. HEW said this
its Judiciary Committee that the extension be limited to
have the political clout to receive the kind of funding that
Opponents' arguments carried little weight in an elec-
approach would pose administrative problems.
one year. (Committee report, Weekly Report p. 1347)
would come out of the discretionary fund."
tion year, even among Republicans. The amendment won
Led by Vander Jagt, Republicans strongly opposed the
The Senate had passed a five-year extension of LEAA
The amendment was rejected by a standing vote of 16-
the support of 89 of 123 voting Republicans.
second amendment, proposed by Charles B. Rangel (D
(S 2212) on July 26. (Weekly Report p. 2077)
22, followed by a roll-call vote of 173-214. (Vote 518, p. 2442)
N.Y.). It would have allowed extra payments of up to $50 a
While adopting numerous amendments, the House
Blind and Disabled Children
month to SSI recipients whose annual expenses for housing,
made few major changes in the bill reported by the
Program Extension
including utility bills, exceeded one-third of their income.
Judiciary Committee May 15.
An unusual coalition of liberal, moderate and conser-
McClory offered an amendment to extend LEAA for
vative House members broke with Corman in a successful
"It is a disgrace to think that in the United States of
The House bill generally made fewer changes in LEAA
three years, through fiscal 1979, instead of the one-year ex-
America, there are those of us who must go without food in
programs than the version passed by the Senate. House
attempt to revise the committee bill to channel more federal
tension proposed in the bill. He reiterated arguments made
aid to disabled and blind preschool children.
order to pay for living facilities that are often indecent and
sponsor John Conyers Jr. (D Mich.) explained that the
in additional views to the committee report that a one-year
As reported, the bill authorized the federal government
unfit for human habitation," Rangel said. He argued that
House bill included "a very modest series of changes"
extension would make it impossible for state and local
to assume half the cost of new rehabilitation programs for
the amendment, heavily supported by New York
because the limited one-year extension required intensive
grantees to develop long-range comprehensive plans. He
all blind and disabled children under age 13. The committee
Democrats, would recognize higher housing costs in some
oversight by the Judiciary Committee during the next year.
also argued that the oversight promised by the Judiciary
decided these children would benefit more from special
parts of the country.
Conyers said improved oversight was crucial because
Committee as a condition of the one-year extension would
Vander Jagt argued that the amendment would cost $1-
LEAA had spent $4.5-billion while the rate of crime had
rehabilitation services than from the vocational training
be severely delayed by the organization time needed by the
services for which they were eligible under existing law.
billion, 10 times the amount set aside for the entire SSI bill
risen 18 per cent.
new 95th Congress.
Abner J. Mikva (D III.), joined by 11 Republicans and
under congressional budget procedures. Ketchum also
As passed by the House, the bill extended LEAA for one
Anything less than a three-year extension, McClory
Democrats on Ways and Means, proposed instead to
suggested that landlords would just raise rents if they knew
year, through fiscal 1977, with an authorization level of
said, "is irresponsible, unrealistic and entirely unfair to
provide full federal funding for rehabilitation services for
SSI recipients were receiving new benefits.
$895-million. As did the Senate bill, the House version re-
every law enforcement agency in this country."
children age 6 and under. To offset this cost, the amend-
Only 10 of 126 Republicans supported the amendment
quired LEAA to place greater emphasis on strengthening
Conyers opposed the amendment, saying that serious
on the 114-269 vote rejecting it. (Vote 505, Weekly Report p.
state judicial systems and to improve evaluation and
ment also eliminated the new 50 per cent federal funding
oversight of LEAA was needed in the next year so that major
2370)
monitoring procedures. Both bills emphasized prevention of
program for disabled children between the ages of 6 and 13.
program changes could be proposed, and that the moderate
crime against the elderly and encouraged crime prevention
Mikva argued that there would be no new program un-
changes proposed in the bill did not justify a three-year ex-
Medicaid
by community groups.
der the committee proposal because states could not afford
One key difference between the House and Senate bills
tension. Conyers indicated that Congress was likely to come
to put up half of the cost. He also maintained that it made
Two other amendments, dealing with SSI recipients'
up with a three-year extension anyway because the Senate
was that the former would require authorizing legislation for
the most sense to target aid on the youngest children, who
eligibility for the Medicaid program for the poor, were
had passed a five-year bill and conferees would split the
the Justice Department, beginning in fiscal 1979.
could benefit most from early assistance. Disabled and
adopted by voice votes. Both amendments, proposed by J.J.
difference between the two versions.
blind children between the ages of 6 and 13, he added,
Pickle (D Texas), dealt with quirks in the SSI law and its
The amendment was rejected by a 119-268 vote. (Vote
would receive some help from schools while the youngest
Floor Action
relationship to other statutes.
519, p. 2442)
children would not.
Under the first amendment, the income of an in-
Corman opposed the amendment on grounds that it
dividual whose spouse is in the hospital could not be
The House debated the proposal Aug. 31 and Sept. 2,
Community Anti-Crime Programs
would leave many children without the services they needed
counted as income for the spouse. Under existing law, the
rejecting more amendments than it adopted before finally
Like the Senate bill, the House strengthened programs
and cut total federal assistance for the program to $18-
income of a husband whose wife is in the hospital might be
passing the House-numbered bill (HR 13636) by a 324-8
for participation of local community groups in the fight
million from $55-million. He also contended that many
counted as income for the wife until she had been in the
vote Sept. 2. It then substituted its provisions for those of S
against crime. However, the House bill included a provision
preschool children already received aid of some sort.
hospital for six months and it might be high enough to dis-
2212 by voice vote. (Vote 527, p. 2445)
changing the existing requirement that local groups obtain
The House adopted the amendment by a 219-146 vote,
qualify her for SSI benefits and Medicaid eligibility. The
The House had adopted the rule (H Res 1246) for con-
the approval of local law enforcement officials before ob-
with the support of 55 of 120 voting Republicans and 164 of
purpose of the amendment was to allow husbands and wives
sideration of the bill Aug. 31 by a 388-0 vote. (Vote 517, p.
taining an LEAA grant. The change allowed the groups
245 voting Democrats. (Vote 506, Weekly Report p. 2370)
in this situation to get Medicaid to pay their hospital bills.
2442)
simply to notify the local police.
The second, equally complicated amendment would
Henry J. Hyde (R Ill.) offered an amendment to strike
Housing
preserve Medicaid eligibility for elderly persons whose in-
Court Funds
the bill's provision and return to existing law. He argued
In other actions, the House agreed by voice vote to
come is just under the limit for SSI recipients. In some
In action Aug. 31, the House rejected a Judiciary Com-
that community groups were supposed to work in coopera-
make it easier for the elderly and disabled to continue to live
cases, the annual increase in Social Security benefits for
mittee amendment that earmarked no less than one-third of
tion with the local police and that deleting the requirement
in their homes while qualifying for SSI benefits. But it
these persons surpasses the annual increase in the limit on
the LEAA discretionary funds under Part C to be used to
of approval by local police would "undercut local
refused to provide additional benefits to recipients with
income for SSI recipients by a matter of cents, so they lose
improve the administration of justice in state and local
governmental authority" and "set up a form of vigilan-
high housing costs.
eligibility for SSI. Generally, such persons are receiving very
courts and reduce criminal case backlogs.
tism
The first amendment, sponsored by William M.
little in SSI benefits, but any eligibility still qualifies them
Opponents of the amendment, led by Robert McClory
Conyers opposed the amendment, saying that com-
Ketchum (R Calif.), changed existing law so that the value
for Medicaid benefits. The amendment would preserve the
(R III.), said the provision would provide a disproportionate
munity groups, like other LEAA applicants, had to go
of a home would not count at all toward the limit on assets
more valuable Medicaid eligibility for the elderly in these
amount of LEAA funds for court programs.
through a number of review steps before receiving a grant.
SSI recipients may hold. HEW regulations had limited the
circumstances.
I
In addition, Charles E. Wiggins (R Calif.) said that in
Adding an extra veto step for community groups from the
value that did not count toward assets to $25,000.
-By Elizabeth Bowman
many areas, members of the judiciary were not ready with
police was unfair, he said. "I think the police would then be
PAGE 2478-Sept. 11, 1976
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
Reproduction prohibited whole part except by editorial clients
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERL INC
Reproduction prohibited whole except by editorial clients
Sept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2479
Law Enforcement and Judiciary 2
engaging in politics and that is too abhorrent for any of us to
Established an Office of Community Anti-Crime
countenance,' Conyers said.
Programs within LEAA to provide technical assistance and
Transportation/Communications
The amendment was first rejected by a standing vote of
information on other successful programs to citizens' groups
38-57. That vote was reversed when the amendment was
and coordinate citizens' anti-crime activity with other
adopted by a subsequent roll-call vote of 253-133. (Vote 520,
federal agencies.
p. 2442)
Required state planning agencies to assure the par-
ticipation of citizens' and community organizations at all
Major Amendments Adopted
planning levels.
Ford Nominations to FCC
Neither of those authorizations had been requested by
the administration, and Secretary of Transportation
The House adopted the following additional
Earmarked $15-million in Part C grants for community
activities and other neighborhood programs.
Approved by Senate Panel
William T. Coleman Jr. had warned earlier in the year that
amendments to HR 13636, all but one by voice vote:
patrol
they represented excessive spending that might draw a veto.
By M. Caldwell Butler (R Va.), to substitute the non-
Authorized state legislatures to review the general
But concern over a veto dissipated in August when the
discrimination provisions of the revenue sharing bill of 1976
goals, priorities and policies of LEAA state plans, without
Resolving a dispute that had become embroiled in
President signed a transportation appropriations bill (HR
(HR 13367) for the civil rights enforcement procedures
veto power over the plan.
election-year politics, the Senate Commerce Committee
14234-PL 94-387) that included funds for the two
recommended by the Judiciary Committee.
Required that state planning agencies include as
Sept. 8 approved President Ford's nomination of two per-
programs. (Fiscal 1977 transportation appropriations,
By McClory, to establish a National Advisory Com-
members no fewer than two members of the judiciary.
sons-one a Democrat, the other a Republican-to the
Weekly Report p. 2139)
mittee on Criminal Standards and Goals.
Authorized use of block grant funds given to states for
Federal Communications Commission (FCC).
Final action on HR 11670 came Aug. 30 when the House
By Robert Krueger (D Texas), to authorize LEAA to
reducing court congestion and case backlog, revision of
The Democratic nominee, Joseph R. Fogarty, easily
agreed by voice vote to a conference compromise on the bill.
make block grants to states to be used to extablish early
criminal and procedural rules, training of judges and ad-
won approval to a full seven-year term on the commission.
The Senate had agreed to the report, also by voice vote, on
case assessment panels to expedite the prosecution of cases
ministrators and other programs to strengthen state courts;
Fogarty is chief counsel to the committee's Subcommittee
Aug. 2. (Senate passage, Weekly Report p. 1844; House, p.
involving repeat offenders and violent criminals. This provi-
developing and operating programs to reduce and prevent
on Communications.
939)
sion was part of the Senate bill.
crime against the elderly; establishing early case assessment
The committee also approved the nomination of
By Gary A. Myers (R Pa.), to require that persons in
panels in cities above 250,000 population to expedite the
Margareta E. White, a former director of Ford's White
LEAA policy-making positions that affect grants must dis-
prosecution of cases involving repeat offenders and violent
House Office of Telecommunications, to complete the final
Provisions
close any conflicts of interest relating to those grants.
criminals.
two years of an unfinished seven-year term. The
As cleared by Congress, HR 11670:
By Wiggins, to delete requirements that grantees meet
Required that state plans, to be considered comprehen-
nominations, both approved unanimously, were sent to the
Authorized $86.2-million for procurement of vessels.
minimum federal physical and service standards before
sive, must include: adequate procedures to deal with
Senate for what was expected to be swift confirmation.
Authorized $24.3-million for procurement of aircraft.
receiving federal funds to construct, improve or renovate
criminal justice problems in areas characterized by high
In announcing the nominations earlier in the summer,
Authorized $24.4-million for shore and offshore con-
state and local jails and prisons. This provision was part of
crime incidence; a comprehensive juvenile justice improve-
Ford originally had appointed White to the full term and
struction of Coast Guard facilities.
the Senate bill. Adopted by a 211-159 vote. (Vote 525, p.
ment program; attention to the special problems of crime
Fogarty to the two-year stint. But almost immediately,
Authorized $100-million for procurement of vessels and
2445)
against the elderly; identification of the special needs of
White ran into trouble over the fact that her husband was a
aircraft for enforcement of the 200-mile commercial fishing
drug-dependent offenders and procedures to coordinate
lawyer for a firm that did substantial business before the
limit.
Amendments Rejected
with other state agencies serving these persons; a total
FCC. Although White in committee hearings promised to
Authorized $50-million for procurement of vessels with
The House rejected the following amendments:
analysis of law enforcement and criminal justice problems
disqualify herself from any cases involving her husband's
ice-breaking capability for the Great Lakes.
By Conyers, to allow a unit of local government with a
throughout the state, as well as goals, priorities and stan-
firm, subcommittee Chairman John 0. Pastore (D R.I.) ex-
Prohibited use of funds in the bill for Coast Guard boat
population of 250,000 or above to receive a single mini-block
dards to meet those problems; procedures for evaluating the
pressed serious personal "anguish" over the possibility of a
safety enforcement on certain lakes and the Merrimac River
grant once its plan had been approved by the state planning
success that state programs and projects had in meeting
conflict of interest in the appointment.
in New Hampshire, but specified that the provision should
agency, freeing it from continuing administration by the
their goals, conforming with the purposes of the state plan
There also was speculation, however, that Pastore was
not limit boat safety funds for the state nor prevent Coast
planning agency. Rejected by a standing vote of 42-50.
and reducing crime and aiding criminal justice.
reluctant to see the seven-year post filled with a Republican
Guard participation in search and rescue operations in that
By McClory, to strike the new definition in the bill of
Required states to pass through to localities the same
on the eve of what could be a Democratic administration.
state.
"local elected official," by voice vote.
percentage of block grants that local governments spend on
Seeking to salvage the White nomination, Ford Aug. 31
Exempted certain fuel cargo vessels operating in Alaska
By Wiggins, to require that state law enforcement plans
total law enforcement activities. However, states could ex-
reversed the appointments, nominating Fogarty for the full
from Coast Guard inspection and certification re-
required under the act must be approved by the state
empt 10 per cent of block-grant funds from the pass-through
term and White for two years.
quirements.
legislature and then reconciled with the governor's plan, by
requirement, as long as they used the money for program
The committee subsequently approved the
Authorized an end strength active duty personnel level
evaluation.
voice vote.
nominations without difficulty. Pastore denied that the
of 38,918.
By Elizabeth Holtzman (D N.Y.), to earmark $50-
Required LEAA to develop criteria for program evalua-
switch was influenced by political considerations.
million to fight high-fear violent crimes in areas with high
tion and to disseminate information on successful projects
If confirmed by the Senate, White would replace
Conference Report
crime rates. Rejected by a standing 5-28 vote. The Senate
to state planning agencies.
Charlotte T. Reid, who retired in June after five years, as
bill contained a similar provision.
Required LEAA to conduct research to determine the
the only woman on the seven-member commission.
Conferees filed a conference report on HR 11670 in the
By Mario Biaggi (D N.Y.), to require state and local
relationship between crime and drug and alcohol abuse.
House (H Rept 94-1374) and the Senate (S Rept 94-1054) on
units of government applying for LEAA grants to enact a
Established a National Advisory Committee on
Final Action:
Criminal Justice Standards and Goals.
July 28. They accepted the Senate bill almost in its entirety,
law enforcement officers' bill of rights. Rejected by a stand-
authorizing the same fiscal 1977 spending level-$284.9-
ing vote of 17-33, followed by a roll-call vote of 148-213.
Established a system of mandatory procedures to be
Coast Guard Authorization
million-as proposed by the Senate. The House had
(Vote 526, p. 2445)
followed in suspending and eventually terminating grants to
authorized $304.1-million and the administration had re-
By Myers (Pa.), to prevent use of LEAA funds for inter-
an LEAA recipient who was found to have discriminated on
Boosting the administration's budget by more than
quested less than half that amount-$125.9-million.
state transport of prisoners convicted of violent crimes to
the basis of race, color, religion, national origin or sex.
Required LEAA to make an annual report to Congress,
double the amount requested, Congress Aug. 30 cleared for
athletic events, by voice vote.
including such items as a summary of innovative programs,
the President a bill (HR 11670) authorizing $284.9-million
200-Mile Limit
By John B. Breaux (D La.), to make a certain percen-
tage of LEAA grants directly to the chief law enforcement
the number of programs approved and discontinued, and a
for the Coast Guard for fiscal 1977.
The administration had requested no funds to enforce
official of each county, by voice vote.
summary of evaluation procedures.
President Ford had asked for only $125.9-million. Most
the new 200-mile commercial fishing limit, scheduled to
Required LEAA employees in policy-making positions
of the increase was contained in an authorization of $100-
take effect March 1, 1977. The Transportation Department
that affect grants to make a financial statement disclosing
million for procurement of ships and airplanes to patrol the
said that the law's requirements still were under review.
Provisions
any relationship with LEAA grant recipients.
new 200-mile commercial fishing limit enacted into law in
Acting before the new law was enacted, the House
Required the Department of Justice to obtain authoriz-
March. The bill included another $50-million for procure-
authorized a total of $108.6-million for a specific number of
The major provisions of S 2212, as passed by the House:
ing legislation for its appropriations beginning in fiscal
ment of ice-breaker ships to keep the Great Lakes open for
airplanes, helicopters and Coast Guard cutters. By contrast,
Extended LEAA through fiscal 1977, with an authoriza-
1979.
winter shipping. (200-mile limit legislation, Weekly Report
the Senate had authorized a flat sum of $100-million for
tion level of $895-million.
-By Mary Link
p. 750)
general procurement of whatever mix of vessels and aircraft
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
PAGE 2480-Sept. 11, 1976
Reproduction prohibited whole or except by editorial clients
Reproduction prohibited whole or part except by editoria clients
Sept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2481
Transportation/Communications 2
the Coast Guard determined to be necessary to patrol the
was the same as that requested by the administration and
new fishing area. Conferees accepted the Senate's more
authorized by the House March 11, and it exceeded the
Agriculture
general plan.
fiscal 1976 authorization by $87,785,000. Sponsors said the
increase reflected a growing gap between U.S. and foreign
Icebreakers
maritime wage levels. (House passage, Weekly Report p.
To improve winter navigation on the Great Lakes, the
634)
House had authorized $52-million for the purchase of four
In the only floor change in the bill as reported (S Rept
Costs, Politics Embroil Peanut Subsidies
small icebreaking vessels. Again taking a general approach,
94-833) by the Commerce Committee May 13, the Senate
the Senate had authorized $50-million for "ice-breaking
added $600,000 to the $4-million in the bill for federal aid to
With a Georgia peanut farmer aiming to take up
Agriculture Committee Chairman W. R. Poage (D Texas)
capability," without specifying what ships were to be
state maritime academies. The additional funds were to
residence in the White House in January 1977, attention has
explained the dilemma during committee consideration of
bought. The administration had opposed the authorization,
permit an increase to $900 per student, from $600, in the
been focused on the peanut subsidy program-a program
the bill: "I think this bill is a dangerous bill, but it is more
saying it was too expensive.
subsistence stipends.
that has helped provide Jimmy Carter's livelihood and that
dangerous to proceed with the present program, with the
Conferees again accepted the general Senate plan.
Arguing that the stipend had not been raised since it
has been criticized as one of the biggest boondoggles in U.S.
Secretary of Agriculture threatening to ruin the program,
Although it went along with the Senate's non-specific
was first authorized in 1958, sponsors originally had sought
agriculture, costing a projected $163-million for 1976.
and I think he has the authority to do it."
authorizations for this particular bill, conferees made it
a $1,200 allowance. But in the face of strong resistance from
Opponents of the program, led by Agriculture Secretary
clear that the agreement should not be taken as a precedent
opponents, who argued that the maritime job market
Earl L. Butz, have been trying to change the program for
Background
for the future. "Too little specificity, leaving too much dis-
already was overcrowded, they compromised on the $900
some years, but peanut growers have had powerful friends in
cretion in the administering agency, is an abdication of con-
figure.
Congress: Sen. Herman E. Talmadge (D Ga.), chairman of
The long history of the peanut program cannot be con-
gressional responsibility,' they said.
The amendment increasing the stipend, offered by
the Senate Agriculture and Forestry Committee, and
sidered apart from the complicated history of U.S.
William D. Hathaway (D Maine), was adopted by voice
Speaker of the House Carl Albert (D Okla.). Both come from
agricultural policy, which has attempted since the 1930s to
vote. The House in March had rejected a similar amend-
Final Action:
large peanut-producing states.
provide a stable framework and income level for farmers
ment by a 53-292 vote.
But the Butz campaign, coupled with the attention
and to avoid the natural tendency of "boom and bust"
The only other change in the House-passed bill was an
drawn by Carter's peanut connections, has caused normally
agriculture, in which the vagaries of weather and changing
Maritime Authorization
increase of $3-million, to $22.5-million, for research and
warring peanut growers to band together and support legis-
markets could wipe out thousands of farmers in a single
development programs by the Commerce Department's
lation (HR 12808) currently pending in the House.
season.
Congress Aug. 30 cleared for the President a bill (HR
Maritime Administration. The Commerce Committee said
The Senate Agriculture Committee refused Sept. 1 to
11481) to authorize $448,041,000 for federal maritime
the additional money would permit accelerated develop-
take up the bill, thus dooming it for this Congress. But it is
Price Supports
programs for fiscal 1977.
ment of industrial plant ships that could produce ammonia.
expected that revision of the peanut program will be con-
Although price supports for various commodities began
The largest authorization item in the bill was $403,721,-
Following are the authorization levels approved by the
sidered as part of the general farm legislation the 95th
as early as 1933, the permanent establishment of a price
000 in operating subsidies for U.S. merchant ships to permit
Senate for various maritime programs:
Congress will face in 1977.
support program with accompanying acreage allotments did
them to charge rates competitive with those of foreign
$403,721,000 for ship operating-differential subsidies;
carriers. That was the same as the amount requested by the
$22.5-million for research and development;
Reform Moves
not begin until the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938.
(Farm policy legislation, 1973 Almanac p. 288, Congress and
administration.
$13.26-million for maritime training at the U.S.
Critics charge that the peanut subsidy program is out-
the Nation Vol. I, p. 682)
For the first time in more than 25 years, the bill did not
Merchant Marine Academy at Kings Point, N.Y.;
dated, inefficient and costly-that American peanut
Under this system, the government estimated the
contain an authorization for shipbuilding subsidies. In the
$4.56-million for expenses of the National Defense
farmers are being paid to grow a commodity far in excess of
amount of acreage that needed to be planted to meet the de-
past, the government's construction program had provided
Reserve Fleet of mothballed merchant ships;
U.S. needs and that the federal government has been forced
mand for a certain commodity. Farmers planting more than
large subsidies to American shipyards so that the cost to
$4.6-million in federal aid to state maritime schools and
to stockpile those huge peanut surpluses at taxpayers' ex-
that amount could be fined, but those staying within their
U.S. purchasers would be comparable to the cost of foreign
for the operation and development of six training ships.
pense.
allotted acreage were eligible to receive price supports by
vessels. In 1976 the Maritime Administration told Congress
House Agriculture Committee member Frederick Rich-
obtaining loans from the Commodity Credit Corporation,
that sufficient funds were available from previous years to
Conference Report
mond (D N.Y.) claimed the current surplus is 1 billion
using their crops as collateral.
carry the program through fiscal 1977.
pounds of peanuts and 1.5 billion pounds of peanut oil.
HR 11481 included $4-million for federal assistance to
Conferees filed a conference report on HR 11481 in the
Defenders of the program respond that the peanut
state maritime academies for student subsistence
House (H Rept 94-1375) and Senate (S Rept 94-1056) on
program has successfully created stable quantities of that
payments. The Senate had proposed to raise the level of aid
July 29.
commodity, has provided economic security to parts of the
U.S. Peanut Production*
to permit higher per-student payments, but House-Senate
Research and Development. Accepting a Senate
country that cannot grow other crops and is the best method
IN BILLIONS OF POUNDS
conferees dropped that provision pending the results of a
authorization provision, conferees approved $22.5-
of dealing with the perishable peanut, which cannot be
General Accounting Office study of the idea. Opponents had
million-$3-million more than authorized by the
stored as long as many other commodities, such as corn and
3.8
contended that the maritime trades were crowded enough
without the government subsidizing more candidates for
House-for maritime research and development. The ad-
wheat.
scarce jobs.
ditional $3-million was for studies of industrial plant ships
The Department of Agriculture has been trying to bring
2.9
and of commercialization of ocean thermal energy.
some changes to the peanut program since 1968, and par-
Final action on HR 11481 came Aug. 30 when the House
However, conferees pointed out that the authorization ac-
ticularly since 1973, when cotton, wheat and other feed
agreed to a conference report by voice vote. The Senate had
2.3
tually was moot, since the Commerce Department
grains were transferred from a subsidy system similar to
approved the report by voice vote on Aug. 3. Since the total
appropriations bill (HR 14239), already enacted, did not in-
peanuts to a market-oriented target-price system. Sup-
level of authorizations was only $3.3-million more than that
clude funds for those studies. They called for further con-
porters of the existing peanut program have accused the
1.7
1.5
recommended by the President, it was expected to win his
sideration of the matter in hearings in 1977. (Appro-
department, and Secretary Butz in particular, of con-
approval.
priations bill, Weekly Report p. 1852)
ducting a vendetta against the program.
Earlier Senate Action
State Marine Schools. Responding to persistent
Growers in the three main peanut-producing areas are
pressure from supporters of the six state maritime
not happy with the bill reported (H Rept 94-1455) by the
academies around the country, the Senate had provided for
House Agriculture Committee Aug. 31. As Oilseeds and
The Senate passed HR 11481 June 15 by voice vote with
a $300 increase in the per-student payment for annual sub-
Rice Subcommittee Chairman Dawson Mathis (D Ga.)
an authorization of $488,641,000.
sistence. The House had resisted that pressure, providing no
said, "This is a bill that nobody loves, but everyone
accepts."
1955
1960
1965
1970
1975
Of the total authorization, the bulk-$403,-
increase. Conferees went along with the House, rejecting the
721,000-was for operating subsidies for U.S. merchant
increase, and noted that the matter was under study by the
Peanut growers, realizing some change was inevitable,
*Based on 1,610,000 minimum national acreage
ships to permit them to charge shipping rates com-
General Accounting Office.
compromised behind HR 12808 to avoid more severe cut-
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture
-By Ted Vaden
backs or possible extinction of the program. Former
chapman
petitive with the low rates of foreign vessels. The figure
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
PAGE 2482-Sept. 11, 1976
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
Reproduction prohibited in whole or part except by editorial clients
Sept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2483
Reproduction prohibited whole or except by editorial clients
Agriculture 2
Agriculture 3
The loan was based on the principle of "parity," a for-
Peanuts Bypassed
Small Farmer
mula set up to establish a fair relationship between the in-
The peanut program, however, was excluded from the
Although some critics, such as Peyser, charge the
come a farmer received and the amount of money he had to
1973 change in agricultural policy. Peanut farmers con-
peanut program has reaped "unbelievable profits for its
Carter's Peanuts
spend for labor, equipment and living costs. Parity formulas
tinued to follow a complex system of acreage allotments,
benefactors," and reports exist of millionaire peanut
were figured from base periods during the first two decades
marketing quotas and price support loans. And, unlike the
of this century (1910-14 or 1919-29 for most crops), which
farmers with thousands of acres in peanut allotments, the
Secretary of Agriculture Earl L. Butz opened fire
farmers growing target-price crops, they continued to build
national average allotment actually is 25 acres.
March 28 on the peanut subsidy program and on
were considered examples of a time when farmers' income
up large surpluses.
Reporters trailing Jimmy Carter tell of new homes and
Jimmy Carter, then the front-runner for the Democratic
and costs were at a fair balance.
One of the chief reasons for the large surpluses was the
late model cars in the peanut country of southwest Georgia.
presidential nomination he later won.
The price support programs continued, with some
increased productivity enjoyed by peanut farmers. In 1941,
But Rep. Don Fuqua (D Fla.) defends the program: "The
Butz accused Carter of "growing fat from federal
changes, until 1973, when Congress passed new farm legisla-
when the minimum national peanut acreage was set at
peanut industry is probably one of the most misunderstood
peanut subsidies" and promised he was "going to dis-
tion putting cotton, wheat and other feed grains on a
1,610,000 acres, the average yield per acre was 900 pounds.
segments of the agricultural industry. Prices can fluctuate
turb his [Carter's] little playhouse."
different system. Called a target-price system, the program
In 1976, the Agriculture Department is projecting an
violently and a producer can literally be wiped out in a
The Carter camp responded by charging Butz with
was hailed as one that was more market-oriented, would
average yield of 2,568 pounds per acres. Department figures
free farmers from the cumbersome complexities of govern-
single growing season without some assurance which past
"political flackery" and using Carter as a focal point for
indicate that 3.8 billion pounds of peanuts were grown in the
programs have provided."
criticism of the peanut program.
ment subsidy programs, and, with the existing world de-
United States in 1975, compared with 1.5 billion pounds in
Those assurances of a fair return on investment, Fuqua
The Carter people said Carter grows only seed
mand for food, would eliminate the embarrassing and costly
1955. (Chart, p. 2483)
said, have enabled "a great many families to enjoy a decent
peanuts, which are sold directly to other farmers in the
surpluses of years past.
Approximately 70 per cent of the crop is sold to peanut
standard of living and children to get an education."
area at a higher price than the government support
One of the effects of the subsidy programs for peanuts,
butter manufacturers and other producers of edible peanut
Since the economies of many counties in peanut-
price and that Carter does not participate in the federal
as well as the other commodities, was that enormous sur-
products, such as salted and roasted nuts and peanut can-
growing states are based almost entirely on peanut produc-
subsidy program.
pluses built up. Although the loans made to farmers were
dy.
tion, most observers agree that a sudden change in the sub-
When the air cleared, Agriculture Department
technically redeemable, in reality farmers frequently
The remainder of the crop is purchased by the govern-
sidy program, or wiping it out entirely, would drastically
reports indicated that Carter had inherited a 243-acre
defaulted, forcing the government to acquire the commodity
ment through its loan program, with the current purchase
affect those areas.
peanut allotment, that he does indeed grow seed
put up as collateral.
price set at 75 per cent of parity.
But Peyser has suggested that the 600,000 unneeded
peanuts and owns a peanut warehouse, but that he had
In actual figures, the government bought peanuts in
allotted peanut acres on which the surplus is grown could be
received only two federal payments since 1970, totaling
1976 at an average $414 a ton. (Peanut marketing box, this
used to produce soybeans, cotton, potatoes and other crops
$2,728, a rather meager amount in view of the enormous
Peanut Marketing
page)
that Americans would really use. "We must find a better
subsidy program.
The government has two basic choices of what it can do
way to help [the peanut farmer] to produce something else
But even though Carter is not now participating in
Farmers grow peanuts on the number of acres they
with the surplus: 1) it can sell it on the world market at a
that is a salable crop," he said.
the subsidy program, the department added, he had
have been allotted by the government. The Secretary of
loss (the current world price is around $250 a ton), or 2) it
Rep. James P. Johnson (Colo.), ranking Republican on
received federal payments during the 1960s for storing
Agriculture annually sets the amount of national
can crush the excess peanuts into oil and meal, donating
the Oilseeds Subcommittee, presented the other side of the
government peanuts.
acreage that can be planted. Since 1941, except for
that to the domestic school lunch program or moving it
argument to the Agriculture Committee when he said that
Butz insisted that Carter benefits indirectly, simp-
variations during war years, the minimum national
through the Food for Peace (PL 480) program.
peanut farmers, unlike those growing other commodities,
ly because the subsidy system exists. As one depart-
acreage has been set at 1,610,000. With the increased
In previous years, the department has chosen to sell the
"don't have much choice in different crops."
ment official said, "He would not be getting the high
yields that have been experienced in recent years, the
surplus, even though the world market price usually was
According to Johnson, "This isn't just a farm program.
price he is getting if it were not for that government
government generally has not allowed more than the
lower than the price the department paid for the peanuts.
This is a social program for that whole section of the country
program."
minimum amount to be planted. By law, the govern-
The general feeling before 1973 seemed to be that recouping
and you make a mistake if you ignore that."
ment cannot allow less than that amount.
part of the loss was better than nothing. In 1973 and 1974
As a result, peanut acreages are almost impossible
the department actually was able to sell most of its peanuts
House Committee Action
cut to 1,247,000 from 1,610,000 acres. Committee members
to come by, unless they are inherited. Critics such as
at a good price; the drought in African peanut-growing
said this would result in a reduction in the number of
Rep. Peter A. Peyser (R N.Y.) have called it a "feudal
countries created shortages that the U.S. surplus was able
In the midst of the pressure from Secretary Butz and
peanuts produced and therefore a decrease in the amount of
system."
to fill.
the spotlight focused on the program by Carter's candidacy,
surplus.
Once the crop is harvested, the peanut farmer
peanut growers from the three major producing areas joined
Since the bill also placed a quota on the number of
takes his peanuts to the middleman-the warehouser
Butz' Resale Policy
together in support of HR 12808, which the House
pounds sold by peanut farmers and cut the loan level on
and sheller. According to the Agriculture Department,
Agriculture Committee reported Aug. 31. Oilseeds Subcom-
However, in 1974 Secretary Butz announced a 100 per
quota peanuts to 70 per cent of parity from 75 per cent, the
the producer cannot bargain for a price. He must accept
mittee Chairman Mathis said the bill had been worked on
cent resale policy. He said he would not sell peanuts for
committee estimated that the changes in the peanut sub-
the price offered by the purchaser-which is pegged to
for five years and would affect only the 1977 crop. Further
prices lower than what the government paid the producers.
sidy program would save the government $64-million a year.
the support price being offered by the government.
changes would be made in the 1977 farm bill.
With the world price significantly lower than the U.S. sup-
The bill also provided for open-ended production of
If the middleman does not want to buy the peanuts
Growers in the three areas traditionally have had
port price, surpluses have been piling up. Rep. Peter A.
peanuts, thus allowing the crop to be grown by anyone who
for sale to commercial companies manufacturing edible
different growing situations and supply problems and have
Peyser (RN.Y.) claimed the cost to the taxpayers between
wanted to participate. This provision was strongly sup-
peanut items, he puts the peanuts under the federal
often been in disagreement over peanut program proposals.
1976 and 1980 would run $961-million.
ported by the Agriculture Department as a way to break the
loan program.
Those from Virginia and North Carolina generally grow
Critics of Secretary Butz say the resale policy is not a
stranglehold on peanut acreage by current allotment
The farmer is paid the same price regardless of how
what is known as the Virginia-type peanut, which is the
holders.
valid one, that the government was willing to sell peanuts at
the peanuts are used.
largest peanut and is most often sold roasted in the shell or
a loss before and that the policy has been instituted strictly
Under the new bill, peanuts grown by non-allotment
Manufacturers then must purchase peanuts at the
as salted peanuts. Those farmers in the Texas-Oklahoma
holders or by allotment holders in excess of their allotments
to embarrass the peanut program and hopefully to kill it.
artificial government support price, which in 1976 is
area generally grow Spanish-type peanuts. Both of these
Subcommittee Chairman Mathis said the surplus has
could be marketed only for export or crushing. These non-
approximately $164 a ton above the world market price.
varieties are in demand in the edible peanut market and
forced the cost of the program to be distorted and "makes it
quota peanuts would be supported at a much lower level
Manufacturers, barred from importing cheaper peanuts
growers seldom have surpluses.
look worse than it is.
than the quota peanuts-60 per cent of the loan level for
grown outside the United States, say they must charge
However, the runner-type peanut, grown in Georgia
The department defended the move in terms of U.S.
quota peanuts, or 90 per cent of their estimated value for
the consumer high prices for peanut products because
and Alabama, is smaller than the Virginia variety. Although
crushing and export, whichever is lower.
trade policy, claiming it would be inconsistent to have ex-
they are forced to pay the government support price.
it generally is used for peanut butter, it is not in such de-
port subsidies for peanuts, when the United States was try-
One provision that provoked some controversy during
At the same time the government is stuck with
mand for edible purposes as the other varieties and growers
ing to avoid such subsidies for other commodities in inter-
committee markup mandated that the Secretary of
billions of pounds of excess peanuts, which it must
of these peanuts generally have surpluses. This has been es-
national trade.
Agriculture would have to sell the surplus peanuts from the
crush into oil or peanut meal and then sell at a loss or
pecially true since 1972 when the florunner variety of
Butz succeeded in drawing attention to the program in
1976 and 1977 crops. Secretary Butz has had discretionary
give away.
peanut, with a very high yield, was introduced.
March when he accused Carter of "growing fat" from the
authority to sell surplus peanuts, but has chosen not to sell
As reported by the committee, the bill reduced the
peanut subsidy program. (Box, p. 2485)
them for less than the price for which the peanuts were
minimum national acreage allotment by 22.5 per cent-a
bought.
PAGE 2484-Sept. 11, 1976
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERL INC
Reproduction prohibited whole or part except by editorial ciients
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC.
Reproduction prohibited in whole or part except by editorial clients
Sept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2485
CQ Senate Votes 555-560
Agriculture 4
Corresponding Congressional Record Votes 564, 565, 566, 567, 568, 569
Although the Agriculture Department objected to HR
12808 as a continuation of the "outmoded" price support
557
558
559
KEY
system that still would result in 750 million pounds of excess
The program has
peanuts in 1977, it said it was willing to support the bill as a
enabled "a great
ALABAMA
IOWA
NEW HAMPSHIRE
Allen
NNYYNN
Clark
YYNNYN
Durkin
YNNNYN
Y Voted for (yea)
"step in the right direction."
YYYNYN
Paired for
many families to en-
Sparkman
NNNYYN
Culver
Mclntyre
YYYN??
+-
Announced for
ALASKA
KANSAS
NEW JERSEY
Gravel
YN? N Y Y N
N
Committee Markup
joy a decent standard
YYNNYN
Dole
Williams
NNNNYY
Voted against (nay)
Stevens
YUNNYY
NYYNYY
X
Pearson
NYYNYN
Paired against.
Case
The House Agriculture Committee markup of HR
of living and children
ARIZONA
KENTUCKY
NEW MEXICO
Announced against.
Ford
YNYNYY
P
Fannin
??YYNN
??????
Voted "present."
Montoya
12808 on Aug. 24 and 25 provided a good example of the dif-
to get an education."
Goldwater
??????
Huddleston
? ? N N Y
Domenici
YNYYYN
Voted "present" to avoid
ficulty Congress has with complex farm legislation. As
ARKANSAS
NEW YORK
possible conflict of interest.
LOUISIANA
?
-Rep. Don Fuqua
Bumpers
YNNNYY
Did not vote or otherwise
YNYNYN
Johnston
Buckley*
??????
members munched on Georgia peanuts provided by Mathis,
(D Fla.)
McClellan
NPNYNY
Long
Y N Y Y Y Y
Javits
X?NNYN
make a position known.
they argued about actual costs of the program, citing the
CALIFORNIA
MAINE
NORTH CAROLINA
??????
YYNNYN
YYNNYY
confusing array of statistics provided by the Agriculture
Cranston
Hathaway
Morgan
Tunney
??????
Muskie
NNNNYN
Helms
NNYYNN
Department and the program's supporters and opponents.
COLORADO
MARYLAND
NORTH DAKOTA
Many members admitted they did not understand the
The Richmond amendment was defeated by a 20-5
Hart
YYNNYN
Beall
??????
Burdick
YNYNYN
Haskell
? ? Y N Y N
Mathias
? ? N N Y
program or the complex amendments that were offered. One
vote.
Young
YNNYYY
CONNECTICUT
MASSACHUSETTS
OHIO
TEXAS
member was heard to remark: "They don't know what the
Ribicoff
YYYNYN
Kennedy
???NYN
Glenn
YYYNY?
Bentsen
? - Y N Y
Export Mandate
Welcker
TXYNYN
Brooke
NYNNYY
Taft
YNYNYN
Tower
YYNYNN
hell they're talking about."
DELAWARE
MICHIGAN
OKLAHOMA
UTAH
One provision in the bill that aroused heated debate
Biden
Y ? Y N Y Y
Hart
???NY?
Bartlett
NNYYNN
Moss
??????
Richmond Amendment
Roth
YNYNYN
Griffin
YNYNYN
Bellmon
YYYYNY
Garn
YNYYNN
during committee consideration was the requirement that
FLORIDA
MINNESOTA
OREGON
VERMONT
Richmond offered an amendment during committee
the Secretary of Agriculture dispose of all 1977 surplus
Chiles
YNYNYN
Humphrey
YN?NYN
Hatfleld
YNYNYY
Leahy
YNYNYN
Stone
YNYNYN
Mondale
??????
Packwood
YYYNYN
peanuts at competitive world prices.
Stafford
YNYNYN
markup that would have reduced the parity level to 60 per
GEORGIA
MISSISSIPPI
PENNSYLVANIA
VIRGINIA
cent instead of the 70 per cent provided in the bill.
Paul Findley (R III.) offered two amendments, one to
Nunn
NNYNYN
Eastland
NNNYNY
Schwelker
YYYNYY
Byrd**
NNYNY?
The New York Democrat contended that the cost of
strike the language and another to soften the requirement,
Talmadge
NNYYYN
Stennis
YNNYNY
Scott
NYYNYN
Scott
NYYYNN
HAWAII
MISSOURI
RHODE ISLAND
WASHINGTON
growing peanuts was $338 an acre, including land rental
but both amendments were defeated.
Inouye
YYNNYY
Eagleton
YN????
Pastore
YYNNY-
Jackson
NYYNYN
Findley argued that forcing the Secretary to sell the sur-
Fong
? ? Y N Y N
Symington
YN? N Y Y
Pell
costs, and that the yield per acre was 1.25 tons. At 70 per
YNNNYY
Magnuson
? ? N N Y Y
IDAHO
MONTANA
SOUTH CAROLINA
WEST VIRGINIA
cent of parity, he said, the farmer would be receiving $386 a
plus would be a new use of export subsidies that would have
Church
YNYNYN
Mansfield
? ? N N Y N
Hollings
YYNNYY
Byrd
NNYNYN
ton; at 60 per cent of parity, the farmer would receive $331 a
impact on U.S. trade policy and could jeopardize continuing
McClure
YNYYNN
Metcalf
???NY?
Thurmond
NNYNNN
Randolph
YYYNYY
ILLINOIS
NEBRASKA
SOUTH DAKOTA
ton for his peanuts, which Richmond said would be more in
international trade negotiations. In addition, Findley said
WISCONSIN
Stevenson
YNNNYN
Curtis
YNYYNN
Abourezk
YNNNYN
Nelson
YNYNYN
line with the farmer's costs.
Butz already had discretionary authority to sell the sur-
Percy
YYYNY?
Hruska
YYYYNY
McGovern
??NNYN
Proxmire
YNYNYN
Richmond told the committee, "The whole idea of
pluses and that Butz had assured him he would offer 1977
INDIANA
NEVADA
TENNESSEE
WYOMING
Bayh
??????
Cannon
YNNNYY
Baker
YNYNYN
McGee
??????
government support is that farmers get a real return [on
peanuts at competitive prices. "I think we should trust
Hartke
??????
Laxalt
Y N Y Y N Y
Brock
K - T Y N N
Hansen
YNYYNN
their investment] but not to let farmers grow a product that
Secretary Butz," Findley said.
Mathis led the opponents of the amendment, saying
Democrats
Republicans
*Buckley elected as Conservative
**Byrd elected as independent.
we won't use. All of us would like to see more peanuts con-
sumed and less in surplus, but we won't have it unless we
Butz had avoided using his authority to dispose of surpluses
lower the support price."
since 1974 and as a result the peanut farmers had lost
Richmond also said his amendment would reduce costs
valuable overseas markets, with the buildup of surpluses
to consumers, since the high government support price has
giving the program a black eye.
caused the price of peanut butter to jump from 63 cents to
Mathis said he knew Butz had promised to dispose of
93 cents a pound since 1970. "Consumption goes down as
1977 surplus peanuts, but Mathis predicted, "Earl Butz
the price goes up," he said, adding that the manufacturers
won't be in charge of peanut policy in 1977."
555. HR 14238. Legislative Appropriations, Fiscal 1977. Taft
presently employed operators would lose their jobs. Adopted 51-30:
of Skippy peanut butter had told him they would drop their
In addition to defeating the Findley amendments, the
(R Ohio) motion to table, and thus kill, the Allen (D Ala.) motion to
R 27-6; D 24-24 (ND 14-16; SD 10-8), Sept. 8, 1976. (Story, p. 2492)
price 5 cents a pound if the bill provided 60 per cent of
committee voted to extend the selling mandate to the 1976
reconsider the vote by which the Senate had previously adopted
parity.
peanut crop. It also rejected a complicated Mathis amend-
the Taft (R Ohio) amendment to allow payment of a salary increase
558. HR 8532. Antitrust Amendments. Allen (D Ala.) sub-
Subcommittee member Johnson said the Richmond
ment that opponents said would have provided greater
for federal employees other than members of Congress. Motion to
stitute bill embodying the original Senate language as passed in
amendment would reduce the program cost by only $25-
benefits to growers of runner peanuts in the Southeast at the
table agreed to 55-19: R 21-8; D 34-11 (ND 25-4; SD 9-7), Sept. 7,
June. (See vote 271, Weekly Report p. 1618) Rejected 22-66: R 15-
million and yet would reduce farmer income by $70-million.
expense of growers of the Virginia-type and Spanish-type
1976. (The Taft amendment had been previously adopted by voice
20; D 7-46 (ND 0-35; SD 7-11), Sept. 8, 1976. (Story p. 2464)
vote.) (Story, p. 2492)
And according to the Department of Agriculture, such a
peanuts.
559. HR 8532. Antitrust Amendments. Byrd (D W.Va.) motion
drop in program cost would not affect consumer prices very
to agree to a substitute antitrust bill to authorize state attorneys
much, Johnson added. "Introducing some vague notion of
Outlook
556. HR 14238. Legislative Appropriations, Fiscal 1977.
general to bring parens patriae antitrust suits on behalf of citizens,
consumerism will be bad in the long run," he said.
Senate Appropriations Committee amendment to delete from the
Despite the Senate committee's decision not to con-
require large companies to notify the government of planned
bill a provision that, as amended by the Taft (R Ohio) amendment
mergers and strengthen the government's antitrust investigatory
sider HR 12808 in 1976, the House committee did file a peti-
(see vote 555, above), banned salary increases for members of
powers. Agreed to 69-18: R 21-14; D 48-4 (ND 34-0; SD 14-4), Sept.
tion with the Rules Committee to take the bill to the House
Congress. Rejected 25-46: R 11-17; D 14-29 (ND 12-16; SD 2-13),
8, 1976. (Story, p. 2464)
floor. However, as of Sept. 9 the bill had not appeared on the
Sept. 7, 1976. (Story, p. 2492)
The peanut subsidy
Rules schedule; the committee had set Sept. 10 as the
560. HR 14238. Legislative Appropriations, Fiscal 1977. Judg-
deadline for granting rules.
ment of the Senate that the Senate Appropriations Committee's
program has reaped
As of Sept. 7, the Agriculture Department was
557. HR 14238. Legislative Appropriations, Fiscal 1977.
amendment to appropriate $35.5 million for purchase of a building
"unbelievable profits
awaiting an appellate court decision on a lawsuit brought
Bartlett (R Okla.) amendment to reduce by 62 positions the
in Washington, D.C., for additional Senate office space was not ger-
by disgruntled Georgia peanut farmers upset over changes
number of elevator operators on automatic elevators in the Capitol
mane. Amendment ruled not germane 28-53: R 10-24; D 18-29
for its benefactors."
and in congressional office buildings, with the provision that no
in the annual price support adjustments. The department
(ND 8-22; SD 10-7), Sept. 8, 1976. (Story, p. 2492)
-Rep. Peter A. Peyser
had suspended all peanut loan activity for the 1976 crop on
(R N.Y.)
Aug. 6, although it had allowed farmers to store their
peanuts in government warehouses. The department said it
would reinstate the loan program after the court decision. I
-By Mary Link
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
PAGE 2486-Sept. 11, 1976
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC.
Reproduction prohibited in whole or in part except by editorial ciients
Sept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2487
Reproduction prohibited whole in part except by aditorial clients.
CQ Senate Votes 561-566
CQ Senate Votes 567-568
Corresponding to Congressional Record Votes 570, 571, 572, 573, 574, 575
Corresponding to Congressional Record Votes 576, 577
AGAGN
AGAGNA
which
KEY
KEY
ALABAMA
IOWA
NEW HAMPSHIRE
ALABAMA
IOWA
NEW HAMPSHIRE
Allen
YNYNNY
Clark
YNYYYY
Y
NYYYNY
Voted for (yea)
Allen
NY
Durkin
Clark
Y Y
Durkin
YY
Y
Voted for (yea)
Paired for.
Sparkman
YY
Sparkman
YNYNNY
Culver
YNNYYY
Mcintyre
??????
Culver
Y Y
McIntyre
??
Paired for.
t
Announced for
ALASKA
KANSAS
NEW JERSEY
ALASKA
KANSAS
NEW JERSEY
f
Announced for.
Gravel
YYNYYY
YNYYYY
N
Williams
Voted against (nay).
Gravel
Y Y
Dole
NNYNYY
Dole
NY
Williams
? ?
N
Voted against (nay)
X
Paired against.
Y Y
X
Paired against
Stevens
NYNYYY
Pearson
NYYYYY
Case
YNNNYY
Stevens
Pearson
YY
Case
vt
ARIZONA
KENTUCKY
NEW MEXICO
Announced against.
ARIZONA
KENTUCKY
NEW MEXICO
Announced against.
Fannin
YNYNNY
YNYNYY
P
Ford
Montoya
??????
Voted "present.
Fannin
NY
Ford
Y Y
Montoya
??
P
Voted present.
??????
YNYNYY
.
Voted "present" to avoid
X?
Goldwater
Huddleston
Domenici
YNYNNY
Goldwater
Huddleston
YY
Domenici
YY
.
Voted 'present' to avoid
ARKANSAS
LOUISIANA
NEW YORK
possible conflict of interest.
ARKANSAS
LOUISIANA
NEW YORK
possible conflict of interest.
Bumpers
YNYNYY
Johnston
YNYNYY
?
Did not vote or otherwise
Buckley*
??????
Bumpers
Y Y
Johnston
YY
Buckley*
??
?
Did not vote or otherwise
make position known.
McClellan
YNYNYY
YN????
make position known.
McClellan
Y Y
Long
Javits
YNNNYY
Long
? Y
Javits
YY
CALIFORNIA
MAINE
NORTH CAROLINA
CALIFORNIA
MAINE
NORTH CAROLINA
Cranston
??????
Hathaway
YNNYYY
Morgan
YNYYNY
Cranston
Y Y
Hathaway
Y Y
Morgan
YY
Tunney
??????
Muskie
YNYNYY
Helms
YNYYNN
Tunney
??
Muskie
Y Y
Helms
NY
COLORADO
MARYLAND
NORTH DAKOTA
COLORADO
MARYLAND
NORTH DAKOTA
Hart
NNYY??
??????
NNYNYY
Hart
??
Beall
Burdick
Beall
??
Burdick
YY
Haskell
YNYYYY
Methias
NYNNYY
Young
YNYNNY
Haskell
Y Y
Mathias
YY
Young
YY
CONNECTICUT
MASSACHUSETTS
OHIO
CONNECTICUT
TEXAS
MASSACHUSETTS
OHIO
TEXAS
Ribicoff
YNYNYN
Kennedy
??????
Glenn
??????
YNYYNY
Ribicotf
YY
Bentsen
Kennedy
??
Glenn
??
Bentsen
YY
Welcker
NYYN??
Brooke
NYNYYY
Taft
Y N Y Y N Y
Tower
YNYNYY
Welcker
Y ?
Brooke
YY
Taft
NY
Tower
NY
DELAWARE
MICHIGAN
OKLAHOMA
DELAWARE
UTAH
MICHIGAN
OKLAHOMA
UTAH
Biden
YNYNYY
Hart
??????
Bartlett
YNYNNY
??????
Biden
Y Y
Moss
Hart
??
Bartlett
NY
Moss
??
Roth
NNYYNN
Griffin
YNY???
Bellmon
YNYNNY
YNYYNN
Roth
??
Griffin
Garn
Y ?
Belimon
YY
Garn
NY
FLORIDA
MINNESOTA
OREGON
FLORIDA
VERMONT
MINNESOTA
OREGON
VERMONT
Chiles
YNYNNY
Humphrey
Y-T?TT
Hetfield
NYYNYY
Leahy
YNYNNY
Chiles
YY
Humphrey
YY
Hatfield
NY
Leahy
NY
YNYYNY
Mondale
??????
Packwood
NNYNNY
Stone
YY
Stone
YYNNYY
Stafford
Mondale
??
Packwood
NY
Stafford
? Y
GEORGIA
MISSISSIPPI
PENNSYLVANIA
GEORGIA
VIRGINIA
MISSISSIPPI
PENNSYLVANIA
VIRGINIA
Nunn
YNYNNY
Eastland
NNYNY?
Schwelker
YNNYYY
Byrd**
??????
Nunn
YY
Eastland
YY
Schweiker
YY
Byrd**
NY
Talmadge
NNYNNY
Stennis
YNYNNY
Scott
YNNYYY
Talmadge
??
NYNYYY
Scott
Stennis
Y Y
Scott
YY
Scott
NY
HAWAII
MISSOURI
RHODE ISLAND
WASHINGTON
HAWAII
MISSOURI
RHODE ISLAND
WASHINGTON
Inouye
YNYYYY
Eagleton
??????
Pastore
NNYYYY
Inouye
YY
......
Jackson
Eagleton
Y Y
Pastore
YY
Jackson
YY
Fong
NNYNYY
Symington
YNYN??
Pell
YNYNYY
Magnuson
YNYYYY
Fong
YY
Symington
Y Y
Pell
YY
Magnuson
YY
IDAHO
MONTANA
SOUTH CAROLINA
IDAHO
WEST VIRGINIA
MONTANA
SOUTH CAROLINA
WEST VIRGINIA
Church
YNYNYY
Mansfield
YNYNYY
Hollings
YNNNYY
NNYNYY
Church
YY
Byrd
Mansfield
YY
Hollings
Y Y
Byrd
YY
McClure
YNYNNY
Metcalf
??????
Thurmond
McClure
NY
YNYNNY
Randolph
YNYNNY
Metcalf
YY
Thurmond
NY
Randolph
YY
ILLINOIS
NEBRASKA
SOUTH DAKOTA
ILLINOIS
WISCONSIN
NEBRASKA
SOUTH DAKOTA
WISCONSIN
Stevenson
YNYN??
Curtis
YNYN??
Abourezk
YNY???
Stevenson
Y N Y Y Y Y
Nelson
1?
Curtis
NY
Abourezk
NY
Nelson
YY
Percy
??????
Hruska
YNYNNY
McGovern
Y N Y ? ?
Proxmire
YNYNNN
Percy
Y Y
Hruska
NY
McGovern
YY
Proxmire
NY
INDIANA
NEVADA
TENNESSEE
WYOMING
INDIANA
NEVADA
TENNESSEE
WYOMING
Bayh
??????
Cannon
YNYNYY
Baker
NYYNYY
McGee
??????
Bayh
??
Cannon
YY
Beker
NY
McGee
??
Hartke
??????
Lexelt
YNYY??
Brock
Hartke
??
NNYNNY
Hansen
YNYNNY
Laxalt
NY
Brock
NY
Hansen
NY
Democrats
Republicans
"Buckley elected as Conservative
**Byrd elected as independent
Democrats
Republicans
"Buckley elected as Conservative
**Byrd elected as independent.
561. HR 14238. Legislative Appropriations, Fiscal 1977. Judg-
564. HR 14238. Legislative Appropriations, Fiscal 1977. Scott
ment of the Senate that the Hollings (D S.C.) amendment to
(R Va.) amendment to provide that members of Congress and the
eliminate the so-called 1 per cent "kicker" raise for federal retirees
Vice President could return any portion of their salaries to the
was germane. Amendment ruled germane 60-20: R 22-12; D 38-8
federal Treasury. Rejected 26-49: R 12-21; D 14-28 (ND 11-15; SD
(ND 23-6; SD 15-2), Sept. 8, 1976. (Story, p. 2492)
13), Sept. 8, 1976. (Story, p. 2492)
567. S Con Res 109. Fiscal 1977 Budget Levels. Adoption of
the resolution to set binding fiscal 1977 budget levels of revenues of
562. HR 14238. Legislative Appropriations, Fiscal 1977.
$362-billion, budget authority of 147.5-billion, outlays of $412.8-
Stevens (R Alaska) motion to table, and thus to kill, the Hollings
565. HR 14238. Legislative Appropriations, Fiscal 1977.
billion and a deficit of $50.8-billion. Adopted 55-23: R 14-18; D 41-5
(D S.C.) amendment to eliminate the 1 per cent "kicker" raise for
Stevens (R Alaska) amendment to allow salary increases
(ND 27-3; SD 14-2), Sept. 9, 1976. (Story, p. 2455)
federal retirees. Motion to table rejected 11-68: R 9-25; D 2-43 (ND
recommended by the President and approved by Congress as a
2-26; SD 0-17), Sept. 8, 1976. (The Hollings (D S.C.) amendment
result of a recommendation of the so-called quadrennial commis-
568. S 522. Indian Health Care. Jackson (D Wash.) motion that
was subsequently adopted by voice vote.) (Story, p. 2492)
sion to take effect. Adopted 41-28: 15-15; D 26-13 (ND SD 7-
the Senate recede from its amendment and concur in the House
9), Sept. 8, 1976. (Story, p. 2492)
version of the bill to improve federal health programs for Indians
563. HR 14238. Legislative Appropriations, Fiscal 1977. Taft
and Alaskan natives with a further amendment to increase funding
(R Ohio) motion to table, and thus kill, the Gravel (D Alaska)
authorized in fiscal 1978 for health services to $10-million, from $5-
amendment to provide that the freeze on congressional salaries
566. HR 14238. Legislative Appropriations, Fiscal 1977.
million. Agreed to 78-0: R 31-0; D 47-0 (ND 30-0; SD 17-0), Sept. 9,
would not take effect until after Congress had had a chance to con-
Passage of the bill to appropriate $971,141,285 for fiscal 1977 for the
1976.
sider recommendations of the so-called quadrennial commission for
operations of the legislative branch, the Library of Congress and
pay raises expected to be presented in January 1977. Motion to
related agencies controlled by Congress. Passed 63-5: R 27-3; 36-2
table agreed to 65-13: R 25-9; D 40-4 (ND 25-3; SD 15-1), Sept. 8,
(ND 21-2; SD 15-0), Sept. 8, 1976. The President had requested
1976. (Story, p. 2492)
$992,290,765 for fiscal 1977. (Story, p. 2492)
PAGE 2488-Sept. 11, 1976
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC.
Reproduction prohibited in whole in part except by editorial clients
Reproduction prohibited in whole or in part except by editorial clients
Sept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2489
CQ House Votes 528-535
Corresponding to Congressional Record Votes 696, 697, 698, 699, 700, 701, 702, 704
KEY
532
532
========
Y Voted for (yea)
Paired for
5 Armstrong
NNYYYNYY
KANSAS
Randall
NYYYNNY?
Martin
N?YYYNYY
Jones
NNYYNNYY
Sebelius
5 Bolling
YYNYNYYY
10 Broyhill
NNYYYNYY
Ford
t Announced for
CONNECTICUT
YYNYNYYY
Keys
YYNYNYYY
6 Vacancy
11 Taylor
NYYYNYYY
TEXAS
N Voted against (nay)
Cotter
YYNYNYYY
Winn
NYYYYNYY
7 Taylor
NNYYYNYY
NORTH DAKOTA
Hall
?7Y7YNYY
X Paired against
Dodd
YYNYNYYY
4 Shriver
NYYYNNYY
8 Ichord
NYYYYNYY
AL Andrews
NYYYYNY?
Wilson
NYYYNYYY
Announced against.
3 Giaimo
NNY?YNYY
9 Hungate
NYYYNYYY
OHIO
Collins
NNYYYNYY
P Voted "present
4 McKinney
NYNYNNYY
5 Skubitz
YYNYNNYY
KENTUCKY
10 Burlison
NYYYNYYY
1 Gradison
NYNYNNYY
Roberts
NYYYYYYY
Voted "present" to avoid
5 Sarasin
YYNYNYNY
Hubbard
NYYYYNYY
MONTANA
2 Clancy
77/YYNYY
Steelman
X7X7777?
possible conflict of interest
6 Moffett
2 Natcher
NYYYNYYY
Baucus
NYNYNYYY
Whalen
YYNYNYYY
6 Teague
X77NYYY
Did not vote or otherwise
DELAWARE
3 Mazzol
NYNYNYYY
Melcher
????????
Guyer
NNYYYNYY
Archer
NNYYYNYY
make position known
AL du Pont
TXYNNY
Snyder
NYYYYNYY
NEBRASKA
Latta
NYYYYNYY
8 Eckhardt
YYNYNYYY
528. HR 10498. Clean Air Act Amendments. Maquire (D N.J.)
FLORIDA
YNYYNNYY
1 Thone
NYNYYNYY
6 Harsha
NNYYYNYY
9 Brooks
NYYYNYYY
Sikes
NNYYNNYY
5 Carter
amendment to delete the "Class III" nondegradation category from
NYNYNYYY
6 Breckinridge
NYYYNYYY
2 McCollister
77777777
7 Brown
X7YYNYY
10 Pickle
NYYYNYYY
2 Fuqua
7 Perkins
NYNYNYYY
3 Smith
NYNYYNYY
8 Kindness
NNYYYNYY
the bill, thus requiring more stringent protection of air in areas
11 Poage
NYYYNYYY
3 Bennett
NYYYYYYY
4 Chappeli
NYYYYNYY
LOUISIANA
NEVADA
9 Ashley
NYNYNYYY
12 Wright
NYYYNYYY
where it had not deteriorated to the minimum air quality levels re-
Hebert
X7N??YY
AL Santini
NYYYNYYY
10 Miller
NYYYYNYY
13
Hightower
NYYYNYYY
5 Kelly
NNYYYNYY
quired by national standards. Rejected 107-247: R 18-98; D 89-149
Boggs
NYNYNYYY
NEW HAMPSHIRE
11 Stanton
NYYYNNYY
14 Young
NYY???7?
6 Young
NNYYYNYY
NNYYYNYY
D'Amours
12 Devine
NNYYYNYY
15 de Garza
NYYY?YYY
(ND 79-80; SD 10-69), Sept. 8, 1976. (Story, p. 2457)
Gibbons
YYNYNYYY
3 Treen
4 Waggonner
NNYYNNYY
ALABAMA
Haley
PY/YYYYY
2 Cleveland
YYNYNNYY
13 Mosher
YYNYNYNY
16 White
NYYYNYYY
5 Passman
7YY?YY
529. HR 10498. Clean Air Act Amendments. Rogers (D Fla.)
NYYYYNYY
Frey
NYYYYNYY
NEW JERSEY
14 Seiberling
YYNYNYNY
17 Burleson
NYYYNYYY
1 Edwards
6 Moore
NYYYYNYY
Florio
NYNYNYYY
15 Wylle
X77?W???
18 Jordan
NYNYNYYY
2 Dickinson
NNYYYNNY
10 Bafalls
000YYNYY
amendment to establish a National Commission on Air Quality to
Breaux
NYYYNYY
NYNYNYYY
2 Hughes
NYNYNNYY
16 Regula
NYYYYNYY
19 Mahon
NYYYNYYY
3 Nichols
NYYYYYYY
11 Rogers
Long
NYYYNYYY
3 Howard
?X7X???
17 Ashbrook
X?YYNYY
20 Gonzalez
YYYYNNYY
review implementation of the act. Adopted 301-57: R 66-48; 235-9
Bevill
N?YYYYYY
12 Burke
7?-YYNYY
YYNY???Y
MAINE
4 Thompson
YYNYNYX?
18 Vacancy
21 Krueger
NYYYNYYY
(ND 167-0; SD 68-9), Sept. 8, 1976. (Story, p. 2457)
5 Jones
NYYYNY?Y
13 Lehman
Emery
NYNYNYYY
5 Fenwick
YYNYNYYY
19 Carney
YYNYNYYY
22 Paul
NNYYYNY?
6 Buchanan
NYYYYNYY
14 Pepper
YYNYNYYY
2 Cohen
NYNYNYYY
6 Forsythe
NYNYNNNY
20 Stanton
77777777
23 Kazen
NYYYNYYY
7 Flowers
NYYYNYYY
15 Fascell
NYNYNYYY
MARYLAND
Maguire
YYNYNYNY
530. HR 10498. Clean Air Act Amendments. Chappell (D Fla.)
21 Stokes
YYYYNYNY
24 Milford
? Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
ALASKA
GEORGIA
Bauman
NNYYYNYY
NYNYNYYY
22 Vanik
YYNYNYNY
UTAH
amendment to delete from the bill provisions to require protection
AL Young
X???
Ginn
NYYYYYY Y
47777777
NYYYYYYY
2 Long
NYNYNYYY
Helstoski
23 Motti
YYNYYNYY
McKay
NYNYNYYY
of pristine air (nondegradation) and direct the National Commis-
ARIZONA
Mathis
NYYYYNYY
Sarbanes
YYNYNYY?
10 Rodino
YYNYNYYY
OKLAHOMA
Howe
sion on Air Quality to conduct a one-year study of the issue. Re-
Rhodes
NYYYNNYY
Brinkley
NYNYYYYY
Holt
NNYYYNYY
11 Minish
YYNYNYYY
1 Jones
NYYYYYYY
VERMONT
2 Udall
YYNYNYYY
Levitas
5 Spellman
WYNYNYYY
12 Rinaldo
NYNYNYYY
2 Risenhoover
NYYYYYYY
AL Jeffords
NYNYNNYY
jected 156-199: R 77-38; D 79-161 (ND 20-142; SD 59-19), Sept. 8,
3 Steiger
Young
???YNY??
NNYYYNYY
6 Byron
NYYYYNYY
13 Meyner
YYNYNYYY
3 Albert
VIRGINIA
1976. (Story, p. 2457)
Conlan
Flynt
YYNYNYNY
YYNYNYYY
Steed
NYYYNYY?
1 Downing
NYYYNYYY
McDonald
NNYYYNYY
Mitchell
14 Daniels
ARKANSAS
8 Gude
YYNYNYY?
15 Patten
NYNYNYYY
Jarman
NYYYYYYY
2 Whitehurst
NNYYYNYY
Alexander
???YYYYY
8 Stuckey
X77YNYY
531. H Res 1526. Privilege of the House Floor. Adoption of the
N?YYNYYY
MASSACHUSETTS
NEW MEXICO
6 English
NYYYYYYY
3 Satterfield
NNYYYNYY
2 Mills
NYWYNYYY
9 Landrum
1 Conte
YYNYNYYY
1 Lujan
X?X?7??
OREGON
Daniel
NNYYYNYY
resolution to request an investigation by the House Rules Com-
3 Hammerschmidt
NNYYYNYY
10 Stephens
X?
2 Boland
NYNYNYYY
2 Runnels
AuCoin
NYN???7?
Daniel
NNYYYNYY
mittee concerning certain abuses of privileges regarding House floor
4 Thornton
NYYYNYYY
HAWAII
3 Early
YYNYNYNY
NEW YORK
2 Uliman
NYYY?YYY
6 Butler
NNYYYNY?
CALIFORNIA
Matsunaga
NYYYNYYY
proceedings by former House members. Adopted 371-1: R 122-0; D
Drinan
YYNYNYNY
Pike
NYNYNYYY
3 Duncan
7 Robinson
NNYYYNYY
Johnson
NYNYNYYY
Mink
5 Tsongas
YYNYNYNY
Downey
YYNYNYYY
Weaver
????????
8 Harris
YYNYNYYY
249-1 (ND 167-0; SD 82-1), Sept. 9, 1976.
2 Clausen
????????
IDAHO
YY?YNYYY
Symms
X2V3772
6 Harrington
YY?YNNNP
Ambro
YYNYNYYY
PENNSYLVANIA
9 Wampler
NNYYYNYY
Moss
7 Vacancy
Lent
NYNYNNYY
1 Vacancy
10 Fisher
YYNYNNYY
Leggett
NYNYNYYY
2 Hansen, G.
X7V3V777
532. H Con Res 728. Fiscal 1977 Budget Levels. Rousselot (R
8 O'Neill
YYNYNYY?
Wydler
YNNYNNYY
2 Nix
NYNYNYYY
WASHINGTON
Burton.
YYNYNNNY
ILLINOIS
YYNYNYYY
YYNYNYYY
3 Green
77777777
1 Pritchard
NYNYNNYY
Calif.) substitute amendment to H Con Res 728 (see vote 533, below)
YYNYNYN?
9 Moakley
Wolft
6 Burton. P
YYNYNY?
Metcalfe
X?X?X???
10 Heckler
YYN?NYYY
7 Addabbo
4?X?X7??
4 Eilberg
?YNYNYYY
2 Meeds
NYNYNYYY
to produce a balanced budget by setting revenues and outlays for
Miller
NYNYNYNY
2 Murphy
YYNYX???
11 Burke
YYNYNYYY
8 Rosenthal
47XYNYNY
5 Schulze
NNYYYNYY
3 Bonker
NYNYNYYY
fiscal 1977 at $362.5-billion. Rejected 111-264: R 76-49; D 35-215
Dellums
YYNYNNNY
3 Russo
NNNYYNYY
12 Studds
YYNYNYNY
9 Delaney
YYNYNYYY
6 Yatron
NYNYNYYY
4 McCormack
NYYYNYYY
9 Stark
YYNYNYNY
4 Derwinski
(ND 6-163; SD 29-52), Sept. 9, 1976. (Story, p. 2455)
NYNYNYY?
MICHIGAN
10 Biagg
YYNYNYY?
7 Edgar
YYNYNYYY
5 Foley
?YYYNY YY
10 Edwards
VYNYNYNY
Fary
X?YYNYY
Conyers
YY?YNNNY
Scheuer
YYNYNYYY
8 Blester
YYNYNNYY
6 Hicks
NYYYNYYY
11 Ryan
Hyde
NYNYNY??
Esch
7777?NY?
12 Chisholm
?X?X???
9 Shuster
NNYYNNYY
Adams
NYNYNYYY
533. H Con Res 728. Fiscal 1977 Budget Levels. Adoption of
12 McCloskey
YYNYNNYY
Collins
NYNYNYY?
3 Brown
???YYNYY
13 Solarz
WYNYNYNY
10 McDade
NYNYNYYY
WEST VIRGINIA
13 Mineta
NYNYNYYY
8 Rostenkowski
the resolution to set binding fiscal 1977 budget levels of revenues of
4 Hutchinson
NNYYYNYY
?YNYNYYN
14 Richmond
YYNYNYNY
11 Flood
NYNYNYYY
1 Mollohan
NYYYN???
14 McFall
NYNYNYYY
9 Yates
YYNYNYY?
5 Vander Veen
????NYYY
15 Zeferetti
4?X?X???
12 Murtha
NYNYNYYY
2 Staggers
NYNYNYYY
$362.5-billion, budget authority of $452.6-billion, outlays of $413.2-
15 Sisk
42222222
10 Mikva
NYNYNYYY
YYNYNYNY
YNNYNNYY
NYYYNYYY
billion and a deficit to $50.7-billion. Adopted 227-151: R 12-113; D
NYNYYNYY
NYNYNYY?
6 Carr
16 Holtzman
13 Coughlin
3 Slack
16 Talcott
11 Annunzio
YYNYNYYY
Riegle
Y7777YY
NNYYYNY?
17 Murphy
NYXYNYYY
14 Moorhead
YYNYNYYY
4 Hechler
YYNYNYNY
17 Krebs
12 Crane
215-38 (ND 154-16; SD 61-22), Sept. 9, 1976. (Story, p. 2455)
NYYYYNYY
8 Traxler
NYNYNY?Y
Koch
YYNYNYNY
15 Rooney
NYNYNYYY
WISCONSIN
18 Ketchum
NNYYYNY?1
13 McClory
NYYYNNYY
Vander Jagt
NYNYYNYY
19 Rangel
YYXYNY??
16 Eshleman
???YYNYY
Aspin
27727777
19 Lagomarsino
NYNYYNYY
14 Erienborn
10 Cederberg
NNYYNNYY
NYNYNYY?
20 Abzug
7X?X???
17 Schneebell
NNYYYNYY
2 Kastenmeier
YYNYNNNY
534. HR 14262. Defense Department Appropriations, Fiscal
20 Goldwater
X????NYY
15
NYYYNNY?
3 Baldus
NYYYNYNY
47X7X74?
YNNYNNYY
11 Ruppe
21 Badillo
18 Heinz
1977. Adoption of the conference report on the bill to appropriate
21 Corman
16 Anderson
NYYYYNYY
12 Hara
NYNYNYYY
22 Bingham
YYNYNYNY
19 Goodling.
W.
NNYYYNYY
4 Zablocki
NYNYNYYY
22 Moorhead
NYYYYNYY
17 O'Brien
$104,343,835,000 for operations and programs of the Department of
NNYYYNYY
13 Diggs
?N?NYY?
23 Peyser
20 Gaydos
?YNYNYYY
Reuss
NYNYNYNY
23 Rees
YY??NYNY
18 Michel
Nedzi
NYNYNYYY
NYYYNNYY
24 Ottinger
YYNYNNNY
21 Dent
NYNYNYYY
Steiger
NYYYNNYY
Defense for fiscal year 1977. Adopted 323-45: R 121-3; D 202-42 (ND
24 Waxman
YYNYNYYY
19 Rallsback
15 Ford
NYNYNYYY
WYNYNYNY
20 Findley
NYYYYNYY
25 Fish
YYNYNNYY
22 Morgan
NYNYNYY?
Obey
YYNYNYNY
120-42; SD 82-0), Sept. 9, 1976. The President had requested
25 Roybal
NYN?NYYY
YYNYNNYY
NYYYNNYY
16 Dingell
26 Gliman
23 Johnson
NYYYYNYY
Cornell
NYNYNYNN
26 Rousselot
NNYYYNY?
21 Madigan
$107,936,172,000. (Story, p. 2459)
17 Brodhead
77777727
27 McHugh
NYNYNYYY
27 Bell
NYNYN???
22 Shipley
NYYYNYYY
24 Vigorito
NYNYNYYY
Kasten
NYNYYNYY
28 Burke
YYNYNYNY
23 Price
NYNYNYYY
18 Blanchard
YYNYNYYY
28 Stratton
NYYYNYYY
25 Myers
YNNYNNYY
WYOMING
29 Hawkins
YYNYNYYY
19 Broomfield
YYYYYNYY
29 Pattison
YYNYNYYY
RHODE ISLAND
AL Roncalio
NYNYNYYY
535. HR 14262. Defense Department Appropriations, Fiscal
YYNYNYNY
24 Simon
MINNESOTA
30 McEwen
NNYYNNYY
St Germain
1977. Mahon (D Texas) motion to concur in the Senate amendment
30 Danielson
NYNYNYYY
INDIANA
1 Quie
NYNYNNYY
31 Mitchell
NYNYN???
Beard
YYNYNYYY
NYNYNY??
31 Wilson
YYNYNYYY
Madden
2 Hagedorn
NNYYYNYY
32 Hanley
NYNYNYYY
to the bill that would waive the prohibition on CHAMPUS
32 Anderson
YYNYYYYY
NYNYNNYY
SOUTH CAROLINA
Fithian
Frenzel
NYYYNNYY
33 Waish
X?X?????
33 Clawson
Brademas
YYNYNYY?
Davis
NYNYNYYY
payments for counseling services in cases where the counseling had
NNY?
4 Karth
34 Horton
??X?NYYY
Spence
NYYYYNYY
been recommended by a physician. Motion agreed to 342-4: R 115-
34 Hannaford
NYNYNYYY
Roush
YYNYNYYY
Fraser
YYNYNYYY
35 Coneble
NNYYNNYY
Derrick
NYNYNYYY
35 Lloyd
YYNYNYYY
Hillis
N??YNNYY
0; D 227-4 (ND 146-4; SD 81-0), Sept. 9, 1976. (Story, p. 2459)
NYYYYNYY
Nolan
YYN?????
36 LaFalce
NYYYNYYY
Mann
NYYYYNY?
36 Brown
YYNYNYNY
Evans
Bergland
NYNYNY??
37 Nowak
NYNYNYYY
Holland
NYYYYYY?
37 Pettis
NYNYNNYY
Myers
NYYYYNYY
Oberstar
NYNYNYNY
38 Kemp
NYYYYNYY
6 Jenrette
NYYYNYYY
38 Patterson
YYNYNYYY
8 Hayes
YYNYNYYY
MISSISSIPPI
39
Lundine
???YNNYY
SOUTH DAKOTA
39 Wiggins
Hamilton
NYNYNYYY
Whitten
NYYYNYYY
NORTH CAROLINA
Pressler
NYNYNNYY
40 Hinshaw
10 Sharp
YYNYNYYY
Bowen
NYYYYN?Y
NYNYNNYY
Jones
NYYYNYYY
Abdnor
NYYYNNYY
41 Wilson
11 Jacobs
YYNYNYYY
Montgomery
NNYYYNYY
2 Fountain
NYYYNNYY
TENNESSEE
42 Van Deerlin
IOWA
Cochran
NYYYYNYY
3 Henderson
Y7YYYYY
Quillen
NNYYYNYY
43 Burgener
NYYYYN??
Mezvinsky
NYNYNYNY
Lott
NYYYYNYY
NYYYNNYY
NNYYYNYY
COLORADO
Blouin
NYNYNYNY
4 Andrews
Duncan
MISSOURI
5 Neal
NYYYNYYY
Schroeder
YYNYYNYY
Grassley
NNYYYNYY
Lloyd
NNYYYNYY
Clay
YYYYNYNY
YYNYNYYY Smith
6 Preyer
NYNYNYYY
Evins
NYYY?YY?
Wirth
NYNYNYYY
2 Symington
NYNYNYYY
7 Rose
NYNYNYYY
Allen
YYNYNNYY
3 Evans
NYNYNYYY
Harkin
NYNYNYNY
3 Sullivan
??7YNYYN
8 Hefner
NYYYNYYY
6 Beard
NNYYYNYY
4 Johnson
NNYYYNYY
Bedell
NYNYNYNN
Democrats
Republicans
Democrats
Republicans
PAGE 2490-Sept. 11, 1976
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC.
Reproduction prohibited whole or part except by editorial clients
Reproduction prohibited whole or except by editorial clients
Sept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2491
Inside Congress 2
The number of aides on the Hill grew by 44 per cent
Congressional Budget Office
of
Inside Congress
between 1970 and 1976, the report said, while the size of the
total federal work force grew by only 12 per cent during the
The committee recommended $9,319,200 for the new
same period.
Congressional Budget Office, an amount equal to the
House-passed figure. This amount was requested by Budget
Committee Report
Office Director Alice Rivlin and would allow the CBO to add
Senate Votes To Reject
15 new positions, bringing its total staff to 208.
Members Refusing '75 Pay Raise
The Senate Appropriations Committee reported HR
Congressional Pay Raise
14238 (S Rept 94-1201) Sept. 3 with appropriations totaling
Architect of the Capitol
$1,008,850,285 for fiscal 1977. The amount was $16,559,520
The following members of Congress have returned
An election-minded Senate voted Sept. 8 to deny a
higher than the budget request and $75,801,882 over the
The committee proposed an appropriation of $124,479,-
all or part of their 1975 cost-of-living pay increase as of
cost-of-living pay raise for members of Congress this year, to
amount appropriated for fiscal 1976.
500 for fiscal 1977 for the Architect of the Capitol, an
Sept. 1, according to the Treasury Department's
The committee's recommendation was $228,539,335
amount that was $86,841,500 above the House-passed
scrap plans for a new $35-million Senate office building, and
Bureau of Government Financial Operations. The pay
more than the House had approved, with most of the in-
amount and $22,854,800 above the budget.
to cut in half the number of operators on automatic
raise amounted to a $2,100 annual salary increase for
crease devoted to expenses of the Senate, which by custom
Two items in this section that promised to be con-
elevators in the Capitol and Senate office buildings.
most members of Congress. (Earlier box, Weekly
troversial were the committee's recommendation of $25-
These three actions were taken as the Senate cut $37.7-
are not considered by the House.
Report p. 884)
million for restoration of the West Front of the Capitol and
million from the fiscal 1977 legislative appropriations bill
REPRESENTATIVES
Senate Operations
$35.5-million for acquisition of additional Senate office
(HR 14238) approved by the Appropriations Committee.
space.
As passed by the Senate 63-5, the measure
L.A. (Skip) Bafalis (R Fla.)
$ 958.60
The committee recommended $135,988,875 for opera-
In recommending restoration of the West Front, the
appropriated $971,141,285 to run the legislative branch dur-
Alphonzo Bell (R Calif.)
958.60
tion of the Senate during fiscal 1977, an amount equal to the
committee pointed out that "the central West Front of the
ing fiscal 1977. (Vote 566, p. 2488)
Charles E. Bennett (D Fla.)
766.88
budget request and an increase of $9,914,230 over the 1976
Capitol has not been painted since 1967 and is a shameful
In another major cost saving action, the Senate voted to
Bob Carr (D Mich)
1,120.00
appropriation. The bulk of the increase was earmarked for
disgrace to the millions of Bicentennial visitors
end the system of paying a 1 per cent bonus to federal
Jack Edwards (R Ala.)
900.00
salary boosts for senators and Senate employees.
retirees every time they received a cost-of-living increase in
*Charles E. Grassley (R Iowa)
1,400.00
Senators' Compensation. The committee
Library of Congress
their pensions.
Tom Harkin (D Iowa)
1,575.00
recommended $5,068,630 for salaries and mileage and ex-
The Senate voted to scrap entirely the existing law,
David N. Henderson (D N.C.)
1,727.00
pense allowances for senators, the Vice President and the
The committee recommended an appropriation of
which provided for the paying of the bonus every time the
Henry J. Hyde (R Ill.)
835.47
Senate leadership.
$139,260,000 for the Library of Congress, an increase of
cost of living rose by 3 per cent over three consecutive
Andy Jacobs Jr. (D Ind.)
858.48
Senate Employees. For salaries of employees of the
$3,844,900 over the House-passed amount.
months.
William M. Ketchum (R Calif.)
575.22
Senate and of aides to individual senators, the committee
The bulk of the increase was earmarked for additional
Instead, it voted for a system that would adjust the
Edward Mezvinsky (D Iowa)
1,750.00
recommended an appropriation of $89,613,110. The com-
personnel, including 31 more jobs than the House had
pensions automatically every six months without the so-
George Miller (D Calif.)
862.74
mittee recommended no changes in the size of Senate staffs,
allowed for the library itself and 25 positions not funded by
called 1 per cent kicker.
Charles A. Mosher (R Ohio)
176.75
but did provide funds for seven new positions in the office of
the House for the Copyright Office.
But the desire to cut costs did not dominate all the ac-
George M. O'Brien (R III.)
958.61
the Secretary of the Senate, 38 new jobs in the Sergeant at
All 44 positions requested by the Congressional
tion on the bill. The Senate crackdown on pay raises, for ex-
Phil Sharp (D Ind.)
1,575.00
Arms and Doorkeeper's offices and an adjustment in the
Research Service of the library were approved. The House
ample, did not go as far as the House.
ranks of Capitol policemen to meet salary raises of local,
had approved 12 new positions.
Grossley told Congressional Quorterly he personally presented o check to Treasury
The House had voted to ban all pay raises for all top
Secretary William E. Simon for on additional a of $525 on Dec. 13, 1975. The amount
District of Columbia, police forces.
level federal officials-including judges and high ranking
was not recorded by the Bureau of Government Financial Operations.
Legislative Counsel. The committee recommended
Floor Action
executive branch bureaucrats as well as congressmen-dur-
Some members of the House channeled their
$629,700 for the office of Legislative Counsel of the Senate,
ing fiscal 1977.
payments through the office of the clerk of the House.
an amount equal to the budget estimate.
Pay Raises. On the pay raise controversy, the Senate
The Senate killed only the automatic pay raise for
The report of the clerk of the House through Dec. 31,
Contingent Expenses. The committee recommended
Sept. 7 adopted a compromise position that was between
members of Congress scheduled to take effect in October. Its
1975, listed the following members as having made gifts
an appropriation of $40,677,435 for contingent expenses of
the House decision to ban pay raises for all top-level federal
version permitted the raise for other federal employees to
of part of their salaries to the Treasury:
the Senate in fiscal 1977, including $21,854,485 for special
officials, including members of Congress, for fiscal 1977, and
take effect and reserved judgment on the expected
John B. Breaux (D La.)
$194.80
investigations. The total amount was the same as the
the Senate committee-backed proposal to allow the raises to
recommendation for pay hikes for members and other of-
Norman E. D'Amours (D N.H.)
194.80
budget estimate.
take effect for all federal employees.
ficials expected to be presented to Congress by the so-called
Christopher J. Dodd (D Conn.)
97.40
Joint Items
The Senate adopted by voice vote an amendment spon-
quadrennial commission in January 1977.
Millicent Fenwick (R N.J.)
350.00
sored by Robert Taft Jr. (R Ohio) to allow the October cost-
In an action likely to re-ignite a long smouldering dis-
Louis Frey Jr. (R Fla.)
192.14
The committee proposed a $55,488,860 appropriation
of-living increase, estimated at approximately 5 per cent, to
agreement with the House, the Senate endorsed a Senate
Ken Hechler (D W.Va.)
350.00
for fiscal 1977 to pay for the six joint committees and other
take effect for all federal employees except members of
Appropriations Committee proposal to spend $25-million to
Jack F. Kemp (R N.Y.)
95.86
activities shared with the House. The amount was $220,060
Congress. The Taft language also allowed any other pro-
renovate the West Front of the Capitol without changing its
Martha Keys (D Kan.)
135.92
more than the House-passed figure and $71,400 below the
posed pay increases during fiscal 1977 to take effect.
appearance or location. The House in the past has favored
*Jerry Litton (D Mo.)
287.58
budget estimate.
Following adoption of the Taft amendment, a motion to
an extension rather than a renovation.
Andrew Maguire (D N.J.)
191.72
The largest single item in this section was a $46,904,000
reconsider the vote, supported by senators favoring the in-
In a related development the day after the Senate
Henry J. Nowak (D N.Y.)
191.72
recommendation for official mail costs, specifically to reim-
crease, was tabled handily, 55-19. (Vote 555, p. 2487)
passed its bill, Tax Foundation Inc., a non-profit organiza-
*Died Aug. 3
burse the U.S. Postal Service for official mail sent by
Backers of the Taft amendment argued that it was un-
tion based in New York, released a study showing that
SENATORS
members and Senate employees. This was $803,000 above
fair to penalize other government workers, especially judges,
appropriations for the legislative branch in fiscal 1976 were
the fiscal 1976 appropriation.
simply because Congress, in an election year, was unwilling
nearly triple the fiscal 1970 level.
Lloyd Bentsen (D Texas)
1,120.00
to vote a raise for itself.
According to the study, the single most important
Harry F. Byrd Jr. (Ind Va.)
289.41
Office of Technology Assessment
"A pay raise for other federal employees is fair and
reason for the increase was congressional salaries, both the
Robert C. Byrd (D W.Va.)
960.88
necessary to keep first class people in government," Taft
large pay raises granted in recent years and those needed to
Lawton Chiles (D Fla.)
1,750.00
The committee recommended an appropriation of $8-
said. "However, I point out that there seems to be no lack of
pay additional staff members.
John A. Durkin (D N.H.)
289.00
million for the the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA),
candidates for the jobs we hold in the House and Senate."
"Congressional staff salaries," the report said, "are
Jennings Randolph (D W.Va.)
1,750.00
an amount $1,422,000 above the House-passed total. The in-
But opponents of the Taft amendment said that what
high by almost any standard," averaging $15,000 a year in
Richard (Dick) Stone (D Fla.)
1,750.00
crease, according to the committee, was needed to provide
was fair for other employees should be fair for members of
the Senate and $14,000 a year in the House, as against the
Robert Taft Jr. (R Ohio)
1,610.00
fully for "the high priority oceans and energy assessment
Congress as well. "It seems to me that if we want the best
national per capita average salary of $5,000 a year.
programs."
caliber of people representing us in Congress," said William
PAGE 2492-Sept. 11, 1976
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
COPYRIGHT 1976 QUARTERLY INC
Reproduction prohibited whole or except by editorial clients.
Reproduction prohibited whole part except by editorial clients
Sept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2493
Inside Congress 4
Inside Congress 3
House-Passed
Senate-Passed
Chairman John J. Flynt Jr. (D Ga.) said it was the
Lloyd Scott (R Va.), "they should be paid comparable pay. I
But John C. Culver (D Iowa), in a long and colorful
Item
denunciation of the building, said the needs of the Senate
Appropriation
Appropriation
committee's feeling that Hinshaw should not be expelled
think that we are letting politics decide this question."
since his conviction involved actions taken before his elec-
could be met by reallocation of existing space.
Copyright Royalty
Politics did appear to play a role in the outcome of the
Commission
Culver denounced the 400 North Capitol Street
268,000
tion to the House and because the conviction itself was still
issue. Of those voting to reconsider the Taft amendment,
Government Printing Office
140,827,400
140,827,400
under appeal. The two members voting in favor of the
only one, Henry M. Jackson (D Wash.), was facing re-
building as a "white elephant," a "mausoleum," and a
General Accounting Office
150,580,000
150,580,000
resolution were Republicans Floyd Spence (S.C.) and
election in 1976.
"boilerplate, speculative building."
Cost Accounting Standards
Albert H. Quie (Minn.). Wiggins was not a member of the
In the key vote on the issue, the Senate then rejected,
Hollings called Culver's statements "malarkey," but in
Board
1,700,000
1,700,000
committee.
25-46, the Senate committee-sponsored amendment that
the end the Senate decided, on a vote of 28-53, that the com-
Total
$780,310,950
$971,141,285
had the effect of granting the pay increase for congressmen
mittee amendment was not germane to the bill, in effect
as well. Again, Jackson was the only senator up for re-
killing it. Majorities of both parties voted against it: R 10-
*These items not considered by the House.
election to vote for the pay hike. (Vote 556, p. 2487)
24; D 18-29. (Vote 560, p. 2487)
-By Thomas P. Southwick
There remained some confusion about whether the
House-passed language on the pay issue was retroactive,
One Per Cent Kicker
Weekly Report
eliminating the cost-of-living raise given members in 1975.
With enactment in 1969 of a law (PL 91-93) making
Sentenced for Speeding:
Therefore, without objection, the Senate adopted an
modifications in the federal pension system, government
amendment by Ernest F. Hollings (D S.C.) specifying that
Chairman of the Board
Editor and President
retirees became eligible to receive a bonus in their pensions
salaries of members would be frozen at the level in effect as
Horton Released From Jail
Nelson Poynter
Eugene Patterson
every time the cost of living went up by 3 per cent over the
of Sept. 30, 1976.
previous base period for three consecutive months. In such
Executive Editor
General Manager
On Sept. 8 the Senate adopted another amendment
situations, they became eligible for an extra 1 per cent
Rep. Frank Horton (R N.Y.) was released from Genesee
Wayne Kelley
Paul Massa
relating to the pay issue. Sponsored by Ted Stevens (R
"kicker" payment.
County Jail in Batavia, N.Y., Sept. 7 after serving less than
Alaska), it provided that the pay freeze would not apply to
The idea behind the kicker was to make up for the delay
a week of an 11-day sentence for speeding. Officials said
EDITORIAL DEPARTMENT
recommendations by the so-called quadrennial commission
between the time the cost of living began to rise and the
Horton's early release was for good behavior.
Peter A. Harkness (Managing Editor)
that were expected to be made in January 1977.
time it rose high enough to trigger a raise in pensions.
Horton had been arrested for speeding and drunken
Mercer Cross (Assistant to Executive Editor)
The amendment to reserve judgment on this expected
However, because the kicker was then included in the
driving on the New York State Thruway near Batavia July
John L. Maore (Asst. Managing Editor)
pay hike was adopted on a vote of 41-28. (Vote 565, p. 2488)
base for the next raise, it had a multiplier effect, which some
Michael D. Wormser (Asst. Managing Editor)
18. (Earlier story, Weekly Report p. 2031)
Alan Ehrenhalt (Political Editor)
The Senate earlier the same day had rejected a related
critics charged went far beyond its intent.
After pleading guilty to the charges before Justice
amendment, sponsored by Mike Gravel (D Alaska), that
Hollings said the effect of the kicker had been to in-
Frederick Muskopf, Horton was sentenced Aug. 31 to serve
News Editors
RESEARCH DEPARTMENT
would have delayed the effect of the pay raise freeze until
crease federal annuities by 72 per cent, between 1969 and
11 days in jail. Muskopf also ordered Horton to pay a fine of
Mary Cohn
Robert E. Cuthriell (Director)
after consideration of the quadrennial commission's report.
1975, while the cost of living went up only 56 per cent. This
$200-$100 each for the two charges. Horton's driver's
Caralyn Mathiasen
Wayne Walker (Asst. Director)
The Gravel amendment was tabled, and thus killed, by a
resulted in an additional loss to the government of $1.6-
licence also was revoked.
Peg O'Hara
Edno Frazier (Librarian)
Diane Huffman (Indexer)
65-13 vote. (Vote 563, p. 2488)
billion over the seven-year period.
At a news conference following his release, Horton said
James R. Berger
The Senate also rejected, 26-49, an amendment spon-
Earlier in the year the Senate had approved legislation
he had been resentenced by Muskopf, thus allowing him to
Harrison H. Donnelly
sored by Scott (Va.) that would have officially allowed
(HR 12438) repealing the kicker for military retirees, but
serve the jail sentence for the speeding charge while he
Reporters
Walter E. Eling
members of Congress to return to the Treasury any portion
related legislation to do the same for civilians remained
received a conditional discharge on the drunken driving
Elizabeth Bowman
Mark Gruenberg
of their salaries. (Vote 564, p. 2488)
bottled up in the Senate Post Office and Civil Service Com-
Rhodes Cook
charge. This change, said Horton, allowed him to regain his
Jerome Harris
Prudence Crewdson
mittee. (Weekly Report p. 1704)
driver's license on the condition that he attend a state driv-
Gary C. Hong
Ted Stevens (R Alaska), the ranking Republican on
Mary Eisner Eccles
Elevator Operators
ing rehabilitation school.
Susan B. Jenkins
Judy Gardner
By a vote of 51-30 Sept. 8, the Senate adopted an
that committee, objected to the Hollings amendment as an
Horton was the first sitting member of Congress to
David Loomis
Mary Link
amendment sponsored by Dewey F. Bartlett (R Okla.) to
infringement on his committee's rights. But the Senate, on
serve time in jail since Rep. Thomas J. Lane (D Mass. 1941-
Warden Moxley
Margaret Hurst Lowe
Carol Ott
reduce to 63 from 125 the number of persons operating
a vote of 60-20, ruled the amendment germane and then re-
63), who served a four-month term in 1956 for federal in-
David M. Maxfield
Bob Rankin
automatic elevators in the Capitol and the congressional of-
jected Stevens' motion to table the amendment by a vote of
come tax evasion.
Matt Pinkus
Mary Anne Rothwell
fice buildings. (Vote 557, p. 2487)
11-68. It then adopted the Hollings amendment by voice
After his release Horton said his sentence showed that
Danald Smith
David Speights
Bartlett said his amendment would save $502,262 a
vote. (Votes 561, 562, p. 2488)
in his case, justice "was administered without regard to
Thomas P. Southwick
Robert D. Wakefield Jr.
Pat Towell
year and that the reduction had been recommended by the
The Senate then went on to adopt an amendment spon-
social, economic or political position."
Elizabeth Wehr
Ted Vaden
Architect of the Capitol. He argued that to continue to pay
sored by Lawton Chiles (D Fla.) to replace the existing
James R. Wagner
BOOK DEPARTMENT
people to run automatic elevators would "make a mockery
method of computing cost-of-living pension increases with a
Elder Witt
Robert A. Diamond (Editor)
out of our desire to hold the line on government spending."
system that would adjust pensions automatically every
Patricia Ann O'Connor (Asst. Editor)
six months.
INSIDE CONGRESS NOTES
Robert E. Healy
Senate Office Building
Jeanne D. Heise
Provisions
Editorial Assistants
Mary Neumann
The committee had recommended an appropriation of
Michael L. Pleasants
David Tarr
$35.5-million for the purchase of a building at 400 North
Rep. Hinshaw Status
Lynda McNeil
Capitol Street to serve as a fourth Senate office building.
As passed by the Senate Sept. 8 and by the House Sept.
Margaret Thompsan
1, HR 14238 made appropriations for the legislative branch
The House Select Committee on Standards of Official
Laura Weiss
The building had been the subject of some controversy
for fiscal 1977 in the following amounts:
Conduct voted 10-2 Sept. 2 to reject a resolution to expel
for several years. Negotiations between the General Services
Rep. Andrew J. Hinshaw (R Calif.). Hinshaw was convicted
Proofreaders
ART DEPARTMENT
Administration and the building owners for a federal lease
Jan. 26 on two counts of bribery that stemmed from his
Eugene J. Gabler
Howard Chapman (Director)
broke down early in 1976 when the owners asked a rental
House-Passed
Senate-Passed
term as Orange County assessor before he came to
Sumie Kinoshita
Richard A. Pottern
price greater than GSA had been authorized to pay. (1975
Item
Appropriation
Appropriation
Congress.
Almanac p. 868)
Senate
$137,279,875
The resolution had been introduced June 30 by Rep.
Hollings, defending the committee position, argued
Sales Manager
Promotion Director
House of Representatives
$241,773,550
241,773,550
Charles E. Wiggins (R Calif.) after he had tried un-
Rabert C. Hur
that the building's 550,000 square feet of office space was
James V. Bullard
Joint Items
55,268,800
55,488,860
successfully to convince Hinshaw to resign. Wiggins said
needed to house additional Senate computers and to relieve
Production
Office of Technology Assessment
6,624,000
8,000,000
that despite the committee's vote he would bring the
Controller
the space squeeze in other buildings.
Cangressional Budget Office
9,319,200
9,319,200
privileged resolution to the House floor, as he was per-
Jonathan C. Angier
I. D. Fuller (Manager)
Hollings said that the existing space limitation in the
Architect of the Capitol
37,638,000
85,479,500
mitted to do under House rules. (Earlier story, Weekly
Kathleen E. Walsh (Asst. Manager)
Senate was so bad that it violated federal regulations on
Botanic Gardens
1,164,900
1,164,900
Report p. 1961)
health and safety standards for workers.
Library of Congress
135,415,100
139,260,000
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY NC
Reproduction prohibited whole or except by editorial clients
Sept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2495
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC.
PAGE 2494-Sept. 11, 1976
Reproduction prohibited whole or part except by editorial clients
CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY
of
C
CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY
Weekly Report
Weekly Report
September 11, 1976
Pages 2453-2496
Vol. XXXIV No. 37
Pages 2453-2496
Sept. 11, 1976
Economic Affairs
Supplemental Security Income Program 2477
Budget Resolution
2455
Law Enforcement and Judiciary
Congress neared final action on a budget for the
Law Enforcement Agency Authorization 2479
fiscal year beginning Oct. 1 that called for more
spending, higher taxes and about one million
Transportation/Communications
more jobs than the plan proposed by President
Communications Commission Nominees 2481
Budget
Ford eight months ago.
Coast Guard Authorization
2481
Tax Revision Conference
2456
Maritime Authorization
2482
Congress nears final action on budget
Energy and Environment
Agriculture
Late Action on Legislation
2457
Peanut Subsidies
2483
as House, Senate pass resolutions (2455)
With time running short, Congress struggled
The 95th Congress is expected to consider a
toward final action on key environmental
general farm bill including a revision of a
bills-clean air and toxic substances. And the
program that has been criticized as one of the
Rules Committee put off granting rules on two
biggest boondoggles in U.S. agriculture.
Defense Money
more measures-strip mining and synthetic fuels.
New River Bill Cleared
2458
Inside Congress
Conferees agree to record $104-billion
Legislative Branch Appropriations
2492
Foreign Policy/National Security
Horton Released from Jail
2494
appropriations for Pentagon (2459)
Defense Department Appropriations
2459
Rep. Hinshaw Status
2495
Major Weapons Funded
2460
Foreign Arms Sales Resolutions
2463
Status of Appropriations
2454
Consumer Affairs
Senate Votes (555-568)
2487
Campaign Issues
Senate Passes Modified Antitrust Bill
2464
House Votes (528-535)
2490
Candidates cannot easily avoid pitfalls
Politics
Carter and Ford-A Contrast in Styles 2465
on Social Security, welfare reform (2467)
Candidates' Travel Schedules
2465
Legislative Action
Nonvoters Poll
2466
Committee
National Issues: Welfare, Social Security .2467
Primaries
Peanut Subsidy Program (HR 12808)
2433
The second in a series of articles detailing the
differences between President Ford's and Jimmy
Floor
Results in Arizona, Florida, Connecticut;
Carter's positions on major issues likely to face
Antitrust Bill (HR 8532)
2464
the 95th Congress.
Budget Resolution (S Con Res 139)
2455
outlook in Washington, Wyoming (2470)
Primary Results
2470
FCC Nominations Approved
2481
Arizona
2470
LEAA Extension (S 2212)
2479
Florida
2471
Legislative Branch Funds (HR 14238)
2492
Georgia
2473
Supplemental Security Income (HR 8911)
2477
Peanuts
Connecticut
2473
Conference
North Dakota
2473
Primary Outlook
2474
Defense Appropriations (HR 14262)
2457
Carter's livelihood helps focus attention
Tax Revision (HR 10612)
2456
Washington
2474
Wyoming
2475
Final Action
on $163-million subsidy program (2483)
Filing Completed
2475
Coast Guard Funds (HR 11670)
2481
Day Care Centers Bill (PL 94-401)
2476
Health/Education/Welfare
Maritime Programs Funds (HR 11481)
2482
Labor-Health Appropriations Bill
2476
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC.
New River Preservation (HR 13372)
2458
Ford Signs Day Care Center Bill
2476
1414 22nd Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20037
(202) 296-6800
PAGE 2496-Sept. 11, 1976
of
Economic Affairs
Appropriations in 2nd Session, 94th Congress
Budget Conferees Approve
Con Res 109) cleared in May that set targets for spending
For fiscal year 1977, in thousands of dollars
and revenues. Since Congress had largely stayed within
those targets and the economic recovery had proceeded
AS OF SEPT. 10, 1976
$413.1-Billion Ceiling
close to expectations, there was no need to make dramatic
changes in the binding totals, the Budget Committees ex-
plained.
Budget Authority (authority to obligate funds) in this type.
Outlays (funds provided by these bills to be spent in fiscal 1977) in this type
On Fiscal 1977 Spending
Many of the adjustments in the second version were
due to re-estimates in spending rates for various programs.
SOURCE: Congressional Budget Office
Congress neared final action on a budget for the fiscal
In some areas, such as defense, totals were down slightly to
year beginning Oct. 1 that called for more spending, higher
reflect congressional action on appropriations bills. In
taxes and about one million more jobs than the plan
others, such as Medicare, adjustments had to be made
proposed by President Ford eight months ago.
upward because program reforms and savings anticipated in
Weekly
Both the House and Senate passed resolutions Sept. 9
May had not taken place.
Administration
Final
Report
setting binding levels for outlays and revenues for fiscal
Request
House
Senate
Action
Page
1977. They varied only slightly, and conferees quickly
Uncertainty of Recovery
settled the differences Sept. 10, clearing the way for final
While both the House and Senate committees
Legislative Branch (HR 14238)
$
2492
congressional approval by the Sept. 15 deadline set by the
968,733
$
780,267*
$ 971,141
remained hopeful about the nation's continued recovery
1974 congressional budget act. The budget resolution does
899,619
727,449
880,296
from one of its worst recessions, they made clear they were
not require the President's signature.
willing to consider a third budget resolution if economic
Agriculture and related agencies
11,464,892
11,703,438
12,181,232
$11,542,998
1845
The conferees on the resolution (S Con Res 139) settled
conditions worsened in the coming months.
(HR 14237-PL 94-351)
11,752,613
11,169,399
11,970,830
11,211,904
on revenues of $362.5-billion; outlays of $413.1-billion;
"The committee is prepared to consider a subsequent
budget authority of $451.5-billion and a deficit of $50.6-
District of Columbia (HR 15193)
396,894
372,707
400,422
concurrent resolution early next year if the economic data
billion.
352,197
333,526
355,035
received by then do not indicate that the recovery is
Ford, in his mid-summer budget revision, had proposed
proceeding satisfactorily," stressed the Senate committee
Transportation and related agencies
5,220,471
5,280,656
5,395,718
5,296,418
2139
revenues of $352.5-billion; budget authority of $431.4-
report, after noting the uncertainty of the recovery un-
(HR 14234-PL 94-387)
3,737,800
3,737,180
3,903,681
3,842,469
(
billion; outlays of $400-billion and a deficit of $47.5-billion.
derway.
Housing and Urban Development, Space
45,306,198
42,982,730
43,336,200
43,284,615
2065
In Full Operation
The House report said additional economic stimulus
Science, Veterans (HR 14233)
21,078,656
20,711,721
20,750,391
20,721,251
measures should be considered early in the 95th Congress if
Adoption of the final budget resolution would mark the
the slowdown in the recovery experienced in the second
Labor, Health, Education and Welfare and
54,661,665
55,977,862
56,896,639
56,390,858+
2344
first full implementation of the budget procedures Congress
quarter of 1976 continued the rest of the year. Even if the
related agencies (HR 14232-PL 94-378)
43,057,210
43,949,818
44,234,401
44,136,059
approved in 1974 to bring some control to its previously
resolution's goals were met, unemployment would remain at
fragmented process of setting federal spending. Members in
Interior and related agencies (HR 14231
5,748,054
5,660,897
5,797,965
5,641,379
1970
very high levels, and any great slowdown in the recovery
both chambers used debate on the resolution to con-
PL 94-373)
3,895,661
3,980,411
3,878,247
would produce "severe hardships" for millions of citizens, it
3,917,114
gratulate themselves for making a success of the new
continued.
State, Justice, Commerce, Judiciary
6,313,251
6,541,128
6,880,147
6,680,314
1852
system, which had been partially tested in 1975. (Trial run,
Committee economists estimated that the similar
and related agencies (HR 14239-
4,785,524
4,874,964
4,989,813
4,935,180
1975 Almanac p. 120)
resolutions approved by the two houses should result in un-
"Perhaps the most important aspect of the final budget
PL 94-362)
employment of about 7 per cent by the end of 1976 and 6 per
resolution of fiscal year 1977 is the fact that it contains the
cent by the end of 1977, and an average inflation rate below
Defense Department (HR 14262)
107,936,172
105,397,343
104,014,226
104,343,835
2459
budget of Congress and not that of the President," said
6 per cent in 1976 and about 5.5 per cent in 1977.
72,534,173
71,535,718
70,928,245
71,214,699
House Budget Committee Chairman Brock Adams (D
Wash.) Sept. 8. "...The important thing is that Congress
Foreign Aid (HR 14260)
5,817,770
4,833,498
5,353,265
1950
faced up to the challenge, decided upon a course of action
Senate Action
2,485,682
2,218,443
2,348,945
and followed it through to a successful conclusion despite
Military Construction (HR 14235-
3,472,400
3,293,118
3,426,891
3,338,759
1829
the doubts of the cynics and the occasional setback."
The Senate passed S Con Res 139 on Sept. 9 by a vote of
PL 94-367)
911,327
903,632
910,035
906,604
The final figures, when agreed upon by the two
55-23 after limited debate in which no opposition was ex-
chambers, will set a binding floor under revenues and a ceil-
pressed to the budget levels. No changes were made in the
Public Works, Energy (HR 14236-
9,398,895
9,645,609
9,718,885
9,703,713
1756
ing on budget authority and outlays. Any bills that would
PL 94-355)
5,342,126
5,536,110
5,590,175
5,586,224
breach those levels could be ruled out of order.
Treasury, Postal Service and General
8,004,892
8,267,636
8,301,470
8,313,119
1851
As Adams noted, the congressional budget differed
"Perhaps the most
Government (HR 14261-PL 94-363)
7,721,226
7,979,106
8,015,214
8,022,403
sharply from the approach favored by the White House,
important aspect" of
with an emphasis on programs to fight unemployment. Ford
Public Works Employment
1,138,308
1,638,300*
2328
had proposed larger tax cuts and a lower level of outlays
the resolution "is the
(HR 15194)
962,300
987,300
than favored by Congress, as well as consolidations and
fact that it contains
reductions in domestic programs. (Ford budget, Weekly
the budget of Con-
House
Senate
Report p. 111)
gress and not that
Conference committee figures, not approved by Congress.
Democrats
286
62**
Few Changes
*Recommended by House or Senate Appropriations Committee, but not yet brought to the floor.
Republicans
145
38***
of the President.
*Includes Harry F. Byrd elected as on independent.
Vacancies
4
0
The overwhelming approval given the two versions of
*Includes James L. Buckley elected - Conservative.
-Rep. Brock Adams
the resolution Sept. 9 was somewhat anticlimactic because
(D Wash.)
they were similar in all major respects to the resolution (S
Published weekly by Congressional Quarterly. Inc., 1414 22nd Street, N.W.
photocopy, recording or any Information storage and retrieval system. Second rights
Washington D.C. 20037. reproduction rights, quotations, broadcasting. publication,
are reserved. including use of Congressional Quarterly material in campaign
reserved for current editorial clients. No part of this publication may be reproduced or
supplements, advertisements and hardbooks without permission. Rates are furnished
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL INC
transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including
on request. Second class postage paid at Washington, D.C.
Reproduction prohibited whole except by editorial clients
Sept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2455
Economic Affairs 2
resolution reported Sept 3 (S Rept 94-1204). (Vote 567,
Energy and Environment
p. 2489)
The resolution provided for:
Conferees Agree on Tax Bill
Revenues of $362-billion.
House-Senate conferees on the tax revision bill
Budget authority of $447.5-billion.
(HR 10612) settled the last of their 251 differences Sept.
Outlays of $412.8-billion.
9, clearing the way for final approval by Congress.
A deficit of $50.8-billion.
After nine sessions that lasted all day and often
Congress Struggles Toward
would stop growth in vast areas of the country and retard
Budget Committee Chairman Edmund S. Muskie (D
progress toward energy independence. President Ford also
into the evening, the conference committee approved a
Maine) called the resolution an "economic recovery budget"
bill that was estimated to result in a net gain in tax
designed to produce jobs and restrain inflation, and head
Final Action on Key Energy,
opposed the provision, for similar reasons. Environmen-
revenues in fiscal 1977 of $1.6-billion. That figure was
talists supported the nondegradation concept and had
the nation toward a balanced budget by 1980.
considered a victory for the House conferees; the bill
passed by the House in 1975 would have raised that
Environmental Legislation
worked for even stronger protection than provided in the
James B. Allen (D Ala.) told Muskie he doubted a
House bill.
balanced budget was possible in either four years or four
Chappell's amendment would have deleted the non-
amount, while the Senate version passed in August
decades, given Congress' proclivity to spend any additional
1976 would have resulted in a net tax revenue loss of
With the time left for legislative action rapidly
degradation provisions from the bill and directed a new
revenues that became available. Muskie agreed that each
$300-million. The revenue pickup also met the total set
dwindling, Congress struggled during the week of Sept. 6 to
National Commission on Air Quality to conduct a one-year
senator must be willing to show fiscal discipline to reach
by conferees on the second budget resolution (S Con
complete action on a number of key energy and en-
study of the issue. The Senate had rejected a similar
such a goal, but was optimistic the projections could be
vironmenal bills. Besides the pressure of the planned Oct. 2
amendment, offered by Frank E. Moss (D Utah), by a two-
Res 139). They had called for a $1.6-billion tax revenue
achieved. Another committee member, Pete V. Domenici (R
gain in setting the binding floor of $362.5-billion for
adjournment deadline, some of the bills faced possible
to-one margin, 31-63.
N.M.), told Allen that with the budget process "at least we'll
vetoes by President Ford.
The House also turned down Sept. 8 an amendment
fiscal 1977 revenues. (Budget, p. 2455)
know when we're moving off line" in trying to reach a
In action on major provisions during the week of
The House took up its long-delayed clean air act
offered by Andrew Maguire (D N.J.) that would have
balanced budget.
amendments bill Sept. 8 and adjourned Sept. 10 without
Sept. 6, the conferees increased the taxes imposed on
strengthened the nondegradation provision from the en-
The only committee decision questioned on the floor
completing action. Conferees held two lengthy meetings on
wealthy individuals by approving several changes in
vironmentalists' viewpoint and brought it closer in line with
was its decision to omit $500-million for an extension of the
toxic substances control legislation, resolving many issues
the minimum tax. They included raising the minimum
the Senate version. It was opposed by Rogers and rejected
emergency unemployment federal supplemental benefits
tax rate to 15 per cent from 10 per cent, lowering the ex-
but recessing for the week with some important differences
107-247. (Vote 528, p. 2490)
(FSB) program beyond its March 31, 1977, expiration. The
remaining.
The House took up the clean air bill again late in the
isting exemption of $30,000, and adding new tax
committee had explained in its report that continued im-
House sponsors of a solid waste measure similar to one
preference items to those subject to the minimum tax.
afternoon of Sept. 9 and worked until 10 p.m. on
provement in the economy and the funding of approximate-
passed by the Senate rushed their bill through committee in
Similar changes also were made for corporations.
amendments to the stationary source provisions. Auto emis-
ly 500,000 jobs through the Comprehensive Employment
Conferees also approved new provisions aimed at
hopes of getting it to conference next week also. The House
sion deadlines were the subject when the House reconvened
and Training Act (CETA) would relieve the problem of ex-
Rules Committee considered two controversial bills, one
cracking down on the use of tax shelters to shield in-
at 10 a.m. Friday, Sept. 10, with debate on an administra-
tended unemployment and make an extension unnecessary.
come from taxation. The House-passed limitation on
regulating strip mining and one providing guaranteed loans
tion and industry-backed amendment by John D. Dingell
An extension had been assumed in the first budget targets.
artificial losses (LAL) was dropped in favor of
for development of synthetic fuels, but postponed final
(D Mich.) to extend the deadlines and another by Henry A.
Under the FSB program, unemployment benefits are paid
provisions that would limit deductions for losses from
decisions on whether to send them to the floor until Sept.
Waxman (D Calif.) to tighten them. No votes were taken
for up to an additional 26 weeks to workers who have used
15.
an investment to the amount a taxpayer actually had at
before the House adjourned for the week. The House was
up their 39 weeks of ordinary unemployment payments,
scheduled to resume consideration of the bill with votes on
risk, combined with other curbs for each of the tax
Clean Air
when certain conditions are met.
shelters addressed-real estate, farming, oil and gas,
those amendments Sept. 15, and possibly get to final
"We are by no means out of the woods" in reducing
movies, equipment leasing, sports franchises, and cer-
The House began general debate in early August on its
passage the same day.
high unemployment, said Jacob K. Javits (R N.Y.). He
tain partnership operations.
clean air bill (HR 10498), reported in May. But in what its
wanted to make sure funding would be available if high un-
The conference bill also included changes in estate
chief sponsor Paul G. Rogers (D Fla.) called "ludicrous
Toxic Substances
employment made an extension necessary. Muskie and
and gift taxes. The Senate had included revisions in the
scheduling" by the leadership, the measure had been
House-Senate conferees on the toxic substances control
ranking minority member Henry Bellmon (R Okla.) assured
tax bill, while a separate bill (HR 14844) approved by
shunted aside for the rest of the month.
bill (S 3149) held their second and third sessions Sept. 8 and
him the Budget Committee would "watch this with a very
the Ways and Means Committee had run into dif-
The Senate passed its version of the bill (S 3219) Aug.
9. They recessed until Sept. 14 or 15 with much ac-
sensitive eye" and that an extension, if necessary, could be
ficulties on the House floor. (Weekly Report p. 2417)
5, and time was running short for the difficult conference
complished and a number of significant differences left to
accommodated in a third resolution or within the income
The conferees also decided to restrict an existing
negotiations that would be required to resolve differences
compromise.
security levels set by S Con Res 139.
exclusion for sick pay, to provide a 20 per cent tax
between the complex bills. (Senate action, Weekly Report
The legislation, which would tighten federal regulation
credit for child care and to restrict deductions for
p. 2107; House committee action, Weekly Report p. 1441)
of industrial and commercial chemicals and for the first time
attending foreign conventions. (Weekly Report p. 2415)
The measures, the first comprehensive revisions of the
require premarket testing of potentially harmful sub-
House Passage
1970 Clean Air Act (PL 91-604), represent over a year's work
stances, died in two previous Congressses because of un-
by House and Senate committees. They extend deadlines
resolved House-Senate differences.
The House passed its version (H Con Res 728) Sept. 9
The House rejected Sept. 9:
by a vote of 227-151. (Vote 533, p. 2490)
An amendment offered by John H. Rousselot (R Calif.)
and otherwise modify the strict auto and industrial clean-up
This year, the bills are closer. The consumer-
schedules established in the law, but not to the extent re-
that would have set revenues and outlays at $362.5-billion
environmental-labor coalition backing strong legislation
Its levels, too, were unchanged from those reported by
quested by the Ford administration or many of the affected
prefers the Senate version, while a major chemical industry
the Budget Committee Sept. 1 (H Rept 94-1457):
for a zero deficit, by a vote of 111-264. (Vote 532, p. 2490)
industries.
An amendment offered by Delbert L. Latta (R Ohio),
group, the Manufacturing Chemists Association, endorsed
Revenues of $362.5-billion.
The House bill was brought back on the floor to begin
the House-passed bill. (House action, Weekly Report pp.
Budget authority of $452.6-billion.
ranking minority member of the Budget Committee, to set
the amending process after Rogers complained publicly
2339, 1969; Senate action, Weekly Report p. 764)
Outlays of $413.2-billion.
revenues at $354.9-billion and outlays at $399.2-billion,
about the leadership's lack of urgency in scheduling, and
Still to be decided when the conferees reconvene is the
A deficit of $50.7-billion.
based on a 5 per cent cut in spending in 13 of the 17 budget
others charged that the leadership had been influenced by
question of whether the Environmental Protection Agency
Debate on the resolution, which had begun Sept. 8,
categories, and a reduction in personal income taxes, by
utility industry lobbyists who oppose the measure.
(EPA) should have authority to withhold suspicious
turned into an opportunity for conservative members to dis-
voice vote.
cuss the merits of a balanced budget for fiscal 1977 and to
An amendment offered by Clarence E. Miller (R Ohio)
Rogers won an important victory Sept. 8 when the
chemicals from the market through administrative action as
House rejected, 156-199, an amendment offered by Bill
in the Senate bill, or whether the EPA should go to court for
press for reductions in the spending levels approved by the
to reduce budget authority for discretionary program
Chappell Jr. (D Fla.) to knock out a highly controversial
such an action.
committee. The House easily rejected three efforts to lower
spending (as opposed to mandatory spending) by 5 per cent,
section of the bill aimed at protecting the air over national
Some compromise is likely. But if key House
the budget levels after arguments from Budget Committee
for a savings estimated by Miller at about $6.5-billion, by a
parks and other regions where it is cleaner than required by
Republicans such as James T. Broyhill (N.C.) are unhappy
members that the amendments were unrealistic, would
standing vote of 20-39.
Following passage of H Con Res 728, the House passed
national air quality standards. (Vote 530, p. 2490)
with the outcome, the chances of a veto may increase. The
destroy the fiscal policies carefully devised by Congress
Utility and other industry groups had fought hard
Ford administration favors toxic substances legislation that
through the new budget procedures, and would jeopardize
S Con Res 139 substituting the House provisions.
against this "nondegradation" provision, arguing that it
is weaker than either the House or Senate bills.
the success of the entire procedure.
-By Judy Gardner
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
Reproduction prohibited except by editorial ciients
Sept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2457
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
PAGE 2456-Sept. 11, 1976
Reproduction prohibited in whole or part except by editorial clients
Energy and Environment 2
Solid Waste
American Electric Power, the parent company, threatened
The House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Com-
to sue the government for about $500-million in damages
because of the cancellation.
of
Foreign Policy/National Security
mittee Sept. 9 approved a bill (HR 14496) tightening federal
control of hazardous waste disposal, providing grant money
The struggle over the New River pitted utility and labor
for state solid waste management programs, and beefing up
spokesmen who supported the project against environmen-
EPA solid waste programs. A report (H Rept 94-1491) was
talists, prominent North Carolinians and residents of the
filed the same day, and the House Rules Committee was
state's endangered river valleys. Those opponents said the
Conferees Approve $104.3-Billion Defense Bill
scheduled to consider the bill Sept. 10.
project would destroy the natural ecology of the second
The Transportation and Commerce Subcommittee
oldest river in the world and the farms that supported about
3,000 state residents.
The House Sept. 9 approved the conference report on
reported the bill after dropping a provision, strongly op-
posed by environmentalists, to provide $2.5-billion in loan
The labor and industry supporters of the project, joined
legislation (HR 14262) appropriating $104.3-billion for the
Defense Department in fiscal 1977. The vote was 323-45.
Ford Warships Request Denied
guarantees for development of new waste recycling techni-
by members of the Virginia congressional delegation, said it
would provide needed energy, new construction jobs and
Senate approval, which would clear the bill for the
ques. Staff members on the panel say they have been work-
new recreation and tourist attractions. The North Carolina
President's signature, was expected to follow quickly
The House Armed Services Committee Sept. 8
ing with Senate staff to work out differences between HR
delegation, including conservative Republican Jesse A.
without difficulty. (House vote 534, p. 2490)
killed on a voice vote an administration request for a
14496 and a Senate solid waste bill (S 2150) passed in June.
Helms, was united against the project.
The bill appropriated the $948-million requested for
supplemental authorization totaling $1.1-billion for
They are optimistic that if the bill clears the House, a con-
production of the first three B-1 bombers, but it barred until
warships. The funds were denied by Congress in
ference agreement can be reached quickly. (Senate bill,
The Ford administration joined the project's opponents
Feb. 1, 1977, a production contract for the controversial
approving the fiscal 1977 weapons procurement
Weekly Report p. 1819)
shortly before the North Carolina presidential primary in
plane, produced by Rockwell International Corp. Produc-
authorization bill (HR 12438).
March, with Interior Secretary Thomas S. Kleppe
tion of the plane, designed to replace the B-52 in the U.S.
The panel's Seapower Subcommittee
Other Bills
designating the 26.5-mile stretch as part of the wild and
scenic system. But legislation still was necessary to resolve
nuclear strike forces, was favored by President Ford but op-
recommended approval of the request for four missile
The House Rules Committee heard hours of testimony
the issue, because a federal appeals court upheld the con-
posed by Democratic presidential nominee Jimmy Carter. If
frigates ($521-million)-in addition to the eight already
Sept. 8 on a bill (HR 12112) providing federal loan
the winner of the November election wanted to kill the B-1
authorized in HR 12438-and for $170-million to begin
tested license in late March.
guarantees for private development of synthetic fuels.
The New River dispute was fought within the FPC until
program without obligating the money appropriated in HR
work on a nuclear-powered strike cruiser. The subcom-
Chairman Ray J. Madden (D Ind.) complained that the bill
the agency granted the license in 1974, and then shifted to
14262, he would need congressional approval of a bill
mittee also proposed authorizing $420-million of the
was too complex and far-reaching to be brought up so late in
rescinding the appropriation. (B-1 compromise, Weekly
$858.5-million requested for an anti-aircraft missile-
Congress. The Senate passed a New River protection bill in
the session, especially when four House committees ad-
Report p. 2434)
firing destroyer.
1974 but it died in the House Rules Committee. After
vocated different versions. A final vote was set for Sept. 15.
vigorous lobbying on both sides, the panel sent the 1976 bill
The only major weapons requests not funded by the bill
"We need the ships," insisted Seapower Subcom-
(Weekly Report p. 2340)
to the House floor by a vote of 10-6. (House action, Weekly
were six warships sought by the Navy to counter the threat
mittee Chairman Charles E. Bennett (D Fla.). He said
Prospects were equally uncertain for an amended ver-
Report p. 2215; background on issue, Weekly Report p.
of Soviet anti-ship missiles. Congress had denied authoriza-
that the Navy was particularly anxious to begin work
sion of the controversial strip mining bill (HR 13950), on
1665)
tion for the vessels because of disagreement between the
on the cruiser and the destroyer; both vessels would
which the Rules Committee also promised to vote Sept. 15.
Senate and House over the relative priority of large,
carry the Aegis anti-aircraft system to counter the
Supporters said the twice-vetoed bill had been modified to
nuclear-powered warships versus smaller, conventionally
Soviet Union's armory of anti-ship missiles.
meet the President's objections, and hoped members would
Senate Floor Action
powered vessels of more limited capability.
But the committee's former chairman, F. Edward
be reluctant to vote against it so close to an election. (Week-
The House Armed Services Committee Sept. 8 rejected
Hebert (D La.), a veteran Pentagon ally, dismissed the
ly Report p. 2343)
an administration request to authorize the six ships: a
administration's request as "idiotic, idealistic and im-
The Senate passed HR 13372 by a vote of 69-16 Aug. 30
Also on the Rules panel's schedule for Sept. 10 was HR
nuclear-powered strike cruiser and a conventionally
practical." Charles H. Wilson (D Calif.) charged that
after rejecting, 13-72, an amendment intended to gut the
15069, a forest management bill that environmentalists con-
bill. (Votes 534, 535; Weekly Report p. 2437)
powered destroyer, both carrying the Aegis anti-aircraft
the request was politically motivated, noting that it
sider too weak, particularly on the issue of clearcutting. A
system to escort carrier task forces, and four missile frigates
had been made just after President Ford's
The amendment, offered by William L. Scott (R Va.),
conference will be necessary to compromise it with a stronger
would have upheld the FPC license for the Blue Ridge Proj-
to protect supply convoys and amphibious forces. (Com-
renomination.
Senate bill (S 3091) passed in August. (Weekly Report p.
ect. Scott and Harry F. Byrd Jr. (Ind Va.) argued that the
mittee action, box this page)
2450)
project would provide needed energy without cost to tax-
-By Prudence Crewdson
$14-Billion Increase
payers or damage to the environment. Byrd warned that the
had cut President Ford's $97.9-billion fiscal 1976 Pentagon
Appropriations Committee Chairman George Mahon
appropriations bill by $7.4-billion, a reduction of more than
bill would have "a chilling effect on the willingness of
private enterprise to invest in this type of project in the
(D Texas) told the House that the $14-billion increase over
7.5 per cent. (Fiscal 1976 appropriations bill, 1975 Almanac,
future."
the fiscal 1976 defense appropriation was necessary because
p. 873)
Senate Action:
Sounding very much like the environmentalists he
inflation would absorb $7-billion of the increase and Soviet
usually opposed, Helms said Congress had to "face up to the
military strength was continuing to grow.
Soviet Threat Seen
fact that the FPC decision is based on data that is eight or
"I cannot accept a position of military inferiority for the
Congress' endorsement of the major elements of the ad-
New River Bill Cleared
ten years old, and that has been outdated by intervening
United States," he said, "and I do not believe many
ministration's request was based on growing congressional
events." He added that attitudes toward conservation and
members of the House, if any, could." He added that the
suspicion of increasing Soviet military strength, particular-
The campaign to save the New River in North Carolina
energy had changed, and "our awareness of citizens' rights
bill's $104.3-billion was "sufficient to prevent an erosion of
ly in view of Soviet diplomatic adventurism in Africa and
from inundation by a huge hydroelectric project
has been sharpened."
our military position."
the Middle East. The near success of Ronald Reagan's
triumphed Aug. 30 when the Senate passed and sent to the
Helms was joined in his support for the New River bill
But Edward I. Koch (D N.Y.) argued that the con-
stridently hawkish campaign to wrest the GOP presidential
White House legislation (HR 13372) invalidating a federal
by two other well-known Senate conservatives-James B.
ference report did not cut enough fat from the Pentagon re-
nomination from President Ford further dampened con-
license for construction of the project. President Ford is ex-
Allen (D Ala.) and Barry Goldwater (R Ariz.). Goldwater
quest. Citing presidential candidate Carter and House
gressional willingness to impose major funding cuts on the
pected to sign the measure.
commented that "of all the votes I have cast in the 20-odd
Budget Committee Chairman Brock Adams (D Wash.), he
Pentagon.
Passed by the House Aug. 10, HR 13372 designated a
years I have been in this body, if there is one that stands out
said: "Even the more moderate members of my own par-
No major reductions in weapons programs were serious-
26.5-mile stretch of the New River in North Carolina as part
above all others that I would change if I had the chance it
ty...have advocated a $5-billion to $7-billion reduction."
ly contemplated by either the House or the Senate. Op-
of the Wild and Scenic Rivers System. That had the effect
was a vote I cast to construct Glen Canyon Dam on the
The final appropriation of $104,343,835,000 was $1.05-
ponents of various major weapons proposed by the ad-
of cancelling a Federal Power Commission (FPC) license
Colorado While the Glen Canyon Dam has created the
billion less than had been approved by the House June 17
ministration-the B-1, a fifth nuclear-powered aircraft
issued in 1974 for construction of a pumped storage power
most beautiful lake in the world and has brought millions
and $330-million more than was voted Aug. 9 by the Senate.
carrier, 60 additional Minuteman missiles-argued instead
project involving two dams on the Virginia side of the
and millions of dollars into my state and the state of Utah,
(House passage, Weekly Report p. 1651; Senate passage p.
for deferral of funds for the programs until the next ad-
Virginia-North Carolina border.
nevertheless, I think of that river as it was when I was a boy
2207)
ministration took office. Only with the B-1 did this tactic
The Blue Ridge Power Project, first proposed in 1962,
and that is the way I would like to see it again."
I
The administration's amended request of $107.9-billion
partially succeed. Funds for the carrier and the missiles
was to be built by the Appalachian Power Company.
-By Prudence Crewdson
was cut by $3.6-billion, a reduction of 3.3 per cent. Congress
were provided without restriction.
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC.
PAGE 2458-Sept. 11, 1976
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
Reproduction prohibited whole except by editorial clients.
Sept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2459
Reproduction prohib whole part except by editoria clients
Foreign Policy/National Security 2
Foreign Policy/National Security 3
Provisions
Distribution by
Among the significant financial and management in-
month until Feb. 1, 1977. The effect of the limitation was to
Organizational Component
itiatives contained in the bill were:
delay until February signature of a contract for production
A separate appropriation of $5.6-million, as
of the plane.
Army
$26,005,882,000
$25,488,887,000
recommended by the House, for executive branch oversight
For advanced research on intercontinental ballistic
As approved by the conference committee, HR 14262
Navy
37,882,712,000
35,910,529,000
of the intelligence community. The separate appropriation
missiles (ICBMs), including the new M-X missile, conferees
appropriated the following amounts for Defense Depart-
Air Force
31,584,974,000
30,765,835,000
was intended to ensure that the Intelligence Community
recommended $69-million, the amount approved by the
ment spending in fiscal 1977:
Defense Agencies
3,969,204,000
3,762,984,000
Staff and the National Foreign Intelligence Board main-
Senate. The administration had requested, and the House
Retired Military Personnel
8,493,400,000
8,381,700,000
tained policy independence from those intelligence agencies
provided, $84-million. (Both houses had approved the re-
Related Agencies
28,300,000
33,900,000
that they were charged with supervising.
quested $317-million for procurement of 60 Minuteman
Distribution
Amended
The bill funded Pentagon manpower at approximately
A productivity enhancement program to finance the
ICBMs, the models currently in service.)
by
Administration
Final
the levels requested by the administration. The only major
purchase by defense contractors of capital equipment that
For continued development work on the Trident
Program
Request
Appropriation
departure from the President's request was the rejection by
would reduce production costs by reducing manpower re-
submarine-launched ballistic missile, the bill provided
conferees of Ford's proposal to cut the Naval Reserve to
quirements; $19.3-million was appropriated for the
$569-million, the amount approved by the Senate. Both
Military Personnel
$ 25,497,907,000
$ 25,418,408,000
52,000, from its current strength of 102,000. Conferees
program and the Pentagon was directed to link future
houses had agreed to appropriate $723-million for procure-
Retired Military Personnel
8,493,400,000
8,381,700,000
recommended funding the Naval Reserve at an average
funding requests to specific projects.
ment of the first 48 Trident missiles, an amount to which
Operations and Maintenance
32,285,400,000
31,655,444,000
strength in fiscal 1977 of 96,500, the level recommended by
$6-million earmarked for evaluation of foreign weapons
the administration had agreed after its initial request to
Procurement
30,601,400,000
28,416,300,000
the Senate. The amounts approved by the conference com-
or weapons components for possible use by U.S. forces.
purchase 80 missiles was thwarted by delays in the missile
(transfer from other accounts)
(82,600,000)
An administration-sponsored program to stabilize
test program. Both houses had also agreed to appropriate
Research and Development
11,054,400,000
10,434,418,000
mittee would provide personnel levels for Pentagon com-
ponents at the end of fiscal 1977 as follows:
prices paid by the armed services during the fiscal year for
$729.7-million for construction of the fifth Trident-missile
Special Foreign Currency
commercially sold commodities such as petroleum
submarine.
Program
3,665,000
3,665,000
Organizational
Administration
Final
products. The bill provided $548-million for a surcharge on
For continued research on the Seafarer (formerly
Related Agencies
28,300,000
33,900,000
Component
Request
Appropriation
prices paid by the services to stock funds-revolving ac-
Sanguine) system for communication with submerged mis-
Total, Department of
counts through which the services purchase commercially
sile submarines, conferees agreed to $14.8-million, the
Defense (new obliga-
Army
790,000
789,000
vended commodities.
amount approved by the House. The administration had re-
tional authority)
$107,964,472,000
$104,343,835,000
Navy
554,000
540,600
The final version of the bill also:
Marine Corps
196,000
192,000
quested $29.8-million and the Senate had approved $27.1-
(transfer from other
Air Force
571,000
571,000
Rejected an administration proposal to consolidate at
million.
accounts)
--
(82,600,000)
Total, Active
the Army's Ft. Rucker, Ala., base all basic helicopter flight
Conferees accepted the Senate-passed amount of
Duty Military
2,111,000
2,092,600
training for the services.
$119.8-million for development of the sea-launched cruise
Total, Funding Available
$107,964,472,000
$104,426,435,000
Reserve and Guard Forces
836,500
877,700
Continued the subsidy for military commissary payroll
missile. The administration had requested $182.4-million
(transfer authority)
(750,000,000)
(750,000,000)
Civilian Employees
1,035,800
1,031,000
costs, with an appropriation of $281-million for fiscal 1977.
and the House had allowed all but $20-million. Both houses
Limited to 60 days the unused leave time for which pay
had approved the requested $79.2-million for research on
could be collected by a person leaving the service and
the air-launched cruise missile.
limited the lump sum terminal leave payment to basic pay,
For research on defenses against ICBMs, conferees
thus excluding additional allowances for housing and sub-
approved $203-million. The administration request for
Major Weapons Appropriations for Fiscal 1977
sistence.
$224.9-million was cut to $206.9-million by the House and to
Prohibited payment by the Civilian Health and
$178-million by the Senate.
Medical Program of the Uniformed Services (CHAMPUS)
Pentagon
Final
for religious, family, child or marital counseling of military
Requests
Appropriation
dependents, unless the dependent was referred for treat-
Ground Forces
ment by a medical doctor.
Procurement: (some of the amounts include funds
Quantity
Amount
Quantity
Amount
Administration requests designed to offset Soviet
for spare parts or for items that will
(amounts in millions of dollars)
Conference Action
numerical superiority in tanks and aircraft were, in general,
be procured in fiscal 1978)
supported by the final version. Production of some items
Trident missile
48
$ 720.3
48
$ 720.3
B-1 bomber
3
1,037.0
3
1,037.0
In contrast to the prolonged and hard-fought con-
was deferred because of inadequate testing, but the major
clash with the administration was over an administration-
M-60 tank
886
472,8
886
462.8
ference on the weapons procurement authorization bill, the
imposed pause in a program to develop a new tank.
Trident submarine
1
791.5
1
791.5
conference on the appropriations measure was completed in
Both houses had recommended $35.6-million to begin
Attack submarine
3
958.7
3
958.7
three meetings. The conference report was filed Sept. 3 (H
tooling-up for production of the new XM-1 tank. But con-
Aircraft carrier
1
350.0
1
350.0
Rept 94-1475).
ferees voiced concern that the administration's
Strike cruiser
1
170.0
-
-
Strategic Weapons
modifications in the program could increase its cost and
Aegis (anti-aircraft) destroyer
1
858.5
-
-
degrade its performance. The Pentagon Aug. 4 delayed un-
Minuteman ICBM
60
317.0
60
317.0
The final version had the effect of slowing some
til November selection of a contractor for the new tank in
Missile frigate
12
1,732.9
8
1,179.5
strategic weapons projects while endorsing the ad-
order to allow modifications to be made in the tank to per-
Tankers and tenders (support ships)
4
726.6
3
623.6
ministration's basic policy of maintaining and modernizing
mit use of an engine and the armament used in a new
A-6E all-weather attack plane
-
-
6
65.8
the "triad" of three independent nuclear strike forces com-
German tank. Conferees said the modified program was
A-10 ground attack plane
100
575.9
100
575.9
prising land-based missiles, submarine-launched missiles
substantially different from the one Congress approved and
F-14 carrier-based fighter
36
693.7
36
693.7
and bombers. Commitment to production of the B-1
that funds for the new arrangement would have to be for-
F-15 fighter
108
1,386.6
108
1,378.0
bomber was delayed until after the presidential election,
mally reprogrammed, subject to approval by the Armed
F-16 lightweight fighter
16
360.6
-
151.5
and the development of a strategic version of the sea-
Services and Appropriations Committees.
AWACS radar-warning and command plane
6
474.7
6
474.7
launched cruise missile was blocked. But the bill funded ini-
Both houses had agreed to provide $450.9-million to
Research and Development:
tial production of a new sea-launched missile and the
purchase 886 M-60 tanks, the current front-line weapon.
ICBM Advanced Technology (including M-X)
84.0
69.0
development of a new land-based missile.
Conferees agreed to reduce the appropriation by $27.8-
Cruise Missiles, Navy
182.5
119.8
The conference version appropriated $948-million, the
million, to be made up by unspent funds appropriated in
XM-1 tank
35.6
35.6
amount requested for procurement of the first three regular
previous years.
F-18 lightweight fighter
346.9
346.9
production B-1 bombers. But it provided that the funds
Endorsing the Senate's position, conferees approved an
could be obligated at a rate of no more than $87-million a
administration request for $74.5-million to procure 360 non-
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERL INC
PAGE 2460-Sept. 11, 1976
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERL INC
Reproduction prohibited whole Of part except by editorial clients
Sept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2461
Reproduction prohibited in whole or part except by editorial clients
Foreign Policy/National Security 4
Foreign Policy/National Security 5
nuclear Lance battlefield support missiles. The House had
The conferees approved the funding as authorized, but
limiting to 60 days the amount of accumulated leave for
of $6-billion worth of U.S. arms offered for sale by the Ford
denied all funds for the program.
strongly criticized the arrangement as a violation of the
which a person leaving the service could collect pay and 2)
administration to 11 foreign governments.
For the Advanced Concepts Laboratory, an armored
principle of "full-funding"- practice, followed by the
not funding the 1 per cent "kicker" on cost-of-living in-
Under the veto procedure, Congress has 30 days from
warfare think tank, the bill included $1-million. The Senate
Appropriations Committees, of considering only funding re-
creases in military retired pay. Repeal of the kicker was con-
Sept. 1-the date President Ford submitted the proposed
had voted $2-million; the House had denied funding.
quests that covered the entire cost of a weapon. They
tingent on congressional action to impose the same reduc-
contracts to Capitol Hill-to halt the sales. The concurrent
All funds for procurement of the Stinger, a one-man
warned that by partially funding the initial group of F-16s,
tion on pay increases for federal civilian retirees, a move
resolution process-requiring a majority vote by both
anti-aircraft missile, were deleted, but funds for continued
Congress obscured the total cost of the program, thus mak-
backed by the Senate Aug. 8 during action on the legislative
houses-does not give the President authority to reject
development of the missile were increased to $25.3-million,
ing congressional oversight more difficult.
branch appropriations bill. (1 per cent kicker repeal, p.
Congress' decisions. (Nelson arms sale veto amendment,
the policy recommended by the House. Both houses had
Conferees also agreed on minor adjustments in funding
2492)
1974 Almanac p. 533)
agreed on funds for continued purchase of the Hawk long-
108 F-15 fighters, recommending $1.3-billion. Both houses
Conferees provided $8.4-billion for pay of military
In related action, Sen. William Proxmire (D Wis.)
range anti-aircraft missile ($87.5-million) and the
had approved the amounts requested for 100 A-10 ground
retirees, thus rejecting a Senate move to delete $346.2-
Sept. 1 submitted 24 resolutions to disapprove $5.3-billion
Chaparral short-range anti-aircraft missile ($59.1-million).
attack planes ($537.7-million) and for six AWACS radar
million for anticipated cost-of-living increases. The bill in-
worth of sales to five governments covered by the Nelson
They also agreed on funding for development of the SAM D
warning and command planes ($384.6-million).
cluded no funds for the 1 per cent "kicker" on cost-of-living
measures.
long-range missile ($179.9-million) and the Roland short-
increases in retired pay.
A long-time critic of the U.S. role in the international
range missile ($85-million).
Airlift
But conferees followed the House in rejecting another
arms race, Nelson told the Senate that the 1976 Ford
For advance procurement of a new tanker/cargo plane
major element of the administration's program, the phase-
package of contracts represented the equivalent of 13.7 per
Naval Forces
that would use a commercial wide-body jet, conferees
out of the subsidy for payroll costs of military commissaries.
cent of all arms sale shipments made by the United States
The bill's major break with the administration's
approved $28.8-million. The Air Force had requested, and
The administration had requested a three-year phase-out
since 1951. (Sales figures, 1975 Almanac p. 356)
weapons policy was in shipbuilding, on which Senate and
the Senate allowed, $37.2-million; the House appropriated
and the Senate had approved a phase-out over six years.
"I do not expect or wish to see all the sales stopped,"
House conflict over the relative merits of expensive, multi-
$11.7-million Conferees said they sought to slow down the
The final version included $281-million for the commissary
Nelson said, explaining that his resolutions would give the
purpose nuclear-powered vessels versus cheaper, single-
program because the Pentagon was reviewing its current
subsidy in fiscal 1977.
Foreign Relations Committee and other panels time "to
purpose ships led to a standoff having a major impact on the
reliance on airlift to reinforce U.S. troops and allies abroad
Following action by the Senate, the bill included $18.3-
hold hearings and call administration witnesses to explore
administration's program for the Navy.
and was considering placing more emphasis on sea transport
million for Army enlistment bonuses and $7-million for
in detail the underlying rationale for so extensive an arms
Both houses had agreed to provide $350-million for the
and on permanently stocking a larger amount of equip-
Army personnel sent to their home towns to serve as
sales plan.. this particular moment."
powerplant of a fifth nuclear-powered aircraft carrier and
ment overseas.
recruiting aides. Conferees announced that Congress would
Among the contracts submitted by the administration
$745.6-million for three attack submarines.
The Senate and House had approved the amounts re-
take no further action on the administration's July 28
was the proposed sale of 160 F-16 jet fighters to Iran at a
A principal facet of the Senate-House stalemate in-
quested for development of a new, short takeoff/landing
budget amendment requesting $39.3-million for enlistment
price tag of $3.8-billion and an order from Saudi Arabia for
volved construction of ships to carry the Aegis anti-aircraft
transport ($29.3-million) and for modification of the giant
bonuses.
$701-million worth of military equipment, including 850
system designed to protect U.S. fleets against the Soviet
C-5A transport, including a rebuilding of the plane's wing
Reasoning that alcohol abuse was more widespread in
Sidewinder air-to-air missiles and 650 Maverick air-to-
Union's vast array of anti-ship missiles. The administration
($43.5-million). Both houses also had denied $29.3-million
the military than drug abuse, the House had directed the
ground missiles.
had asked for two ships carrying the system, a nuclear-
requested for modification of civilian jetliners to facilitate
Pentagon to shift half of the $56.4-million currently spent on
Hearings on the Iranian deal are tentatively scheduled
powered strike cruiser favored by the House and a conven-
their conversion to military duty in time of emergency.
drug-abuse programs to combat alcoholism. Conferees
for Sept. 16, and the Saudi Arabian transaction is expected
tionally powered destroyer supported by the Senate. Unable
directed the Pentagon to halt the random urinalysis of
to receive committee scrutiny Sept. 24 because of the con-
to agree on these ships, Congress authorized neither.
Communications Systems
military personnel to detect drug use and to channel the
cern over the Maverick's offensive capability. The ad-
Conferees accepted a Senate proposal to mount the Aegis
For communications scattered across several funding
funds thus freed to the alcohol-abuse program.
ministration's proposed arms sales package follows:
system on the 15-year-old nuclear-powered cruiser Long
accounts, conferees agreed to an overall reduction of $85.9-
Beach at a cost of $371-million.
million, nearly splitting the difference between the $112-
Operations and Maintenance
(amounts in millions of dollars)
Both houses had agreed to fund eight missile frigates to
million cut by the House and the $60.2-million cut of the
The bill included $548-million for an administration
escort supply convoys and amphibious forces ($1.1-billion).
Senate.
Israel
$ 241.4
program to protect against inflation the amounts budgeted
For the Defense Satellite Communications System II,
Saudi Arabia
Conferees agreed to reject a House-passed provision that
701.6
for training activities and maintenance vital to the services'
Iran
4,458.0
would have canceled four missile-launching hydrofoil patrol
the bill approved $179.9-million of a requested $200.1-
combat-readiness. The funds would enable the services to
Pakistan
79.5
boats that had been funded in previous years.
million. The Senate had allowed $195.4-million, the House,
pay a surcharge on prices paid to the stock funds. The cash
South Korea
116.7
For six A-6E all-weather attack planes, the conference
$172.6-million. Conferees agreed to the House action cutting
balances generated by the surcharge would allow the stock
Norway
100.0
committee provided $65.8-million, the amount approved by
to four the requested six satellites for the system.
funds to absorb the cost of commodity price increases in the
Philippines
61.4
the Senate. Conferees followed the House in deleting all
Conferees also followed the action of the Senate in
course of a fiscal year. This would ensure that the services
Australia
confidential
funds requested ($102.8-million) for six US-3A planes to
approving the requested $30.6-million for development of a
could actually purchase the amount of supplies for which
Germany
38.8
transport men and equipment to aircraft carriers. Conferees
newer, more advanced Defense Satellite Communications
Morocco
they had been budgeted. In recent years sharp price in-
88.9
also agreed to terminate the Rockwell-manufactured Con-
System III. The House had allowed only $10.6-million.
Singapore
109.7
creases after passage of an appropriations bill had led to
dor television-guided missile program, thus endorsing the
For development of an airborne command post to con-
cuts in the amount of supplies that the services could ac-
position of the House.
trol U.S. forces in case of a nuclear war, the bill
tually afford.
.
Nelson expressed particular hostility to the F-16 sales,
Both the Senate and House versions approved funding
appropriated $69-million, the amount approved by the
-By Pat Towell
asserting that "it will take a great deal of convincing to
for procurement of 36 F-14 carrier-based fighters ($571.2-
Senate. The administration had requested $79-million and
prove to me that the United States must commit itself this
million), 30 A-7E attack planes ($212.5-million) and six EA-
the House allowed $65.2-million.
Sept. 30 Deadline:
month" to the sales. "Telling Congress that this decision is
6B electronic warfare planes ($116-million). Both houses
in the national interest just will not wash," he added.
also approved $346.9-million for continued development of
Intelligence Programs
Recalling that the weapons sales program originally
the lightweight F-18 carrier-based fighter.
The House had cut intelligence and intelligence-related
Resolutions to Block
was intended to supply U.S. NATO allies, Nelson said that
programs by $149.7-million (including $28.3-million for the
Iran and other so-called Third World countries currently
Tactical Air Forces
CIA retirement fund that had not been authorized when the
The weapons procurement authorization bill had
Foreign Arms Sales
were the principal buyers. "Such sales have major foreign
House acted). The Senate restored $104.2-million of the cut.
policy implications, but there is little if any evidence that
denied all funds requested for the purchase of the first 16
The conference version reduced intelligence and
the administration has given adequate thought to the long-
models of the F-16 lightweight fighter, but increased to
intelligence-related programs by $89.7-million. It included
Introduced in Senate
range diplomatic or military considerations of the weapons
$174.9-million, from $23.4-million, the amount for ad-
the $28.3-million requested for the CIA retirement fund.
transactions," he said.
vanced procurement of components for planes to be
Activating a procedure he devised in 1974 to give
Both Nelson and Proxmire criticized the "chaotic
purchased in future years. The change had been proposed
Personnel Costs
Congress an opportunity to veto proposed sales of U.S.
manner" in which the contracts had been submitted to
by the Senate Armed Services Committee, which argued
The bill endorsed two major elements of the ad-
weapons to foreign countries, Sen. Gaylord Nelson (D Wis.)
Congress.
that the F-16 purchases would not occur until 1978.
ministration's package of personnel cost reductions by 1)
Sept. 7 filed 37 concurrent resolutions to block the shipment
-By David M. Maxfield
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
PAGE 2462-Sept. 11, 1976
Reproduction prohibited in whole or in part except by editoriel clients
Reproduction prohibited in whole or part except by editorial clients
Sept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2463
of
Consumer Affairs
Politics
Senate Passes Modified Antitrust Bill, 69-18
Carter and Ford Offer Contrasting Styles
With the summer preliminaries behind them, President
Overcoming a second filibuster, the Senate passed and
Dole (R Kan.), voted for the bill. Dole had voted against the
Ford and Jimmy Carter moved into the final, eight-week
welfare, inflation, Medicaid-the captain hides in his
returned to the House Sept. 8 an antitrust enforcement bill
original Senate bill in June.
phase of their campaigns for the presidency.
stateroom and the crew argues about who is to blame."
(HR 8532) Congress has been struggling with all year. The
The contrast in the ways they moved could hardly have
Carter also invoked the meinory of President Kennedy,
Senate passed its compromise version, drafted informally to
Provisions
been more distinct. Carter, the Democratic challenger,
who had spoken at Warm Springs during his 1960 cam-
short-circuit further delaying tactics, by a vote of 69-18.
stuck with tradition and gave a rousing, emotional Labor
paign. Slightly modifying the Kennedy slogan of 16 years
As passed by the Senate Sept. 8, the "Hart-Scott-
(Vote 559, p. 2487)
Day speech on Sept. 6. Then he headed into a strenuous
earlier, Carter said that it was time "to get our country on
Rodino Antitrust Improvement Act of 1976" (HR 8532) in-
The measure authorizes state attorneys general to bring
the move again."
cluded the following major provisions:
week of travels to industrial cities of the Northeast and
antitrust suits ("parens patriae") on behalf of citizens, re-
Title I: Antitrust Civil Process Act Amendments.
Midwest.
His biggest applause from the crowd on the lawn of
quires large companies to notify the government of planned
Authorized the Justice Department's Antitrust Division to
Ford, the Republican incumbent, attempted to
Roosevelt's "little White House" came from this statement:
mergers and strengthens the government's antitrust in-
issue civil investigative demands (CIDs), in the course of in-
capitalize on the prestige of the presidency. He remained at
"As a political candidate, I owe nothing to special interests.
vestigatory powers. It is backed by consumer and state at-
I owe everything to the people."
vestigating potential antitrust violations, to natural persons
the White House and left the travel up to his running mate,
torney general groups, and opposed by business groups.
and third parties (such as competitors or suppliers) and to
Kansas Sen. Robert Dole. But he still found time to use the
The House and Senate had passed differing versions of
Rose Garden and the press briefing room to score some par-
Presidential Offensive
compel production of oral testimony and answers to written
the legislation by early August, and a conference was
interrogatories. CIDs also could be issued in connection with
tisan points against his opponent.
Deliberately emphasizing his incumbency, Ford
planned to resolve differences. But James B. Allen (D Ala.),
investigations of planned mergers and regulatory agency
Neither side was without its problems. Carter ran into
remained in Washington over Labor Day, combining work
who led a time-consuming filibuster against the Senate bill
proceedings. (Existing law limited the reach of CIDs to
some unexpectedly vehement opposition from anti-abortion
with relaxation-but making no speeches.
in June, threatened to filibuster again on the motion to ap-
documentary evidence obtained from corporations being in-
groups in North Philadelphia and Scranton, Pa. Dole was
There was an element of irony in the President's
point conferees and on the conference report. (Weekly
vestigated for violations, not including illegal mergers.)
pushed onto the defensive by reports of oil-company con-
posture at this stage of the campaign. Harry Truman is one
Report p. 2424)
Title II: Premerger Notification. Required notice to
tributions to past campaigns.
of his acknowledged idols, and Truman made history in
To avoid two filibusters so late in the session, Senate
the Antitrust Division and the Federal Trade Commission
Even as the campaign was hitting its stride, a sense of
1948 by touring the country, "giving 'em hell" and
and House sponsors worked out a compromise version which
(FTC) 30 days in advance of mergers involving companies
expectancy prevailed as plans continued for the first of four
snatching victory away from Republican Thomas E. Dewey.
was introduced in the Senate Aug. 27. The Senate invoked
worth $100-million or more and companies worth $10-
televised debates. Philadelphia was chosen as the site of the
Ford, far from emulating his hero, delayed the start of
cloture on it Aug. 31 and reached agreement to take a final
million or more, providing the transaction involves acquisi-
first debate between Ford and Carter, to be sponsored by
his campaign until a week later, when he was scheduled to
vote Sept. 8.
tion of more than $15-million in stock or assets, or 15 per
the League of Women Voters and held at 9:30 p.m. Sept. 23.
kick it off in his home state of Michigan. During Labor Day
Before approving the compromise bill, the Senate re-
cent of the voting securities of the acquired company. A 20-
Carter went on the attack immediately in his speech
week, he did not make any openly political utterances until
jected 22-66 a substitute proposal offered by Allen which
day extension could be granted. Material filed with the
from the steps of the house in Warm Springs, Ga., where
Sept. 7, when he appeared twice before White House
would have retained the original Senate version of the bill
government under this provision would be exempt from dis-
President Franklin D. Roosevelt had died in 1945.
reporters, and Sept. 8, when he held another impromptu
and thus required a conference. (Vote 558, p. 2487; original
closure under the Freedom of Information Act.
Playing the Roosevelt theme for all it was worth, Carter
press conference. Ford's first appearance on Sept. 7 was a
Senate action, Weekly Report p. 1591)
Title III: Parens Patriae. Authorized state attorneys
compared Ford with the Republican President, Herbert
bill-signing ceremony in the Rose Garden of the executive
The bill still faces two uncertainties-the House and
general to bring triple damage suits in federal court on
Hoover, in 1932. "This year, as in 1932, our nation is
mansion. He used the occasion to defend himself against
President Ford. Several members of the House Judiciary
behalf of state citizens injured by violations of the Sherman
divided, our people are out of work and our national leaders
Carter's past criticism of his vetoes.
Committee complained that they did not approve the final
Antitrust Act.
do not lead," said Carter. "Our nation is drifting without in-
As he signed a bill on child day care standards-he had
"compromise" bill, and that provisions important to them
In cases involving price-fixing, the state could prove the
spiration, without vision and without purpose."
vetoed a previous version-he said: "It is a better bill
were left out. Of utmost concern to those members were
amount of damages to be awarded "in the aggregate by
The former Georgia governor took his hardest slap at
because my veto exerted a balancing influence on the
House provisions that would have imposed an absolute ban
statistical or sampling methods, by the computation of il-
Ford in a comparison with Harry Truman. "When Truman
deliberations of the Congress in this important area.
on contingency fees for outside attorneys in state parens
legal overcharges" or other reasonable system approved by
was in the White House, there was never any doubt who was
Without this constitutional check and balance, the original
patriae suits and permitted single instead of triple damages
the court-instead of proving the exact amount of each in-
captain of the ship," he said. "Now, every time another ship
bill might now be law and making day care services more
for "good faith" violations in parens suits.
dividual claim.
runs aground-CIA, FBI, Panama, unemployment, deficits,
costly to the taxpayer and increasing the federal intrusion
The dispute between those members and Committee
States could notify citizens of a parens suit by general
into family life.
Chairman Peter W. Rodino Jr. (D N.J.), who supports the
publication, but courts could require other forms of notice.
A few days earlier, in a speech in Kansas City, Mo.,
Senate compromise bill, may be aired in the House Rules
States could not pay outside attorneys conducting
Candidates' Travel Schedules
Dole had answered Carter's criticism of the vetoes with
Committee before the issue goes to the floor.
parens suits a contingency fee based on a percentage of the
some comparative arithmetic. He said that Ford had
"I have serious doubts that the Senate proposal can
expected damage award or on any other basis, unless the
Following are the tentative schedules of the
averaged 26.5 vetoes annually during his two years in office,
clear the House floor and the President's desk in its present
court approves the amount as reasonable. Courts could
Republican and Democratic presidential candidates for
whereas the average for Truman had been 35 a year and for
form," Tom Railsback (R III.) said Sept. 2. "They are play-
award reasonable attorney's fees to a prevailing defendant if
the week starting Monday, Sept. 13, as made available
Roosevelt, 52 a year. As Georgia governor between 1971 and
ing a dangerous game in asking us to accept what we have
the state suit was brought in bad faith.
by their campaign offices Sept. 9:
1975, Dole said, Carter had averaged 38 vetoes a year, with
already rejected," warned Robert McClory (III.), a senior
Recovered damages must be distributed according to
Ford
53 his last year in office.
committee Republican.
court order or treated as general state revenue.
Sept. 15-Ann Arbor, Mich.
Ford made a second appearance Sept. 7 in the White
Senate sponsors insisted that they gave up more than
The U.S. Attorney General would be required to notify
Carter
House press briefing room, read a statement denouncing the
did their House counterparts. "I hope we can meet across a
state attorneys general of federal antitrust cases that could
Sept. 13-Birmingham, Ala.; Norman, Okla.; Phoenix.
North Vietnamese government for being "callous and cruel"
conference table in the next Congress to discuss even
inspire state parens suits, and to provide state attorneys
Sept. 14-Billings, Mont.; Bismarck, N.D.; Sioux Falls,
and demanding a "full accounting" of some 800 American
stronger antitrust laws, and tighter amendments to the one
general with relevant materials upon request.
S.D.
servicemen still listed as missing in action in Southeast
we will vote on today," Edward M. Kennedy (D Mass.) said
A state could pass a law invalidating the authority to
Sept. 15-Minneapolis; Crystal Lake, Minn.; Dearborn,
Asia.
Sept. 8.
Mich.
bring parens suits. Suits could not apply to violations com-
He appeared again on the south lawn of the White
Although talk of a Ford veto persisted, backers of the
mitted before enactment.
I
Sept. 16-Indianapolis; Baltimore; Washington, D.C.
House on Sept. 8 at another quickly summoned press con-
antitrust bill pointed out that his running mate, Robert
ference.
-By Prudence Crewdson
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC.
PAGE 2464-Sept. 11, 1976
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
Reproduction prohibited whole or in part except by editorial clients
Reproduction prohibited whole or part except by editorial clients.
Sept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2465
Politics 2
On Sept. 4, Ford had decided neither to discipline nor
to dismiss FBI Director Clarence M. Kelley for accepting
Nonvoters on the Rise
gifts and favors fromithe agency he heads. On Sept. 7, Carter
said he thought Kelley should be dismissed; but he declined
For the first time since 1924, a majority of eligible
to say whether he would dismiss him if he were elected
voters may stay away from the polls in this year's
President.
presidential election, a comprehensive survey of non-
At the Sept. 8 press conference, Ford attacked Carter
voting Americans has concluded.
for "flip-flopping" on the issue and for showing "lack of
Contrary to a common belief, however, the prin-
compassion." Kelley's wife was dying of cancer at the time
cipal reasons for the low turnout will not be procedural
Kelley accepted the gifts and favors.
impediments such as registration laws or getting to the
polls. The principal reasons will be disenchantment
with candidates and alienation from the political
The Abortion Problem
system.
After his campaign kickoff in the South, Carter headed
The survey, released Sept. 5, was conducted by
into the ethnic enclaves of the North in an effort to build
Peter D. Hart Research Associates Inc. of Washington,
support among Catholic blue-collar workers. But he con-
D.C., for a nonpartisan project, the Committee for the
tinued to encounter hostility because of his refusal to en-
Study of the American Electorate. The committee is
dorse a constitutional amendment banning abortion.
financed by businesses, unions and foundations.
Because the abortion issue was not on the agenda of a
Hart's pollsters had 90-minute interviews with 1,-
Sept. 7 meeting at a Catholic church in North Philadelphia,
486 nonvoters nationwide between July 16 and July 31.
the meeting was moved to a Lutheran church. And that
Nonvoters were defined as voting-age persons who had
night, Carter was jostled by a shouting crowd of anti-
voted in two or fewer previous federal elections; who
abortionists outside a hotel in Scranton.
had not registered this year; or who said their chances
Not until Sept. 8, when he visited "Polish Hill" in
of voting Nov. 2 were less than 50-50.
Pittsburgh, did Carter receive a genuinely cordial welcome
Using a similar definition for political dropouts-
from a predominantly Catholic crowd.
people who had voted occasionally since 1968 but do
Ford, in an apparent shift in his position, said at his
not intend to vote this year-Hart estimated that some
Sept. 8 press conference that he supports the abortion
10 million voting-age Americans had dropped out of the
plank in the Republican platform. The plank endorses a
electoral system in the past eight years. "These are
constitutional amendment. Previously, Ford had stated his
people who participated in the electorate in 1972 or
personal opposition to abortion-as had Carter-but had
prior to that time and who since then have become dis-
not supported a constitutional amendment.
illusioned with politicans and dispirited with the direc-
Two reported Senate campaign contributions from Gulf
tion of the country," he said.
Oil Corp., one in 1970 and the other in 1973, distracted
The proportion of young nonvoters is far larger
attention from Dole's vice presidential campaigning.
than the proportion of young people in the population
Throughout the week, press reports appeared about a
as a whole, Hart found. Forty-six per cent of the non-
$2,000 contribution to Dole from Gulf in 1970, for distribu-
voters are under age 35, compared with about 33 per
tion to other Republican Senate candidates that year, and
cent of the total eligible population.
about a $5,000 Gulf contribution to Dole in 1973 for his 1974
About 55 per cent of the eligible voters voted in
Senate re-election campaign. Dole denied knowledge of the
1972, continuing a decline that began after 1960, when
contributions.
the figure was 64 per cent. But much of the drop in 1972
But he acknowledged being questioned by a federal
was due to the extension of the franchise to 18-21-year-
grand jury March 8 about Gulf's contributions to Senate
olds. Had the 18-year-old vote not become law, a Hart
Minority Leader Hugh Scott (R Pa.).
spokesman estimated, the 1972 turnout would have
Claude C. Wild Jr., the former Gulf lobbyist who had
been about 58 per cent.
distributed the money, changed his story Sept. 8 and
Persons interviewed for the survey were given lists
apologized to Dole for saying earlier that he had given him
of 21 reasons for not voting and were asked to rank the
the $2,000. He did not mention his allegation that he had
importance of the reasons.
given Dole's former administrative assistant $5,000 for the
Sixty-eight per cent said they believed that "can-
1974 campaign. The former aide said he had no recollection
didates say one thing and then do another."
of receiving the money.
Fifty-five per cent said they thought "it doesn't
Ford said Sept. 8 that he was satisfied that Dole had
make any difference who is elected, because things
received no questionable or illegal campaign money as a
never seem to work out right."
senator. And the Republicans hoped the matter would end
Fifty-two per cent rated as important their belief
there, without further damaging reverberations.
that "Watergate proved that elected officials are only
out for themselves."
Carter's Taxes
Which politicians, living or dead, do the nonvoters
The Democrats, too, had their personal money
admire most? The dead won by a landslide. John F.
troubles. Carter disclosed Sept. 3 that he had paid federal
Kennedy was the choice of 50 per cent; Franklin D.
taxes of 12.8 per cent, or $17,484, of his 1975 income of $136,-
Roosevelt, 20 per cent; Dwight D. Eisenhower, 10 per
138 and that he had received a $41,702 tax credit for install-
cent; and Harry S Truman, 10 per cent.
ing a new peanut sheller.
And this year's nominees? Both President Ford
The disclosure brought a biting attack from Dole, who
and Jimmy Carter were the first choice of only 1 per
questioned Carter's dedication to tax reform. Carter said
cent.
the tax break "illustrates vividly the need for tax reform."I
-By Mercer Cross
PAGE 2466-Sept. 11, 1976
COPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
Reproduction prohibited in whole or in part except by editorial clients
Page data
- Page
- 1
- Source index
- 0
- Type
- document
- Media ID
- 7acf9425ac0b28e9
- Size
- unknown
Document data
- ID
- 1554413
- Core
- doc
- Type
- document
DTO data
{
"id": "1554413",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/1554413",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "First Debate: Press Clippings - General",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/1554413",
"collections": [
"White House Special Files Unit Files",
"Ford - Carter Debates Files"
],
"subjects": [
"Republican National Committee (U.S.)",
"Campaign debates",
"Presidential campaign, 1976"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/13/5544/1554413/content/library/document/0010/1554413.pdf",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/13/5544/1554413/content/library/document/0010/1554413.pdf",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/13/5544/1554413/content/library/document/0010/1554413.pdf",
"imageCount": 1,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Context sent to Scholar
Document identity
{
"localId": "1554413",
"label": "First Debate: Press Clippings - General",
"core": "doc",
"dtoType": "document",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/1554413"
}
Document source metadata
{
"id": "1554413",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/1554413",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "First Debate: Press Clippings - General",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/1554413",
"collections": [
"White House Special Files Unit Files",
"Ford - Carter Debates Files"
],
"subjects": [
"Republican National Committee (U.S.)",
"Campaign debates",
"Presidential campaign, 1976"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/13/5544/1554413/content/library/document/0010/1554413.pdf",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/13/5544/1554413/content/library/document/0010/1554413.pdf",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/13/5544/1554413/content/library/document/0010/1554413.pdf",
"imageCount": 1,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras
{
"url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/1554413",
"naId": 1554413,
"coverageEndDate": {
"logicalDate": "1976-09-30",
"month": 9,
"year": 1976
},
"coverageStartDate": {
"logicalDate": "1976-08-01",
"month": 8,
"year": 1976
},
"levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
"recordType": "description",
"ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}
Page context
{
"seq": 1,
"pageIndex": 0,
"type": "document",
"url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/13/5544/1554413/content/library/document/0010/1554413.pdf",
"mediaId": "7acf9425ac0b28e9",
"ocrText": "The original documents are located in Box 1, folder \"First Debate: Press Clippings -\nGeneral\" of the White House Special Files Unit Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential\nLibrary.\nCopyright Notice\nThe copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of\nphotocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald Ford donated to the United\nStates of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.\nWorks prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public\ndomain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to\nremain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid\ncopyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.\nDigitized from Box 1 of the White House Special Files Unit Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library\nTHE PRESIDENT HAS SEEN\nREPUBLICAN AND DEMOCRATIC\nPARTY PLATFORMS\nWASHINGTON POST ANALYSIS & COMPARISON\nAug. 18,1976\nGERALD #\nRepublicans\nDemocrats\nParty Aims\n\"The Democrats' platform repeats\n\"Two Republican administrations\nthe same thing on every page: more\nhave both misused and mismanaged\nFORD\nCovernment, more spending, more in-\nthe powers of national government,\nflation This Republican platform\nobstructing the pursuit of economic\nsays the opposite-less government,\nand social opportunity, causing need-\nless spending, less inflation. In other\nless hardship and despair among mil-\nwords, we want you to retain more of\nlions of our fellow citizens\nyour own money, money that repre-\n\"We do pledge a government that\nsents the worth of your labors.\"\nhas as its guiding concern the needs\nMr.\nCarter is firmly attached to\nand aspirations of all the people rather\na contract with you to vastly increase\nthan the perquisites and special privi-\nthe powers of government\nThe\nleges of the few\nWe do pledge a\nprice tag of five major Democrat plat-\ngovernment that will be committed to\nform promises could add as much as\na fairere distribution of wealth, in-\n$100 billion to the annual cost of gov-\ncome and power.\"\nernment\nThe total of all Democrat\npreposals could be as high as $200 bil-\nlion could raise your taxes by 50\nper tent.\nWe do care about your basic free-\ndom to manage your own life\nWe\ndo care about encouraging permanent\nand meaningful jobs\nWe do care\nabout your getting paid in sound dol-\nlars.\"\nWatergate\n\"Your elected officials, their ap-\n\"Two Republican administrations\npointees, and government workers are\nhave betrayed the people's trust and\nexpected to perform their public acts\nhave created suspicion and distrust of\nwith honesty, openness, diligence, and\ngovernment through illegal and un-\nspecial integrity.\"\nconstitutional actions.\"\nJobs and Inflation\nDeficit spending\" required by\n\"During the past 25 years the Amer-\nDemocratic congressional programs is\nican economy has suffered five major\nthe -cause of inflation, and this de-\nrecessions, all under Republican ad-\nstroys jobs.\nministrations [and] 10 million peo-\n\"Wage and price controls\nhave\nple are unemployed right now.\"\nalways been a dismal failure.\"\n\"At times direct government in-\nOpposes attempts to take away\nvolvement in wage and price decisions\n\"independence of the federal reserve\nmay be required\" (but not at this time,\nboard.\" Opposes Humphrey-Hawkins\nat least not a comprehensive system.)\nfull employment bill, which will \"cost\n\"The Federal Reserve Board must\nbillions\" and provide only \"make-\nbe made a full partner in national eco-\nwork,\" \"temporary stimulus.\"\nnomic decisions and become respon-\nsive to economic goals of Congress\nand the President Need for na-\ntional economic planning capability.\"\nFavors use of tax, spending and\ncredit policies, \"accompanied by a\nbroad range of carefully targeted em-\nployment programs that will reduce\nunemployment\nlow-interest loans\nto business and state and local gov.\nernments\n(and) domestic develop-\nment bank.\"\n(But no specific mention of the\nHumphrey-Hawkins bill as such; the\nabove is its substance more or less.)\nREPUBLICANS\nDEMOCRATS\nAffirmative Action\n\"avors \"equal treatment but not by\nSupports affirmative action, en-\nresurrecting the much discredited\nforcement of Equal Employment Op-\nquota system.\"\nportunity Commission decisions.\nTaxes\nFavors \"a balanced federal budget\n\"Tax reform at all levels ... 80 that\nand reduced tax rates.\"\nhigh-income citizens pay a reasonable\n\"Tax credits for college tuition,\ntax on all economic income.\"\npostecondary technical training and\nReduce tax shelters [for] oil and\nchild-care expenses incurred by work-\ngas, tax-loss farming, real estate and\ning parents.\"\nmovies.\" Overhaul federal estate and\nAlso \"tax credits for parents mak.\ngift taxes, remove incentives for\ning elementary and secondary school\nmulti-nationals to shift jobs to over-\npayments.\"\nseas.\nNew accelerated depreciation, re-\nmove burden on equity financing, end\n\"unfair double taxation of dividends\"\nwhen balanced by spending reduc-\ntions, raise personal exemption to\n$1,000.\nAgriculture\nDposes government-controlled\nOverhaul federal estate and gift\ngrain reserves, unrealistic safety and\ntaxes, aid workers in housing, employ-\nenvironmental rules. Favors increase\nment, health and education.\nin estate-tax exemption to $200,000,\nCollective bargaining and unions\nvaluing farmland on current-use basis.\nfor farm workers.\nLabor legislation to help workers but\nrecognize need to prevent stoppages\nduring harvest.\nMiscellaneous Government\nSupports automatic and mandatory\nMandatory sentence for committing\nminimum sentences for persons com-\nfelony with gun.\nmating federal offenses using danger-\nBacks laws to control manufacture\nous weapons.\nand distribution of handguns and Sat-\nSupports \"right of citizens to keep\nurday night specials, but sportsmen\nand bear arms\nopposes federal\ncan possess guns for hunting and tar-\nregistration of fire arms.\"\nget shooting.\nOpposes federal postcard registra-\nFavors federal postcard registration\ntion bill.\nbill, D.C. voting in Congress, full\nFavors D.C. voting representation\nhome rule.\nin House and Senate and full home\nrule over local matters.\nEducation\nSegregated schools are morally\n\"Mandatory transportation of stu-\nwaong and unconstitutional.\" But \"we\ndents beyond their neighborhoods for\noppose forced busing to achieve racial\nthe purpose of desegregation remains\nasiances\" and \"favor consideration of\na judicial tool of the last resort for\nat amendment to the Constitution for-\nthe purpose of achieving school deseg.\nbidding the assignment of children to\nregation.\"\nschool on the basis of race.\"\nFavors \"federally financed family\nFavors a constitutional amendment\ncentered developmental and educa-\nto permit local communities \"wishing\ntional child-care programs.\"\nto conduct non-sectarian prayers in\nCalls school programs \"underfunded\"\ntheir schools to do so.\"\nat federal level. \"With increased fed-\nFavors child-care assistance for\neral funds, it is possible to enhance\nworking parents.\neducational opportunity by eliminating\nFavors study to find ways to with-\nspending disparities within state bor-\ndraw federal aid to elementary and\nders.\"\nsecondary education, provided ways\ncan be found to return to the states\nequivalent revenue (to compensate for\nany loss in present levels of federal\nfunding.)\nRepublicans\nDemocrats\nHealth\n\"The Republican Party opposes\n\"We need a comprehensive national\ncompulsory national health insurance\nhealth insurance system with univer-\n[which] will increase federal govern-\nsal and mandatory coverage [financed\nment spending by more than $70 bil-\nby] employer-employee shared payroll\nlion in its first full year [and] require\ntaxes and general tax revenues.\"\na personal income tax increase of ap-\nLower costs by government rate-set.\nproximately 20 per cent.\"\nting. \"Rates for institutional care and\n\"We support extension of cata-\nphysicians' services should be set in\nadvance\nstrophic filness protection to all who\ncannot obtain it.\"\nOpposes any research on dive fe.\ntuses and legislation which sanctions\nending life of the patients.\nLower health care costs by encour-\naging healthier life styles, ending\nwasteful duplication of facilities, pre-\nventive care, more out-of-hospital\nservice but \"we oppose excessive in-\ntrusions from Washington in the de-\nlivery of health care.\"\nCivil Rights, Discrimination\n\"There must be vigorous enforce-\n\"We must insure that all citizens\nment of laws to assure equal treat-\nare treated equally before the law,\nment in job recruitment, hiring, pro-\nand given the opportunity regardless\nof race, color, sex, religion, age, lan-\nmotion, pay, credit, mortgage access\nand housing\nWe reaffirm our\nguage or national origin, to partici-\npledge to work to eliminate discrimi-\npate fully in the economic and social\nnation in all areas for reasons of race,\nand political processes and to vindi-\ncolor, national origin, age, creed or\ncate their legal and constitutional\nsex and to enforce vigorously laws\nrights.\"\nguaranteeing women equal rights.\"\n\"We seek ratification of the Equal\n\"The Republican Party reaffirms its\nRights Amendment.\"\nsupport for ratification of the Equal\n\"We feel that it is undesirable\nRights Amendment\" to the Constitu-\nto attempt to amend the U.S. Consti-\ntion.\ntution to overturn the Supreme Court\n\"The Republican Party favors a con-\ndecision\" permitting abortion.\ntinuance of the public dialogue on\n\"We pledge\nto protect citizens'\nabortion and supports the efforts of\nprivacy from bureaucratic and techno-\nthose who seek enactment of a consti-\nlogical intrusions, such as wiretapping\ntutional amendment to restore protec-\nand bugging without judicial scrutiny\ntion of the right to life for unborn\nand supervision.\"\nchildren.\"\n\"Major changes are needed to main-\ntain the confidentiality of tax returns\nand Social Security records\" and pro-\ntect against seizure an individual's\nbank records by the government.\nREPUBLICANS\nDEMOCRATS\nAmnesty\n\"Full and complete pardon for those\nwho are in legal or financial jeopardy\nbecause of their peaceful opposition\nto the Vietnam war, with deserters to\nbe considered on a case-by-case basis.\"\nLabor\nSupports youth differential in mini-\n\"We will seek repeal of Section 14B,\nmum wage law.\nwhich allows states to legislate the\nFavors retention of Section 14B of\nanti-union open shop.\"\nTaft-Hartley Act, which allows states\nSupports legalization of commonsite\nto pass open-shop right to work laws.\npicketing.\nOpposes legalization of commonsite\npicketing on construction sites.\nWelfare\n\"We oppose federalizing the welfare\n\"We should move toward\na\nsystem We also oppose the guaran-\nsimplified system of income mainte-\nteed annual income concept\n\"\nnance, substantially financed by the\nfederal government It should\nprovide an income floor both for the\nworking poor and the poor not in the\nlabor market.\"\nArts and Humanities\nSupport for national endowments,\nSupport for national endowments,\npublic broadcasting, copyright and tax\npublic broadcasting, copyright and tax\nlaw protections.\"\nlaw protections, also, \"special anti-re-\ncession employment programs for art-\nists.\"\nUrban Policy\nFavors continuation of revenue\nFavor continuation of revenue shar-\nsharing. Continued deductability of\ning. Also emergency anti-recession aid\nproperty taxes and home mortgage in-\nto states and cities.\nterest.\n\"Aggressive enforcement of Fair\nOpposes discrimination in housing.\nHousing Act.\" Prohibit \"redlining.\"\nFavors reduced direct federal in-\nDirect U.S. subsidies for low-and\nvolvement in housing.\nmoderate-income housing and housing\nfor elderly.\nAutomatic triggering of production\nsubsidies and mortgage funds when\nhousing starts fall below acceptable\nlevels.\nRepublicans\nDemocrats\nEnergy\n\"Immediately eliminate price con-\n\"Beyond certain levels, increasing\ntrols on oil and newly discovered nat-\nenergy prices simply produces high-\nural gas in order to increase supply.\"\ncost energy, without producing any\nFavors \"accelerated use of nuclear\nadditional energy supplies.\" Increases\nenergy through processes that have\nin 1975 law for oil prices are ade-\nbeen proven safe,\" with more safety\nquate. As for natural gas, favor some\nresearch on nuclear waste disposal.\nraises in price ceilings, but not total\n\"We vigorously oppose\ndivesti-\nremoval. Just enough to bring close to\nture of oil companies\" and their brea-\nequivalent energy price for oil.\nkup into separate producting and mar-\n\"U.S. dependence on nuclear power\nketing segments.\nshould be kept to the minimum neces-\nsary to meet our needs. We should\nsupply stronger safety standards as\nwe regulate its use. And we must be\nhonest with our people concerning its\nproblems and dangers\nSupports divestiture of oil compa-\nnies.\nBar oil companies from owning\ncompeting types of energy such as\ncoal.\nEnvironment\nPledges to preserve \"clean and\nPledges to preserve environment.\nhealthy\" environment.\n\"Those who would use the environ-\nPublic lands to be used for multiple\nment must assume the burden of dem-\nuse, not \"closed to exploration for\nonstrating that it will not be abused.\"\nminerals or for mining without an ov-\nEconomic growth and environmen-\nerriding national interest.\"\ntal preservation are compatible.\n\"Emphasis on environmental con-\ncerns must be brought into balance\nwith the needs for industrial and eco-\nnomic growth.\"\nMaximize sustained yield in forests,\nincluding national forests, using\n\"clear-cutting and replanting where\nappropriate.\"\nREPUBLICANS\nDEMOCRITS\nOur strategic nuclear torees must\nprovide a strong and credible deter\nForeign and Defense Policy\nrent to nuclear attack and nuclear\nblackmail\" without \"undue emphasis\"\nCalls for \"superior national de\nSupports \"racial peace\nurge\nall\non the overall size of the defense\nTense\" and period of sustained\nconcerned that the rights of tribal,\nbudget.\ngrowth in our defense effort.\" Specifi-\nethnic and racial minorities be guar-\nanteed through workable safeguards.\nCut the defense budget of $110 bil-\ncally, construction of B-1 bomber. In-\nOur policy is to strengthen the forces\nlion by $5 billion to $7 billion.\ncrease Army to 16 divisions.\nof moderation.\" Against external in-\nDelay the B-1 bomber until Febru-\nEndorses NATO continued strength.\nterference, Soviet arms.\nary, 1977.,\nAsks Spain be added to NATO.\nDoes not use of the word detente.\n\"NATO remains a vital commit-\nReaffirms U.S. commitment to terri-\ntorial integrity and sovereignty of Re-\nHolds it a good idea to \"isolate and\nment.\" (No mention of Spain.)\npublic of Korea. \"U.S. troops will be\ndevelop those areas of our relations\nMaintain commitment to Korea but\nmaintained in Korea so long as there\nwhich would serve to lessen tensions\n\"we can redeploy and gradually phase\nexists the possibility of renewed ag-\nand reduced the chance of unwanted\nout U.S. ground forces and withdraw\ngression from North Korea.\"\nconflict.\" Favors steps to \"limit strate-\nthe nuclear weapons now stationed in\ngic nuclear arms,\" cites en-going\nKorea.\"\nBlames Democrats in part for losing\ntalks, Vladivostok agreements.\nSouth Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos\nFriendship with Japan the\nbecause of \"the refusal of the Demo-\nSoviets must adhere to their prom-\neornerstone\" of Asia policy.\ncrat-controlled Congress to give sup-\nises of the free flow of people and\n\"Our relations with China should\nort to presidential requests for mili-\nideas and eased emigration restric-\ncontinue to develop on peaceful lines,\nary aid to the beleaguered nations of\ntions, as spelled out in the Helsinki\nincluding early movement toward nor-\nSouth Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos.\"\nagreements, including granting of em-\nmalizing diplomatic relations in the\nFriendship with Japan, the \"pillar\"\nigration rights to Jews, Christians and\ncontext of a peaceful resolution of the\nof Asia policy.\nMoslems, and must cease imprison-\nfuture of Taiwan.\"\nWe seek \"expanded network of con-\nment and harassment of those wishing\n\"Relations with Cuba can only be\nto emigrate.\ncacts and trade\" and \"normalization of\nnormalized if Cuba refrains from in-\nrelations with Communist China but\nSupports the right of the people of\nterference with the internal affairs of\n\"will continue to support the freedom\nCentral and Eastern Europe to \"self-\nthe U.S. and releases all U.S. citizens\nand independence of our friend and\ndetermination,\" and favors adequate\ncurrently detained in Cuban prisons\nlly, the Republic of China (Taiwan)\nfunding for the Voice of America, Ra-\nand labor camps for political reasons.\nand will fulfill and keep its commit-\ndio Free Europe and Radio Liberty.\nWe can move toward such relations if\nments, such as the mutual defense\nInsists Soviets end microwave trans-\nCuba abandons its provocative inter-\ntreaty, with the Republic of China.\"\nmissions en the U.S. embassy in Mos-\nnational actions and policies.\"\n\"Exporting subversion and violence,\ncow.\n\"We pledge support for a new Pan-\nCuba remains outside the inter-Ameri-\nama Canal treaty, which insures the\ncan family of nations.\"\ninterests of the U.S. in that waterway,\nrecognizes the principles already\nUnder the 1903 treaty, the United\nagreed upon, takes into account the\nStates enjoys \"jurisdictional rights in\ninterests of the canal work force, and\nthe Canal Zone as 'if it were the sov-\nwhich will have wide hemispheric sup-\nereign.' The U.S. intends that the Pan-\nport.\"\nama Canal be preserved as an interna-\ntional waterway for the ships of all\n\"Firm commitment to the independ-\nence and security of the state of Is-\nnations in talks with Panama,\nrael\nhowever, the U.S. negotiators should\nincluding sufficient military\nand economic assistance to maintain\nin no way cede, dilute, forfeit, negoti-\nIsrael's deterrent strength in the re-\nate or transfer any rights, power au-\ngion and maintenance of U.S. military\nthority, jurisdiction, territory or pro-\nforce in the Mediterranean adequate\nperty that are necessary for the pro-\nto deter \"Soviet military intervention.\ntection and security of the U.S. and\nthe entire western Hemisphere.\"\n\"Free passage of shipping in the\nMiddle East, especially the Suez Ca-\n\"Commitment to Israel is funda-\nEfforts should be made to normal-\nnal.\"\nmental and enduring. We have hon-\nIse relations with Angola.\"\nored and will continue to honor that\nRecognize and support Jerusa-\ncommitment in every way-politically,\nFavors \"pursuit of detente,\" work-\nlem as the capital of Israel\nU.S.\neconomically and by providing the\ning toward arms limits, comprehen-\nembassy should be moved from Tel\nmilitary aid that Israel requires to re-\nrive ban on nuclear tests, nuclear ar-\nAviv to Jerusalem.\"\nmain strong enough to deter any po-\nsenal reduction on both sides but we\nMust recognize \"inevitability of ma.\ntential aggression. Forty per cent of\nshould \"not overall limit the U.S. to\njority rule on that continent.\"\nall U.S. aid that Israel has received\nlevels of intercontinental strategic\n\"Unequivocal and concrete support of\nsince\n1948 has come as a result of\nforces inferior to the limits provided\nmajority rule in southern Africa.\"\nRepublican initiatives.\"\nfor the Soviet Union.\"\nNo recognition of South Africa an-\n\"The U.S. has always supported the\n\"We should continually remind the\nnexation of Namibia.\nprocess of self-determination in Af-\nSoviet Union\nof its commitments\nEnd \"Republican administration's\nrica.\"\nIn Helsinki to the free flow of people\nrelaxation of arms embargo against\nand ideas.\"\nSouth Africa deny tax advantages\n\"We do not accept military dom-\nto all corporations doing business in\nInance of many Eastern European\nSouth Africa and Rhodesia who sup-\ncountries\" by the U.S.S.R. attempt to\nport or participate in apartheid prac-\ndominate anyother European country\ntices and policies.\"\nlike Yugoslavia would pose \"a grave\nFully enforce un-ordered Rhodesia\nthreat to Deace.\"\nsenction\nand repeal the Byrd\nAmendment.\"\ncontest, for It was the inter-\nMr. Carter's newness on\nwhy -personalities, not\nthe national some and\nideas, that really mattered.\nof foreign policy experience\nThis removed in time, It is\nare obviously going to be\neasy to see how carefully\nprice Republican issues. But\nTHE\nHAS\nthe candidates manipulated\nif 1960 provides any clues,\ntheir disagreements for maxi-\nthe debates could give the\nTHE\nmum tactical advantage. The\nGeorgian an opportunity to\nhottest exchanges came on\nneutralize them.\nKennedy-Nixon Debates a Key\nquestions on which their dif-\nRound Two\nferences appeared to be nar-\nrowest, usually, cold war\nPrequmably, Mr. Ford's\naldes hope that Mr. Carter\nTo What'76 Clashes May Hold\nissues.\nThe first debate was sup-\nwill crumple under pressure\nas Mr. Nixon is sometimes\nposed to be confined to\nsupposed to have done in\nBy JOSEPH LELYVELD\npurses his lips, cranse his\ndetail-the lighting, the can-\ndomestic matters. But Mr.\n1960. But the Vice President\nSpecial to The New Total Times\nneck and, twice simost\nare angles and, because of\nKennedy, who got to speak\ncame back to the second\nMr. Nixon's perspication prob-\nfirst, immediately began a\nWASHINGTON, Aug. 29-\nseems to ned in agreement.\ndebate in fighting trim: He\nProud of what they took\nTwice also, be is shown wip-\nlam, even the temperature.\ngrim exhortation on \"our\nwas better-tailored: profes-\nto be a big advance in the\ning his chin with handker-\nDon Howitt, the CBS pro-\nstruggle for survive! fith Mr.\nsionally made-up, more as-\nway Americans select their\nchief. This Impression is coe\nducer who handled the first\nKhrushchev His riyal, who\ngressive and obviously intent\nof strain.\ndebate, said that it. would\nhad made his reputation as a\nPresident. the television net-\non keeping his gaze steady\nworks promoted the events\nCommetic Problem\nhave been better to k. had\nglobetrotting Vice President\nand his hands from fluttering\nas \"the Great Debates.\" But\nbeen performed before an\nand militant anti-Communist,\nat the time, a number of critics\nMis sult is not dark spough\naudience rather than pro-\nthus found himself on the de-\nIn the numerous opinion\nasked what was as great\nto set him off distinctly from\nduced as & television show.\nfensive in what was supposed\nsurveys made at the time,\nthere is scant evidence that\nabout the encounters and\nthe gray background, and his\nm 4 memo distributed\nin\nto be his area of greatest\nstrength.\nhe lost support as a result\nwhether they were even real\nface has a chalky look-the\nCongress last, week, how-\nof the debates. Their most\ndebates.\nresult, the press soon dis-\never, CBS took the opposite\nAim at Same Target\nimportant effect, it appears,\ncovered, of a last-minute sp\nview, contending that \"the\n\"The dialogue was larguly\nBut while they magnified\nwas to solidify support for\nplication of cosmetic called\nstudio atmosphere\" would be\na paste-up job containing\nbits and enippets from cam-\n\"Lazy Shave\" after he bad\n\"lees of a personal, physical\ntheir differences on for-\nMr. Kennedy among waver-\neign policy, the candidates\ning Democrats who had pre-\nrefused professional makeup.\nend paychic drain on each of\npaign rhetoric already used\nseemed to mute them on do-\nviously been unenthusiastic\nmany times,\" wrote a Wash-\nSo much was eventually\nthe candidates\" than a de-\nwritten about Mr. Nixon's\nbate before a live audience.\nmestic issues. Mr. Kennedy\nabout him.\nington journalist, Douglass\nThis view to Hkely to be\nwarned of stagnation; Mr.\nOf course, the analogy be-\nCater, shortly after be had\nmakeup problems that the\ntested, for Mr. Ford and Mr.\nNixon, of inflation. But they\ntween 1976 and 1960 breaks\nparticipated as a. panellst to\nbiggest surprise in seeing the\nwere aiming at the same\ndown in a number of ways:\nthe third set between John\ndebate now la that be looks\nCarter are negotiating on the\nmiddle-of-the-road voters, so\nMr. Ford is President: also,\nF. Kennedy and Richard M.\nmuch better than legend\ndebates with the nonpartisan\nthey confined themselves to\nhe is regarded as the under-\nNixon. \"As the series wore\nleads one to expect, His dis-\nLeague of Women Voters,\non, the protagonists were\ncomfort was real: He had\nwhich proposes to stage them\nbroad generalities, cautiously\ndog as Mr. Nixon was not.\nlike two weary wrestiers\nin front of audiences in hired\nexpressed.\nMoreover, neither candidate\ncome to the debate tired and\nReactions to the first de-\nhas demonstrated the foren-\nwho kept trying to get the\nIII and had then banged &\nhalls.\nbate made it clear that what\nsic skills of his 1960 precur-\nsame holds.\npreviously infected kneecap\nThe league also proposes to\nYet no one doubted that\non a car door before entering\nhave a debate by the Vice-\nwas said mattered less than\nsors. And, finally, the elect-\nhow it was said. The show\nrate may be more volatile\nthe four debates were the\nthe studio.\nPresidential candidates. It is\nopened with the two candi-\nand open to impressions.\ncentral campaign events of\nBut the impression of stress,\na. curious, footnote, but that\nidea also dates back to 1960\ndates seated in chairs on\nIn this letter connection,\n1960. And after Mr. Kennedy\nwhile distinct, is fleeting.\nwhen It was put forward by\neither side of the moderator,\nProfessor Michael Robinson,\ncame out ahoud by a tissue-\nMost of the time he effective-\nHoward K. Smith.\na political scientists at Amen-\nVice President Nizon to coun-\nthin margin of fewer than\ncommands attention.\n113,000 votes, it was widely\nter a demand by Mr. Kennedy\nMrs. Kennedy has one leg\nican University, notes that\nBut Mr. Nixon's problem\ncrossed over the other; as he\nparty loyalties have loosened\nconcluded that what had\nIn the first debate was more\nfor a fifth debate.\nis introduced, he nods\ndramatically in the last 16\nhappened on television had\nthan cosmetic. It was finding\ngravely.\nyears.\ndetermined the result:\na way to match his rival's\nThe Vice President's hands\nA major change is in the\nsharp and assertive todo\nfidget on his lap; his feet\nrole of the television net-\nEstimating the Risks\nand to defend the record of\n#lide around aimlessly under\nworks in producing the de-\nNow, 16 years later, that\nthe Elsenhower Administra-\nhis chair. As he is intro-\nbates. The 1960 encounters\ntelevised debates between the\ntion without sounding &\nduced, he breaks into a sud-\ntook place in television stu-\ntwo major-party Presidential\nden smile and nods, swivel-\ndios, with the television con-\nfeasive.\ncandidates appear to be an\ning his body awkwardly\nsultants of the candidates on\nidea whose time has come\nIssue of Experience\ntoward Mr. Smith, then back\nhand in the control rooms to\nagain, looking back at 1960\nAlso, \"experience\" had\nto the camera.\nbargain and badger on every\nis one way to estimate the\nbeen one, of Mr. Nixon's\nIgnores Rival\nrisks President Ford and Tim-\ncampaign selling point;\nmy Carter will take and the\nInstead of spontaneous\nCongressman Protests\nthe suggestion being that it\ngive-and-take, there is a\nbenefits they may derive\nwould be dangerous to turn\nwhen they meet before the\nover the country to his\ncounterpoint of capsulized\nWolf Hunt in Alaska\ncameras.\nleaser-known rival, But -\nstatements. Mr. Kennedy\nperience did not prove to be\nspeaks directly into the cam-\nWASHINGTON, Aug. 28\nA reviewing the\na something that \"televised\"\nera without acknowledging\n(UPI)-A Virginia Congress-\nA viewing the other day\nthe presence of his rival. Mr.\nman has asked the Depart-\nof the first two Kennedy-\nwell.\nNixon, beads of perspiration\nment of the Interior to inves-\nNixon debates in a CBS stu-\nHis appoint incomed to\nforming on his lower lip,\ntigate a planned aerial wolf\ndio helped to correct some\nknow at least as many facts\nseems to want to engage both\nhunt in Alaska's Brooks\nold Impressions and reinforce\nis Mr. Nixon did. For Mr.\nMr. Kennedy and the TV\nMountain Range\nothers. in non way, the ex-\nKennody, selevision was a great\naudience. Three times he aska\nRepresentative William G.\nperience was similar to that\nequalizer. He closed the \"ma-\nhis opponent to acknowledge\nWhitehurst, a Republican,\nof sitting through an old\nturity gap.\" Mr. Carter errote\nthat they both are \"sincere.\"\nsaid that the Alaska Fish and\nmovie that was considered\nat the time, by proving him-\nThe camera switches for\nGame Department wanted to\nbold and exciting in its day\nself \"able to stand up to the\n\"reaction shots\" of the Sen-\nkill 80 percent of the wolves\nbut now seems mannered and\nman who stood up to Krush-\nator while the Vice President\nin a vast area of the range\ncoy.\nchev.' 4 reference to Mr.\nis speaking His eyes are\nbecause of . decline In the\nThe narrow neckties, short\nNixon's Imprompte televised\nsteady and alert; his face,\npopulation of Western Arctic\nhaircuts and Armageddos\n\"debate\" with the Soviet\nimpassive except for & slight\nCaribou there.\nrhetoric all contribute to this\nPrime Minister,\nsuggestion of amusement,\nThe area includes land\neffect. The Que-\nIf there is a parralles be-\neven disdain, at the corners\nproposed for designation as\nmay and Matsu to whether\n(weet) 1960 and 1976, M. only\nof his mouth. There is a still-\na major national park and a\nPresident Elsenhower should\nserves to underscore the risk\nness about him that gives an\nnumber of wildlife refuges.\nhave expressed regrets for\nPresident Foed is running as\nimpression of composure.\nMr. Whitehurst asked Thom-\nU-2 flights over the Soviet\nthe first incumbent to debate\nThe close-up shots of Mr.\nas S. Kleppe, Secretary of\nUnion longer seem com-\na for A White House side,\nNixon when Mr. Kennedy\nthe Interior, to review the\npelling. If they ever did.\nRichard B. Cheney, said the\nspeaks show his glance dart-\nplanned wolf hunts to see if\nother day that Mr. would\ning around the studio set. He\nPersonalities Mattered\nthey could be stopped.\ndemonstrate ex-\nBut that hardly detracts\nperience and of\nfrom the fascination of the\nthe Issues.\nTHE CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR\nTuesday, September 7, 1976\n13\nTHE PRESIDENT HAS SEEN\nfinancial\nCarter economics a clear choice over Ford's\nBy David R. Francis\ntheir votes. If the jobless blame the govern-\nUnit labor costs rose at an annual rate of\nment for their plight, they have no other\nUnemployment in the U.S.\nonly 3.4 percent in the mrst hair of this year.\nBeston\nreal alternative than to vate for Mr. Carter.\nSecurity adjusted\nParcent\nThat is sharply below increases of 7.5 per-\nDemocratic presidential candidate\nHe is clearly somewhat more liberal than\n9\ncent in 1975 and 13.2 percent in 1974.\nJunny Carter is beginning to sing the\nthe President.\ntheme song of electoral challengers: \"Any-\nUnlike in the 1999s and the Great Depres-\n:\nBusiness pressure lessened\nthing you can do, I can do better.\nsion, however, the recent recession has\n7\nBusiness is thus under less pressure to\nOn Saturday. at a news conference in\nturned public opinion toward the right\n7.9\njack up prices. especially since there is\nPlains, Georgia, be stressed the need to\nrather than towards the left. That may be\n6\nmore than adequate capacity in most in-\ncurb inflation and achieve a balanced bud-\nbecause of the high inflation rate that ac-\ndustries.\nget. These goals, he added, might delay the\ncompanied the recession.\n5\nSo, whether the voters choose Mr. Ford\nstart of \"costly\" social and other programs\nSo Mr. Carter must make sure be appeals\n4\nor Mr. Carter, the new president's chief\nbe has promised to introduce if elected.\nto the new fiscal and economic conserva-\nThe shift in Mr. Carter's emphasis un-\ntism. This Saturday be emphasized a goal\n3\neconomic problem will be to step up the ex-\npansion slightly without rekindling inflation.\ndoubledly reflects an economic fact: There\nof ending inflation and balancing the federal\n2\nAnd that won't be an easy trick.\nbudget by 1980.\nEconomic scene\nActually, the economy tends to shape the\nEconomists at Data Resources, Inc.,\neconomic positions of presidents more than\nheaded by Harvard Prof. Otto Eckstein,\ntheir economic ideology. And right now in-\nlast week recommended devising ways to\nare as of August 87 million employed in\n1974\n1975\n1975\nflation is probably less of a problem than\nsolve # part of the unemployment problem\nthe United States and 7.5 million unem-\nthe slower pace of the recovery.\nby direct methods that do not require stim-\nployed.\nManagement, Inc a trade group, says that\nulation of the nation's output beyond its pro-\nThis means that those with work are a\nPrices softening\ncorporate purchasing agents now have low-\nductive capacity.\ndominant majority. They are likely to be\nRecent price news has been exceptionally\nered their inflation expectations for the rest\nsomewhat more concerned with rising\ngood for consumers.\nThey suggested a tax credit for job devel-\nof this now expect price boosts\nprices than high unemployment. So Mr.\nthe month ended August 15, farm\nopment in private industries, encouraging\nto be moderate or slight, and look for selec-\nCarter must avoid being labelled a \"big\nprices fell by 4 percent - the sharpest de-\nemployers to use more labor and less capi-\ntive markups rather than increases across\nspender\" if he is to win their political back-\ncline since last November. This should put\ntal and resources to produce a given output,\nthe board. Back in May, the corporate buy-\ning.\nsome restraint on food price increases.\nand hiring disadvantaged persons in the sec-\ners expected \"a period of tough going on\nIt was announced Friday that the number\n. Wholesale prices fell in August by a\nondary labor force. They also urged special\nthe price front.\"\nof jobless rose 80,000 in August to 7,504,000,\nseasonally adjusted 0.1 percent, reflecting\nhiring by state, local, and federal govern-\nWage increase patterns have been rela-\nment.\nor from 7.8 percent to 7.9 percent of the la-\ndeclining food prices. However, industrial\ntively moderate. During the first half of this\nbor force. There now is little chance of the\nprices increased 0.7 percent.\nTheir econometric model shows that the\nyear, first-year pay raises averaged 8.4 per-\nunemployment rate slipping below 7 per-\nof Steel producers had to back off from\ncent. That compares with 10.2 percent last\nuse of fiscal and monetary measures alone\ncent. as predicted earlier by Ford adminis-\ntheir announced 4.5 percent increase in\ncould soon push inflation back up to the 8\nyear and 0.8 percent in 1974.\ntration economists\nprices of flat-rolled products. Competitive\nMoreover productivity has continued to\npercent range.\nPromises can be moderate\nmarket pressures nullified what economists\nincrease handsomely. This means that man-\nThough candidate Carter now talks fiscal\nThe Democratic candidate will undoubt-\ncall \"administered prices\" decisions.\nufacturers unit Labor costs rise less than the\nconservatism. he probably will be more\nedly roast President Ford for mismanaging\nAlumimm makers are also shaving\nwage rates of their employees. At mid-year,\nsympathetic to direct methods of trimming\nthe economy. But he needn't promise\nprices from announced price bikes, though\nthe hourly output of employees in private\nthe number of jobless than Mr. Ford. De-\ngrandiose public, works programs, etc.,\nthey have not rescinded them.\nbusinesses was 4.5 percent higher than a\nspite his step right. the voters still have an\nIn create jobs for the unemployed to get\nThe National Association of Purchasing\nyear earlier\neconomic choice.\nWe buy\nDIAMONDS\nINSURANCE\nFLAME\nPRECIOUS GEMS\nScudder Managed Reserves-\nANNUITIES\nGOLD JEWELRY\nLIFE INSURANCE\nPremium Prices Paid\nComplete Appraisal Servic\nInformation from agency\nNOTCHING DRILLING DRILL NCHING TURAL FABRICATION 30 FORMING\nan easy way to invest\nSILVERWARE\nin Swiss francs\nin the money market.\nScudder Managed Reserves provides an efficient\nway to invest in money-market securities with low risk.\nfor Individuals Estates\nL. AESCHIMANN\nwithout tying up your money.\nInsurance Companies\n$1,000 minimum initial investment\nMember - Appraisers\nAssociation of America\n40, rue du Rhône\nSTRUCTIONS\nNo minimum holding period\nLING\nWrite-a-check redemption feature\nRoy K. Eyges,\nELDING\nInvest by mail or phone\n1211 Geneva 1\nARC\nInc\nSwitzerland\nMIG\nBFI\nTelephone redemption option\nTHE CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR\nTuesday, September 7, 1976\n13\nTHE PRESIDENT HAS SEEN\nfinancial\nCarter economics a clear choice over Ford's\nBy David R. Francis\ntheir votes. If the jobless blame the govern-\nUnit labor costs rose at an annual rate of\nment for their plight, they have no other\nUnemployment in the U.S.\nonly 3.4 percent in the first half of this year.\nBoston\nreal alternative than to vote for Mr. Carter.\nSeasonally adjusted\nPercent\nThat is sharply below increases of 7.5 per-\nDemocratic presidential candidate\nHe is clearly somewhat more liberal than\n9\ncent in 1975 and 13.2 percent in 1974.\nJimmy Carter is beginning to sing the\nthe President.\ntheme song of electoral challengers: \"Any-\nUnlike in the 1930s and the Great Depres-\n8\nBusiness pressure lessened\nthing you can do, I can do better.\"\nsion, however, the recent recession has\n7\nBusiness is thus under less pressure to\nOn Saturday. at a news conference in\nturned public opinion toward the right\n7.9\njack up prices, especially since there is\nPlains, Georgia, he stressed the need to\nrather than towards the left. That may be\n6\nmore than adequate capacity in most in-\ncurb inflation and achieve a balanced bud-\nbecause of the high inflation rate that ac-\ndustries.\n5\nget. These goals, he added, might delay the\ncompanied the recession.\nSo, whether the voters choose Mr. Ford\nstart of \"costly\" social and other programs\nSo Mr. Carter must make sure he appeals\n4\nor Mr. Carter, the new president's chief\nhe has promised to introduce if elected.\nto the new fiscal and economic conserva-\nThe shift in Mr. Carter's emphasis un-\ntism. Thus Saturday he emphasized a goal\n3\neconomic problem will be to step up the ex-\npansion slightly without rekindling inflation.\ndoubtedly reflects an economic fact: There\nof ending inflation and balancing the federal\n2\nAnd that won't be an easy trick.\nbudget by 1980.\nEconomic scene\nActually, the economy tends to shape the\n1\nEconomists at Data Resources, Inc.,\neconomic positions of presidents more than\nheaded by Harvard Prof. Otto Eckstein,\ntheir economic ideology. And right now in-\nlast week recommended devising ways to\nare as of August 87.9 million employed in\n1973-\n1974\n1975\n1976\nflation is probably less of a problem than\nsolve a part of the unemployment problem\nthe United States and 7.5 million unem-\nthe slower pace of the recovery.\nby direct methods that do not require stim-\nployed.\nManagement, Inc., a trade group, says that\nulation of the nation's output beyond its pro-\nThis means that those with work are a\nPrices softening\ncorporate purchasing agents now have low-\nductive capacity.\ndominant majority. They are likely to be\nRecent price news has been exceptionally\nered their inflation expectations for the rest\nThey suggested a tax credit for job devel-\nsomewhat more concerned with rising\ngood for consumers.\nof this year They now expect price boosts\nin the month ended August 15, farm\nopment in private industries, encouraging\nprices than high unemployment. So Mr.\nto be moderate or slight, and look for selec-\nCarter must avoid being labelled a \"big\nprices fell by 4 percent - the sharpest de-\nemployers to use more labor and less capi-\ntive markups rather than increases across\nspender\" if he is to win their political back-\ncline since last November. This should put\ntal and resources to produce a given output,\nthe board. Back in May, the corporate buy-\nand hiring disadvantaged persons in the sec-\ning.\nsome restraint on food price increases.\ners expected \"a period of tough going on\nondary labor force. They also urged special\nIt was announced Friday that the number\nWholesale prices fell in August by a\nthe price front.\"\nhiring by state, local, and federal govern-\nof jobless rose 80,000 in August to 7,506,000,\nseasonally adjusted 0.1 percent, reflecting\nWage increase patterns have been rela-\nment.\nor from 7.8 percent to 7.9 percent of the la-\ndeclining food prices. However, industrial\ntively moderate. During the first half of this\nbor force There now is little chance of the\nprices increased 0.7 percent.\nTheir econometric model shows that the\nyear, first-year pay raises averaged 8.4 per-\nunemployment rate slipping below 7 per-\nSteel producers had to back off from\nuse of fiscal and monetary measures alone\ncent. That compares with 10.2 percent last\ncent. as predicted earlier by Ford adminis-\ntheir announced 4.5 percent increase in\nyear and 9.8 percent in 1974.\ncould soon push inflation back up to the 8\ntration economists.\nprices of flat-rolled products. Competitive\nMoreover productivity has continued to\npercent range.\nPromises can be moderate\nmarket pressures nullified what economists\nincrease handsomely. This means that man-\nThough candidate Carter now talks fiscal\nThe Democratic candidate will undoubt-\ncall \"administered prices\" decisions.\nufacturers unit Tabor costs rise less than the\nconservatism, ne probably will be more\nedly roast President Ford for mismanaging\nAluminum makers are also shaving\nwage rates of their employees. At mid-year,\nsympathetic to direct methods of trimming\nthe economy. But he needn't promise\nprices from announced price hikes, though\nthe hourly output of employees in private\nthe number of jobless than Mr. Ford. De-\ngrandiose public. works programs, etc.,\nthey have not rescinded them.\nbusinesses was 4.5 percent higher than a\nspite his step right, the voters still have an\nto create jobs for the unemployed to get\nThe National Association of Purchasing\nyear earlier.\neconomic choice.\nWe buy\nDIAMONDS\nINSURANCE\nPRECIOUS GEMS\nPRESS TOMATICHING BRAKE AME\nN/C\nScudder Managed Reserves-\nANNUITIES\nGOLD JEWELRY\nLIFE INSURANCE\nSILVERWARE\nin Swiss francs\nCOANSLING\nFORMING\nan easy way to invest\nin the money market.\nPremium Prices Paid\nSAW CUNG\n30'\nScudder Managed Reserves provides an efficient\nComplete Appraisal Service\nInformation from agency\nfor Individuals. Estates.\nFABRICATION\nway to invest in money-market securities with low risk,\nL. AESCHIMANN\nwithout tying up your money.\nInsurance Companies. etc.\n$1,000 minimum initial investment\nMember Appraisers\nthe\nNo minimum holding period\nAssociation of America\nWrite-a-check redemption feature\n40, rue du Rhône\nRoy K. Eyges,\nInvest by mail or phone\n1211 Geneva 1\nARC\nSwitzerland\nBEL\nTelephone redemption option\nInc.\nAdditions or withdrawals in any\n1901\namount on any business day\nONE BULFINCH PLACE\nSince\nNo purchase or redemption charges\nIN THE CAPITOL BANK BUDG 3rd Floor\nat Sudbury St.\nPAX\nDividends declared daily\nBOSTON, MA 02114 617-227-8400\nA Swiss Life Insurance Company\nBLOOMER BLOOMER.FR BLOOMER BLOOMER steel BLOOMER.538. steel PAINTING INC. 60609 INQUIRY\nBroadly diversified investments\nin the Government Ctr.\nMonthly account statements\nNo withdrawal penalty\nContinuous management by\nScudder, Stevens & Clark\nInvest in the money market conveniently with\nPENN SQUARE\nYOUR\nScudder Managed Reserves and make your money work\nharder for you.\nP\nMail to:\nMUTUAL FUND\nScudder Managed Reserves Dept. #32\n10 Post Office Square, Boston, Mass. 02109\na no - load fund\nAPPRAISERS\nTelephone: 617-482-3990 (Call collect)\nA prospectus containing more complete infor-\nDo You Know Today's Value\nmation about Scudder Managed Reserves,\nsting in common stocks for capital gains possibilities\nof Your Machinery and Equipment?\nincluding all charges and expenses, will be sent\nES COMMISSION TO BUY SHARES\nWe specialize in appraising and purchasing\nupon receipt of this coupon. Read the prospectus\ncarefully before you invest or send money.\nHARGE UPON REDEMPTION\nmanufacturing plants of all types.\nName\nPLANS (including \"Keogh Act\" Plan\nMETALWORKING\n-Employed) are available\nAddress\nRUBBER AND PLASTIC\nOur Specialty\nCity\nState\nZip\n76-6771 or Mail Coupon to:\n1419, Reading, PA 19603\nOccupation\nTitle\nLoeser Associates\nSCUDDER\nSCUDDER INVESTMENT\nZip\nCSM\n70 Sanford Street, Fairfield, CT 06430 (203) 259-3321\nTHE PRESIDENT HAS STIEN\nTHURSDAY, SEPT. 2, 1976\nWhat Do We Want From the Debates?\nBy ARTHUR SCHLEEINGHR Ju.\nof the debates will help the electorate most\nsame thing about inflation. Mr. Ford\nThe debates are indisputably a good\nin making its choice? This question is inev.\nshould break down and confess If he has\nthing. The underlying premise of democ-\nItably of secondary Interest to the candi-\nbeen able to think up any other way of con-\nracy is an informed and attentive elector-\ndates. They are naturally concerned with\ntaining inflation than by inducing unem-\nate. Voters are confronting a choice that\nthe design they think will be of greatest po-\nplayment. Mr. Carter should similarly be\nwill very possibly make & considerable dit.\nlitical benefit to themselves. Bo we are in\npressed to explain how he hopes simultane-\nference to their lives. We may not learn a\nfor a time of negotiation in which the sec.\nously to reduce inflation and unemploy-\nlot from watching Messrs. Ford and Carter\nonds maneuver for tactical advantage.\nment without resort to controls. Both\ngrapple with public issues and each other\nThus Mr. Ford's team proposes $0 minute\nshould be asked why price stability has\non television. But we will learn something.\nbeen abandoned as a national objective.\nWe will certainly not loss from the expert-\nLet them tell us how they differ on en-\nence.\nBoard of Contributors\nergy policy, on health policy. on tax policy.\nAt the very worst, the debates will re-\non tariffs. We want to know what they\nmind us that an election is taking place. In\n1960 the proportion of voters expressing\nWe need to know\nthink about the SALT talks. nuclear prolif.\nerations, Americans hustling arms sales to\n\"very much interest\" in the campaign rose\nwhether each candidate is\nthe world. Does Mr. Ford still think he was\n12 percentage points (according to the Ro-\nright in his attack on the government of\nper pall) after the Kennedy Nixon debates\nsatisfied with the present\nPortugal and his covert intervention in An-\nbegan. Over the same period four years\ngola? Does Mr. Carter still want to with.\nbefore, without debates, the Increase was\nlevel of opportunity for\ndraw American troops from South Korea?\none percentage point.\nWhat would they do about Latin America?\nDebates between presidential candi-\nminorities. If not, what\nAfrica? Do we abandon Taiwan and recog.\ndates are BQ self-evidently useful that pro-\nspecific steps would they\nnise Peking? What about Communists in\nvision should have been made long since to\nthe Italian government?\nincorporate them at least as an option In\ntake to improve matters?\nthe quadrennial process. We should not\nA Tricky Business, but\nhave to be struggling in September to\nForeign policy, it must be said, is a\nspring them from the clutches of obscure\ndebates, starting in early September with a\ntricky business. A responsible politician\nsections of the communications and election\nsession on national defense. (Can Mr. Ford\nmight well prefer not to tie. or tip. his\nlaws. Nor should the League of Women\nbe so confident that this is his best terrain?\nhand in connection with, say. Korea, China\nVoters have to be passing the hat in order\nOne assumes that Mr. Carter's decade at\nand Eurocommunism. One cannot promise\nto raise the cash to put them on. We ought\nAnnapolis and with Admiral Rickover's nu-\nabsolutely what one will do In the unknown\nnot to have to bribe our television networke\nclear submarines was not spent In vain.)\nfuture: crises have a way of presenting\nand stations to make prime time available.\nMr. Carter's team likes 60 minute debates,\nthemselvee in unexpected forms. Still. if\nMost Western democracies give their\nstarting later in the campaign and cover-\nthis is frankly said, reasonable listeners\nparties time during elections as an elemen-\ning a diversity of topics.\nwill understand. So, in specific. domestic\ntary public duty. We should do the same.\npolicy will probably be more revealing\nTelevision channels do not own the air-\nt suppose some sort of panel will be\nthan foreign policy.\nways. They make immense profits from 11-\nnecessary to keep the conversation going.\ncenses granted, as the Communications\nBut the debate should not be permitted to\nWhat might be most revealing of all is\nAct says, when \"public convenience, inter-\ndwindie into parallel press conferences\nthe third of the league's proposed sub-\nest, or necessity will be served thereby.'\nwithout direct exchange between the two\njects: the presidency. We would like to\nWhat is better calculated to serve the pub-\nprincipals. As for the subjects, It seems to\nknow to what extent each candidate be\nlic interest than to strengthen and en-\nme that the original League of Women Vot-\nlieves a President can withhold informa-\nlighten our democratic process? Why\nera proposal has much merit: debates on\ntion from Congress and the people by\nshould we have to pay private corporations\nforeign policy, on domestic policy and on\nclaiming \"Executive privilege. How seri-\nto put on programs of such indispensable\nthe presidency itself; to which could be ap-\nously will each take the presidential re-\nimportance to a free society?\npended a fourth catch-all debate dealing\nsponsibility to hold press conferences\"\nwith questions not adequately treated in\nWhat would each do about the CIA? The\nTo do the networks justice, CBS in 1984\nthe first three and adding Measrs. McCar.\nFBI? How can Mr. Ford, as If It were none\noffered free prime time for an extended se-\nthy and Maddox to the cast.\nof his business, Inveigh against a bureau-\nries of joint appearances by the two major\npresidential candidates and, interestingly.\nWhat the country would like to get out\ncracy that has been presided over by Re-\nfor their running mates as well. NBC, I be-\nof the debates, I think, are two things in\npublicans for the last eight years and for\nlieve, has made a similar offer. Congress\nparticular: a sense of the quality of the\n16 of the last 24? Does Mr Carter honestly\nought immediately do whatever is required\nmen seeking our highest office: and a\nbelieve that the reshuffling of government\nsense of their visions of the future of the\nbureaus will produce miraculous results In\nto make those proposals operational.\nRepublic. We hope the debates will test the\neconomy and efficiency? What does each\nMinor Party Problem\njudgment, intelligence, knowledge and\nthink are the vital qualities a President\nshould have? What Presidents does each\npoise of the two candidates. We hope the\nThere is, of course, the troubling quee.\ndebates will give us a vivid impression of\nparticularly admire?\ntion of minor party candidacy. A case can\nwhat each wants to achieve in the next\nA notable opportunity for public enlight-\nbe made for the appearance in one, say, of\nfour years.\nenment lies ahead. The capacity of each\nfour sessions of those candidistes-this year\nEugene McCarthy and Laster Maddox-\nOur gravest domestic problem remains\ncandidate to take advantage of that oppor-\nwho might appeal to more than a minus.\nthat of racial justice. We need to know\ntunity, and forego handing out the usual\ncule number of voters. Our lawyers are re-\nwhether each candidate is satisfied with\nmess of cliches and claptrap, will be EA\nthe present level of opportunity for minori-\nmeasure of their qualifications for the\nsourceful enough, I have no doubt, to find\nties. If not, what specific steps would they\npresidency.\ncriteria that distinguish McCarthy and\nMaddox from Ford and Carter on the one\ntake to improve matters? What kind of\nhand and from the candidates of the prohi-\npriority would they give this issue? Both\nMr. Schlesinger is Albert Schweitzer\nbitionist and vegetarian parties on the\nshould be quizzed, and should quis each\nProfessor of the Humanities at the City\nother. Perhaps one criterion could be the\nother. mercilessly about their intentions to-\nUniversity of New York and winner of Pu-\nnumber of states in which the candidate\nward the cities.\nlitzer Prizes in history and biography. He\nappears on the ballot.\nWe need to know what rate of unem-\nis also a member of the Journal's Board of\ndiscussion will lie be-\nplayment each finds acceptable and how\nContributors. live distinguished professors\nsaño periodic\ntenders The next question is: what design\ndown\nthat\nlevel\nCommodities\nWall Street Journal 9/7/76\nFord-Carter Differences on Farm Policy\nFocus on Proper Size of Government Role\nTHE PRESIDENT HAS SEEN\nBy KAREN ELLIOTT HOUSE\nCOMMODITY INDEXES\nStaff Referter of Two WALL STREET JOURNAL\nWASHINGTON - Jimmy Carter, who\nJAN\nFEB\nMAR\nAPRIMAY\nJUN\nJUL\nAUGISEP\nwent through the Democratic primaries ar-\n380\nguing for less government. favors more gov.\nernment in farming\nIn speeches and position papers, the\nDemocratic presidential nominee argues\n360\nthat the government must Insure stable 'con-\nsumer food prices by creating a grain re-\n1976\nserve and at the same time assure profita-\n340\nble farm prices by raising federal subsidies\nSPOT\nto farmers.\nThose proposals put him at loggerheads\n320\nwith President Ford And next spring. one of\nthem will be In the White House to press his\nfarm policies on Congress, which will be re-\nplacing the expiring 1973 farm bill with a\n300\nFUTURES\nnew one. The key question how big a role\nshould government have in farm and food\nDOW JONES\npolicies?\n280\nCOMMODITY INDEXES\n'Our policy is one of freedom from gov.\n1924 26-100\nernment interference for our farmers.\" says\nEarl Buts, Mr. Ford's Agriculture Secre-\nJAN\nFEB\nMAR\nAPR\nMAY\nJUN\nJUL\nAUG\nSEP\n260\ntary. \"The Democrats program to just the\nNet\nYr\nopposite. They talk of a grain reserve and\nClose\nChe\nAgo\nhigher support prices. Those two add up to\nDew Jenes Patures\n342.00\n0.73\n299.06\nDew Jenes Send\n337.43\n0.19\n316.20\ngetting government back in the commodity\nRouter United Kingdom\n1466.1\n24\n1161.8\nbusiness\nNot so, says P. R (Bobby) Smith of Win-\nFord and Mr. Carter on other 198ues. Both\nder. Ga., one of Mr. Carter's chief farm ad.\npromise they won't embargo grain sales to\nvisers. We're not going back to the Kenne-\nother nations except in emergencies. such as\ndy-Johnson era of big government farm pro-\na massive crop failure here. Both agree that\nFrams. were simply talking about giving\nthe estate-tax exemption for farms should\narmers a chance to stay in business.\nbe increased. President Ford has proposed\nBoth sides already are blasting away at\nraising it to $150,000 from $80,000. Mr.\neach other in front of farm audiences. Secre-\nCarter hasn't said how high he would like to\ntary Butz calls Mr. Carter, who grows pea-\nsee the exemption but he has said the es\nnuts, a \"one-crop farmer,\" and declares he\ntate-tax value of the land should be based on\nis in the hip pocket of AFL-CIO President\nits use for agriculture rather than on its po-\nGeorge Meany. \"With Carter in the White\ntential value for commercial subdivision\nHouse, George Meany will be the shadow\nSecretary or ARTICUITURE. Mr. Butz says.\nMr. Carter charges Mr. Butz and President\nFord with \"unparalleled incompetence\" in\nblocking foreign grain sales, which have\nbeen embargoed four times in the past three\nyears.\nStockpiling Grain\nBehind the loud rhetoric are key differ.\nences between Mr. Carter and President\ninvolve the creation of a grain\nstockbiling\nenom\nmeat\nmarreed\nsatisfy\ndo-\nmestle needs for 60 days roughly 25 million\nmetric tons based on current use. A metric\nton is 2,201.6 pounds. Buch a reserve, he\nsays, would insure grain for U.S. needs,\nkeep food prices stable and make future em-\nbargoes unhecessary.\nUnder the Carter plan half the grain\nheld by Armera and the rest by\ngovernment n tan known how much the\nreserve would cost taxpayers, whether the\ngovernment would pay storage costs on\ngrain held by farmers or how farmers would\nbe prohibited from selling their stored grain\nif prices rose.\nWe looking into the exact mechanism\nof how to accumulate and operate\nserve.\" says Oliver Miller, Mr. Carter's co-\nordinator in Atlanta for agricultural issues.\nWe may have an answer in a few weeks.\"\nPresident Ford strongly opposes any gov-\nernment grain reserve, which hill mt depress\n(Tem prices. Farmers, he says, rare better\nwhen they control surplus grain, selling It as\nthey do currently when the prices rise\nFarmers currently hold about a 79-day sup-\nply of wheat and feed grains, or about 33.3\nmillion metric tons. the Agriculture Depart-\nment estimates. Farmers pay the storage\nbill. thereby sparing taxpayers those costs,\nwhich rose to $1 million a day in 1970 before\nthe Nixon administration sold government-\nowned grain to Russia and subsequently\nended farm programs that had created gov.\nernment surpluses.\nAt the heart of Mr. Carter's farm policy\nis a promise of higher price supports the\ngovernment loans BIRT aubsidies available to\nfarmers. Mr. Carter says the support prices,\ncurrently tar below market prices, must be\nraised at least to reflect the cost of produc.\ning commodities. But he hasn't said what\nthe new levels might be in a Carter adminis-\ntration.\nRobert Lewis of the National Farmers\nUnion here says, \"his statement is poorly\ndefined and could mean a lot of things But\nwe're optimistic ne Intends to put prices at\nreasonable levels.\nSubsidy for Feanuts\nOne crop that is highly subsidized is pea\nnuts, Mr. Carter hasn't announced whether\nhe favors continuing a New Deal program\nthat forces the government to buy about\n600,000 tons of surplus peanuts each year at\nmore than double the world market price\nThat program will cost taxpayers $155 mil-\nlion this year. VI don't expect him to take B\nposition,' Mr. Smith, the Carter adviser\nsays. He has a vested interest. Although\nMr. Carter hasn't received any federal pay-\nments since 1973. he benefits from the artifi-\ncially high price that peanuts bring because\nof government controls. Mr. Ford favors\neliminating the peanut program.\nThere is agreement between President\nCommodities\nWall Street Journal 9/7/76\nFord-Carter Differences on Farm Policy\nFocus on Proper Size of Government Role\nTHE PRESIDENT HAS SEEN\nBy KAREN ELLIOTT HOUSE\nCOMMODITY INDEXES\nStaff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL\nWASHINGTON Jimmy Carter, who\nJAN\nMAR\nAPR\nMAY\nJUN\nJUL\nAUG\nSEP\nwent through the Democratic primaries ar-\n380\nguing for less government, favors more gov-\nernment in farming.\nIn speeches and position papers, the\nDemocratic presidential nominee argues\n360\nthat the government must insure stable con-\nsumer food prices by creating a grain re-\n1976\nserve and at the same time assure profita-\n340\nble farm prices by raising federal subsidies\nSPOT\nto farmers.\nM\nThose proposals put him at loggerheads\n320\nwith President Ford And next spring, one of\nthem will be in the White House to press his\nfarm policies on Congress, which will be re-\nplacing the expiring 1973 farm bill with a\n300\nFUTURES\nnew one. The key question: how big a role\nshould government have in farm and food\nDOW JONES\npolicies?\n280\nCOMMODITY INDEXES\n\"Our policy is one of freedom from gov-\n1924 26-100\nernment interference for our farmers,\" says\nEarl Butz, Mr. Ford's Agriculture Secre-\nJAN\nFEB\nMAR\nAPR\nMAY\nJUN\nJUL\nAUG\nSEP\n260\ntary. \"The Democrats program is just the\nNet\nYr.\nopposite. They talk of a grain reserve and\nClose\nChg.\nAgo\nhigher support prices. Those two add up to\nDow Jones Futures\n342.00\n0.73\n299.06\nDow Jones Spot\n337.43\n0.19\n316.20\ngetting government back in the commodity\nReuter United Kingdom\n1466.1\n+ 2.4\n1161.8\nbusiness.\nNot says P. R. (Bobby) Smith of Win-\nFord and Mr. Carter on other issues. Both\nder. Ga., one of Mr. Carter's chief farm ad-\npromise they won't embargo grain sales to\nvisers. We re not going back to the Kenne-\nother nations except in emergencies, such as\nJohnson era of big government farm pro-\na massive crop failure here. Both agree that\ngrams. We re simply talking about giving\nthe estate-tax exemption for farms should\nfarmers a chance to stay in business.\nbe increased. President Ford has proposed\nBoth sides already are blasting away at\nraising it to $150,000 from $60,000. Mr.\neach other in front of farm audiences. Secre-\nCarter hasn't said how high he would like to\ntary Butz calls Mr. Carter, who grows pea-\nsee the exemption but he has said the es-\nnuts, a \"one-crop farmer, and declares he\ntate-tax value of the land should be based on\nis in the hip pocket of AFL-CIO President\nits use for agriculture rather than on its po-\nGeorge Meany. With Carter in the White\ntential value for commercial subdivision.\nHouse. George Meany will be the shadow\nSecretary of Agriculture.' Mr. Butz says.\nMr. Carter charges Mr. Butz and President\nFord with \"unparalleled incompetence\" in\nblocking foreign grain sales, which have\nbeen embargoed four times in the past three\nyears.\nStockpiling Grain\nBehind the loud rhetoric are key differ-\nences between Mr. Carter and President\nFord. One involves the creation of a grain\nreserve. Mr. Carter favors stockpiling\nenough wheat and feed grains to satisfy do-\nmestic needs for 60 days-roughly 25 million\nmetric tons based on current use. A metric\nton is 2,204.6 pounds. Such a reserve, he\nsays, would insure grain for U.S. needs,\nkeep food prices stable and make future em-\nbargoes unnecessary.\nUnder the Carter plan, half the grain\nwould be held by farmers and the rest by\ngovernment. It isn't known how much the\nreserve would cost taxpayers, whether the\ngovernment would pay storage costs on\ngrain held by farmers or how farmers would\nbe prohibited from selling their stored grain\nIf prices rose.\nWe re looking into the exact mechanism\nof how to accumulate and operate a re-\nserve, says Oliver Miller, Mr. Carter's co-\nordinator in Atlanta for agricultural issues.\n'We may have an answer in a few weeks.\"\nPresident Ford strongly opposes any gov-\nernment grain reserve, which might depress\nfarm prices. Farmers, he says, fare better\nwhen they control surplus grain, selling It as\nthey do currently when the prices rise.\nFarmers currently hold about a 79-day sup-\nply of wheat and feed grains, or about 33.5\nmillion metric tons, the Agriculture Depart-\nment estimates. Farmers pay the storage\nbill, thereby sparing taxpayers those costs,\nwhich rose to $1 million a day in 1970 before\nthe Nixon administration sold government-\nowned grain to Russia and subsequently\nended farm programs that had created gov-\nernment surpluses.\nAt the heart of Mr. Carter's farm policy\nis a promise of higher price supports the\ngovernment loans and subsidies available to\nfarmers. Mr. Carter says the support prices,\ncurrently far below market prices, must be\nraised at least to reflect the cost of produc-\ning commodities. But he hasn't said what\nthe new levels might be in a Carter adminis-\ntration.\nRobert Lewis of the National Farmers\nUnion here says, \"his statement is poorly\ndefined and could mean a lot of things. But\nwe're optimistic he intends to put prices at\nreasonable levels.'\nSubsidy for Peanuts\nOne crop that is highly subsidized is pea-\nnuts. Mr. Carter hasn't announced whether\nhe favors continuing a New Deal program\nthat forces the government to buy about\n600,000 tons of surplus peanuts each year at\nmore than double the world market price.\nThat program will cost taxpayers $155 mil-\nlion this year. VI don't expect him to take a\nposition,' Mr. Smith, the Carter adviser\nsays. \"He has a vested interest.' Although\nMr. Carter hasn't received any federal pay-\nments since 1973, he benefits from the artifi-\ncially high price that peanuts bring because\nof government controls. Mr. Ford favors\neliminating the peanut program.\nThere is agreement between President\nJohn P. Roche\nWodnington Star\nCarter has NATO checking the fire esca\nThat 4.5 tremor on the\nneutral Austrians fit into\nable response to a Warsaw\nwould be limited to Europe\nHe then\nRichter Scale about a week\nthe picture? Finally, where\nPact blitz into Western En-\nWest and East and it\ntation on\nago did not demity another\nwould the meeting be held\nrope.\nwould be horrible. But it is\nclear wes\nearthquake in China it\nin safety Iceland?\nTo quiet Soviet fears, we\na false hope to exclude the\nwonder N\nrepresented a shudder in\nThen came another\nwent in for ministurization\ntwo superpowers from\nsurreptitio\nthe NATO chancelleries\nthump on Dulles's bass-\nand extraordinary accura-\nthat.\"\nfire escape\nover Jimmy Carter's Intest\ndrum: \"The standoff mu-\ncy. The theory was that if\nramblings on limited\nclear strength between us\nBrezhnev knew our nukes\nclear war\nand the Soviet Union, where\nwere small, clean and accu-\nRight after the conven-\nboth of us have substantial\nrate, and only targeted on\ntion, the candidate met with\noverkill capacities, is a\nmilitary installations, be\nthe Hearst Taskforce and\nmajor deterrent to war in\nwould genially accept the\ndelivered some remarkable\nEurope. \"Massive retalia-\nmilitary symmetry. His re-\nmusings on the subject of\ntion,\" Dulles's phrase, rides\nponse, however, was to up-\nAmerican reliance on the\nagain.\ndate his large, dirty and\nnuclear deterrent. To the\nFinally, he seemed to be-\nrelatively inaccurate short-\nextent they were Intelligi-\nlieve we still have a \"pre-\nrange and intermediate-\nble, they marked - as I\nemptive strike\" capacity\nrange ballistic missiles.\nnoted here a pure \"Back\nagainst the Soviets, that we\n(Contrary to recent specu-\nto Dulles\" approach.\ncould take out their retalia-\nlation, the evidence indi-\nSince his views went\ntory capabilities in one sud-\ncates their SRBMs and\nlargely unreported in the\nden salvo.\nIRBMs have not been\nsummer doldrums, let me\nThe root of Carter's prob.\nMIRVed: Moscow is just\nagain summarize them.\nlem is his belief that limited\ngetting more resonance for\nFirst, he said he would\nnuclear war is a fake op-\nthe ruble.)\nuse atomic weapons if he\ntion. I completely agree.\nGiven Brezhnev's under-\nwas \"convinced the securi-\nSince Henry Kissinger\nstandable refusal to play by\nty or existence own\nfirst surfaced the concept in\nour rules (they have anoth-\n1958 (later backing off), I\ner manual, by Lenin, out of\nImmediately readers in\nhave inveighed against it in\nClausewitz, which empha-\nTokyo, Seoul and Western\nseason and out, particularly\nsizes that war is not a\nEurope went on red alert.\nwhen it almost became part\nballet), only a lunatic would\nour own nation.\"\nof our national policy dis-\nput his money on a limited\nguised as the Multilateral\nwar staying limited. Jimmy\nSecond he got into the\nNuclear Force (MLF).\nCarter clearly does not fall\nEuropean situation, though\nIndeed, I like to think I\ninto this category, but in-\nhardly in a reassuring fash-\nhad a hand in President\nstead of advocating the only\nion: 'The use of atomic\nJohnson's decision, immedi-\nreasonable alternative - a\nweapons in Europe would\nately after the 1964 election,\nconventional build-up - he\ncertainly not be contemplat-\nto scuttle MLF. I asked if\nhas again, in an interview\ned by me without agree-\nhe really thought Moscow\nwith C.L. Suizberger of the\nment of the nations who\nwould take seriously a\nNew York Times, gone\nwould be most directly af-\nstatement that the views ex-\ndrifting off into strategic no\nfected by retaliatory ac-\npressed by an MLF nuke\nman's land.\ntions against the Soviet\nhitting Kiev were not neces-\nUnion\nI certainly\nsarily those of the govern-\n\"The Russians,' he said,\ncouldn't imagine us using\nment of the United States?\n\"have always gone all-out\nnuclear weapons in Europe\nIn the post-Vietnam run-\nin their planning (for a\nwithout Germany and Aus-\ndown of American\ntactical, not limited, nu-\ntria and perhaps France ap-\nconventional forces, tacti-\nclear war). But make the\nproving their use.\"\ncal nuclear weapons\ndistinction that they would\nWhat on earth did this\nbecame a capital-intensive\nexclude direct attacks by\nmean?\nsubstitute for troops. And\nthem on the U.S.A. and di-\nIn the event of a crisis,\nwhether we admitted it or\nrect attacks by us (on\nwould he call a conference\nnot, a tactical nuclear first-\nthem).\nand take a vote? How do\nstrike was the only conceiv-\n\"For them, a tactical war\nJohn P. Roche\nTHE PRESIDENT STATE\nWodnington Star\n9/3/76\nCarter has NATO checking the fire escape\nThat 4.5 tremor on the\nneutral Austrians fit into\nable response to a Warsaw\nwould be limited to Europe\nHe then advocated a limi-\nRichter Scale about a week\nthe picture? Finally, where\nPact blitz into Western Eu-\n- West and East - and it\ntation on the spread of nu-\nago did not signify another\nwould the meeting be held\nrope.\nwould be horrible. But it is\nclear weapons! Is it any\nearthquake in China - it\nin safety? Iceland?\nTo quiet Soviet fears, we\na false hope to exclude the\nwonder NATO powers are\nrepresented a shudder in\nThen came another\nwent in for miniaturization\ntwo superpowers from\nsurreptitiously checking the\nthe NATO chancelleries\nthump on Dulles's bass-\nand extraordinary accura-\nthat.\"\nfire escape?\nover Jimmy Carter's latest\ndrum: \"The standoff nu-\ncy. The theory was that if\nramblings on limited nu-\nclear strength between us\nBrezhnev knew our nukes\nclear war.\nand the Soviet Union, where\nwere small, clean and accu-\nRight after the conven-\nboth of us have substantial\nrate, and only targeted on\ntion, the candidate met with\noverkill capacities, is a\nmilitary installations, he\nthe Hearst Taskforce and\nmajor deterrent to war in\nwould genially accept the\ndelivered some remarkable\nEurope. \"Massive retalia-\nmilitary symmetry. His re-\nmusings on the subject of\ntion,\" Dulles's phrase, rides\nponse, however, was to up-\nAmerican reliance on the\nagain.\ndate his large, dirty and\nnuclear deterrent. To the\nFinally, he seemed to be-\nrelatively inaccurate short-\nextent they were intelligi-\nlieve we still have a \"pre-\nrange and intermediate-\nble, they marked - as I\nemptive strike\" capacity\nrange ballistic missiles.\nnoted here - a pure \"Back\nagainst the Soviets, that we\n(Contrary to recent specu-\nto Dulles\" approach.\ncould take out their retalia-\nlation, the evidence indi-\nSince his views went\ntory capabilities in one sud-\ncates their SRBMs and\nlargely unreported in the\nden salvo.\nIRBMs have not been\nsummer doldrums, let me\nThe root of Carter's prob-\nMIRVed: Moscow is just\nagain summarize them.\nlem is his belief that limited\ngetting more resonance for\nFirst, he said he would\nnuclear war is a fake op-\nthe ruble.)\nuse atomic weapons if he\ntion. I completely agree.\nGiven Brezhnev's under-\nwas \"convinced the securi-\nSince Henry Kissinger\nstandable refusal to play by\nty or existence of our own\nfirst surfaced the concept in\nour rules (they have anoth-\nwas threatened.\"\n1958 (later backing off), I\ner manual, by Lenin, out of\nImmediately readers in\nhave inveighed against it in\nClausewitz, which empha-\nTokyo, Seoul and Western\nseason and out, particularly\nsizes that war is not a\nEurope went on red alert.\nwhen it almost became part\nballet), only a lunatic would\nour own nation.\"\nof our national policy dis-\nput his money on a limited\nguised as the Multilateral\nwar staying limited. Jimmy\nSecond he got into the\nNuclear Force (MLF).\nCarter clearly does not fall\nEuropean situation, though\nIndeed, I like to think I\ninto this category, but in-\nhardly in a reassuring fash-\nhad a hand in President\nstead of advocating the only\nion: \"The use of atomic\nJohnson's decision, immedi-\nreasonable alternative - a\nweapons in Europe would\nately after the 1964 election,\nconventional build-up - he\ncertainly not be contemplat-\nto scuttle MLF. I asked if\nhas again, in an interview\ned by me without agree-\nhe really thought Moscow\nwith C.L. Sulzberger of the\nment of the nations who\nwould take seriously a\nNew York Times, gone\nwould be most directly af-\nstatement that the views ex-\ndrifting off into strategic no\nfected by retaliatory ac-\npressed by an MLF nuke\nman's land.\ntions against the Soviet\nhitting Kiev were not neces-\nUnion I certainly\nsarily those of the govern-\n\"The Russians,' he said,\ncouldn't imagine us using\nment of the United States?\n\"have always gone all-out\nnuclear weapons in Europe\nIn the post-Vietnam run-\nin their planning (for a\nwithout Germany and Aus-\ndown of American\ntactical, not limited, nu-\ntria and perhaps France ap-\nconventional forces, tacti-\nclear war). But make the\nproving their use.\"\ncal nuclear weapons\ndistinction that they would\nWhat on earth did this\nbecame a capital-intensive\nexclude direct attacks by\nmean?\nsubstitute for troops. And\nthem on the U.S.A. and di-\nIn the event of a crisis,\nwhether we admitted it or\nrect attacks by us (on\nwould he call a conference\nnot, a tactical nuclear first-\nthem).\nand take a vote? How do the\nstrike was the only conceiv-\n\"For them, a tactical war\nDigitized from Box 1 of the White House Special Files Unit Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library\nFORD\nTHE PRESIDENT HAS SEEN\nPolitics 3\nSensitive Issues: Welfare, Social Security\nThis is the second of a series of articles detail-\nThe House Ways and Means Committee, however, is\ning the differences between President Ford's and\nexpected to consider tacking a smaller rate increase-.1 per\nJimmy Carter's positions on major issues likely to\ncent for employer and employees-onto \"decoupling\"\nface the 95th Congress.\nlegislation (HR 14430), which aims to correct a costly defect\nMuch as they might like to, President Ford and Jimmy\nin the method used to adjust Social Security benefits for in-\nCarter cannot easily avoid the Social Security and welfare\nflation. While the \"decoupling\" bill is not likely to pass dur-\nreform issues that have been pitfalls for some other\ning 1976, chances are good that the 95th Congress will\npresidential nominees of both parties.\napprove some form of the legislation.\nFor example, Sen. Barry Goldwater (R Ariz.) alarmed\nFord has called his proposal to raise payroll taxes essen-\nmuch of the nation in 1964 with his proposal to make Social\ntial to the solvency of the Social Security system. \"Simple\nSecurity voluntary, a stand Republicans have taken pains\narithmetic warns all of us that the social security trust fund\nto repudiate ever since. Then in 1972 Sen. George\nis headed for trouble,\" Ford said in his 1976 State of the\nMcGovern (D S.D.) floated his plan to guarantee every\nUnion message. \"Unless we act soon to make sure the fund\nAmerican an income of $1,000, which proved an easy target\ntakes in as much as it pays out, there will be no security\nfor his opponents.\nfor old or young.\"\nWhile such experiences might suggest a cautious, low-\nprofile approach to these issues, certain facts make them\nimpossible for this year's candidates to ignore.\nNational Issues\nGovernment reports show the Social Security system\nrunning an annual deficit and forecast depletion of the Old\nAge, Survivors and Disability Insurance (OASDI) trust\nThe President is staunchly opposed to other approaches\nfunds by the early 1980s, unless additional revenues are\nfor boosting trust fund revenues. Emphasizing his intention\nprovided or benefit levels adjusted. In addition, economists\nto preserve the contributory nature of the program, Ford es-\nwarn that demographic factors such as low birth rates com-\npecially objected to proposals to supplement payroll tax\nbined with the aging of the \"baby boom\" generation even-\nreceipts with general tax revenues, even on a temporary\ntually will strain the system even more, requiring a relatively\nbasis.\nsmaller work force to support a larger population of retirees.\nHis administration also has been unsympathetic to\nsuggestions involving further extensions of the payroll tax\nStaggering Caseloads\nwage base; under existing law, the ceiling on earnings sub-\nAnother unsettling trend is the sharp growth of welfare\nject to the tax will rise automatically to $16,500, from\ncaseloads. The Department of Health, Education and\n$15,300, in January. Administration spokesmen, such as\nWelfare estimates that Aid to Families with Dependent\nSocial Security Administration Commissioner James B.\nChildren (AFDC)-the nation's largest welfare\nCardwell, argued that raising the ceiling on covered earn-\nprogram-now supports 11.5 million persons, compared\nings would simply compound the system's long-range\nwith 4.4 million in 1965 and 2 million in 1955. And, despite\nfinancial difficulties, because of the link between con-\nannual federal outlays exceeding $32-billion for public\ntributors' taxable earnings and their eventual benefit levels.\nassistance programs (such as AFDC, Medicaid, food\nDemocratic nominee Jimmy Carter has flatly opposed\nstamps), the numbers of poor Americans continue to rise. In\nproposals to raise payroll taxes. \"Increasing the contribu-\n1974 the Census Bureau counted 24.3 million persons as\ntion rate as President Ford has suggested would put an\npoor-over one million more than the year before.\neven greater burden on the average wage earner, would not\nIn view of such developments, Ford and Carter agree\ninsure more benefits, and would require everyone to pay\nthat something must be done to restore public confidence in\nmore,\" Carter said.\nthe Social Security system and to improve the operations of\nBlaming Republican economic policies for the current\nwelfare programs. But there has been little consensus on\nshortages of Social Security revenues, Carter claimed that\njust what steps to take.\nrecent periods of high unemployment and inflation had\ntogether deprived the system of tax receipts and\nnecessitated large increases in benefit costs. Carter said he\nSocial Security\nwould concentrate on achieving greater reductions in un-\nemployment and inflation to bring the system into balance.\nPayroll Tax and Wage Base\nIf the deficits persisted, however, Carter said he would\nFord and Carter sharply disagree on solutions to the\nsupport further increases in the taxable earnings base. And,\nSocial Security system's short-run financing problems. In\nas more of a last resort, he would be willing to use general\nhis fiscal 1977 budget request, Ford called for an increase in\ntax revenues to help finance Social Security.\npayroll tax rates, raising both the employer and employee\ncontributions (currently a flat 5.85 per cent of covered earn-\nBenefits Structure\nings) by .3 percentage points apiece. According to ad-\nBoth candidates have endorsed the types of changes in\nministration estimates, the higher rates would produce an\nthe benefits structure contained in the \"decoupling\" bill.\nextra $3.5-billion in tax revenues.\nIntroduced at Ford's request, the bill would end current\nConcerned that a tax increase of this size would tend to\ntechniques of adjusting benefit schedules for both wage and\ncounteract the stimulative economic effects of the income\nprice increases-an overcompensation for inflation that\ntax cuts initiated in 1975, Congress effectively rejected the\ncould allow recipients' benefits to exceed their pre-\nproposal when it agreed upon spending targets in March.\nretirement wages. Carter has proposed a similar reform,\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL OUARTERLY INC.\nReproduction prohibited in whole or in part except by editorial clients\nSept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2467\nPolitics 4\nPolitics 5\naimed at guaranteeing current workers the same\nproposals to increase the share of federal funds supporting\nof congressional action, Ford pressed for administrative\nfinancial situation will be harmed by the breadwinner\nrelationship between benefits and wages in effect for current\nAFDC and medical assistance programs, but few plans\nregulations to reduce program costs and participation\nremaining with his dependents,\" Carter told the\nretirees.\naddressed the issue of converting the existing network of\nlevels. New Department of Agriculture standards, currently\nDemocratic Party Platform Committee in June, \"and ef-\nBeyond the existing financial difficulties, few campaign\nstate-run public assistance programs (such as AFDC,\nunder court challenge, would drop from the program an es-\nforts should be made to have fathers who abandon their\nproposals address longer-run or more permanent concerns.\nMedicaid) and federal \"in-kind\" aid (such as food stamps)\ntimated 5 million recipients-most with household incomes\nfamily be forced to continue support.\"\nWith projections raising doubts about the ability of future\ninto a single, nationally standard cash payment system.\njust above the poverty line. (Details of food stamp con-\nCarter also emphasized the need to relate welfare\ngenerations to support the growing population of retired\ntroversy, Weekly Report pp. 2236, 1118)\nreform to changes in existing government employment\npersons, for example, the wisdom of maintaining the current\nMinimum Income Concept\nprograms.\n\"pay-as-you-go\" system has been questioned.\nShortly before she retired, Rep. Martha W. Griffiths (D\nCarter\nAs part of broader plans to improve living conditions of\nsenior citizens, and make retirement life more meaningful,\nMich. 1955-75) broke the ice in December 1974 with a com-\nCarter, in contrast, has said that his administration\nOutlook\nCarter favors some liberalization of the rule requiring\nbination cash allowance/tax rebate plan that has served as\nwould consider \"a complete overhaul of our welfare system\"\nproportionate reductions in Social Security payments to\nthe model for current proponents of the guaranteed\na high priority matter. \"Our welfare system is an insult to\nBecause Carter is making an issue of welfare reform\nbeneficiaries earning more than $2,760 a year. \"Let them\nminimum income concept in both the House and the\nthose who pay the bill and those who honestly need help,\"\nduring his campaign, the legislative prospects for com-\nearn up to $3,600 at most,\" Carter recommended, claiming\nSenate. (1974 Weekly Report p. 3274)\nCarter said. \"The basic components of a fair and workable\nprehensive changes in the system generally are considered\nthat \"it would cost too much\" to drop the retirement earn-\nGriffiths' plan set the basic benefit for a family of four\nprogram are well known It's time to act.\"\nmuch brighter under Carter than under Ford. \"If Carter's\nings test entirely.\nwith no income at $4,300 and required that the grants be\nCarter has endorsed the guaranteed minimum payment\nelected, you'll see new life at HEW,\" predicted a con-\nThe Social Security Administration estimates a loss of\nreduced 50 cents for each dollar earned. The payments, to\nconcept, with some modifications. \"We should have one\ngressional aide to Robert J. Cornell (D Wis.), a main\nmore than $6-billion from elimination of the earnings\nbe administered by the Internal Revenue Service, would\nfairly uniform standard of payment, adjusted to the extent\norganizer of large-scale welfare reform efforts in the House.\ntest-a drain the agency claims it cannot afford. Its es-\nreplace the existing AFDC and food stamps programs.\nfeasible for cost-of-living differences and with strong work\nIn addition, there are definite plans to revive in the\ntimate makes allowance for Social Security taxes-but not\n(Revisions of Medicaid, however, would await action on\nincentives built in,\" Carter told the National Governors'\n95th Congress current congressional proposals for a\nincome taxes-that beneficiaries would pay if the removal\nnational health insurance plans.) The additional cost of the\nConference July 6. \"In no case should the level of benefits\nguaranteed minimum income. These include companion\nof the restriction induced more retirement-age individuals\nGriffiths-type reforms is estimated in the $13-billion to $15-\nmake not working more attractive than working.\"\nbills by Cornell (HR 6430), Sens. Jacob K. Javits (R N.Y.)\nto continue working.\nbillion range, if the existing income tax cuts enacted in 1975\nTo preserve incentives to work, Carter calls for a \"two-\nand McGovern (S 3000), as well as a separate bill (S 3665)\nremain in effect. Without the tax reductions, the cost is\ntrack\" system, essentially separating the employable from\nby Sen. J. Glenn Beall Jr. (R Md.). In the next Congress,\nplaced at $22- to $24-billion.\nWelfare Reform\nthe unemployable poor. Under this plan, persons physically\nthese sponsors generally anticipate more help from a Carter\nPolitically conservative critics of the welfare system\nable to work-except for mothers of pre-school\nadministration than from a Ford administration.\nhave focused on reducing the role of the federal government\nchildren-would be considered unemployed. \"They should\nSome observers also expect Ford, if re-elected, to be\nSocial Security does not function purely as a pension\nand tightening standards of eligibility for relief. One set of\nbe trained for a job and offered a job,\" Carter explained,\nmore receptive to minimum income-type programs in his\nplan, of course; it has an income-support component as\nproposals advanced by conservatives in both chambers of\nadding that public jobs should be created if necessary. \"If\nnext term than he has been in the past. In either case, much\nwell. Since the first payments of Social Security benefits in\nCongress would eliminate aid to strikers and students and\nthey decline the job, they should be ineligible for further\nprobably will depend on outside momentum for change.\n1940, the benefit schedule has favored workers at the lower\nrequire stricter proof that recipients have sought work.\nbenefits.\"\n\"There's little interest now among members of Congress,\"\nend of the income scale, \"replacing\" larger proportions of\nAlong with the minimum income plans, these proposals\nThe Carter campaign estimates that about 10 per cent\none welfare reform proponent said. \"They think it's too con-\ntheir pre-retirement earnings.\ncurrently are lodged in congressional committees that have\nof current welfare recipients would fall in the employable\ntroversial and costly, and they'd rather not get involved.\"\nStressing the distinction between social insurance and\ntaken no action on them.\ncategory. The rest-primarily the aged, the handicapped or\nFurther, as the McGovern campaign found out, the\nwelfare, proponents of the Social Security system have firm-\ndisabled, and persons with dependent children-would\nconcept of a guaranteed annual income can quickly lose its\nly resisted proposals to make benefits even more directly\nFord\nreceive a standard payment \"adequate to meet the\nappeal when numbers and cost figures are identified. A cash\ncontingent on means. Advocates of welfare reform, on the\nPresident Ford generally has taken the position that\nnecessities of life.\" To encourage these individuals to hold\nprogram that aids any significant numbers of the working\nother hand, have had somewhat greater success when they\nmore than piecemeal reform of the welfare system is needed,\npart-time jobs if possible, Carter favors increasing the\npoor, explained a congressional specialist in welfare reform,\nhave been able to link their proposals with Social Security.\nbut not necessarily right away. Maintaining that \"complex\namounts they can earn without triggering a reduction of\nwill not necessarily cost any less than is being spent on\nwelfare programs cannot be reformed overnight,\" Ford also\ntheir benefits.\npublic assistance already-and may cost a great deal more.\nSSI\nhas expressed doubts that the economy could absorb any\nUnlike McGovern, Carter has not attempted to attach\n\"Setting the specific benefit levels will be very difficult,\"\nIn 1974 the Supplemental Security Income (SSI)\nmajor new expenditures for welfare before the end of the\nnumbers and prices to these proposals. Details such as the\nshe added, noting that the incomes of about 10 per cent of\nprogram administered by the Social Security Administra-\ndecade.\nspecific benefit levels for either group of recipients and the\nAmerican families fall just above the poverty line, making\ntion became the nation's first guaranteed minimum income\nIn 1974 a special welfare reform group in HEW\nbenefit-reduction-or \"tax\"-rates applied to earnings, his\nthem eligible for some benefits under such a plan.\nprogram. Replacing more than 1,000 state and local public\ndeveloped its own version of the guaranteed minimum in-\ncampaign explains, are matters to receive careful study\nassistance programs, SSI provided uniform federal\ncome plan, which reportedly met with a cool reception at\nfrom his administration. Similarly, without such\nSocial Security\nallowances, based on financial need, to elderly, blind or dis-\nthe White House. \"I have never believed that a guaranteed\nspecifications, cost estimates cannot yet be made, though\nThe debate over how to rescue the Social Security\nabled persons. For the very poorest recipients, the program\nannual income was the answer to any of our problems,\"\nCarter has indicated that expenditures in the $20-billion\nsystem will also certainly continue into the next Congress.\nnow provides monthly payments of $168 per individual and\nFord said during a campaign appearance in Alabama in\nrange would not be acceptable. In a press conference Sept.\nWhile a Ford administration might renew its request for an\n$252 per couple. (Background, Weekly Report p. 1508)\nMay. But, emphasizing his dissatisfaction with the existing\n3, he also stressed the need to balance the federal budget\nincrease in payroll taxes, its chances in Congress-if un-\nThe SSI program was the only part of former President\nwelfare system, he has asked HEW to make new recommen-\nduring his first term, delaying such programs as welfare\nemployment rates remain well above 7 per cent-probably\nNixon's Family Assistance Plan (FAP), to aid poor families\ndations on welfare reform, including analysis of minimum\nreform if necessary.\nwould be slight.\nwith children, that survived. The main welfare reform\nincome possibilities.\nThough Carter consistently has characterized the ex-\nAccording to projections in both the Carter and Ford\nfeatures of the FAP bill-grants of cash and food stamps\nWhile viewing complete federalization of the system\nisting collection of state-run assistance programs as \"a crazy\ncamps, some form of \"decoupling\" would eliminate about\n(totaling $2,400 for a family of four with no other income)\nwith reservations, Ford has not supported the conservative\nquilt of regulations administered by a bloated\nhalf of the long-range deficit in the Social Security system,\ncombined with a 50 per cent tax on earnings of more than\nposition that welfare responsibilities be left to state\nbureaucracy,\" he does not favor complete federal spon-\nmaking the need for revenues less pressing.\n$720 a year-were dropped by House-Senate conferees in\ngovernments alone. \"Surely we cannot simply dump welfare\nsorship of welfare. His plans call for the federal government\nIn the meantime, as the government deliberates on the\nOctober 1972. After passing the House in June 1971, the\ninto the laps of the 50 states. and just walk away from it,\"\nto assume a \"substantial part\" of the funding and, when\nissue of Social Security financing, the system itself is in no\nplan met fierce opposition from conservatives in the Senate,\nFord said in his State of the Union address. He also would\nfinancially feasible, a phased reduction of the states' shares\ndanger of \"going under.\" Acknowledging that, unlike a\nled by Finance Committee Chairman Russell B. Long (D\nlike the federal government to assume greater control over\nof the cost. Localities would not have to foot any of the bill,\nprivate insurance company, the government can always\nLa.), who pressed for the inclusion of strict work re-\nthe eligibility standards, benefit schedules and other\nas New York City now does.\nstand behind its payment obligations, the Ford administra-\nquirements for able-bodied adults. (Background, 1972\norganizational aspects of the existing programs. (Weekly\nAs part of his proposals for uniform national criteria for\ntion has said that \"the public's benefits are not in jeopar-\nAlmanac p. 899)\nReport p. 135)\nwelfare benefits, Carter urged the elimination of regulations\ndy.\" And Jimmy Carter would probably add, \"You can de-\nComprehensive welfare reform efforts have been essen-\nIn addition, his administration has made special efforts\nthat encourage fathers to desert their families. \"Family\npend on it.\"\nI\ntially stalled since then. There have been subsidiary\nto revamp the food stamp program. Impatient with the pace\nstability should be encouraged by assuring that no family's\n-By Mary Eisner Eccles\nPAGE 2468-Sept. 11, 1976\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC.\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC\nReproduction prohibited whole in part except by editorial clients\nReproduc whole or in part except by editorial clients,\nSept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2469\nPolitics 6\nPolitics 7\nArizona: Steiger\nmajority of the GOP vote, Steiger was the winner by about\n8,500 votes. This was more than enough to cancel Conlan's\nDefeats Conlan\nedge in southern Arizona and his 1,100 vote majority in\nSikes Renominated:\nPima County (Tucson).\nThe Democratic primary was largely overshadowed by\nA bitter campaign clouded by personal animosity and\nthe Republican feuding, but DeConcini goes into the\ncharges of anti-Semitism ended Sept. 7 as Arizona\ngeneral election with at least an even chance to win. He\nFlorida: Grady Wins GOP Senate Nomination\nRepublicans chose U.S. Rep. Sam Steiger to run for the\ncarried every county except small Apache in the northeast\nSenate seat being vacated by incumbent Republican Paul\ncorner of the state, winning over Warner by nearly 18,000 in\nJohn L. Grady swamped two other Senate candidates\nno political experience in 1974 when he nearly upset Burke.\nJ. Fannin. Steiger defeated U.S. Rep. John B. Conlan by\nMaricopa and by 19,000 in Pima, his home base. Warner\nin Florida's Sept. 7 primary to win the Republican nomina-\nThe runoff could be close.\nfewer than 10,000 votes. He faces a difficult contest in the\nneeded a strong showing in the Phoenix area to have any\ntion to oppose Democrat Lawton Chiles in November. All\nDemocrats also believe their chances are good in the 5th\ngeneral election against Democrat Dennis DeConcini, the\nchance, but her campaign suffered from a late start and\nHouse incumbents seeking renomination won it, including\nDistrict against first-term Republican Rep. Richard Kelly,\nformer Pima County (Tucson) attorney who resigned to\npoor organization.\nveteran Democrat Robert L. F. Sikes, who was reprimanded\nbut first they must have a runoff. JoAnn Saunders, who lost\nmake the race. DeConcini won the Democratic nomination\nThe House seats vacated by Steiger and Conlan could\nby the House for financial misconduct in July. (Florida out-\nto Kelly by 11,300 votes in 1974, came within about 50 votes\nby almost 50,000 votes over Carolyn Warner, the state\ngo to either party. Steiger's 3rd District will have a battle\nlook, Weekly Report p. 2353)\nof winning a majority in the five-candidate Democratic\nsuperintendent of public instruction, and Wade Church, a\nbetween two conservative state senators, Democrat Bob\nGrady, who had been expected to win, received two-\nprimary. Her opponent in the runoff is Miller Newton, who\nformer state attorney general. (Arizona outlook, Weekly\nStump and Republican Fred Koory. Stump had been the\nthirds of the vote against State Sen. Walter Sims and at-\ntrailed Saunders Sept. 7 by nearly 20,000 votes. Newton\nReport p. 2324)\nearly favorite for his party's nomination, but took less than\ntorney Helen S. Hansel. A member of the national board of\nbenefitted in the primary from several newspaper en-\nIn the Republican contest, the deciding factor may\none-third of the vote in a five-way race. Koory won easily\nthe John Birch Society, Grady was the American Party can-\ndorsements and from the surprising failure of an expensive\nhave been the endorsement of Steiger by Sen. Barry\nover Don Aldridge, a Mohave County commissioner. In the\ndidate for the Senate in 1974. He received 15.5 per cent that\nadvertising campaign by Sidney L. Vihlen Jr.\nGoldwater, who accused Conlan of trying to make an issue\n4th District, Democrat Tony Mason won his primary by a\nyear against Sen. Richard (Dick) Stone (D) and Republican\nof the fact that Steiger is Jewish. Conlan has close ties with\ncomfortable margin over blind State Rep. Craig E. Davids.\nJack M. Eckerd. Grady is a physician in Belle Glade.\nChristian fundamentalist groups and he frequently men-\nHe will face Republican Eldon Rudd, a Maricopa County\nIn the 8th District, six Democrats and four Republicans\nClose Call\ntioned the need to involve Christians actively in politics. He\nsupervisor who defeated a state corporation commissioner,\ncompeted for the seat of retiring Democratic Rep. James A.\nDemocratic Rep. Don Fuqua had a close call in the\nstruck back at the endorsement with statements hinting\nErnest Garfield.\nHaley. The Democratic winner, with about 150 votes more\nthree-man 2nd District primary. Until the absentee ballots\nthat Goldwater drank too much. The campaign ended with\nThe two incumbents seeking re-election, Democrat\nthan the required majority, was Andy Ireland. The wealthy\nwere counted, giving Fuqua about 200 votes more than a\nthe GOP badly split and Conlan refusing to concede defeat\nMorris K. Udall and Republican House Minority Leader\nbanker made use of experienced political consultants and\nmajority, it appeared that he would be in a runoff with\nor talk to the press.\nJohn J. Rhodes, were renominated easily over weak op-\nextensive advertising. Ireland led his closest rival, conser-\nRussell R. Bevis. A former mayor of Tallahassee, Bevis\nSteiger and Conlan each carried the small rural coun-\nposition. Udall is a shoo-in in November, while Rhodes is\nvative State Rep. Ray Mattox, by 9,600 votes.\nties in his own congressional district. In Maricopa County\nfavored in a rematch with Democrat Pat Fullinwider, who\nrelied heavily on television advertising. Fuqua is assured of\n(Phoenix), a constituency they share and one which casts a\ngave him a close race in 1974.\nRunoff Ahead\nhis eighth term. He has no Republican opponent.\n-By Matt Pinkus\nFirst District Democrats overwhelmingly approved\nSENATET\nThe Republican primary in the 8th resulted in a runoff\nSikes, 70, despite charges by his young opponent, John J.\nto be held Sept. 28 between State Rep. Robert Johnson and\nBenton Jr., that Sikes would be ineffective in Congress\nDistrict\nLocation\nCandidate\nResidence\nAge\nOccupation\nVotes\nPer Cent\nJoe Z. Lovingood. Johnson led by 3,000 votes over\nbecause of the reprimand. The House on July 29 voted 381-3\nLovingood, who ran against Haley three times without\nWade Church (D)\nPhoenix\nto reprimand Sikes for financial misconduct. Sikes has no\n67 Former state attorney general\n34,138\n15.1\nDennis DeConcini (D)*\nTucson\n39 Former Pima County attorney\n121,002\n53.4\nsuccess. Registered Democrats outnumber Republicans\nRepublican opponent. (Reprimand, Weekly Report, p.\nCarolyn Warner (D)\nPhoenix\n46 Superintendent of public\ntwo-to-one in the district, but voters there frequently sup-\n2027)\ninstruction\n71,343\n31.5\nport GOP candidates in statewide elections.\nRep. L.A. (Skip) Bafalis (R), of the 10th District will\nIn the 12th District, where Democrats believe they have\nJohn B. Conlan (R)\nParadise Valley\n45 U.S. representative\nagain meet Democrat Bill Sikes, winner of a three-man\n92,812\n47.5\nSam Steiger (R)*\nPrescott\n47 U.S. representative\n102,506\n52.5\na good chance of defeating Republican Rep. J. Herbert\nprimary. Sikes (no relation to Robert Sikes) ran against\nBurke, the field of eight was narrowed to a runoff between\nBafalis in 1972 and drew 38 per cent of the vote. Against\nHOUSET\nAnne L. Kolb and Charles Friedman. Kolb, who led the\nanother Democrat in 1974, Bafalis took 73.7 per cent.\n1\nSouthern Phoenix, Tempe,\nDemocratic primary by about 3,500 votes, is a county com-\nMesa\nPat Fullinwider (D)*\nTempe\n35 Housewife\nUnopposed\nmissioner with liberal views. Friedman is a dentist who had\n-By James R. Wagner\nJohn J. Rhodes (R)*\nMesa\n60 Incumbent\n36,962\n76.9\nLouis E. Stradling (R)\nMesa\n59 City councilman\n11,121\n23.1\nSENATE\n2\nSouth-Tuscon\nRuben Romero (D)\nTucson\n41 City councilman\n14,181\n21.4\nMorris K. Udall (D)*\nTucson\n54\nIncumbent\n52,238\n78.6\nCandidate\nResidence\nAge\nOccupation\nVotes\nPer Cent\nLaird Guttersen (R)*\nTucson\n51 Management consultant\nUnopposed\nLawton Chiles (D)*\nLakeland\n46\nIncumbent\nUnopposed\n3\nWestern Phoenix, Glendale,\nTony Gabaldon (D)\nFlagstaff\n45 State senator\n10,573\n18.9\nWalter Sims (R)\nOrlando\n53\nState senator\n70,995\n30.2\nYuma\nMax Klass (D)\nGlendale\n49\nFormer mayor\n6,352\n11.4\nJohn L. Grady (R)*\nBelle Glade\n46\nPhysician\n157,846\n67.1\nJoe Eddie Lopez (D)\nPhoenix\n36 Maricopa county supervisor\n7,297\n13.0\nSid Rosen (D)\nPhoenix\n37\nLawyer\n14,193\n25.4\nHelen S. Hansel (R)\nSt. Petersburg\n54\nLawyer\n6,247\n2.7\nBob Stump (D)*\nTolleson\n49 State senate president\n17,524\n31.3\nHOUSE#\nDon Aldridge (R)\nLake Havasu City\n38 Mohave County supervisor\n18,766\n36.5\nDistrict\nLocation\nCandidate\nResidence\nAge\nOccupation\nVotes\nPer Cent\nFred Koory Jr. (R)*\nGlendale\n36\nState senator\n32,626\n63.5\n1\nNorthwest-Pensacola,\nRobert L. F. Sikes (D)*\nCrestview\n70\nIncumbent\n84,467\n73.7\n4\nEast-Northern Phoenix\nCraig E. Davids (D)\nCoolidge\n57 State representative\n26,679\n46.6\nPanama City\nJohn J. Benton Jr. (D)\nPanama City\n26\nFormer Commerce Dept. economist\n30,104\n26.3\nTony Mason (D)*\nPhoenix\n37\nLawyer\n30,619\n53.4\nErnest Garfield (R)\nPhoenix\n2\nNorth-Tallahassee,\nRussell R. Bevis (D)\nTallahassee\n50\nInsurance executive\n41,587\n32.4\n44 State corporation commissioner\n22,273\n41.2\nFountain Hills\nGainesville\nDon Fuqua (D)*\nAltha\n43\nIncumbent\nArch DiRoberts (R)\n64,416\n50.2\nFormer policeman\n3,837\n7.1\nEldon Rudd (R)*\nScottsdale\nJack Armstrong (D)\nTallahassee\n32\nFormer education official\n22,375\n17.4\n56 Maricopa County supervisor\n27,989\n51.7\n*Nominee\nNearly complete returns\n3\nNortheast-Jacksonville\nCharles E. Bennett (D)*\nJacksonville\n66\nIncumbent\nUnopposed\nNearly complete returns\nNominee\nCOPYAIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC\nPAGE 2470-Sept. 11, 1976\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL OUARTERLY INC\nReproduction proh bited whole or part except by editor clients\nSept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2471\nReproduction prohibited whole or except by editorial Clients\nPolitics 8\nPolitics 9\nDistrict\nLocation\nCandidate\nResidence\nAge\nOccupation\nVotes\nPer Cent\nGeorgia Runoff\nexecutive secretary to former Gov. Carl Sanders (D 1963-\n4\n67), is thought to be more liberal than the incumbent, while\nNortheast-Daytona Beach\nBill Chappell Jr. (D)*\nOcala\n54\nIncumbent\n52,890\n66.4\nJ. Townley (D)\nPadgett is a conservative and former aide to Lester G. Mad-\nCandler\n18,992\n23.8\nGeorgia Democrats in three congressional districts\nTommy Boney (D)\ndox, the controversial ex-governor and lieutenant governor.\nKeystone Heights\n39\nPark superintendent\n7,788\n9.8\npreferred moderate candidates in the Aug. 31 primary\nPadgett depended on rural votes, and carried 14 of the 21\n5\nWest Central-Clearwater,\nDon T. Reynolds (D)\nSanford\n41\nHigh school principal\n7,529\n10.7\nrunoffs as they chose replacements for three retiring House\ncounties in the district. But Barnard received a 7,000-vote\nOrlando\nJames E. Sursely (D)\nMaitland\n28\nVietnam veteran\n3,094\nmembers. Two of the winners are assured of election in\n4.4\nmargin in Atlanta and Augusta, enough for a 2,799-vote\nJoAnn Saunders (D)t\nOrlando\n42\nFormer businesswoman\n34,982\n49.8\nNovember; the third faces a potentially strong Republican\ndistrict-wide plurality.\nSidney L. Vihlen Jr. (D)\nAltamonte Springs\n35\nSeminole County commissioner\n9,536\n13.6\nopponent in the general election. (Primary results, Weekly\nBarnard has no Republican opposition on the\nMiller Newton (D)t\nLutz\n37\nPinellas-Pasco Circuit Court clerk\n15,053\n21.5\nReport p. 2199)\nNovember ballot.\nIn the 8th District (South central-Macon, Waycross)\nRichard Kelly (R)*\nNew Port Richey\n52\nIncumbent\nUnopposed\nvacated by five term Rep. W.S. (Bill) Stuckey, the runoff\n6\nWest-St. Petersburg\nGabriel Cazares (D)*\nbetween two Georgia state representatives was won by Billy\nClearwater\n56\nMayor\nUnopposed\nConnecticut Results\nLee Evans, 34, of Macon. He received 54,055 votes (51.7%)\nC. W. Bill Young (R)*\nSt. Petersburg\n45\nIncumbent\nUnopposed\nin nearly complete returns to 50,582 (48.3%) for Wash\nGeoffrey Peterson won a mild upset victory in Connec-\nLarsen, 48, of rural Dublin. The outcome reversed the result\nticut's 4th District Democratic U.S. House primary, Sept. 7,\n7\nWest-Tampa\nSam Gibbons (D)*\nTampa\n56\nIncumbent\nUnopposed\nof the primary, in which Larsen had led by several thousand\nearning the chance to challenge Republican incumbent\nvotes with heavy rural support.\nDusty Owens (R)*\nStewart B. McKinney in the fall. The 4th District\nTampa\n46\nBusinessman\nUnopposed\nIn the runoff, however, Evans managed to put together\nDemocratic race was the only contest in the state primary.\na diverse coalition. He was endorsed by two opponents\n8\nWest Central-Lakeland,\nRay Mattox (D)\nWinter Haven\n49\nState representative\n15,710\n22.3\nThere was no primary battle in either party for the Senate or\nSarasota\neliminated in the primary, one of them a conservative\nWilliam Willner (D)\nSarasota\n50\nState consumer official\n1,249\n1.8\nfor the other five House seats.\nAndy Ireland (D)*\nmember of the John Birch Society, but he also courted and\nWinter Haven\n46\nBanker\n35,326\n50.2\nPeterson, 30, a former administrative assistant to Sen.\nT. David Burns (D)\nLakeland\n48\nwon a majority of the district's black voters. Larsen was\nLawyer\n3,338\n4.7\nAbraham Ribicoff, defeated Charles B. Tisdale by a margin\nWilliam A. Hartman (D)\nSarasota\nMarketing executive\n3,206\n4.6\nreportedly helped by Stuckey and several of Stuckey's con-\nof 1,122 votes. Complete but unofficial returns showed\nJerome Pratt (D)\nPalmetto\nLawyer\n11,522\n16.4\ngressional staff aides, but the rural turnout was too low to\nPeterson with 8,788 votes (53.4 per cent) to Tisdale's 7,666\novercome an 11,000-vote Evans plurality in Bibb County\nDavid M. Molthrop (R)\nvotes (46.6 per cent).\nLakeland\n61\nBusiness executive\n2,037\n6.7\n(Macon).\nRobert Johnson (R)t\nSarasota\n41\nTisdale, 43, a black and a former director of\nState representative\n14,354\n47.7\nIn the general election, Evans will be favored over a\nJoe Z. Lovingood (R)t\nSarasota\n51\nRealtor, building supply dealer\n11,348\n37.7\nBridgeport's anti-poverty program, had won the support of\nwell-known Republican candidate, Billy Adams, 48, also\nLex Taylor (R)\nLakeland\n2,369\n7.9\nthe party organization at the district convention in July,\nfrom Macon. Adams is a petroleum distributor and a former\nmaking him a slight favorite when the campaign began. But\n9\nEast Central-Melbourne,\nJoseph A. Rosier (D)*\nWinter Park\nstate senator.\n39\nMaitland municipal judge\n25,572\n69.2\nThe runoff in the northern 9th District was not much of\nPeterson campaigned aggressively and carried most of the\nOrlando\nFrank J. Dama (D)\nOrlando\n57\nCompany president\n11,399\n30.8\na contest. The Democratic nominee there will be Ed\nmajor communities in the district, including Bridgeport,\nTisdale's home base.\nLou Frey Jr. (R)*\nOrlando\n42\nIncumbent\nUnopposed\nJenkins, 43, a former aide to retiring Rep. Phil M. Landrum\nMcKinney ran unopposed in the Republican primary\nand law partner of Landrum's son. He received 58,905 votes\n10\nSouth Central-Fort\nRobert F. Culpepper (D)\nand is seeking his fourth term in the House.\nJupiter\n44\nCounty commissioner\n21,002\n28.9\n(55.1%) to 47,963 votes (44.9%) for his runoff opponent.\nPierce, Myers\nG. W. Jerry Bowers (D)\nStuart\nSen. Lowell P. Weicker Jr. (R) was unopposed for\n47\nWriter, photographer\n14,400\n19.8\nJenkins defeated J. Albert Minish, a conservative dentist\nBill Sikes (D)*\nClewiston\n33\nLife insurance agent\nrenomination to the Senate. His Democratic challenger,\n37,312\n51.3\nand former mayor of Commerce, winning 14 of the district's\nalso unopposed in the primary, will be Secretary of State\nL.A. (Skip) Bafalis (R)*\n23 counties, including populous Gwinnett in the Atlanta\nFt. Meyers Beach\n46\nIncumbent\nUnopposed\nGloria Schaffer.\nsuburbs. Minish won his home county of Jackson and\n11\nSoutheast-West Palm\nPaul G. Rogers (D)*\nWest Palm Beach\n55\nIncumbent\nseveral others in the southeast part of the district. Jenkins\nUnopposed\nBeach, Pompano Beach\nhas token opposition in November from Republican Louise\nWofford.\nNorth Dakota Results\n12\nSoutheast-Fort Lauder-\nJohn Lomelo Jr. (D)\nSunrise\n48\nMayor-administrator\n4,988\n11.3\ndale, Hollywood\nThe closest race in the state was in the 10th District,\nFrederick Lippman (D)\nHollywood\n41\nPharmacist\n4,421\n10.0\nCharles Friedman (D)t\nHollywood\n41\nDentist\ndominated by the cities of Athens and Augusta, where a\nRichard Elkin won a lopsided victory in the Republican\n8,694\n19.6\nAndrew DeGraffenreidt (D)\nFt. Lauderdale\n48\nEducator\n5,044\n11.4\nsuccessor was chosen for retiring Rep. Robert G. Stephens\ngubernatorial primary and Lloyd B. Omdahl triumphed in\nArt Barker (D)\nFt. Lauderdale\n5,092\n11.5\nJr. In final unofficial returns, Doug Barnard, 54, executive\nthe Democratic U.S. House race-the only two contests in\nJoseph K. O'Brien (D)\nFt. Lauderdale\n2,204\n4.9\nvice president of the Georgia Railroad Bank in Augusta,\nthe Sept. 7 North Dakota primary. Elkin's win matches him\nAnne L. Kolb (D)t\nPlantation\n44\nCounty commissioner\n12,139\n27.4\nreceived 43,294 votes (51.7%) to 40,495 votes (48.3%) for\nagainst Democratic Gov. Arthur A. Link, who was unop-\nBill Brown (D)\nLauderdale Lakes\n1,715\n3.9\nMike Padgett, 52, a former state senator. Barnard, former\nposed in his party's primary. Omdahl faces the Republican\nincumbent, Mark Andrews, who was also unopposed.\nJ. Herbert Burke (R)*\nHollywood\n63\nIncumbent\nUnopposed\nThe easy victories recorded by Elkin and Omdahl were\n13\nNorthern Miami and\nWilliam Lehman (D)*\nMiami\n44\nanticipated. Both had gained the endorsement of their par-\nIncumbent\n35,981\n71.3\nsuburbs\nRobert Renick (D)\nMiami\n42\nTV production and lighting\nty's state convention and faced nominal primary opposition.\n7,653\n15.2\nDick Watson (D)\nMiami\n60\nGolf equipment sales\n1,175\n2.3\nElkin, 43, chairman of the state's public service com-\nE.C. (Mike) Ackerman (D)\nMiami\n5,626\n11.2\nmission, defeated his lone opponent, Herb Geving, a former\nmember of the state legislature, by a margin of more than 4-\nLee Arnold Spiegelman (R)*\nMiami Shores\n49\nAttorney-business executive\nUnopposed\n1. Nearly complete returns showed Elkin with 46,210 votes\n(81.9 per cent) to Geving's 10,201 votes (18.1 per cent).\n14\nCentral Miami and suburbs\nClaude Pepper (D)*\nMiami\n76\nIncumbent\nUnopposed\nOmdahl, 45, the state director of accounts and\nHerbert J. Hoodwin (R)\nCoral Gables\npurchases, was drafted by. Democratic leaders who felt his\n55\nConsulting engineer-general contractor 2,340\n42.8\nEvelio S. Estrella (R)*\nMiami\npresence on the ticket would help Gov. Link and the party's\n3,133\n57.2\nlegislative candidates. Omdahl won his primary contest\n15\nSouthern Miami, Monroe\nDante B. Fascell (D)*\nMiami\n59\nIncumbent\nUnopposed\nhandily over Torfin A. Teigen. Nearly complete returns\nCounty\ngave Omdahl a more than 6-1 lead, with 39,356 votes (86.2\nPaul R. Cobb (R)*\nMiami\n29\n*Nominee\nFormer college instructor\nUnopposed\nBilly Lee Evans\nDoug Barnard\nper cent) to Teigen's 6,302 votes (13.8 per cent).\nI\n+Runoff Sept. 28\nPAGE 2472-Sept. 11, 1976\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 QUARTERLY INC\nReproduction prohibited whole or part except by editorial\nReproduction prohibited whole or except by editorial clients\nSept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2473\nPolitics 10\nPolitics 11\nJackson Safe:\nWyoming\nWashington House Candidates\nThere is little suspense about the congressional\nWashington: Scramble to Succeed Evans\nDistrict\nDemocrats\nRepublicans\nprimaries coming up in Wyoming Sept. 14. Both parties will\nbe nominating candidates for the Senate and for the House,\n1\nCarl Viking Holman\n*Joel Pritchard\nbut there are certain winners in each case.\nThe major contest in Washington's Sept. 21 primary is\nDave Wood\namounts of campaign funds. As a scientist and former\nDemocratic Sen. Gale W. McGee has no primary\n2\nfor the governorship, with close contests expected in both\nchairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, she has no\nDon Lenderman\nJohn Nance Garner\nopposition in his bid for a fourth term. State Sen.\nmajor parties. Democratic Sen. Henry M. Jackson, whose\nprevious involvement in state issues, but her apolitical im-\n*Lloyd Meeds\nMalcolm Wallop, 43, of Big Horn, is the overwhelming\n3\npresidential ambitions were shot down in the early\nage appears to be a solid asset in a year when voters are\n*Don Bonker\nRichard F. Dideon\nfavorite in the Republican primary. His two opponents are\nprimaries, is certain to be re-nominated and re-elected over\nseeking new kinds of candidates. Ray's campaign has\nChuck Elhart\nDoyle Henry, 49, a salesman from Casper, and Nels T. Lar-\ntoken opposition. In House races, Democrats are choosing\ndeveloped late; she recently shuffled her staff and placed\n4\n*Mike McCormack\nBruce Cone\nson, 63, a Lutheran minister from Casper. Henry was a can-\nthe likely successor to retiring Rep. Floyd V. Hicks in the\nmore emphasis on voter contact and mailings, symbols of\nDick Granger\ndidate in the 1972 Democratic Senate primary and finished\n6th District primary, while Republicans are targeting\nthe more traditional politics she has not practiced up to\nJames C. May\nsecond in a field of five, drawing 18.6 per cent of the vote.\nDemocrats Mike McCormack and Lloyd Meeds for defeat in\n5\n*Thomas S. Foley\nnow.\n#Charles Kimball\nOn the House side, Democratic Rep. Teno Roncalio has\nthe general election.\nUhlman, the mayor of Seattle, is hoping to overcome\n6\nNorman D. Dicks\nJeff G. Prosser\nminor primary opposition from Al Hamburg, a 44-year-old\nthe Ray phenomenon with heavy spending and an appeal to\nGordon N. Johnston\nRobert M. Reynolds\nTorrington house painter who ran for the Republican\nSenate\nliberals who dislike Ray's conservative image, advocacy of\nJim O'Donnell\nGeorge Van Buskirk\nnomination unsuccessfully in 1972 and 1974. The un-\nnuclear power and lack of experience in state politics. He\nJim Nicholls\nchallenged Republican candidate is Larry Hart of Powell,\nhas worked hard to increase his recognition in the vast ex-\nMike Parker\nIncumbent. Henry M. Jackson (D), 64, of Everett, is\nwho resigned as a Navy lieutenant in order to challenge\npanse of eastern Washington where a big city mayor is or-\nEugene W. Wiegman\nRoncalio.\nseeking a fifth term.\n7\ndinarily suspect. Despite his liberal image, Uhlman has\n*Brock Adams\nWilliam M. Champion\nDemocrats. Jackson; Paul Gumbel of Seattle; Dennis\nThe fall campaigns will be more exciting. Both Ron-\nbeen tough on municipal unions in labor negotiations. He\nJack May\nRaymond Pritchard\n(Hitch Hiker) Kelley of Seattle.\ncalio and McGee begin the campaign as favorites, but\nwas the target of a recall effort last year sponsored by the\nIncumbent\nRepublicans. George M. Brown of Renton; Will Davis\nMcGee has a formidable challenger in Wallop, who sought\nof Seattle; Warren E. Hanson of Bellingham; Henry C.\ncity's firemen. His stance was overwhelmingly sustained by\nDeceased\nthe GOP gubernatorial nomination in 1974 and came within\nSeattle's voters.\n400 votes of winning it with a late-starting campaign keyed\nNeilsen of Seattle; Wilbur R. Parkin of Centralia; and\nUhlman is believed to trail Ray by a small margin, but\nto environmental protection. Roncalio, the only Democrat\nClarice L.R. Privette of Spokane.\nboth appear to be well ahead of Durning, a lawyer who has\nelected to the House from Wyoming since World War II, was\nOutlook. Despite the large field of primary candidates,\nbeen stressing environmental issues. Durning has been cam-\nWashington, D.C., job with the Grocery Manufacturers of\nthe Senate race effectively ended in May, when Jackson\na narrow victor in 1970 and 1972 before winning comfortably\npaigning the longest and has been spending heavily, but\nAmerica earlier this year to organize a campaign, but is not\ntwo years ago in a strong Democratic year.\nabandoned his active pursuit of the Democratic presidential\ndoes not appear to have moved close to the leaders. Durning\ngiven much chance to overtake Granger. The third can-\nnomination. Republican Slade Gorton, the popular state at-\nwas endorsed in August by the Washington Education\ndidate, Bruce Cone, is an economist from Kennewick.\ntorney general, and Democratic Rep. Brock Adams of\nAssociation.\nSeattle had been waging a shadow campaign for the seat up\n6th District (Puget Sound-Bremerton, Tacoma)\nFiling Completed\nto then. They dropped out to seek re-election to their\nThe Republican race is an ideological struggle between\ncurrent offices.\ncompeting wings of the state party. Spellman represents the\nIncumbent Floyd V. Hicks (D), 61, is quitting the\nJackson has token opposition in his own primary, and\nmoderate Republicanism of Evans, whose faction\nHouse after six terms to seek a seat on the state supreme\nDelaware\nthe Republican field consists of political neophytes and\ndominated the party until recently. His reputation is that of\ncourt. The district is heavily Democratic, and Hicks'\nThere were no primaries for the governorship or con-\nperennial office-seekers. Republican sources in Washington\nan efficient executive but a colorless campaigner in contrast\nprobable successor should emerge from a six-man primary.\ngressional races in Delaware this year. Democratic Gov.\nbelieve the party's nominee will be either George M. Brown,\nwith Hoppe, an aggressive and controversial conservative.\nIf campaign spending decides the race, the winner may\nSherman W. Tribbitt will be opposed by Republican U.S.\n40, of Renton, a pilot for United Airlines, or Henry C.\nBoth hold countywide office in Seattle. The conservatives\nbe Norman D. Dicks, 35, of Port Orchard, who was the ad-\nRep. Pierre S. (Pete) du Pont and two minor candidates,\nNielsen of Seattle, a life insurance underwriter. Neither one\nnow control the machinery of the state party, but Spellman\nministrative assistant to Sen. Warren G. Magnuson for\nGeorge W. Cripps of the American Party and Harry Conner\nhas any chance in a general election, and Jackson's victory\nis considered the slight favorite. He is also thought to be\nthree years until he resigned to start a campaign here. Dicks\nof the Prohibition Party. In the Senate race, Republican\nmore electable in a statewide race.\nmargin may exceed the 82.4 per cent he received in 1970.\nis receiving support from labor and many of the special in-\nSen. William V. Roth Jr. faces Democrat Thomas C.\nWashington voters do not register by party, 80\nterest groups he and Magnuson dealt with over the years.\nMaloney, American Party candidate Donald G. Geis and\ncrossovers could further confuse the outlook in a contest\nHe raised more than $60,000 through June.\nProhibition candidate John Massimilli. There will be six\nGovernor\nthat still appears volatile in both parties.\nThe other candidates lack Dicks' ability to tap outside\ncandidates for the state's at-large seat in the House of\ncontributors, but several have substantial campaign chests\nRepresentatives-Republican Thomas B. Evans Jr.,\nIncumbent. Daniel J. Evans (R), 50, is retiring after 12\n4th District (Central-Yakima, Vancouver)\nof their own and more recent visibility in the district. The\nDemocratic and GOP nominees will be joined on the\nyears in office.\nRepublicans are gearing up for another effort to oust\nmost aggressive campaign is being waged by Mike Parker,\nAmerican Party, Raymond Green of the Prohibition Party,\nRepublicans. John Spellman, 49, of Seattle, the King\nDemocratic Rep. Mike McCormack, 54, of Richland, who is\n29, a state representative and pharmaceuticals salesman\nJoseph B. Hollon of the Socialist Labor Party, and Philip\nCounty executive; Harley Hoppe, 45, of Mercer Island, the\nseeking a fourth term. McCormack has never won by large\nfrom Tacoma who contributed nearly $20,000 to his own ef-\nValenti of the U.S. Labor Party.\nKing County assessor; John (Hugo Frye) Patric of\nmargins and is not popular with environmental lobbying\nfort, announcing that it was an inheritance from his grand-\nSnohomish; Carl D. Ricketts of Fall City; Emmett Watson,\ngroups.\nmother. Parker has been an active legislator, but opponents\nHawaii\n56, a Seattle restaurant owner.\nThe candidate who could give McCormack a tough con-\nhave criticized him as a publicity-seeker who prefers media\nA flood of candidates joined the Hawaii Senate race\nDemocrats. Dixy Lee Ray, 61, of Fox Island, former\ntest in the general election is Dick Granger, a county com-\nattention to legislative success.\nbefore the Aug. 18 filing deadlines, and three minor parties\nchairman of the Atomic Energy Commission (1973-74) and\nmissioner from Clark County (Vancouver) at the southern\nGordon N. Johnson, 58, the mayor of Tacoma for eight\nalso qualified for the general election.\nformer U.S. assistant secretary of state (1974-75); Wes\nend of the district. Granger, a moderate Republican, spent\nyears, has not been as active but is expected to benefit from\nThe major Democratic candidates are U.S. Reps. Patsy\nUhlman, 41, the mayor of Seattle; Marvin Durning, 47, a\nover $20,000 in the first half of the year building a campaign\nhis wide recognition in the district's largest city. However,\nT. Mink and Spark M. Matsunaga. Also on the primary\nSeattle lawyer; Duke Stockton of Olympia.\norganization. He is a solid favorite to take the GOP nomina-\nthat base vote must be shared with Parker and Eugene W.\nballot are Floyd C. Loving, Nathan N. Napoleon and\nOutlook. Both parties have sharply contested\ntion over two more conservative challengers. Granger\nWiegman, 46, a former president of Pacific Lutheran\nKamuela Price. On the Republican side, former Gov.\nprimaries to succeed Evans, but voters are just beginning to\nreceived a $5,000 contribution in June from the League of\nUniversity. Wiegman is considered somewhat more conser-\nWilliam F. Quinn is opposed by Spencer J. Cabral. The\ntake notice of the campaign even though the candidates\nConservation Voters Campaign Fund.\nvative than the others.\nDemocratic and GOP nominees will be joined on the\nhave been on the stump for months. The biggest surprise\nOne of Granger's opponents, James C. May, 30, is the\nThe favorite for the Republican nomination in a three-\nNovember ballot by Rockne Johnson of the Libertarian Par-\nthus far has been Ray's strong showing in a variety of public\nson of former Republican Rep. Catherine May (R 1959-71),\nway primary is Robert M. Reynolds, a Tacoma lawyer.\n-\nty, James D. Kimmel of the Non-partisan Party and\nopinion polls despite her lack of organization or large\nwho was beaten by McCormack six years ago. He quit his\n-By Matt Pinkus\nAnthony N. Hodges of the People's Party.\nPAGE 2474-Sept. 11, 1976\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC\nReproduction prohibited whole part except by editorial clients\nReproduction prohibited whole or part except by editorial clients\nSept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2475\nHealth/Education/Welfare 2\nHouse Votes Changes\n\"Pass Through\" of Benefit Increases\nHealth/Education/Welfare\nBy a 317-52 vote, the House easily adopted the amend-\nment ensuring that federal cost-of-living increases in SSI\nIn SSI Program Aiding\nbenefits actually would end up in the pockets of recipients.\nThe amendment, sponsored by Donald M. Fraser (D Minn.)\nConferees Still Stalled\nAged, Blind, Disabled\nand Majority Leader Thomas P. O'Neill Jr. (D Mass.), il-\nThe House conferees then rejected two proposed com-\nlustrated the complexities of the SSI program. (Vote 508,\npromises offered by Rep. David R. Obey (D Wis.), again on\nWeekly Report p. 2440)\nOn Abortion Provision\nthe grounds that they would allow too much leeway for\nWhile sidestepping broader welfare \"reform\" measures,\nLike Social Security payments, basic federal SSI\nHEW.\nthe 94th Congress is moving in its waning days to make life a\nbenefits are adjusted automatically on July 1 of each year to\nFinally the conferees agreed only to meet again, on\nOf Labor-HEW Funds Bill\nlittle easier for the more than four million needy aged, blind\nreflect cost-of-living increases. On July 1, 1976, the basic\nSept. 13, to take another crack at compromise. In the mean-\nand disabled persons qualifying for welfare assistance under\nfederal SSI payment rose to $167.80 a month from $157.70\ntime Senate conference chairman Warren G. Magnuson (D\nthe federal Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program.\nfor an individual with no offsetting income and to $251.80\nThe $56.6-billion fiscal 1977 Labor-HEW\nWash.) agreed to poll senators who were absent when the\nLegislation (HR 8911) pending before the Senate\nfrom $236.60 for a couple.\nappropriations bill (HR 14232) remained hung up on the\nvote was taken on the House-backed compromise proposal,\nFinance Committee after House passage Aug. 30 would\nMore than half the states, however, choose to supple-\nissue of abortion Sept. 9, as a House-Senate conference\nan action not expected to change the outcome of the vote.\nmake numerous seemingly technical changes in the SSI\nment federal SSI benefits with their own funds, so actual\ncommittee failed for the second time to resolve the impasse.\nDespite the seeming obstinacy of both sides, members\nprogram that would make it simpler for many persons to\npayments are higher. Rather than \"pass through\" the\nAt issue was a House-passed amendment which would\nremained confident that some kind of compromise could be\nqualify for benefits and guarantee future benefit increases to\nfederal cost-of-living increase in benefits, many of these\nban the use of federal funds in the bill to pay for or to\nreached. Brooke predicted that the House members would\nall. Many of the changes were fashioned by the House Ways\nstates have decided to reduce their state supplements by a\npromote abortions. The Senate struck the language from the\nagree to soften their language rather than risk killing the en-\nand Means Committee, which reported the bill May 27.\ncorresponding amount. So despite a federal benefit increase,\nbill, and when conferees were unable to agree on a middle\ntire bill.\n(Committee action, provisions, Weekly Report p. 1508)\nan elderly SSI recipient would see no increase in his benefit\nground in August, both houses voted to insist on their\nThe result would present a difficult choice for President\nThe legislation represents the first congressional fine-\ncheck.\npositions and asked the conferees to meet again. (Earlier\nFord, who would then have to decide whether to sign or veto\ntuning of the SSI program, begun in 1974 as a federal\nThe Fraser-O'Neill amendment barred states from\nstory, Weekly Report p. 2344)\na bill which was $4-billion over his budget but which also\nreplacement for more than 1,000 state and local assistance\nreducing their supplements after July 1977, guaranteeing a\nAs about 50 anti-abortion demonstrators, carrying\ncarried an anti-abortion amendment. Ford had made a\nprograms partially supported by the federal government.\n\"pass through\" of the annual federal increase. Debate\nroses, waited outside, the conferees rejected four different\ncampaign issue out of his opposition to abortion.\nThe federalized program has been plagued by payment\nhighlights follow:\ncompromise proposals.\nBrooke and other Republicans predicted that the\nerrors, delays in processing applications and other ad-\nOn a 7-2 vote, the Senate conferees turned down a\nbudget-minded President would nevertheless veto the bill.\nministrative problems, but the Department of Health,\nPRO: Supporters of the amendment argued that it was\nproposal by the House to retain the anti-abortion amend-\nIn order to have an opportunity to override the expected\nEducation and Welfare (HEW) has instituted many correc-\nunfair to deny the needy a tiny increase in benefits that\nment with additional language to permit abortions if a birth\nveto before its scheduled Oct. 2 adjournment date, Congress\ntive steps. (Background, Weekly Report p. 1508)\ncould make an important difference in their meager\nwould endanger the life of the mother.\nwill have to send the bill to the President by Sept. 21. I\nHR 8911 also addressed these problems, providing for\nbudgets.\nSen. Edward W. Brooke (R Mass.), who led the opposi-\n-By Thomas P. Southwick\nemergency replacement of improperly drawn or lost benefit\n\"When I voted for the annual cost-of-living increase for\ntion to the House proposal, said it did not go far enough.\nchecks and immediate payment of benefits to some in-\nthe SSI beneficiaries,\" noted O'Neill, \"I did not intend it to\nBrooke argued that the amendment would not permit\ndividuals while their applications were being processed. Key\ngo into the state treasuries\npayments for abortions where a birth presented a risk of per-\nFord Signs Bill Increasing\nprovisions added by the full House offered more federal aid\nAfter reading about the federal increase, added John L.\nmanent injury to the mother or where the pregnancy had\nfor rehabilitation of disabled preschool children, guaranteed\nBurton (D Calif.), the elderly could not understand why\nresulted from rape or incest.\nThe House conferees then rejected a proposal offered by\nAid to Day Care Centers\nthat recipients actually would receive federal cost-of-living\ntheir benefit checks remained the same. \"They want the ad-\nincreases in basic SSI benefits and made it easier for\nditional money,\" he said. \"It may be $7 or $10 or $15 but\nSen. Ted Stevens (R Alaska) which would have allowed\nrecipients owning homes to continue to qualify for benefits.\nwhen they get their paycheck, it is the same old paycheck.\"\npayments for abortions where the \"physical or mental\nFaced with probable congressional rejection of a second\nhealth\" of the mother was in jeopardy or where the\nveto, President Ford Sept. 7 signed legislation (HR\nThe administration generally supported most of the\nJames C. Corman (D Calif.), acting chairman of the\n12455-PL 94-401) providing $240-million in new federal\nprovisions of the bill. It objected to its extension of the SSI\nWays and Means Public Assistance Subcommittee, con-\npregnancy had resulted from rape or incest.\nprogram to Puerto Rico, Guam and the Virgin Islands, the\nceded that the amendment might be inconsistent with the\nRep. Silvio O. Conte (R Mass.) said such an exemption\nsupport for day care centers for the poor. In May, Congress\nmost expensive provision of the bill. The administration\nphilosophy of the SSI program, which eventually was sup-\nwould provide too much leeway for the Department of\nsustained a veto of an earlier version of the bill. (Weekly\nHealth, Education and Welfare (HEW) to define what was\nReport p. 1115)\nalso had opposed the House-added amendment guarantee-\nposed to provide adequate federal benefit levels without\nWith an eye to Democratic criticism of his long list of\ning that SSI recipients would get federal cost-of-living in-\nstate supplements. But arguing in favor of the amendment,\nlikely to endanger the physical or mental health of the\ncreases.\nCorman added, \"Of course, SSI recipients cannot eat\nvetoes, Ford contended that his first veto had forced\nphilosophy.\"\nCongress to develop a more responsible bill. \"Without this\nconstitutional check and balance,\" he said, \"the original\nHouse Floor Action\nOthers contended that the federal government must act\nThe decision to allow federal\nto guarantee receipt of the increases because state\nbill might now be law and making day care services more\ngovernments had proved insensitive to the needs of\npayments for abortions was made\ncostly to the taxpayer and increasing the federal intrusion\nThe House passed the bill on Aug. 30 by a 374-3 vote\nrecipients.\nby \"some long-haired, striped-\ninto family life.\"\nafter adopting most floor amendments to the measure on\n\"These are the people least likely to rally on the steps of\nThe President opposed the first bill primarily because\nAug. 26. (Vote 509, Weekly Report p. 2440)\npants clerk at HEW.\"\nthe state capitol,\" argued Patsy T. Mink (D Hawaii). \"They\nit would have imposed federal staffing standards on day\nBefore approving the bill, the House agreed to a Ways\nare among the most likely to have their urgent human needs\n-Rep. Daniel J. Flood (D Pa.)\ncare centers serving children from low-income families. He\nand Means Committee substitute (HR 15080) that added\nignored\nargued that such standards should be set by the states.\none provision not included by the committee in HR 8911.\nHR 12455 postponed imposition of the staffing stan-\nThe provision, sponsored by Martha Keys (D Kan.),\nCON: Opponents of the amendment contended that it\nmother. \"HEW's interpretation would totally emasculate\ndards until Oct. 1, 1977, pending completion of a govern-\nallowed persons, such as the mentally retarded, living in\nwould devastate the basic philosophical underpinnings of a\nthe amendment,\" Conte said.\nment study. It also provided the additional $240-million\ncommunity-based homes with no more than 16 residents to\nfederalized SSI program.\nAnd Rep. Daniel J. Flood (D Pa.), chairman of the\nthrough that date to help states make general im-\nqualify for SSI benefits.\nCongress designed the SSI program to provide a basic\nHouse conferees, charged that the original decision to allow\nprovements in their day care programs. (Final congressional\nIn general, the bill won the warm support of both\nfederal minimum level of benefits, Guy Vander Jagt\nfederal payments for abortions had been made by \"some\naction, Weekly Report p. 2345)\nDemocrats and Republicans on the Ways and Means Com-\n(Mich.), ranking Republican on the Public Assistance Sub-\nlong-haired, striped-pants clerk at HEW.\"\nFord said he had \"serious reservations\" about the\nmittee. Committee members split, however, over the floor\ncommittee, pointed out. It allowed states to decide for\nFlood argued that the issue of pregnancies resulting\namount of extra funding provided by the bill. But heavy\namendments guaranteeing SSI recipients benefit increases\nthemselves whether they had the resources to supplement\nfrom rape or incent was \"so remote that its consideration is\nRepublican support in Congress for the measure weighed\nand increasing federal assistance to disabled preschool\nbenefits above levels offered under their old programs in\nacademic.\"\nagainst a second veto eight weeks before election day.\nchildren.\n1973. In contrast to this philosophy, Vander Jagt argued,\nPAGE 2476-Sept. 11, 1976\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC\nReproduction proh whole or except by editorial clients\nReproduction prohibited part except by editorial clients\nSept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2477\nHealth/Education/Welfare 3\nthe amendment would make state supplements a perma-\nKetchum and Herbert E. Harris II (D Va.) argued that\nnent feature of the program.\nit was unfair to take away SSI benefits just because the\n\"Please understand, no recipient across the country\nhouse an elderly person may have lived in all his life had in-\nLaw Enforcement and Judiciary\nloses [benefits] if we vote down the Fraser amendment,'\ncreased in value due to inflation or other real estate factors.\nadded William A. Steiger (R Wis.). \"But the federal govern-\nTo get around existing law, Ketchum noted, many elderly\nment will lose. The concept of a federalized program will be\npeople had to give their homes, if only in name, to their\nundone if this is adopted.\"\nchildren.\nSpecifically, Steiger argued, the amendment, in effect,\nAt the same time, Ketchum and Harris maintained\nwould mandate uneven benefit payments across the\nthat the change would not allow elderly persons living in\nHouse Votes One-Year\nplans for use of the funds. \"We are limiting the appropriate\ncountry, a return to the old welfare programs for the aged,\n\"mansions\" to qualify for SSI benefits because the income\ndiscretion of the administrator with respect to the expen-\nblind and disabled. Because of another quirk in the law, he\nthey must have to pay property taxes on palatial houses\nnoted, the federal share of these payments would remain\nLEAA Extension, 324-8\nditure of discretionary funds he said, \"even though the\nwould disqualify them for the program.\nplans are not ready and probably will not be ready for the\ndisproportionately high in three states-his own,\nRepublicans raised no objections to the amendment,\nprudent expenditure of the funds.\"\nMassachusetts and Hawaii.\nwhich carried an estimated first-year cost of $5-million to\nWith the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration\nSupporting the amendment, Conyers argued that\n\"The taxpayers of 47 states will be paying dollars to\n$7-million. The amendment replaced a section of the com-\n(LEAA) slated to expire Sept. 30, the House voted Sept. 2 to\nmoney should be set aside for courts \"for the simple reason\nsolve the problem in those three states...,\" Vander Jagt\nmittee bill that would have allowed HEW to use the\nextend the controversial agency, but held to the decision of\nthat our courts are in trouble and the judges clearly do not\ncomplained.\npurchase price of a home as its value. HEW said this\nits Judiciary Committee that the extension be limited to\nhave the political clout to receive the kind of funding that\nOpponents' arguments carried little weight in an elec-\napproach would pose administrative problems.\none year. (Committee report, Weekly Report p. 1347)\nwould come out of the discretionary fund.\"\ntion year, even among Republicans. The amendment won\nLed by Vander Jagt, Republicans strongly opposed the\nThe Senate had passed a five-year extension of LEAA\nThe amendment was rejected by a standing vote of 16-\nthe support of 89 of 123 voting Republicans.\nsecond amendment, proposed by Charles B. Rangel (D\n(S 2212) on July 26. (Weekly Report p. 2077)\n22, followed by a roll-call vote of 173-214. (Vote 518, p. 2442)\nN.Y.). It would have allowed extra payments of up to $50 a\nWhile adopting numerous amendments, the House\nBlind and Disabled Children\nmonth to SSI recipients whose annual expenses for housing,\nmade few major changes in the bill reported by the\nProgram Extension\nincluding utility bills, exceeded one-third of their income.\nJudiciary Committee May 15.\nAn unusual coalition of liberal, moderate and conser-\nMcClory offered an amendment to extend LEAA for\nvative House members broke with Corman in a successful\n\"It is a disgrace to think that in the United States of\nThe House bill generally made fewer changes in LEAA\nthree years, through fiscal 1979, instead of the one-year ex-\nAmerica, there are those of us who must go without food in\nprograms than the version passed by the Senate. House\nattempt to revise the committee bill to channel more federal\ntension proposed in the bill. He reiterated arguments made\naid to disabled and blind preschool children.\norder to pay for living facilities that are often indecent and\nsponsor John Conyers Jr. (D Mich.) explained that the\nin additional views to the committee report that a one-year\nAs reported, the bill authorized the federal government\nunfit for human habitation,\" Rangel said. He argued that\nHouse bill included \"a very modest series of changes\"\nextension would make it impossible for state and local\nto assume half the cost of new rehabilitation programs for\nthe amendment, heavily supported by New York\nbecause the limited one-year extension required intensive\ngrantees to develop long-range comprehensive plans. He\nall blind and disabled children under age 13. The committee\nDemocrats, would recognize higher housing costs in some\noversight by the Judiciary Committee during the next year.\nalso argued that the oversight promised by the Judiciary\ndecided these children would benefit more from special\nparts of the country.\nConyers said improved oversight was crucial because\nCommittee as a condition of the one-year extension would\nVander Jagt argued that the amendment would cost $1-\nLEAA had spent $4.5-billion while the rate of crime had\nrehabilitation services than from the vocational training\nbe severely delayed by the organization time needed by the\nservices for which they were eligible under existing law.\nbillion, 10 times the amount set aside for the entire SSI bill\nrisen 18 per cent.\nnew 95th Congress.\nAbner J. Mikva (D III.), joined by 11 Republicans and\nunder congressional budget procedures. Ketchum also\nAs passed by the House, the bill extended LEAA for one\nAnything less than a three-year extension, McClory\nDemocrats on Ways and Means, proposed instead to\nsuggested that landlords would just raise rents if they knew\nyear, through fiscal 1977, with an authorization level of\nsaid, \"is irresponsible, unrealistic and entirely unfair to\nprovide full federal funding for rehabilitation services for\nSSI recipients were receiving new benefits.\n$895-million. As did the Senate bill, the House version re-\nevery law enforcement agency in this country.\"\nchildren age 6 and under. To offset this cost, the amend-\nOnly 10 of 126 Republicans supported the amendment\nquired LEAA to place greater emphasis on strengthening\nConyers opposed the amendment, saying that serious\non the 114-269 vote rejecting it. (Vote 505, Weekly Report p.\nstate judicial systems and to improve evaluation and\nment also eliminated the new 50 per cent federal funding\noversight of LEAA was needed in the next year so that major\n2370)\nmonitoring procedures. Both bills emphasized prevention of\nprogram for disabled children between the ages of 6 and 13.\nprogram changes could be proposed, and that the moderate\ncrime against the elderly and encouraged crime prevention\nMikva argued that there would be no new program un-\nchanges proposed in the bill did not justify a three-year ex-\nMedicaid\nby community groups.\nder the committee proposal because states could not afford\nOne key difference between the House and Senate bills\ntension. Conyers indicated that Congress was likely to come\nto put up half of the cost. He also maintained that it made\nTwo other amendments, dealing with SSI recipients'\nup with a three-year extension anyway because the Senate\nwas that the former would require authorizing legislation for\nthe most sense to target aid on the youngest children, who\neligibility for the Medicaid program for the poor, were\nhad passed a five-year bill and conferees would split the\nthe Justice Department, beginning in fiscal 1979.\ncould benefit most from early assistance. Disabled and\nadopted by voice votes. Both amendments, proposed by J.J.\ndifference between the two versions.\nblind children between the ages of 6 and 13, he added,\nPickle (D Texas), dealt with quirks in the SSI law and its\nThe amendment was rejected by a 119-268 vote. (Vote\nwould receive some help from schools while the youngest\nFloor Action\nrelationship to other statutes.\n519, p. 2442)\nchildren would not.\nUnder the first amendment, the income of an in-\nCorman opposed the amendment on grounds that it\ndividual whose spouse is in the hospital could not be\nThe House debated the proposal Aug. 31 and Sept. 2,\nCommunity Anti-Crime Programs\nwould leave many children without the services they needed\ncounted as income for the spouse. Under existing law, the\nrejecting more amendments than it adopted before finally\nLike the Senate bill, the House strengthened programs\nand cut total federal assistance for the program to $18-\nincome of a husband whose wife is in the hospital might be\npassing the House-numbered bill (HR 13636) by a 324-8\nfor participation of local community groups in the fight\nmillion from $55-million. He also contended that many\ncounted as income for the wife until she had been in the\nvote Sept. 2. It then substituted its provisions for those of S\nagainst crime. However, the House bill included a provision\npreschool children already received aid of some sort.\nhospital for six months and it might be high enough to dis-\n2212 by voice vote. (Vote 527, p. 2445)\nchanging the existing requirement that local groups obtain\nThe House adopted the amendment by a 219-146 vote,\nqualify her for SSI benefits and Medicaid eligibility. The\nThe House had adopted the rule (H Res 1246) for con-\nthe approval of local law enforcement officials before ob-\nwith the support of 55 of 120 voting Republicans and 164 of\npurpose of the amendment was to allow husbands and wives\nsideration of the bill Aug. 31 by a 388-0 vote. (Vote 517, p.\ntaining an LEAA grant. The change allowed the groups\n245 voting Democrats. (Vote 506, Weekly Report p. 2370)\nin this situation to get Medicaid to pay their hospital bills.\n2442)\nsimply to notify the local police.\nThe second, equally complicated amendment would\nHenry J. Hyde (R Ill.) offered an amendment to strike\nHousing\npreserve Medicaid eligibility for elderly persons whose in-\nCourt Funds\nthe bill's provision and return to existing law. He argued\nIn other actions, the House agreed by voice vote to\ncome is just under the limit for SSI recipients. In some\nIn action Aug. 31, the House rejected a Judiciary Com-\nthat community groups were supposed to work in coopera-\nmake it easier for the elderly and disabled to continue to live\ncases, the annual increase in Social Security benefits for\nmittee amendment that earmarked no less than one-third of\ntion with the local police and that deleting the requirement\nin their homes while qualifying for SSI benefits. But it\nthese persons surpasses the annual increase in the limit on\nthe LEAA discretionary funds under Part C to be used to\nof approval by local police would \"undercut local\nrefused to provide additional benefits to recipients with\nincome for SSI recipients by a matter of cents, so they lose\nimprove the administration of justice in state and local\ngovernmental authority\" and \"set up a form of vigilan-\nhigh housing costs.\neligibility for SSI. Generally, such persons are receiving very\ncourts and reduce criminal case backlogs.\ntism\nThe first amendment, sponsored by William M.\nlittle in SSI benefits, but any eligibility still qualifies them\nOpponents of the amendment, led by Robert McClory\nConyers opposed the amendment, saying that com-\nKetchum (R Calif.), changed existing law so that the value\nfor Medicaid benefits. The amendment would preserve the\n(R III.), said the provision would provide a disproportionate\nmunity groups, like other LEAA applicants, had to go\nof a home would not count at all toward the limit on assets\nmore valuable Medicaid eligibility for the elderly in these\namount of LEAA funds for court programs.\nthrough a number of review steps before receiving a grant.\nSSI recipients may hold. HEW regulations had limited the\ncircumstances.\nI\nIn addition, Charles E. Wiggins (R Calif.) said that in\nAdding an extra veto step for community groups from the\nvalue that did not count toward assets to $25,000.\n-By Elizabeth Bowman\nmany areas, members of the judiciary were not ready with\npolice was unfair, he said. \"I think the police would then be\nPAGE 2478-Sept. 11, 1976\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC\nReproduction prohibited whole part except by editorial clients\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERL INC\nReproduction prohibited whole except by editorial clients\nSept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2479\nLaw Enforcement and Judiciary 2\nengaging in politics and that is too abhorrent for any of us to\nEstablished an Office of Community Anti-Crime\ncountenance,' Conyers said.\nPrograms within LEAA to provide technical assistance and\nTransportation/Communications\nThe amendment was first rejected by a standing vote of\ninformation on other successful programs to citizens' groups\n38-57. That vote was reversed when the amendment was\nand coordinate citizens' anti-crime activity with other\nadopted by a subsequent roll-call vote of 253-133. (Vote 520,\nfederal agencies.\np. 2442)\nRequired state planning agencies to assure the par-\nticipation of citizens' and community organizations at all\nMajor Amendments Adopted\nplanning levels.\nFord Nominations to FCC\nNeither of those authorizations had been requested by\nthe administration, and Secretary of Transportation\nThe House adopted the following additional\nEarmarked $15-million in Part C grants for community\nactivities and other neighborhood programs.\nApproved by Senate Panel\nWilliam T. Coleman Jr. had warned earlier in the year that\namendments to HR 13636, all but one by voice vote:\npatrol\nthey represented excessive spending that might draw a veto.\nBy M. Caldwell Butler (R Va.), to substitute the non-\nAuthorized state legislatures to review the general\nBut concern over a veto dissipated in August when the\ndiscrimination provisions of the revenue sharing bill of 1976\ngoals, priorities and policies of LEAA state plans, without\nResolving a dispute that had become embroiled in\nPresident signed a transportation appropriations bill (HR\n(HR 13367) for the civil rights enforcement procedures\nveto power over the plan.\nelection-year politics, the Senate Commerce Committee\n14234-PL 94-387) that included funds for the two\nrecommended by the Judiciary Committee.\nRequired that state planning agencies include as\nSept. 8 approved President Ford's nomination of two per-\nprograms. (Fiscal 1977 transportation appropriations,\nBy McClory, to establish a National Advisory Com-\nmembers no fewer than two members of the judiciary.\nsons-one a Democrat, the other a Republican-to the\nWeekly Report p. 2139)\nmittee on Criminal Standards and Goals.\nAuthorized use of block grant funds given to states for\nFederal Communications Commission (FCC).\nFinal action on HR 11670 came Aug. 30 when the House\nBy Robert Krueger (D Texas), to authorize LEAA to\nreducing court congestion and case backlog, revision of\nThe Democratic nominee, Joseph R. Fogarty, easily\nagreed by voice vote to a conference compromise on the bill.\nmake block grants to states to be used to extablish early\ncriminal and procedural rules, training of judges and ad-\nwon approval to a full seven-year term on the commission.\nThe Senate had agreed to the report, also by voice vote, on\ncase assessment panels to expedite the prosecution of cases\nministrators and other programs to strengthen state courts;\nFogarty is chief counsel to the committee's Subcommittee\nAug. 2. (Senate passage, Weekly Report p. 1844; House, p.\ninvolving repeat offenders and violent criminals. This provi-\ndeveloping and operating programs to reduce and prevent\non Communications.\n939)\nsion was part of the Senate bill.\ncrime against the elderly; establishing early case assessment\nThe committee also approved the nomination of\nBy Gary A. Myers (R Pa.), to require that persons in\npanels in cities above 250,000 population to expedite the\nMargareta E. White, a former director of Ford's White\nLEAA policy-making positions that affect grants must dis-\nprosecution of cases involving repeat offenders and violent\nHouse Office of Telecommunications, to complete the final\nProvisions\nclose any conflicts of interest relating to those grants.\ncriminals.\ntwo years of an unfinished seven-year term. The\nAs cleared by Congress, HR 11670:\nBy Wiggins, to delete requirements that grantees meet\nRequired that state plans, to be considered comprehen-\nnominations, both approved unanimously, were sent to the\nAuthorized $86.2-million for procurement of vessels.\nminimum federal physical and service standards before\nsive, must include: adequate procedures to deal with\nSenate for what was expected to be swift confirmation.\nAuthorized $24.3-million for procurement of aircraft.\nreceiving federal funds to construct, improve or renovate\ncriminal justice problems in areas characterized by high\nIn announcing the nominations earlier in the summer,\nAuthorized $24.4-million for shore and offshore con-\nstate and local jails and prisons. This provision was part of\ncrime incidence; a comprehensive juvenile justice improve-\nFord originally had appointed White to the full term and\nstruction of Coast Guard facilities.\nthe Senate bill. Adopted by a 211-159 vote. (Vote 525, p.\nment program; attention to the special problems of crime\nFogarty to the two-year stint. But almost immediately,\nAuthorized $100-million for procurement of vessels and\n2445)\nagainst the elderly; identification of the special needs of\nWhite ran into trouble over the fact that her husband was a\naircraft for enforcement of the 200-mile commercial fishing\ndrug-dependent offenders and procedures to coordinate\nlawyer for a firm that did substantial business before the\nlimit.\nAmendments Rejected\nwith other state agencies serving these persons; a total\nFCC. Although White in committee hearings promised to\nAuthorized $50-million for procurement of vessels with\nThe House rejected the following amendments:\nanalysis of law enforcement and criminal justice problems\ndisqualify herself from any cases involving her husband's\nice-breaking capability for the Great Lakes.\nBy Conyers, to allow a unit of local government with a\nthroughout the state, as well as goals, priorities and stan-\nfirm, subcommittee Chairman John 0. Pastore (D R.I.) ex-\nProhibited use of funds in the bill for Coast Guard boat\npopulation of 250,000 or above to receive a single mini-block\ndards to meet those problems; procedures for evaluating the\npressed serious personal \"anguish\" over the possibility of a\nsafety enforcement on certain lakes and the Merrimac River\ngrant once its plan had been approved by the state planning\nsuccess that state programs and projects had in meeting\nconflict of interest in the appointment.\nin New Hampshire, but specified that the provision should\nagency, freeing it from continuing administration by the\ntheir goals, conforming with the purposes of the state plan\nThere also was speculation, however, that Pastore was\nnot limit boat safety funds for the state nor prevent Coast\nplanning agency. Rejected by a standing vote of 42-50.\nand reducing crime and aiding criminal justice.\nreluctant to see the seven-year post filled with a Republican\nGuard participation in search and rescue operations in that\nBy McClory, to strike the new definition in the bill of\nRequired states to pass through to localities the same\non the eve of what could be a Democratic administration.\nstate.\n\"local elected official,\" by voice vote.\npercentage of block grants that local governments spend on\nSeeking to salvage the White nomination, Ford Aug. 31\nExempted certain fuel cargo vessels operating in Alaska\nBy Wiggins, to require that state law enforcement plans\ntotal law enforcement activities. However, states could ex-\nreversed the appointments, nominating Fogarty for the full\nfrom Coast Guard inspection and certification re-\nrequired under the act must be approved by the state\nempt 10 per cent of block-grant funds from the pass-through\nterm and White for two years.\nquirements.\nlegislature and then reconciled with the governor's plan, by\nrequirement, as long as they used the money for program\nThe committee subsequently approved the\nAuthorized an end strength active duty personnel level\nevaluation.\nvoice vote.\nnominations without difficulty. Pastore denied that the\nof 38,918.\nBy Elizabeth Holtzman (D N.Y.), to earmark $50-\nRequired LEAA to develop criteria for program evalua-\nswitch was influenced by political considerations.\nmillion to fight high-fear violent crimes in areas with high\ntion and to disseminate information on successful projects\nIf confirmed by the Senate, White would replace\nConference Report\ncrime rates. Rejected by a standing 5-28 vote. The Senate\nto state planning agencies.\nCharlotte T. Reid, who retired in June after five years, as\nbill contained a similar provision.\nRequired LEAA to conduct research to determine the\nthe only woman on the seven-member commission.\nConferees filed a conference report on HR 11670 in the\nBy Mario Biaggi (D N.Y.), to require state and local\nrelationship between crime and drug and alcohol abuse.\nHouse (H Rept 94-1374) and the Senate (S Rept 94-1054) on\nunits of government applying for LEAA grants to enact a\nEstablished a National Advisory Committee on\nFinal Action:\nCriminal Justice Standards and Goals.\nJuly 28. They accepted the Senate bill almost in its entirety,\nlaw enforcement officers' bill of rights. Rejected by a stand-\nauthorizing the same fiscal 1977 spending level-$284.9-\ning vote of 17-33, followed by a roll-call vote of 148-213.\nEstablished a system of mandatory procedures to be\nCoast Guard Authorization\nmillion-as proposed by the Senate. The House had\n(Vote 526, p. 2445)\nfollowed in suspending and eventually terminating grants to\nauthorized $304.1-million and the administration had re-\nBy Myers (Pa.), to prevent use of LEAA funds for inter-\nan LEAA recipient who was found to have discriminated on\nBoosting the administration's budget by more than\nquested less than half that amount-$125.9-million.\nstate transport of prisoners convicted of violent crimes to\nthe basis of race, color, religion, national origin or sex.\nRequired LEAA to make an annual report to Congress,\ndouble the amount requested, Congress Aug. 30 cleared for\nathletic events, by voice vote.\nincluding such items as a summary of innovative programs,\nthe President a bill (HR 11670) authorizing $284.9-million\n200-Mile Limit\nBy John B. Breaux (D La.), to make a certain percen-\ntage of LEAA grants directly to the chief law enforcement\nthe number of programs approved and discontinued, and a\nfor the Coast Guard for fiscal 1977.\nThe administration had requested no funds to enforce\nofficial of each county, by voice vote.\nsummary of evaluation procedures.\nPresident Ford had asked for only $125.9-million. Most\nthe new 200-mile commercial fishing limit, scheduled to\nRequired LEAA employees in policy-making positions\nof the increase was contained in an authorization of $100-\ntake effect March 1, 1977. The Transportation Department\nthat affect grants to make a financial statement disclosing\nmillion for procurement of ships and airplanes to patrol the\nsaid that the law's requirements still were under review.\nProvisions\nany relationship with LEAA grant recipients.\nnew 200-mile commercial fishing limit enacted into law in\nActing before the new law was enacted, the House\nRequired the Department of Justice to obtain authoriz-\nMarch. The bill included another $50-million for procure-\nauthorized a total of $108.6-million for a specific number of\nThe major provisions of S 2212, as passed by the House:\ning legislation for its appropriations beginning in fiscal\nment of ice-breaker ships to keep the Great Lakes open for\nairplanes, helicopters and Coast Guard cutters. By contrast,\nExtended LEAA through fiscal 1977, with an authoriza-\n1979.\nwinter shipping. (200-mile limit legislation, Weekly Report\nthe Senate had authorized a flat sum of $100-million for\ntion level of $895-million.\n-By Mary Link\np. 750)\ngeneral procurement of whatever mix of vessels and aircraft\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC\nPAGE 2480-Sept. 11, 1976\nReproduction prohibited whole or except by editorial clients\nReproduction prohibited whole or part except by editoria clients\nSept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2481\nTransportation/Communications 2\nthe Coast Guard determined to be necessary to patrol the\nwas the same as that requested by the administration and\nnew fishing area. Conferees accepted the Senate's more\nauthorized by the House March 11, and it exceeded the\nAgriculture\ngeneral plan.\nfiscal 1976 authorization by $87,785,000. Sponsors said the\nincrease reflected a growing gap between U.S. and foreign\nIcebreakers\nmaritime wage levels. (House passage, Weekly Report p.\nTo improve winter navigation on the Great Lakes, the\n634)\nHouse had authorized $52-million for the purchase of four\nIn the only floor change in the bill as reported (S Rept\nCosts, Politics Embroil Peanut Subsidies\nsmall icebreaking vessels. Again taking a general approach,\n94-833) by the Commerce Committee May 13, the Senate\nthe Senate had authorized $50-million for \"ice-breaking\nadded $600,000 to the $4-million in the bill for federal aid to\nWith a Georgia peanut farmer aiming to take up\nAgriculture Committee Chairman W. R. Poage (D Texas)\ncapability,\" without specifying what ships were to be\nstate maritime academies. The additional funds were to\nresidence in the White House in January 1977, attention has\nexplained the dilemma during committee consideration of\nbought. The administration had opposed the authorization,\npermit an increase to $900 per student, from $600, in the\nbeen focused on the peanut subsidy program-a program\nthe bill: \"I think this bill is a dangerous bill, but it is more\nsaying it was too expensive.\nsubsistence stipends.\nthat has helped provide Jimmy Carter's livelihood and that\ndangerous to proceed with the present program, with the\nConferees again accepted the general Senate plan.\nArguing that the stipend had not been raised since it\nhas been criticized as one of the biggest boondoggles in U.S.\nSecretary of Agriculture threatening to ruin the program,\nAlthough it went along with the Senate's non-specific\nwas first authorized in 1958, sponsors originally had sought\nagriculture, costing a projected $163-million for 1976.\nand I think he has the authority to do it.\"\nauthorizations for this particular bill, conferees made it\na $1,200 allowance. But in the face of strong resistance from\nOpponents of the program, led by Agriculture Secretary\nclear that the agreement should not be taken as a precedent\nopponents, who argued that the maritime job market\nEarl L. Butz, have been trying to change the program for\nBackground\nfor the future. \"Too little specificity, leaving too much dis-\nalready was overcrowded, they compromised on the $900\nsome years, but peanut growers have had powerful friends in\ncretion in the administering agency, is an abdication of con-\nfigure.\nCongress: Sen. Herman E. Talmadge (D Ga.), chairman of\nThe long history of the peanut program cannot be con-\ngressional responsibility,' they said.\nThe amendment increasing the stipend, offered by\nthe Senate Agriculture and Forestry Committee, and\nsidered apart from the complicated history of U.S.\nWilliam D. Hathaway (D Maine), was adopted by voice\nSpeaker of the House Carl Albert (D Okla.). Both come from\nagricultural policy, which has attempted since the 1930s to\nvote. The House in March had rejected a similar amend-\nFinal Action:\nlarge peanut-producing states.\nprovide a stable framework and income level for farmers\nment by a 53-292 vote.\nBut the Butz campaign, coupled with the attention\nand to avoid the natural tendency of \"boom and bust\"\nThe only other change in the House-passed bill was an\ndrawn by Carter's peanut connections, has caused normally\nagriculture, in which the vagaries of weather and changing\nMaritime Authorization\nincrease of $3-million, to $22.5-million, for research and\nwarring peanut growers to band together and support legis-\nmarkets could wipe out thousands of farmers in a single\ndevelopment programs by the Commerce Department's\nlation (HR 12808) currently pending in the House.\nseason.\nCongress Aug. 30 cleared for the President a bill (HR\nMaritime Administration. The Commerce Committee said\nThe Senate Agriculture Committee refused Sept. 1 to\n11481) to authorize $448,041,000 for federal maritime\nthe additional money would permit accelerated develop-\ntake up the bill, thus dooming it for this Congress. But it is\nPrice Supports\nprograms for fiscal 1977.\nment of industrial plant ships that could produce ammonia.\nexpected that revision of the peanut program will be con-\nAlthough price supports for various commodities began\nThe largest authorization item in the bill was $403,721,-\nFollowing are the authorization levels approved by the\nsidered as part of the general farm legislation the 95th\nas early as 1933, the permanent establishment of a price\n000 in operating subsidies for U.S. merchant ships to permit\nSenate for various maritime programs:\nCongress will face in 1977.\nsupport program with accompanying acreage allotments did\nthem to charge rates competitive with those of foreign\n$403,721,000 for ship operating-differential subsidies;\ncarriers. That was the same as the amount requested by the\n$22.5-million for research and development;\nReform Moves\nnot begin until the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938.\n(Farm policy legislation, 1973 Almanac p. 288, Congress and\nadministration.\n$13.26-million for maritime training at the U.S.\nCritics charge that the peanut subsidy program is out-\nthe Nation Vol. I, p. 682)\nFor the first time in more than 25 years, the bill did not\nMerchant Marine Academy at Kings Point, N.Y.;\ndated, inefficient and costly-that American peanut\nUnder this system, the government estimated the\ncontain an authorization for shipbuilding subsidies. In the\n$4.56-million for expenses of the National Defense\nfarmers are being paid to grow a commodity far in excess of\namount of acreage that needed to be planted to meet the de-\npast, the government's construction program had provided\nReserve Fleet of mothballed merchant ships;\nU.S. needs and that the federal government has been forced\nmand for a certain commodity. Farmers planting more than\nlarge subsidies to American shipyards so that the cost to\n$4.6-million in federal aid to state maritime schools and\nto stockpile those huge peanut surpluses at taxpayers' ex-\nthat amount could be fined, but those staying within their\nU.S. purchasers would be comparable to the cost of foreign\nfor the operation and development of six training ships.\npense.\nallotted acreage were eligible to receive price supports by\nvessels. In 1976 the Maritime Administration told Congress\nHouse Agriculture Committee member Frederick Rich-\nobtaining loans from the Commodity Credit Corporation,\nthat sufficient funds were available from previous years to\nConference Report\nmond (D N.Y.) claimed the current surplus is 1 billion\nusing their crops as collateral.\ncarry the program through fiscal 1977.\npounds of peanuts and 1.5 billion pounds of peanut oil.\nHR 11481 included $4-million for federal assistance to\nConferees filed a conference report on HR 11481 in the\nDefenders of the program respond that the peanut\nstate maritime academies for student subsistence\nHouse (H Rept 94-1375) and Senate (S Rept 94-1056) on\nprogram has successfully created stable quantities of that\npayments. The Senate had proposed to raise the level of aid\nJuly 29.\ncommodity, has provided economic security to parts of the\nU.S. Peanut Production*\nto permit higher per-student payments, but House-Senate\nResearch and Development. Accepting a Senate\ncountry that cannot grow other crops and is the best method\nIN BILLIONS OF POUNDS\nconferees dropped that provision pending the results of a\nauthorization provision, conferees approved $22.5-\nof dealing with the perishable peanut, which cannot be\nGeneral Accounting Office study of the idea. Opponents had\nmillion-$3-million more than authorized by the\nstored as long as many other commodities, such as corn and\n3.8\ncontended that the maritime trades were crowded enough\nwithout the government subsidizing more candidates for\nHouse-for maritime research and development. The ad-\nwheat.\nscarce jobs.\nditional $3-million was for studies of industrial plant ships\nThe Department of Agriculture has been trying to bring\n2.9\nand of commercialization of ocean thermal energy.\nsome changes to the peanut program since 1968, and par-\nFinal action on HR 11481 came Aug. 30 when the House\nHowever, conferees pointed out that the authorization ac-\nticularly since 1973, when cotton, wheat and other feed\nagreed to a conference report by voice vote. The Senate had\n2.3\ntually was moot, since the Commerce Department\ngrains were transferred from a subsidy system similar to\napproved the report by voice vote on Aug. 3. Since the total\nappropriations bill (HR 14239), already enacted, did not in-\npeanuts to a market-oriented target-price system. Sup-\nlevel of authorizations was only $3.3-million more than that\nclude funds for those studies. They called for further con-\nporters of the existing peanut program have accused the\n1.7\n1.5\nrecommended by the President, it was expected to win his\nsideration of the matter in hearings in 1977. (Appro-\ndepartment, and Secretary Butz in particular, of con-\napproval.\npriations bill, Weekly Report p. 1852)\nducting a vendetta against the program.\nEarlier Senate Action\nState Marine Schools. Responding to persistent\nGrowers in the three main peanut-producing areas are\npressure from supporters of the six state maritime\nnot happy with the bill reported (H Rept 94-1455) by the\nacademies around the country, the Senate had provided for\nHouse Agriculture Committee Aug. 31. As Oilseeds and\nThe Senate passed HR 11481 June 15 by voice vote with\na $300 increase in the per-student payment for annual sub-\nRice Subcommittee Chairman Dawson Mathis (D Ga.)\nan authorization of $488,641,000.\nsistence. The House had resisted that pressure, providing no\nsaid, \"This is a bill that nobody loves, but everyone\naccepts.\"\n1955\n1960\n1965\n1970\n1975\nOf the total authorization, the bulk-$403,-\nincrease. Conferees went along with the House, rejecting the\n721,000-was for operating subsidies for U.S. merchant\nincrease, and noted that the matter was under study by the\nPeanut growers, realizing some change was inevitable,\n*Based on 1,610,000 minimum national acreage\nships to permit them to charge shipping rates com-\nGeneral Accounting Office.\ncompromised behind HR 12808 to avoid more severe cut-\nSource: U.S. Department of Agriculture\n-By Ted Vaden\nbacks or possible extinction of the program. Former\nchapman\npetitive with the low rates of foreign vessels. The figure\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC\nPAGE 2482-Sept. 11, 1976\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC\nReproduction prohibited in whole or part except by editorial clients\nSept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2483\nReproduction prohibited whole or except by editorial clients\nAgriculture 2\nAgriculture 3\nThe loan was based on the principle of \"parity,\" a for-\nPeanuts Bypassed\nSmall Farmer\nmula set up to establish a fair relationship between the in-\nThe peanut program, however, was excluded from the\nAlthough some critics, such as Peyser, charge the\ncome a farmer received and the amount of money he had to\n1973 change in agricultural policy. Peanut farmers con-\npeanut program has reaped \"unbelievable profits for its\nCarter's Peanuts\nspend for labor, equipment and living costs. Parity formulas\ntinued to follow a complex system of acreage allotments,\nbenefactors,\" and reports exist of millionaire peanut\nwere figured from base periods during the first two decades\nmarketing quotas and price support loans. And, unlike the\nof this century (1910-14 or 1919-29 for most crops), which\nfarmers with thousands of acres in peanut allotments, the\nSecretary of Agriculture Earl L. Butz opened fire\nfarmers growing target-price crops, they continued to build\nnational average allotment actually is 25 acres.\nMarch 28 on the peanut subsidy program and on\nwere considered examples of a time when farmers' income\nup large surpluses.\nReporters trailing Jimmy Carter tell of new homes and\nJimmy Carter, then the front-runner for the Democratic\nand costs were at a fair balance.\nOne of the chief reasons for the large surpluses was the\nlate model cars in the peanut country of southwest Georgia.\npresidential nomination he later won.\nThe price support programs continued, with some\nincreased productivity enjoyed by peanut farmers. In 1941,\nBut Rep. Don Fuqua (D Fla.) defends the program: \"The\nButz accused Carter of \"growing fat from federal\nchanges, until 1973, when Congress passed new farm legisla-\nwhen the minimum national peanut acreage was set at\npeanut industry is probably one of the most misunderstood\npeanut subsidies\" and promised he was \"going to dis-\ntion putting cotton, wheat and other feed grains on a\n1,610,000 acres, the average yield per acre was 900 pounds.\nsegments of the agricultural industry. Prices can fluctuate\nturb his [Carter's] little playhouse.\"\ndifferent system. Called a target-price system, the program\nIn 1976, the Agriculture Department is projecting an\nviolently and a producer can literally be wiped out in a\nThe Carter camp responded by charging Butz with\nwas hailed as one that was more market-oriented, would\naverage yield of 2,568 pounds per acres. Department figures\nfree farmers from the cumbersome complexities of govern-\nsingle growing season without some assurance which past\n\"political flackery\" and using Carter as a focal point for\nindicate that 3.8 billion pounds of peanuts were grown in the\nprograms have provided.\"\ncriticism of the peanut program.\nment subsidy programs, and, with the existing world de-\nUnited States in 1975, compared with 1.5 billion pounds in\nThose assurances of a fair return on investment, Fuqua\nThe Carter people said Carter grows only seed\nmand for food, would eliminate the embarrassing and costly\n1955. (Chart, p. 2483)\nsaid, have enabled \"a great many families to enjoy a decent\npeanuts, which are sold directly to other farmers in the\nsurpluses of years past.\nApproximately 70 per cent of the crop is sold to peanut\nstandard of living and children to get an education.\"\narea at a higher price than the government support\nOne of the effects of the subsidy programs for peanuts,\nbutter manufacturers and other producers of edible peanut\nSince the economies of many counties in peanut-\nprice and that Carter does not participate in the federal\nas well as the other commodities, was that enormous sur-\nproducts, such as salted and roasted nuts and peanut can-\ngrowing states are based almost entirely on peanut produc-\nsubsidy program.\npluses built up. Although the loans made to farmers were\ndy.\ntion, most observers agree that a sudden change in the sub-\nWhen the air cleared, Agriculture Department\ntechnically redeemable, in reality farmers frequently\nThe remainder of the crop is purchased by the govern-\nsidy program, or wiping it out entirely, would drastically\nreports indicated that Carter had inherited a 243-acre\ndefaulted, forcing the government to acquire the commodity\nment through its loan program, with the current purchase\naffect those areas.\npeanut allotment, that he does indeed grow seed\nput up as collateral.\nprice set at 75 per cent of parity.\nBut Peyser has suggested that the 600,000 unneeded\npeanuts and owns a peanut warehouse, but that he had\nIn actual figures, the government bought peanuts in\nallotted peanut acres on which the surplus is grown could be\nreceived only two federal payments since 1970, totaling\n1976 at an average $414 a ton. (Peanut marketing box, this\nused to produce soybeans, cotton, potatoes and other crops\n$2,728, a rather meager amount in view of the enormous\nPeanut Marketing\npage)\nthat Americans would really use. \"We must find a better\nsubsidy program.\nThe government has two basic choices of what it can do\nway to help [the peanut farmer] to produce something else\nBut even though Carter is not now participating in\nFarmers grow peanuts on the number of acres they\nwith the surplus: 1) it can sell it on the world market at a\nthat is a salable crop,\" he said.\nthe subsidy program, the department added, he had\nhave been allotted by the government. The Secretary of\nloss (the current world price is around $250 a ton), or 2) it\nRep. James P. Johnson (Colo.), ranking Republican on\nreceived federal payments during the 1960s for storing\nAgriculture annually sets the amount of national\ncan crush the excess peanuts into oil and meal, donating\nthe Oilseeds Subcommittee, presented the other side of the\ngovernment peanuts.\nacreage that can be planted. Since 1941, except for\nthat to the domestic school lunch program or moving it\nargument to the Agriculture Committee when he said that\nButz insisted that Carter benefits indirectly, simp-\nvariations during war years, the minimum national\nthrough the Food for Peace (PL 480) program.\npeanut farmers, unlike those growing other commodities,\nly because the subsidy system exists. As one depart-\nacreage has been set at 1,610,000. With the increased\nIn previous years, the department has chosen to sell the\n\"don't have much choice in different crops.\"\nment official said, \"He would not be getting the high\nyields that have been experienced in recent years, the\nsurplus, even though the world market price usually was\nAccording to Johnson, \"This isn't just a farm program.\nprice he is getting if it were not for that government\ngovernment generally has not allowed more than the\nlower than the price the department paid for the peanuts.\nThis is a social program for that whole section of the country\nprogram.\"\nminimum amount to be planted. By law, the govern-\nThe general feeling before 1973 seemed to be that recouping\nand you make a mistake if you ignore that.\"\nment cannot allow less than that amount.\npart of the loss was better than nothing. In 1973 and 1974\nAs a result, peanut acreages are almost impossible\nthe department actually was able to sell most of its peanuts\nHouse Committee Action\ncut to 1,247,000 from 1,610,000 acres. Committee members\nto come by, unless they are inherited. Critics such as\nat a good price; the drought in African peanut-growing\nsaid this would result in a reduction in the number of\nRep. Peter A. Peyser (R N.Y.) have called it a \"feudal\ncountries created shortages that the U.S. surplus was able\nIn the midst of the pressure from Secretary Butz and\npeanuts produced and therefore a decrease in the amount of\nsystem.\"\nto fill.\nthe spotlight focused on the program by Carter's candidacy,\nsurplus.\nOnce the crop is harvested, the peanut farmer\npeanut growers from the three major producing areas joined\nSince the bill also placed a quota on the number of\ntakes his peanuts to the middleman-the warehouser\nButz' Resale Policy\ntogether in support of HR 12808, which the House\npounds sold by peanut farmers and cut the loan level on\nand sheller. According to the Agriculture Department,\nAgriculture Committee reported Aug. 31. Oilseeds Subcom-\nHowever, in 1974 Secretary Butz announced a 100 per\nquota peanuts to 70 per cent of parity from 75 per cent, the\nthe producer cannot bargain for a price. He must accept\nmittee Chairman Mathis said the bill had been worked on\ncent resale policy. He said he would not sell peanuts for\ncommittee estimated that the changes in the peanut sub-\nthe price offered by the purchaser-which is pegged to\nfor five years and would affect only the 1977 crop. Further\nprices lower than what the government paid the producers.\nsidy program would save the government $64-million a year.\nthe support price being offered by the government.\nchanges would be made in the 1977 farm bill.\nWith the world price significantly lower than the U.S. sup-\nThe bill also provided for open-ended production of\nIf the middleman does not want to buy the peanuts\nGrowers in the three areas traditionally have had\nport price, surpluses have been piling up. Rep. Peter A.\npeanuts, thus allowing the crop to be grown by anyone who\nfor sale to commercial companies manufacturing edible\ndifferent growing situations and supply problems and have\nPeyser (RN.Y.) claimed the cost to the taxpayers between\nwanted to participate. This provision was strongly sup-\npeanut items, he puts the peanuts under the federal\noften been in disagreement over peanut program proposals.\n1976 and 1980 would run $961-million.\nported by the Agriculture Department as a way to break the\nloan program.\nThose from Virginia and North Carolina generally grow\nCritics of Secretary Butz say the resale policy is not a\nstranglehold on peanut acreage by current allotment\nThe farmer is paid the same price regardless of how\nwhat is known as the Virginia-type peanut, which is the\nholders.\nvalid one, that the government was willing to sell peanuts at\nthe peanuts are used.\nlargest peanut and is most often sold roasted in the shell or\na loss before and that the policy has been instituted strictly\nUnder the new bill, peanuts grown by non-allotment\nManufacturers then must purchase peanuts at the\nas salted peanuts. Those farmers in the Texas-Oklahoma\nholders or by allotment holders in excess of their allotments\nto embarrass the peanut program and hopefully to kill it.\nartificial government support price, which in 1976 is\narea generally grow Spanish-type peanuts. Both of these\nSubcommittee Chairman Mathis said the surplus has\ncould be marketed only for export or crushing. These non-\napproximately $164 a ton above the world market price.\nvarieties are in demand in the edible peanut market and\nforced the cost of the program to be distorted and \"makes it\nquota peanuts would be supported at a much lower level\nManufacturers, barred from importing cheaper peanuts\ngrowers seldom have surpluses.\nlook worse than it is.\nthan the quota peanuts-60 per cent of the loan level for\ngrown outside the United States, say they must charge\nHowever, the runner-type peanut, grown in Georgia\nThe department defended the move in terms of U.S.\nquota peanuts, or 90 per cent of their estimated value for\nthe consumer high prices for peanut products because\nand Alabama, is smaller than the Virginia variety. Although\ncrushing and export, whichever is lower.\ntrade policy, claiming it would be inconsistent to have ex-\nthey are forced to pay the government support price.\nit generally is used for peanut butter, it is not in such de-\nport subsidies for peanuts, when the United States was try-\nOne provision that provoked some controversy during\nAt the same time the government is stuck with\nmand for edible purposes as the other varieties and growers\ning to avoid such subsidies for other commodities in inter-\ncommittee markup mandated that the Secretary of\nbillions of pounds of excess peanuts, which it must\nof these peanuts generally have surpluses. This has been es-\nnational trade.\nAgriculture would have to sell the surplus peanuts from the\ncrush into oil or peanut meal and then sell at a loss or\npecially true since 1972 when the florunner variety of\nButz succeeded in drawing attention to the program in\n1976 and 1977 crops. Secretary Butz has had discretionary\ngive away.\npeanut, with a very high yield, was introduced.\nMarch when he accused Carter of \"growing fat\" from the\nauthority to sell surplus peanuts, but has chosen not to sell\nAs reported by the committee, the bill reduced the\npeanut subsidy program. (Box, p. 2485)\nthem for less than the price for which the peanuts were\nminimum national acreage allotment by 22.5 per cent-a\nbought.\nPAGE 2484-Sept. 11, 1976\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERL INC\nReproduction prohibited whole or part except by editorial ciients\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC.\nReproduction prohibited in whole or part except by editorial clients\nSept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2485\nCQ Senate Votes 555-560\nAgriculture 4\nCorresponding Congressional Record Votes 564, 565, 566, 567, 568, 569\nAlthough the Agriculture Department objected to HR\n12808 as a continuation of the \"outmoded\" price support\n557\n558\n559\nKEY\nsystem that still would result in 750 million pounds of excess\nThe program has\npeanuts in 1977, it said it was willing to support the bill as a\nenabled \"a great\nALABAMA\nIOWA\nNEW HAMPSHIRE\nAllen\nNNYYNN\nClark\nYYNNYN\nDurkin\nYNNNYN\nY Voted for (yea)\n\"step in the right direction.\"\nYYYNYN\nPaired for\nmany families to en-\nSparkman\nNNNYYN\nCulver\nMclntyre\nYYYN??\n+-\nAnnounced for\nALASKA\nKANSAS\nNEW JERSEY\nGravel\nYN? N Y Y N\nN\nCommittee Markup\njoy a decent standard\nYYNNYN\nDole\nWilliams\nNNNNYY\nVoted against (nay)\nStevens\nYUNNYY\nNYYNYY\nX\nPearson\nNYYNYN\nPaired against.\nCase\nThe House Agriculture Committee markup of HR\nof living and children\nARIZONA\nKENTUCKY\nNEW MEXICO\nAnnounced against.\nFord\nYNYNYY\nP\nFannin\n??YYNN\n??????\nVoted \"present.\"\nMontoya\n12808 on Aug. 24 and 25 provided a good example of the dif-\nto get an education.\"\nGoldwater\n??????\nHuddleston\n? ? N N Y\nDomenici\nYNYYYN\nVoted \"present\" to avoid\nficulty Congress has with complex farm legislation. As\nARKANSAS\nNEW YORK\npossible conflict of interest.\nLOUISIANA\n?\n-Rep. Don Fuqua\nBumpers\nYNNNYY\nDid not vote or otherwise\nYNYNYN\nJohnston\nBuckley*\n??????\nmembers munched on Georgia peanuts provided by Mathis,\n(D Fla.)\nMcClellan\nNPNYNY\nLong\nY N Y Y Y Y\nJavits\nX?NNYN\nmake a position known.\nthey argued about actual costs of the program, citing the\nCALIFORNIA\nMAINE\nNORTH CAROLINA\n??????\nYYNNYN\nYYNNYY\nconfusing array of statistics provided by the Agriculture\nCranston\nHathaway\nMorgan\nTunney\n??????\nMuskie\nNNNNYN\nHelms\nNNYYNN\nDepartment and the program's supporters and opponents.\nCOLORADO\nMARYLAND\nNORTH DAKOTA\nMany members admitted they did not understand the\nThe Richmond amendment was defeated by a 20-5\nHart\nYYNNYN\nBeall\n??????\nBurdick\nYNYNYN\nHaskell\n? ? Y N Y N\nMathias\n? ? N N Y\nprogram or the complex amendments that were offered. One\nvote.\nYoung\nYNNYYY\nCONNECTICUT\nMASSACHUSETTS\nOHIO\nTEXAS\nmember was heard to remark: \"They don't know what the\nRibicoff\nYYYNYN\nKennedy\n???NYN\nGlenn\nYYYNY?\nBentsen\n? - Y N Y\nExport Mandate\nWelcker\nTXYNYN\nBrooke\nNYNNYY\nTaft\nYNYNYN\nTower\nYYNYNN\nhell they're talking about.\"\nDELAWARE\nMICHIGAN\nOKLAHOMA\nUTAH\nOne provision in the bill that aroused heated debate\nBiden\nY ? Y N Y Y\nHart\n???NY?\nBartlett\nNNYYNN\nMoss\n??????\nRichmond Amendment\nRoth\nYNYNYN\nGriffin\nYNYNYN\nBellmon\nYYYYNY\nGarn\nYNYYNN\nduring committee consideration was the requirement that\nFLORIDA\nMINNESOTA\nOREGON\nVERMONT\nRichmond offered an amendment during committee\nthe Secretary of Agriculture dispose of all 1977 surplus\nChiles\nYNYNYN\nHumphrey\nYN?NYN\nHatfleld\nYNYNYY\nLeahy\nYNYNYN\nStone\nYNYNYN\nMondale\n??????\nPackwood\nYYYNYN\npeanuts at competitive world prices.\nStafford\nYNYNYN\nmarkup that would have reduced the parity level to 60 per\nGEORGIA\nMISSISSIPPI\nPENNSYLVANIA\nVIRGINIA\ncent instead of the 70 per cent provided in the bill.\nPaul Findley (R III.) offered two amendments, one to\nNunn\nNNYNYN\nEastland\nNNNYNY\nSchwelker\nYYYNYY\nByrd**\nNNYNY?\nThe New York Democrat contended that the cost of\nstrike the language and another to soften the requirement,\nTalmadge\nNNYYYN\nStennis\nYNNYNY\nScott\nNYYNYN\nScott\nNYYYNN\nHAWAII\nMISSOURI\nRHODE ISLAND\nWASHINGTON\ngrowing peanuts was $338 an acre, including land rental\nbut both amendments were defeated.\nInouye\nYYNNYY\nEagleton\nYN????\nPastore\nYYNNY-\nJackson\nNYYNYN\nFindley argued that forcing the Secretary to sell the sur-\nFong\n? ? Y N Y N\nSymington\nYN? N Y Y\nPell\ncosts, and that the yield per acre was 1.25 tons. At 70 per\nYNNNYY\nMagnuson\n? ? N N Y Y\nIDAHO\nMONTANA\nSOUTH CAROLINA\nWEST VIRGINIA\ncent of parity, he said, the farmer would be receiving $386 a\nplus would be a new use of export subsidies that would have\nChurch\nYNYNYN\nMansfield\n? ? N N Y N\nHollings\nYYNNYY\nByrd\nNNYNYN\nton; at 60 per cent of parity, the farmer would receive $331 a\nimpact on U.S. trade policy and could jeopardize continuing\nMcClure\nYNYYNN\nMetcalf\n???NY?\nThurmond\nNNYNNN\nRandolph\nYYYNYY\nILLINOIS\nNEBRASKA\nSOUTH DAKOTA\nton for his peanuts, which Richmond said would be more in\ninternational trade negotiations. In addition, Findley said\nWISCONSIN\nStevenson\nYNNNYN\nCurtis\nYNYYNN\nAbourezk\nYNNNYN\nNelson\nYNYNYN\nline with the farmer's costs.\nButz already had discretionary authority to sell the sur-\nPercy\nYYYNY?\nHruska\nYYYYNY\nMcGovern\n??NNYN\nProxmire\nYNYNYN\nRichmond told the committee, \"The whole idea of\npluses and that Butz had assured him he would offer 1977\nINDIANA\nNEVADA\nTENNESSEE\nWYOMING\nBayh\n??????\nCannon\nYNNNYY\nBaker\nYNYNYN\nMcGee\n??????\ngovernment support is that farmers get a real return [on\npeanuts at competitive prices. \"I think we should trust\nHartke\n??????\nLaxalt\nY N Y Y N Y\nBrock\nK - T Y N N\nHansen\nYNYYNN\ntheir investment] but not to let farmers grow a product that\nSecretary Butz,\" Findley said.\nMathis led the opponents of the amendment, saying\nDemocrats\nRepublicans\n*Buckley elected as Conservative\n**Byrd elected as independent.\nwe won't use. All of us would like to see more peanuts con-\nsumed and less in surplus, but we won't have it unless we\nButz had avoided using his authority to dispose of surpluses\nlower the support price.\"\nsince 1974 and as a result the peanut farmers had lost\nRichmond also said his amendment would reduce costs\nvaluable overseas markets, with the buildup of surpluses\nto consumers, since the high government support price has\ngiving the program a black eye.\ncaused the price of peanut butter to jump from 63 cents to\nMathis said he knew Butz had promised to dispose of\n93 cents a pound since 1970. \"Consumption goes down as\n1977 surplus peanuts, but Mathis predicted, \"Earl Butz\nthe price goes up,\" he said, adding that the manufacturers\nwon't be in charge of peanut policy in 1977.\"\n555. HR 14238. Legislative Appropriations, Fiscal 1977. Taft\npresently employed operators would lose their jobs. Adopted 51-30:\nof Skippy peanut butter had told him they would drop their\nIn addition to defeating the Findley amendments, the\n(R Ohio) motion to table, and thus kill, the Allen (D Ala.) motion to\nR 27-6; D 24-24 (ND 14-16; SD 10-8), Sept. 8, 1976. (Story, p. 2492)\nprice 5 cents a pound if the bill provided 60 per cent of\ncommittee voted to extend the selling mandate to the 1976\nreconsider the vote by which the Senate had previously adopted\nparity.\npeanut crop. It also rejected a complicated Mathis amend-\nthe Taft (R Ohio) amendment to allow payment of a salary increase\n558. HR 8532. Antitrust Amendments. Allen (D Ala.) sub-\nSubcommittee member Johnson said the Richmond\nment that opponents said would have provided greater\nfor federal employees other than members of Congress. Motion to\nstitute bill embodying the original Senate language as passed in\namendment would reduce the program cost by only $25-\nbenefits to growers of runner peanuts in the Southeast at the\ntable agreed to 55-19: R 21-8; D 34-11 (ND 25-4; SD 9-7), Sept. 7,\nJune. (See vote 271, Weekly Report p. 1618) Rejected 22-66: R 15-\nmillion and yet would reduce farmer income by $70-million.\nexpense of growers of the Virginia-type and Spanish-type\n1976. (The Taft amendment had been previously adopted by voice\n20; D 7-46 (ND 0-35; SD 7-11), Sept. 8, 1976. (Story p. 2464)\nvote.) (Story, p. 2492)\nAnd according to the Department of Agriculture, such a\npeanuts.\n559. HR 8532. Antitrust Amendments. Byrd (D W.Va.) motion\ndrop in program cost would not affect consumer prices very\nto agree to a substitute antitrust bill to authorize state attorneys\nmuch, Johnson added. \"Introducing some vague notion of\nOutlook\n556. HR 14238. Legislative Appropriations, Fiscal 1977.\ngeneral to bring parens patriae antitrust suits on behalf of citizens,\nconsumerism will be bad in the long run,\" he said.\nSenate Appropriations Committee amendment to delete from the\nDespite the Senate committee's decision not to con-\nrequire large companies to notify the government of planned\nbill a provision that, as amended by the Taft (R Ohio) amendment\nmergers and strengthen the government's antitrust investigatory\nsider HR 12808 in 1976, the House committee did file a peti-\n(see vote 555, above), banned salary increases for members of\npowers. Agreed to 69-18: R 21-14; D 48-4 (ND 34-0; SD 14-4), Sept.\ntion with the Rules Committee to take the bill to the House\nCongress. Rejected 25-46: R 11-17; D 14-29 (ND 12-16; SD 2-13),\n8, 1976. (Story, p. 2464)\nfloor. However, as of Sept. 9 the bill had not appeared on the\nSept. 7, 1976. (Story, p. 2492)\nThe peanut subsidy\nRules schedule; the committee had set Sept. 10 as the\n560. HR 14238. Legislative Appropriations, Fiscal 1977. Judg-\ndeadline for granting rules.\nment of the Senate that the Senate Appropriations Committee's\nprogram has reaped\nAs of Sept. 7, the Agriculture Department was\n557. HR 14238. Legislative Appropriations, Fiscal 1977.\namendment to appropriate $35.5 million for purchase of a building\n\"unbelievable profits\nawaiting an appellate court decision on a lawsuit brought\nBartlett (R Okla.) amendment to reduce by 62 positions the\nin Washington, D.C., for additional Senate office space was not ger-\nby disgruntled Georgia peanut farmers upset over changes\nnumber of elevator operators on automatic elevators in the Capitol\nmane. Amendment ruled not germane 28-53: R 10-24; D 18-29\nfor its benefactors.\"\nand in congressional office buildings, with the provision that no\nin the annual price support adjustments. The department\n(ND 8-22; SD 10-7), Sept. 8, 1976. (Story, p. 2492)\n-Rep. Peter A. Peyser\nhad suspended all peanut loan activity for the 1976 crop on\n(R N.Y.)\nAug. 6, although it had allowed farmers to store their\npeanuts in government warehouses. The department said it\nwould reinstate the loan program after the court decision. I\n-By Mary Link\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC\nPAGE 2486-Sept. 11, 1976\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC.\nReproduction prohibited in whole or in part except by editorial ciients\nSept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2487\nReproduction prohibited whole in part except by aditorial clients.\nCQ Senate Votes 561-566\nCQ Senate Votes 567-568\nCorresponding to Congressional Record Votes 570, 571, 572, 573, 574, 575\nCorresponding to Congressional Record Votes 576, 577\nAGAGN\nAGAGNA\nwhich\nKEY\nKEY\nALABAMA\nIOWA\nNEW HAMPSHIRE\nALABAMA\nIOWA\nNEW HAMPSHIRE\nAllen\nYNYNNY\nClark\nYNYYYY\nY\nNYYYNY\nVoted for (yea)\nAllen\nNY\nDurkin\nClark\nY Y\nDurkin\nYY\nY\nVoted for (yea)\nPaired for.\nSparkman\nYY\nSparkman\nYNYNNY\nCulver\nYNNYYY\nMcintyre\n??????\nCulver\nY Y\nMcIntyre\n??\nPaired for.\nt\nAnnounced for\nALASKA\nKANSAS\nNEW JERSEY\nALASKA\nKANSAS\nNEW JERSEY\nf\nAnnounced for.\nGravel\nYYNYYY\nYNYYYY\nN\nWilliams\nVoted against (nay).\nGravel\nY Y\nDole\nNNYNYY\nDole\nNY\nWilliams\n? ?\nN\nVoted against (nay)\nX\nPaired against.\nY Y\nX\nPaired against\nStevens\nNYNYYY\nPearson\nNYYYYY\nCase\nYNNNYY\nStevens\nPearson\nYY\nCase\nvt\nARIZONA\nKENTUCKY\nNEW MEXICO\nAnnounced against.\nARIZONA\nKENTUCKY\nNEW MEXICO\nAnnounced against.\nFannin\nYNYNNY\nYNYNYY\nP\nFord\nMontoya\n??????\nVoted \"present.\nFannin\nNY\nFord\nY Y\nMontoya\n??\nP\nVoted present.\n??????\nYNYNYY\n.\nVoted \"present\" to avoid\nX?\nGoldwater\nHuddleston\nDomenici\nYNYNNY\nGoldwater\nHuddleston\nYY\nDomenici\nYY\n.\nVoted 'present' to avoid\nARKANSAS\nLOUISIANA\nNEW YORK\npossible conflict of interest.\nARKANSAS\nLOUISIANA\nNEW YORK\npossible conflict of interest.\nBumpers\nYNYNYY\nJohnston\nYNYNYY\n?\nDid not vote or otherwise\nBuckley*\n??????\nBumpers\nY Y\nJohnston\nYY\nBuckley*\n??\n?\nDid not vote or otherwise\nmake position known.\nMcClellan\nYNYNYY\nYN????\nmake position known.\nMcClellan\nY Y\nLong\nJavits\nYNNNYY\nLong\n? Y\nJavits\nYY\nCALIFORNIA\nMAINE\nNORTH CAROLINA\nCALIFORNIA\nMAINE\nNORTH CAROLINA\nCranston\n??????\nHathaway\nYNNYYY\nMorgan\nYNYYNY\nCranston\nY Y\nHathaway\nY Y\nMorgan\nYY\nTunney\n??????\nMuskie\nYNYNYY\nHelms\nYNYYNN\nTunney\n??\nMuskie\nY Y\nHelms\nNY\nCOLORADO\nMARYLAND\nNORTH DAKOTA\nCOLORADO\nMARYLAND\nNORTH DAKOTA\nHart\nNNYY??\n??????\nNNYNYY\nHart\n??\nBeall\nBurdick\nBeall\n??\nBurdick\nYY\nHaskell\nYNYYYY\nMethias\nNYNNYY\nYoung\nYNYNNY\nHaskell\nY Y\nMathias\nYY\nYoung\nYY\nCONNECTICUT\nMASSACHUSETTS\nOHIO\nCONNECTICUT\nTEXAS\nMASSACHUSETTS\nOHIO\nTEXAS\nRibicoff\nYNYNYN\nKennedy\n??????\nGlenn\n??????\nYNYYNY\nRibicotf\nYY\nBentsen\nKennedy\n??\nGlenn\n??\nBentsen\nYY\nWelcker\nNYYN??\nBrooke\nNYNYYY\nTaft\nY N Y Y N Y\nTower\nYNYNYY\nWelcker\nY ?\nBrooke\nYY\nTaft\nNY\nTower\nNY\nDELAWARE\nMICHIGAN\nOKLAHOMA\nDELAWARE\nUTAH\nMICHIGAN\nOKLAHOMA\nUTAH\nBiden\nYNYNYY\nHart\n??????\nBartlett\nYNYNNY\n??????\nBiden\nY Y\nMoss\nHart\n??\nBartlett\nNY\nMoss\n??\nRoth\nNNYYNN\nGriffin\nYNY???\nBellmon\nYNYNNY\nYNYYNN\nRoth\n??\nGriffin\nGarn\nY ?\nBelimon\nYY\nGarn\nNY\nFLORIDA\nMINNESOTA\nOREGON\nFLORIDA\nVERMONT\nMINNESOTA\nOREGON\nVERMONT\nChiles\nYNYNNY\nHumphrey\nY-T?TT\nHetfield\nNYYNYY\nLeahy\nYNYNNY\nChiles\nYY\nHumphrey\nYY\nHatfield\nNY\nLeahy\nNY\nYNYYNY\nMondale\n??????\nPackwood\nNNYNNY\nStone\nYY\nStone\nYYNNYY\nStafford\nMondale\n??\nPackwood\nNY\nStafford\n? Y\nGEORGIA\nMISSISSIPPI\nPENNSYLVANIA\nGEORGIA\nVIRGINIA\nMISSISSIPPI\nPENNSYLVANIA\nVIRGINIA\nNunn\nYNYNNY\nEastland\nNNYNY?\nSchwelker\nYNNYYY\nByrd**\n??????\nNunn\nYY\nEastland\nYY\nSchweiker\nYY\nByrd**\nNY\nTalmadge\nNNYNNY\nStennis\nYNYNNY\nScott\nYNNYYY\nTalmadge\n??\nNYNYYY\nScott\nStennis\nY Y\nScott\nYY\nScott\nNY\nHAWAII\nMISSOURI\nRHODE ISLAND\nWASHINGTON\nHAWAII\nMISSOURI\nRHODE ISLAND\nWASHINGTON\nInouye\nYNYYYY\nEagleton\n??????\nPastore\nNNYYYY\nInouye\nYY\n......\nJackson\nEagleton\nY Y\nPastore\nYY\nJackson\nYY\nFong\nNNYNYY\nSymington\nYNYN??\nPell\nYNYNYY\nMagnuson\nYNYYYY\nFong\nYY\nSymington\nY Y\nPell\nYY\nMagnuson\nYY\nIDAHO\nMONTANA\nSOUTH CAROLINA\nIDAHO\nWEST VIRGINIA\nMONTANA\nSOUTH CAROLINA\nWEST VIRGINIA\nChurch\nYNYNYY\nMansfield\nYNYNYY\nHollings\nYNNNYY\nNNYNYY\nChurch\nYY\nByrd\nMansfield\nYY\nHollings\nY Y\nByrd\nYY\nMcClure\nYNYNNY\nMetcalf\n??????\nThurmond\nMcClure\nNY\nYNYNNY\nRandolph\nYNYNNY\nMetcalf\nYY\nThurmond\nNY\nRandolph\nYY\nILLINOIS\nNEBRASKA\nSOUTH DAKOTA\nILLINOIS\nWISCONSIN\nNEBRASKA\nSOUTH DAKOTA\nWISCONSIN\nStevenson\nYNYN??\nCurtis\nYNYN??\nAbourezk\nYNY???\nStevenson\nY N Y Y Y Y\nNelson\n1?\nCurtis\nNY\nAbourezk\nNY\nNelson\nYY\nPercy\n??????\nHruska\nYNYNNY\nMcGovern\nY N Y ? ?\nProxmire\nYNYNNN\nPercy\nY Y\nHruska\nNY\nMcGovern\nYY\nProxmire\nNY\nINDIANA\nNEVADA\nTENNESSEE\nWYOMING\nINDIANA\nNEVADA\nTENNESSEE\nWYOMING\nBayh\n??????\nCannon\nYNYNYY\nBaker\nNYYNYY\nMcGee\n??????\nBayh\n??\nCannon\nYY\nBeker\nNY\nMcGee\n??\nHartke\n??????\nLexelt\nYNYY??\nBrock\nHartke\n??\nNNYNNY\nHansen\nYNYNNY\nLaxalt\nNY\nBrock\nNY\nHansen\nNY\nDemocrats\nRepublicans\n\"Buckley elected as Conservative\n**Byrd elected as independent\nDemocrats\nRepublicans\n\"Buckley elected as Conservative\n**Byrd elected as independent.\n561. HR 14238. Legislative Appropriations, Fiscal 1977. Judg-\n564. HR 14238. Legislative Appropriations, Fiscal 1977. Scott\nment of the Senate that the Hollings (D S.C.) amendment to\n(R Va.) amendment to provide that members of Congress and the\neliminate the so-called 1 per cent \"kicker\" raise for federal retirees\nVice President could return any portion of their salaries to the\nwas germane. Amendment ruled germane 60-20: R 22-12; D 38-8\nfederal Treasury. Rejected 26-49: R 12-21; D 14-28 (ND 11-15; SD\n(ND 23-6; SD 15-2), Sept. 8, 1976. (Story, p. 2492)\n13), Sept. 8, 1976. (Story, p. 2492)\n567. S Con Res 109. Fiscal 1977 Budget Levels. Adoption of\nthe resolution to set binding fiscal 1977 budget levels of revenues of\n562. HR 14238. Legislative Appropriations, Fiscal 1977.\n$362-billion, budget authority of 147.5-billion, outlays of $412.8-\nStevens (R Alaska) motion to table, and thus to kill, the Hollings\n565. HR 14238. Legislative Appropriations, Fiscal 1977.\nbillion and a deficit of $50.8-billion. Adopted 55-23: R 14-18; D 41-5\n(D S.C.) amendment to eliminate the 1 per cent \"kicker\" raise for\nStevens (R Alaska) amendment to allow salary increases\n(ND 27-3; SD 14-2), Sept. 9, 1976. (Story, p. 2455)\nfederal retirees. Motion to table rejected 11-68: R 9-25; D 2-43 (ND\nrecommended by the President and approved by Congress as a\n2-26; SD 0-17), Sept. 8, 1976. (The Hollings (D S.C.) amendment\nresult of a recommendation of the so-called quadrennial commis-\n568. S 522. Indian Health Care. Jackson (D Wash.) motion that\nwas subsequently adopted by voice vote.) (Story, p. 2492)\nsion to take effect. Adopted 41-28: 15-15; D 26-13 (ND SD 7-\nthe Senate recede from its amendment and concur in the House\n9), Sept. 8, 1976. (Story, p. 2492)\nversion of the bill to improve federal health programs for Indians\n563. HR 14238. Legislative Appropriations, Fiscal 1977. Taft\nand Alaskan natives with a further amendment to increase funding\n(R Ohio) motion to table, and thus kill, the Gravel (D Alaska)\nauthorized in fiscal 1978 for health services to $10-million, from $5-\namendment to provide that the freeze on congressional salaries\n566. HR 14238. Legislative Appropriations, Fiscal 1977.\nmillion. Agreed to 78-0: R 31-0; D 47-0 (ND 30-0; SD 17-0), Sept. 9,\nwould not take effect until after Congress had had a chance to con-\nPassage of the bill to appropriate $971,141,285 for fiscal 1977 for the\n1976.\nsider recommendations of the so-called quadrennial commission for\noperations of the legislative branch, the Library of Congress and\npay raises expected to be presented in January 1977. Motion to\nrelated agencies controlled by Congress. Passed 63-5: R 27-3; 36-2\ntable agreed to 65-13: R 25-9; D 40-4 (ND 25-3; SD 15-1), Sept. 8,\n(ND 21-2; SD 15-0), Sept. 8, 1976. The President had requested\n1976. (Story, p. 2492)\n$992,290,765 for fiscal 1977. (Story, p. 2492)\nPAGE 2488-Sept. 11, 1976\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC.\nReproduction prohibited in whole in part except by editorial clients\nReproduction prohibited in whole or in part except by editorial clients\nSept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2489\nCQ House Votes 528-535\nCorresponding to Congressional Record Votes 696, 697, 698, 699, 700, 701, 702, 704\nKEY\n532\n532\n========\nY Voted for (yea)\nPaired for\n5 Armstrong\nNNYYYNYY\nKANSAS\nRandall\nNYYYNNY?\nMartin\nN?YYYNYY\nJones\nNNYYNNYY\nSebelius\n5 Bolling\nYYNYNYYY\n10 Broyhill\nNNYYYNYY\nFord\nt Announced for\nCONNECTICUT\nYYNYNYYY\nKeys\nYYNYNYYY\n6 Vacancy\n11 Taylor\nNYYYNYYY\nTEXAS\nN Voted against (nay)\nCotter\nYYNYNYYY\nWinn\nNYYYYNYY\n7 Taylor\nNNYYYNYY\nNORTH DAKOTA\nHall\n?7Y7YNYY\nX Paired against\nDodd\nYYNYNYYY\n4 Shriver\nNYYYNNYY\n8 Ichord\nNYYYYNYY\nAL Andrews\nNYYYYNY?\nWilson\nNYYYNYYY\nAnnounced against.\n3 Giaimo\nNNY?YNYY\n9 Hungate\nNYYYNYYY\nOHIO\nCollins\nNNYYYNYY\nP Voted \"present\n4 McKinney\nNYNYNNYY\n5 Skubitz\nYYNYNNYY\nKENTUCKY\n10 Burlison\nNYYYNYYY\n1 Gradison\nNYNYNNYY\nRoberts\nNYYYYYYY\nVoted \"present\" to avoid\n5 Sarasin\nYYNYNYNY\nHubbard\nNYYYYNYY\nMONTANA\n2 Clancy\n77/YYNYY\nSteelman\nX7X7777?\npossible conflict of interest\n6 Moffett\n2 Natcher\nNYYYNYYY\nBaucus\nNYNYNYYY\nWhalen\nYYNYNYYY\n6 Teague\nX77NYYY\nDid not vote or otherwise\nDELAWARE\n3 Mazzol\nNYNYNYYY\nMelcher\n????????\nGuyer\nNNYYYNYY\nArcher\nNNYYYNYY\nmake position known\nAL du Pont\nTXYNNY\nSnyder\nNYYYYNYY\nNEBRASKA\nLatta\nNYYYYNYY\n8 Eckhardt\nYYNYNYYY\n528. HR 10498. Clean Air Act Amendments. Maquire (D N.J.)\nFLORIDA\nYNYYNNYY\n1 Thone\nNYNYYNYY\n6 Harsha\nNNYYYNYY\n9 Brooks\nNYYYNYYY\nSikes\nNNYYNNYY\n5 Carter\namendment to delete the \"Class III\" nondegradation category from\nNYNYNYYY\n6 Breckinridge\nNYYYNYYY\n2 McCollister\n77777777\n7 Brown\nX7YYNYY\n10 Pickle\nNYYYNYYY\n2 Fuqua\n7 Perkins\nNYNYNYYY\n3 Smith\nNYNYYNYY\n8 Kindness\nNNYYYNYY\nthe bill, thus requiring more stringent protection of air in areas\n11 Poage\nNYYYNYYY\n3 Bennett\nNYYYYYYY\n4 Chappeli\nNYYYYNYY\nLOUISIANA\nNEVADA\n9 Ashley\nNYNYNYYY\n12 Wright\nNYYYNYYY\nwhere it had not deteriorated to the minimum air quality levels re-\nHebert\nX7N??YY\nAL Santini\nNYYYNYYY\n10 Miller\nNYYYYNYY\n13\nHightower\nNYYYNYYY\n5 Kelly\nNNYYYNYY\nquired by national standards. Rejected 107-247: R 18-98; D 89-149\nBoggs\nNYNYNYYY\nNEW HAMPSHIRE\n11 Stanton\nNYYYNNYY\n14 Young\nNYY???7?\n6 Young\nNNYYYNYY\nNNYYYNYY\nD'Amours\n12 Devine\nNNYYYNYY\n15 de Garza\nNYYY?YYY\n(ND 79-80; SD 10-69), Sept. 8, 1976. (Story, p. 2457)\nGibbons\nYYNYNYYY\n3 Treen\n4 Waggonner\nNNYYNNYY\nALABAMA\nHaley\nPY/YYYYY\n2 Cleveland\nYYNYNNYY\n13 Mosher\nYYNYNYNY\n16 White\nNYYYNYYY\n5 Passman\n7YY?YY\n529. HR 10498. Clean Air Act Amendments. Rogers (D Fla.)\nNYYYYNYY\nFrey\nNYYYYNYY\nNEW JERSEY\n14 Seiberling\nYYNYNYNY\n17 Burleson\nNYYYNYYY\n1 Edwards\n6 Moore\nNYYYYNYY\nFlorio\nNYNYNYYY\n15 Wylle\nX77?W???\n18 Jordan\nNYNYNYYY\n2 Dickinson\nNNYYYNNY\n10 Bafalls\n000YYNYY\namendment to establish a National Commission on Air Quality to\nBreaux\nNYYYNYY\nNYNYNYYY\n2 Hughes\nNYNYNNYY\n16 Regula\nNYYYYNYY\n19 Mahon\nNYYYNYYY\n3 Nichols\nNYYYYYYY\n11 Rogers\nLong\nNYYYNYYY\n3 Howard\n?X7X???\n17 Ashbrook\nX?YYNYY\n20 Gonzalez\nYYYYNNYY\nreview implementation of the act. Adopted 301-57: R 66-48; 235-9\nBevill\nN?YYYYYY\n12 Burke\n7?-YYNYY\nYYNY???Y\nMAINE\n4 Thompson\nYYNYNYX?\n18 Vacancy\n21 Krueger\nNYYYNYYY\n(ND 167-0; SD 68-9), Sept. 8, 1976. (Story, p. 2457)\n5 Jones\nNYYYNY?Y\n13 Lehman\nEmery\nNYNYNYYY\n5 Fenwick\nYYNYNYYY\n19 Carney\nYYNYNYYY\n22 Paul\nNNYYYNY?\n6 Buchanan\nNYYYYNYY\n14 Pepper\nYYNYNYYY\n2 Cohen\nNYNYNYYY\n6 Forsythe\nNYNYNNNY\n20 Stanton\n77777777\n23 Kazen\nNYYYNYYY\n7 Flowers\nNYYYNYYY\n15 Fascell\nNYNYNYYY\nMARYLAND\nMaguire\nYYNYNYNY\n530. HR 10498. Clean Air Act Amendments. Chappell (D Fla.)\n21 Stokes\nYYYYNYNY\n24 Milford\n? Y Y Y Y Y Y Y\nALASKA\nGEORGIA\nBauman\nNNYYYNYY\nNYNYNYYY\n22 Vanik\nYYNYNYNY\nUTAH\namendment to delete from the bill provisions to require protection\nAL Young\nX???\nGinn\nNYYYYYY Y\n47777777\nNYYYYYYY\n2 Long\nNYNYNYYY\nHelstoski\n23 Motti\nYYNYYNYY\nMcKay\nNYNYNYYY\nof pristine air (nondegradation) and direct the National Commis-\nARIZONA\nMathis\nNYYYYNYY\nSarbanes\nYYNYNYY?\n10 Rodino\nYYNYNYYY\nOKLAHOMA\nHowe\nsion on Air Quality to conduct a one-year study of the issue. Re-\nRhodes\nNYYYNNYY\nBrinkley\nNYNYYYYY\nHolt\nNNYYYNYY\n11 Minish\nYYNYNYYY\n1 Jones\nNYYYYYYY\nVERMONT\n2 Udall\nYYNYNYYY\nLevitas\n5 Spellman\nWYNYNYYY\n12 Rinaldo\nNYNYNYYY\n2 Risenhoover\nNYYYYYYY\nAL Jeffords\nNYNYNNYY\njected 156-199: R 77-38; D 79-161 (ND 20-142; SD 59-19), Sept. 8,\n3 Steiger\nYoung\n???YNY??\nNNYYYNYY\n6 Byron\nNYYYYNYY\n13 Meyner\nYYNYNYYY\n3 Albert\nVIRGINIA\n1976. (Story, p. 2457)\nConlan\nFlynt\nYYNYNYNY\nYYNYNYYY\nSteed\nNYYYNYY?\n1 Downing\nNYYYNYYY\nMcDonald\nNNYYYNYY\nMitchell\n14 Daniels\nARKANSAS\n8 Gude\nYYNYNYY?\n15 Patten\nNYNYNYYY\nJarman\nNYYYYYYY\n2 Whitehurst\nNNYYYNYY\nAlexander\n???YYYYY\n8 Stuckey\nX77YNYY\n531. H Res 1526. Privilege of the House Floor. Adoption of the\nN?YYNYYY\nMASSACHUSETTS\nNEW MEXICO\n6 English\nNYYYYYYY\n3 Satterfield\nNNYYYNYY\n2 Mills\nNYWYNYYY\n9 Landrum\n1 Conte\nYYNYNYYY\n1 Lujan\nX?X?7??\nOREGON\nDaniel\nNNYYYNYY\nresolution to request an investigation by the House Rules Com-\n3 Hammerschmidt\nNNYYYNYY\n10 Stephens\nX?\n2 Boland\nNYNYNYYY\n2 Runnels\nAuCoin\nNYN???7?\nDaniel\nNNYYYNYY\nmittee concerning certain abuses of privileges regarding House floor\n4 Thornton\nNYYYNYYY\nHAWAII\n3 Early\nYYNYNYNY\nNEW YORK\n2 Uliman\nNYYY?YYY\n6 Butler\nNNYYYNY?\nCALIFORNIA\nMatsunaga\nNYYYNYYY\nproceedings by former House members. Adopted 371-1: R 122-0; D\nDrinan\nYYNYNYNY\nPike\nNYNYNYYY\n3 Duncan\n7 Robinson\nNNYYYNYY\nJohnson\nNYNYNYYY\nMink\n5 Tsongas\nYYNYNYNY\nDowney\nYYNYNYYY\nWeaver\n????????\n8 Harris\nYYNYNYYY\n249-1 (ND 167-0; SD 82-1), Sept. 9, 1976.\n2 Clausen\n????????\nIDAHO\nYY?YNYYY\nSymms\nX2V3772\n6 Harrington\nYY?YNNNP\nAmbro\nYYNYNYYY\nPENNSYLVANIA\n9 Wampler\nNNYYYNYY\nMoss\n7 Vacancy\nLent\nNYNYNNYY\n1 Vacancy\n10 Fisher\nYYNYNNYY\nLeggett\nNYNYNYYY\n2 Hansen, G.\nX7V3V777\n532. H Con Res 728. Fiscal 1977 Budget Levels. Rousselot (R\n8 O'Neill\nYYNYNYY?\nWydler\nYNNYNNYY\n2 Nix\nNYNYNYYY\nWASHINGTON\nBurton.\nYYNYNNNY\nILLINOIS\nYYNYNYYY\nYYNYNYYY\n3 Green\n77777777\n1 Pritchard\nNYNYNNYY\nCalif.) substitute amendment to H Con Res 728 (see vote 533, below)\nYYNYNYN?\n9 Moakley\nWolft\n6 Burton. P\nYYNYNY?\nMetcalfe\nX?X?X???\n10 Heckler\nYYN?NYYY\n7 Addabbo\n4?X?X7??\n4 Eilberg\n?YNYNYYY\n2 Meeds\nNYNYNYYY\nto produce a balanced budget by setting revenues and outlays for\nMiller\nNYNYNYNY\n2 Murphy\nYYNYX???\n11 Burke\nYYNYNYYY\n8 Rosenthal\n47XYNYNY\n5 Schulze\nNNYYYNYY\n3 Bonker\nNYNYNYYY\nfiscal 1977 at $362.5-billion. Rejected 111-264: R 76-49; D 35-215\nDellums\nYYNYNNNY\n3 Russo\nNNNYYNYY\n12 Studds\nYYNYNYNY\n9 Delaney\nYYNYNYYY\n6 Yatron\nNYNYNYYY\n4 McCormack\nNYYYNYYY\n9 Stark\nYYNYNYNY\n4 Derwinski\n(ND 6-163; SD 29-52), Sept. 9, 1976. (Story, p. 2455)\nNYNYNYY?\nMICHIGAN\n10 Biagg\nYYNYNYY?\n7 Edgar\nYYNYNYYY\n5 Foley\n?YYYNY YY\n10 Edwards\nVYNYNYNY\nFary\nX?YYNYY\nConyers\nYY?YNNNY\nScheuer\nYYNYNYYY\n8 Blester\nYYNYNNYY\n6 Hicks\nNYYYNYYY\n11 Ryan\nHyde\nNYNYNY??\nEsch\n7777?NY?\n12 Chisholm\n?X?X???\n9 Shuster\nNNYYNNYY\nAdams\nNYNYNYYY\n533. H Con Res 728. Fiscal 1977 Budget Levels. Adoption of\n12 McCloskey\nYYNYNNYY\nCollins\nNYNYNYY?\n3 Brown\n???YYNYY\n13 Solarz\nWYNYNYNY\n10 McDade\nNYNYNYYY\nWEST VIRGINIA\n13 Mineta\nNYNYNYYY\n8 Rostenkowski\nthe resolution to set binding fiscal 1977 budget levels of revenues of\n4 Hutchinson\nNNYYYNYY\n?YNYNYYN\n14 Richmond\nYYNYNYNY\n11 Flood\nNYNYNYYY\n1 Mollohan\nNYYYN???\n14 McFall\nNYNYNYYY\n9 Yates\nYYNYNYY?\n5 Vander Veen\n????NYYY\n15 Zeferetti\n4?X?X???\n12 Murtha\nNYNYNYYY\n2 Staggers\nNYNYNYYY\n$362.5-billion, budget authority of $452.6-billion, outlays of $413.2-\n15 Sisk\n42222222\n10 Mikva\nNYNYNYYY\nYYNYNYNY\nYNNYNNYY\nNYYYNYYY\nbillion and a deficit to $50.7-billion. Adopted 227-151: R 12-113; D\nNYNYYNYY\nNYNYNYY?\n6 Carr\n16 Holtzman\n13 Coughlin\n3 Slack\n16 Talcott\n11 Annunzio\nYYNYNYYY\nRiegle\nY7777YY\nNNYYYNY?\n17 Murphy\nNYXYNYYY\n14 Moorhead\nYYNYNYYY\n4 Hechler\nYYNYNYNY\n17 Krebs\n12 Crane\n215-38 (ND 154-16; SD 61-22), Sept. 9, 1976. (Story, p. 2455)\nNYYYYNYY\n8 Traxler\nNYNYNY?Y\nKoch\nYYNYNYNY\n15 Rooney\nNYNYNYYY\nWISCONSIN\n18 Ketchum\nNNYYYNY?1\n13 McClory\nNYYYNNYY\nVander Jagt\nNYNYYNYY\n19 Rangel\nYYXYNY??\n16 Eshleman\n???YYNYY\nAspin\n27727777\n19 Lagomarsino\nNYNYYNYY\n14 Erienborn\n10 Cederberg\nNNYYNNYY\nNYNYNYY?\n20 Abzug\n7X?X???\n17 Schneebell\nNNYYYNYY\n2 Kastenmeier\nYYNYNNNY\n534. HR 14262. Defense Department Appropriations, Fiscal\n20 Goldwater\nX????NYY\n15\nNYYYNNY?\n3 Baldus\nNYYYNYNY\n47X7X74?\nYNNYNNYY\n11 Ruppe\n21 Badillo\n18 Heinz\n1977. Adoption of the conference report on the bill to appropriate\n21 Corman\n16 Anderson\nNYYYYNYY\n12 Hara\nNYNYNYYY\n22 Bingham\nYYNYNYNY\n19 Goodling.\nW.\nNNYYYNYY\n4 Zablocki\nNYNYNYYY\n22 Moorhead\nNYYYYNYY\n17 O'Brien\n$104,343,835,000 for operations and programs of the Department of\nNNYYYNYY\n13 Diggs\n?N?NYY?\n23 Peyser\n20 Gaydos\n?YNYNYYY\nReuss\nNYNYNYNY\n23 Rees\nYY??NYNY\n18 Michel\nNedzi\nNYNYNYYY\nNYYYNNYY\n24 Ottinger\nYYNYNNNY\n21 Dent\nNYNYNYYY\nSteiger\nNYYYNNYY\nDefense for fiscal year 1977. Adopted 323-45: R 121-3; D 202-42 (ND\n24 Waxman\nYYNYNYYY\n19 Rallsback\n15 Ford\nNYNYNYYY\nWYNYNYNY\n20 Findley\nNYYYYNYY\n25 Fish\nYYNYNNYY\n22 Morgan\nNYNYNYY?\nObey\nYYNYNYNY\n120-42; SD 82-0), Sept. 9, 1976. The President had requested\n25 Roybal\nNYN?NYYY\nYYNYNNYY\nNYYYNNYY\n16 Dingell\n26 Gliman\n23 Johnson\nNYYYYNYY\nCornell\nNYNYNYNN\n26 Rousselot\nNNYYYNY?\n21 Madigan\n$107,936,172,000. (Story, p. 2459)\n17 Brodhead\n77777727\n27 McHugh\nNYNYNYYY\n27 Bell\nNYNYN???\n22 Shipley\nNYYYNYYY\n24 Vigorito\nNYNYNYYY\nKasten\nNYNYYNYY\n28 Burke\nYYNYNYNY\n23 Price\nNYNYNYYY\n18 Blanchard\nYYNYNYYY\n28 Stratton\nNYYYNYYY\n25 Myers\nYNNYNNYY\nWYOMING\n29 Hawkins\nYYNYNYYY\n19 Broomfield\nYYYYYNYY\n29 Pattison\nYYNYNYYY\nRHODE ISLAND\nAL Roncalio\nNYNYNYYY\n535. HR 14262. Defense Department Appropriations, Fiscal\nYYNYNYNY\n24 Simon\nMINNESOTA\n30 McEwen\nNNYYNNYY\nSt Germain\n1977. Mahon (D Texas) motion to concur in the Senate amendment\n30 Danielson\nNYNYNYYY\nINDIANA\n1 Quie\nNYNYNNYY\n31 Mitchell\nNYNYN???\nBeard\nYYNYNYYY\nNYNYNY??\n31 Wilson\nYYNYNYYY\nMadden\n2 Hagedorn\nNNYYYNYY\n32 Hanley\nNYNYNYYY\nto the bill that would waive the prohibition on CHAMPUS\n32 Anderson\nYYNYYYYY\nNYNYNNYY\nSOUTH CAROLINA\nFithian\nFrenzel\nNYYYNNYY\n33 Waish\nX?X?????\n33 Clawson\nBrademas\nYYNYNYY?\nDavis\nNYNYNYYY\npayments for counseling services in cases where the counseling had\nNNY?\n4 Karth\n34 Horton\n??X?NYYY\nSpence\nNYYYYNYY\nbeen recommended by a physician. Motion agreed to 342-4: R 115-\n34 Hannaford\nNYNYNYYY\nRoush\nYYNYNYYY\nFraser\nYYNYNYYY\n35 Coneble\nNNYYNNYY\nDerrick\nNYNYNYYY\n35 Lloyd\nYYNYNYYY\nHillis\nN??YNNYY\n0; D 227-4 (ND 146-4; SD 81-0), Sept. 9, 1976. (Story, p. 2459)\nNYYYYNYY\nNolan\nYYN?????\n36 LaFalce\nNYYYNYYY\nMann\nNYYYYNY?\n36 Brown\nYYNYNYNY\nEvans\nBergland\nNYNYNY??\n37 Nowak\nNYNYNYYY\nHolland\nNYYYYYY?\n37 Pettis\nNYNYNNYY\nMyers\nNYYYYNYY\nOberstar\nNYNYNYNY\n38 Kemp\nNYYYYNYY\n6 Jenrette\nNYYYNYYY\n38 Patterson\nYYNYNYYY\n8 Hayes\nYYNYNYYY\nMISSISSIPPI\n39\nLundine\n???YNNYY\nSOUTH DAKOTA\n39 Wiggins\nHamilton\nNYNYNYYY\nWhitten\nNYYYNYYY\nNORTH CAROLINA\nPressler\nNYNYNNYY\n40 Hinshaw\n10 Sharp\nYYNYNYYY\nBowen\nNYYYYN?Y\nNYNYNNYY\nJones\nNYYYNYYY\nAbdnor\nNYYYNNYY\n41 Wilson\n11 Jacobs\nYYNYNYYY\nMontgomery\nNNYYYNYY\n2 Fountain\nNYYYNNYY\nTENNESSEE\n42 Van Deerlin\nIOWA\nCochran\nNYYYYNYY\n3 Henderson\nY7YYYYY\nQuillen\nNNYYYNYY\n43 Burgener\nNYYYYN??\nMezvinsky\nNYNYNYNY\nLott\nNYYYYNYY\nNYYYNNYY\nNNYYYNYY\nCOLORADO\nBlouin\nNYNYNYNY\n4 Andrews\nDuncan\nMISSOURI\n5 Neal\nNYYYNYYY\nSchroeder\nYYNYYNYY\nGrassley\nNNYYYNYY\nLloyd\nNNYYYNYY\nClay\nYYYYNYNY\nYYNYNYYY Smith\n6 Preyer\nNYNYNYYY\nEvins\nNYYY?YY?\nWirth\nNYNYNYYY\n2 Symington\nNYNYNYYY\n7 Rose\nNYNYNYYY\nAllen\nYYNYNNYY\n3 Evans\nNYNYNYYY\nHarkin\nNYNYNYNY\n3 Sullivan\n??7YNYYN\n8 Hefner\nNYYYNYYY\n6 Beard\nNNYYYNYY\n4 Johnson\nNNYYYNYY\nBedell\nNYNYNYNN\nDemocrats\nRepublicans\nDemocrats\nRepublicans\nPAGE 2490-Sept. 11, 1976\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC.\nReproduction prohibited whole or part except by editorial clients\nReproduction prohibited whole or except by editorial clients\nSept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2491\nInside Congress 2\nThe number of aides on the Hill grew by 44 per cent\nCongressional Budget Office\nof\nInside Congress\nbetween 1970 and 1976, the report said, while the size of the\ntotal federal work force grew by only 12 per cent during the\nThe committee recommended $9,319,200 for the new\nsame period.\nCongressional Budget Office, an amount equal to the\nHouse-passed figure. This amount was requested by Budget\nCommittee Report\nOffice Director Alice Rivlin and would allow the CBO to add\nSenate Votes To Reject\n15 new positions, bringing its total staff to 208.\nMembers Refusing '75 Pay Raise\nThe Senate Appropriations Committee reported HR\nCongressional Pay Raise\n14238 (S Rept 94-1201) Sept. 3 with appropriations totaling\nArchitect of the Capitol\n$1,008,850,285 for fiscal 1977. The amount was $16,559,520\nThe following members of Congress have returned\nAn election-minded Senate voted Sept. 8 to deny a\nhigher than the budget request and $75,801,882 over the\nThe committee proposed an appropriation of $124,479,-\nall or part of their 1975 cost-of-living pay increase as of\ncost-of-living pay raise for members of Congress this year, to\namount appropriated for fiscal 1976.\n500 for fiscal 1977 for the Architect of the Capitol, an\nSept. 1, according to the Treasury Department's\nThe committee's recommendation was $228,539,335\namount that was $86,841,500 above the House-passed\nscrap plans for a new $35-million Senate office building, and\nBureau of Government Financial Operations. The pay\nmore than the House had approved, with most of the in-\namount and $22,854,800 above the budget.\nto cut in half the number of operators on automatic\nraise amounted to a $2,100 annual salary increase for\ncrease devoted to expenses of the Senate, which by custom\nTwo items in this section that promised to be con-\nelevators in the Capitol and Senate office buildings.\nmost members of Congress. (Earlier box, Weekly\ntroversial were the committee's recommendation of $25-\nThese three actions were taken as the Senate cut $37.7-\nare not considered by the House.\nReport p. 884)\nmillion for restoration of the West Front of the Capitol and\nmillion from the fiscal 1977 legislative appropriations bill\nREPRESENTATIVES\nSenate Operations\n$35.5-million for acquisition of additional Senate office\n(HR 14238) approved by the Appropriations Committee.\nspace.\nAs passed by the Senate 63-5, the measure\nL.A. (Skip) Bafalis (R Fla.)\n$ 958.60\nThe committee recommended $135,988,875 for opera-\nIn recommending restoration of the West Front, the\nappropriated $971,141,285 to run the legislative branch dur-\nAlphonzo Bell (R Calif.)\n958.60\ntion of the Senate during fiscal 1977, an amount equal to the\ncommittee pointed out that \"the central West Front of the\ning fiscal 1977. (Vote 566, p. 2488)\nCharles E. Bennett (D Fla.)\n766.88\nbudget request and an increase of $9,914,230 over the 1976\nCapitol has not been painted since 1967 and is a shameful\nIn another major cost saving action, the Senate voted to\nBob Carr (D Mich)\n1,120.00\nappropriation. The bulk of the increase was earmarked for\ndisgrace to the millions of Bicentennial visitors\nend the system of paying a 1 per cent bonus to federal\nJack Edwards (R Ala.)\n900.00\nsalary boosts for senators and Senate employees.\nretirees every time they received a cost-of-living increase in\n*Charles E. Grassley (R Iowa)\n1,400.00\nSenators' Compensation. The committee\nLibrary of Congress\ntheir pensions.\nTom Harkin (D Iowa)\n1,575.00\nrecommended $5,068,630 for salaries and mileage and ex-\nThe Senate voted to scrap entirely the existing law,\nDavid N. Henderson (D N.C.)\n1,727.00\npense allowances for senators, the Vice President and the\nThe committee recommended an appropriation of\nwhich provided for the paying of the bonus every time the\nHenry J. Hyde (R Ill.)\n835.47\nSenate leadership.\n$139,260,000 for the Library of Congress, an increase of\ncost of living rose by 3 per cent over three consecutive\nAndy Jacobs Jr. (D Ind.)\n858.48\nSenate Employees. For salaries of employees of the\n$3,844,900 over the House-passed amount.\nmonths.\nWilliam M. Ketchum (R Calif.)\n575.22\nSenate and of aides to individual senators, the committee\nThe bulk of the increase was earmarked for additional\nInstead, it voted for a system that would adjust the\nEdward Mezvinsky (D Iowa)\n1,750.00\nrecommended an appropriation of $89,613,110. The com-\npersonnel, including 31 more jobs than the House had\npensions automatically every six months without the so-\nGeorge Miller (D Calif.)\n862.74\nmittee recommended no changes in the size of Senate staffs,\nallowed for the library itself and 25 positions not funded by\ncalled 1 per cent kicker.\nCharles A. Mosher (R Ohio)\n176.75\nbut did provide funds for seven new positions in the office of\nthe House for the Copyright Office.\nBut the desire to cut costs did not dominate all the ac-\nGeorge M. O'Brien (R III.)\n958.61\nthe Secretary of the Senate, 38 new jobs in the Sergeant at\nAll 44 positions requested by the Congressional\ntion on the bill. The Senate crackdown on pay raises, for ex-\nPhil Sharp (D Ind.)\n1,575.00\nArms and Doorkeeper's offices and an adjustment in the\nResearch Service of the library were approved. The House\nample, did not go as far as the House.\nranks of Capitol policemen to meet salary raises of local,\nhad approved 12 new positions.\nGrossley told Congressional Quorterly he personally presented o check to Treasury\nThe House had voted to ban all pay raises for all top\nSecretary William E. Simon for on additional a of $525 on Dec. 13, 1975. The amount\nDistrict of Columbia, police forces.\nlevel federal officials-including judges and high ranking\nwas not recorded by the Bureau of Government Financial Operations.\nLegislative Counsel. The committee recommended\nFloor Action\nexecutive branch bureaucrats as well as congressmen-dur-\nSome members of the House channeled their\n$629,700 for the office of Legislative Counsel of the Senate,\ning fiscal 1977.\npayments through the office of the clerk of the House.\nan amount equal to the budget estimate.\nPay Raises. On the pay raise controversy, the Senate\nThe Senate killed only the automatic pay raise for\nThe report of the clerk of the House through Dec. 31,\nContingent Expenses. The committee recommended\nSept. 7 adopted a compromise position that was between\nmembers of Congress scheduled to take effect in October. Its\n1975, listed the following members as having made gifts\nan appropriation of $40,677,435 for contingent expenses of\nthe House decision to ban pay raises for all top-level federal\nversion permitted the raise for other federal employees to\nof part of their salaries to the Treasury:\nthe Senate in fiscal 1977, including $21,854,485 for special\nofficials, including members of Congress, for fiscal 1977, and\ntake effect and reserved judgment on the expected\nJohn B. Breaux (D La.)\n$194.80\ninvestigations. The total amount was the same as the\nthe Senate committee-backed proposal to allow the raises to\nrecommendation for pay hikes for members and other of-\nNorman E. D'Amours (D N.H.)\n194.80\nbudget estimate.\ntake effect for all federal employees.\nficials expected to be presented to Congress by the so-called\nChristopher J. Dodd (D Conn.)\n97.40\nJoint Items\nThe Senate adopted by voice vote an amendment spon-\nquadrennial commission in January 1977.\nMillicent Fenwick (R N.J.)\n350.00\nsored by Robert Taft Jr. (R Ohio) to allow the October cost-\nIn an action likely to re-ignite a long smouldering dis-\nLouis Frey Jr. (R Fla.)\n192.14\nThe committee proposed a $55,488,860 appropriation\nof-living increase, estimated at approximately 5 per cent, to\nagreement with the House, the Senate endorsed a Senate\nKen Hechler (D W.Va.)\n350.00\nfor fiscal 1977 to pay for the six joint committees and other\ntake effect for all federal employees except members of\nAppropriations Committee proposal to spend $25-million to\nJack F. Kemp (R N.Y.)\n95.86\nactivities shared with the House. The amount was $220,060\nCongress. The Taft language also allowed any other pro-\nrenovate the West Front of the Capitol without changing its\nMartha Keys (D Kan.)\n135.92\nmore than the House-passed figure and $71,400 below the\nposed pay increases during fiscal 1977 to take effect.\nappearance or location. The House in the past has favored\n*Jerry Litton (D Mo.)\n287.58\nbudget estimate.\nFollowing adoption of the Taft amendment, a motion to\nan extension rather than a renovation.\nAndrew Maguire (D N.J.)\n191.72\nThe largest single item in this section was a $46,904,000\nreconsider the vote, supported by senators favoring the in-\nIn a related development the day after the Senate\nHenry J. Nowak (D N.Y.)\n191.72\nrecommendation for official mail costs, specifically to reim-\ncrease, was tabled handily, 55-19. (Vote 555, p. 2487)\npassed its bill, Tax Foundation Inc., a non-profit organiza-\n*Died Aug. 3\nburse the U.S. Postal Service for official mail sent by\nBackers of the Taft amendment argued that it was un-\ntion based in New York, released a study showing that\nSENATORS\nmembers and Senate employees. This was $803,000 above\nfair to penalize other government workers, especially judges,\nappropriations for the legislative branch in fiscal 1976 were\nthe fiscal 1976 appropriation.\nsimply because Congress, in an election year, was unwilling\nnearly triple the fiscal 1970 level.\nLloyd Bentsen (D Texas)\n1,120.00\nto vote a raise for itself.\nAccording to the study, the single most important\nHarry F. Byrd Jr. (Ind Va.)\n289.41\nOffice of Technology Assessment\n\"A pay raise for other federal employees is fair and\nreason for the increase was congressional salaries, both the\nRobert C. Byrd (D W.Va.)\n960.88\nnecessary to keep first class people in government,\" Taft\nlarge pay raises granted in recent years and those needed to\nLawton Chiles (D Fla.)\n1,750.00\nThe committee recommended an appropriation of $8-\nsaid. \"However, I point out that there seems to be no lack of\npay additional staff members.\nJohn A. Durkin (D N.H.)\n289.00\nmillion for the the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA),\ncandidates for the jobs we hold in the House and Senate.\"\n\"Congressional staff salaries,\" the report said, \"are\nJennings Randolph (D W.Va.)\n1,750.00\nan amount $1,422,000 above the House-passed total. The in-\nBut opponents of the Taft amendment said that what\nhigh by almost any standard,\" averaging $15,000 a year in\nRichard (Dick) Stone (D Fla.)\n1,750.00\ncrease, according to the committee, was needed to provide\nwas fair for other employees should be fair for members of\nthe Senate and $14,000 a year in the House, as against the\nRobert Taft Jr. (R Ohio)\n1,610.00\nfully for \"the high priority oceans and energy assessment\nCongress as well. \"It seems to me that if we want the best\nnational per capita average salary of $5,000 a year.\nprograms.\"\ncaliber of people representing us in Congress,\" said William\nPAGE 2492-Sept. 11, 1976\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 QUARTERLY INC\nReproduction prohibited whole or except by editorial clients.\nReproduction prohibited whole part except by editorial clients\nSept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2493\nInside Congress 4\nInside Congress 3\nHouse-Passed\nSenate-Passed\nChairman John J. Flynt Jr. (D Ga.) said it was the\nLloyd Scott (R Va.), \"they should be paid comparable pay. I\nBut John C. Culver (D Iowa), in a long and colorful\nItem\ndenunciation of the building, said the needs of the Senate\nAppropriation\nAppropriation\ncommittee's feeling that Hinshaw should not be expelled\nthink that we are letting politics decide this question.\"\nsince his conviction involved actions taken before his elec-\ncould be met by reallocation of existing space.\nCopyright Royalty\nPolitics did appear to play a role in the outcome of the\nCommission\nCulver denounced the 400 North Capitol Street\n268,000\ntion to the House and because the conviction itself was still\nissue. Of those voting to reconsider the Taft amendment,\nGovernment Printing Office\n140,827,400\n140,827,400\nunder appeal. The two members voting in favor of the\nonly one, Henry M. Jackson (D Wash.), was facing re-\nbuilding as a \"white elephant,\" a \"mausoleum,\" and a\nGeneral Accounting Office\n150,580,000\n150,580,000\nresolution were Republicans Floyd Spence (S.C.) and\nelection in 1976.\n\"boilerplate, speculative building.\"\nCost Accounting Standards\nAlbert H. Quie (Minn.). Wiggins was not a member of the\nIn the key vote on the issue, the Senate then rejected,\nHollings called Culver's statements \"malarkey,\" but in\nBoard\n1,700,000\n1,700,000\ncommittee.\n25-46, the Senate committee-sponsored amendment that\nthe end the Senate decided, on a vote of 28-53, that the com-\nTotal\n$780,310,950\n$971,141,285\nhad the effect of granting the pay increase for congressmen\nmittee amendment was not germane to the bill, in effect\nas well. Again, Jackson was the only senator up for re-\nkilling it. Majorities of both parties voted against it: R 10-\n*These items not considered by the House.\nelection to vote for the pay hike. (Vote 556, p. 2487)\n24; D 18-29. (Vote 560, p. 2487)\n-By Thomas P. Southwick\nThere remained some confusion about whether the\nHouse-passed language on the pay issue was retroactive,\nOne Per Cent Kicker\nWeekly Report\neliminating the cost-of-living raise given members in 1975.\nWith enactment in 1969 of a law (PL 91-93) making\nSentenced for Speeding:\nTherefore, without objection, the Senate adopted an\nmodifications in the federal pension system, government\namendment by Ernest F. Hollings (D S.C.) specifying that\nChairman of the Board\nEditor and President\nretirees became eligible to receive a bonus in their pensions\nsalaries of members would be frozen at the level in effect as\nHorton Released From Jail\nNelson Poynter\nEugene Patterson\nevery time the cost of living went up by 3 per cent over the\nof Sept. 30, 1976.\nprevious base period for three consecutive months. In such\nExecutive Editor\nGeneral Manager\nOn Sept. 8 the Senate adopted another amendment\nsituations, they became eligible for an extra 1 per cent\nRep. Frank Horton (R N.Y.) was released from Genesee\nWayne Kelley\nPaul Massa\nrelating to the pay issue. Sponsored by Ted Stevens (R\n\"kicker\" payment.\nCounty Jail in Batavia, N.Y., Sept. 7 after serving less than\nAlaska), it provided that the pay freeze would not apply to\nThe idea behind the kicker was to make up for the delay\na week of an 11-day sentence for speeding. Officials said\nEDITORIAL DEPARTMENT\nrecommendations by the so-called quadrennial commission\nbetween the time the cost of living began to rise and the\nHorton's early release was for good behavior.\nPeter A. Harkness (Managing Editor)\nthat were expected to be made in January 1977.\ntime it rose high enough to trigger a raise in pensions.\nHorton had been arrested for speeding and drunken\nMercer Cross (Assistant to Executive Editor)\nThe amendment to reserve judgment on this expected\nHowever, because the kicker was then included in the\ndriving on the New York State Thruway near Batavia July\nJohn L. Maore (Asst. Managing Editor)\npay hike was adopted on a vote of 41-28. (Vote 565, p. 2488)\nbase for the next raise, it had a multiplier effect, which some\nMichael D. Wormser (Asst. Managing Editor)\n18. (Earlier story, Weekly Report p. 2031)\nAlan Ehrenhalt (Political Editor)\nThe Senate earlier the same day had rejected a related\ncritics charged went far beyond its intent.\nAfter pleading guilty to the charges before Justice\namendment, sponsored by Mike Gravel (D Alaska), that\nHollings said the effect of the kicker had been to in-\nFrederick Muskopf, Horton was sentenced Aug. 31 to serve\nNews Editors\nRESEARCH DEPARTMENT\nwould have delayed the effect of the pay raise freeze until\ncrease federal annuities by 72 per cent, between 1969 and\n11 days in jail. Muskopf also ordered Horton to pay a fine of\nMary Cohn\nRobert E. Cuthriell (Director)\nafter consideration of the quadrennial commission's report.\n1975, while the cost of living went up only 56 per cent. This\n$200-$100 each for the two charges. Horton's driver's\nCaralyn Mathiasen\nWayne Walker (Asst. Director)\nThe Gravel amendment was tabled, and thus killed, by a\nresulted in an additional loss to the government of $1.6-\nlicence also was revoked.\nPeg O'Hara\nEdno Frazier (Librarian)\nDiane Huffman (Indexer)\n65-13 vote. (Vote 563, p. 2488)\nbillion over the seven-year period.\nAt a news conference following his release, Horton said\nJames R. Berger\nThe Senate also rejected, 26-49, an amendment spon-\nEarlier in the year the Senate had approved legislation\nhe had been resentenced by Muskopf, thus allowing him to\nHarrison H. Donnelly\nsored by Scott (Va.) that would have officially allowed\n(HR 12438) repealing the kicker for military retirees, but\nserve the jail sentence for the speeding charge while he\nReporters\nWalter E. Eling\nmembers of Congress to return to the Treasury any portion\nrelated legislation to do the same for civilians remained\nreceived a conditional discharge on the drunken driving\nElizabeth Bowman\nMark Gruenberg\nof their salaries. (Vote 564, p. 2488)\nbottled up in the Senate Post Office and Civil Service Com-\nRhodes Cook\ncharge. This change, said Horton, allowed him to regain his\nJerome Harris\nPrudence Crewdson\nmittee. (Weekly Report p. 1704)\ndriver's license on the condition that he attend a state driv-\nGary C. Hong\nTed Stevens (R Alaska), the ranking Republican on\nMary Eisner Eccles\nElevator Operators\ning rehabilitation school.\nSusan B. Jenkins\nJudy Gardner\nBy a vote of 51-30 Sept. 8, the Senate adopted an\nthat committee, objected to the Hollings amendment as an\nHorton was the first sitting member of Congress to\nDavid Loomis\nMary Link\namendment sponsored by Dewey F. Bartlett (R Okla.) to\ninfringement on his committee's rights. But the Senate, on\nserve time in jail since Rep. Thomas J. Lane (D Mass. 1941-\nWarden Moxley\nMargaret Hurst Lowe\nCarol Ott\nreduce to 63 from 125 the number of persons operating\na vote of 60-20, ruled the amendment germane and then re-\n63), who served a four-month term in 1956 for federal in-\nDavid M. Maxfield\nBob Rankin\nautomatic elevators in the Capitol and the congressional of-\njected Stevens' motion to table the amendment by a vote of\ncome tax evasion.\nMatt Pinkus\nMary Anne Rothwell\nfice buildings. (Vote 557, p. 2487)\n11-68. It then adopted the Hollings amendment by voice\nAfter his release Horton said his sentence showed that\nDanald Smith\nDavid Speights\nBartlett said his amendment would save $502,262 a\nvote. (Votes 561, 562, p. 2488)\nin his case, justice \"was administered without regard to\nThomas P. Southwick\nRobert D. Wakefield Jr.\nPat Towell\nyear and that the reduction had been recommended by the\nThe Senate then went on to adopt an amendment spon-\nsocial, economic or political position.\"\nElizabeth Wehr\nTed Vaden\nArchitect of the Capitol. He argued that to continue to pay\nsored by Lawton Chiles (D Fla.) to replace the existing\nJames R. Wagner\nBOOK DEPARTMENT\npeople to run automatic elevators would \"make a mockery\nmethod of computing cost-of-living pension increases with a\nElder Witt\nRobert A. Diamond (Editor)\nout of our desire to hold the line on government spending.\"\nsystem that would adjust pensions automatically every\nPatricia Ann O'Connor (Asst. Editor)\nsix months.\nINSIDE CONGRESS NOTES\nRobert E. Healy\nSenate Office Building\nJeanne D. Heise\nProvisions\nEditorial Assistants\nMary Neumann\nThe committee had recommended an appropriation of\nMichael L. Pleasants\nDavid Tarr\n$35.5-million for the purchase of a building at 400 North\nRep. Hinshaw Status\nLynda McNeil\nCapitol Street to serve as a fourth Senate office building.\nAs passed by the Senate Sept. 8 and by the House Sept.\nMargaret Thompsan\n1, HR 14238 made appropriations for the legislative branch\nThe House Select Committee on Standards of Official\nLaura Weiss\nThe building had been the subject of some controversy\nfor fiscal 1977 in the following amounts:\nConduct voted 10-2 Sept. 2 to reject a resolution to expel\nfor several years. Negotiations between the General Services\nRep. Andrew J. Hinshaw (R Calif.). Hinshaw was convicted\nProofreaders\nART DEPARTMENT\nAdministration and the building owners for a federal lease\nJan. 26 on two counts of bribery that stemmed from his\nEugene J. Gabler\nHoward Chapman (Director)\nbroke down early in 1976 when the owners asked a rental\nHouse-Passed\nSenate-Passed\nterm as Orange County assessor before he came to\nSumie Kinoshita\nRichard A. Pottern\nprice greater than GSA had been authorized to pay. (1975\nItem\nAppropriation\nAppropriation\nCongress.\nAlmanac p. 868)\nSenate\n$137,279,875\nThe resolution had been introduced June 30 by Rep.\nHollings, defending the committee position, argued\nSales Manager\nPromotion Director\nHouse of Representatives\n$241,773,550\n241,773,550\nCharles E. Wiggins (R Calif.) after he had tried un-\nRabert C. Hur\nthat the building's 550,000 square feet of office space was\nJames V. Bullard\nJoint Items\n55,268,800\n55,488,860\nsuccessfully to convince Hinshaw to resign. Wiggins said\nneeded to house additional Senate computers and to relieve\nProduction\nOffice of Technology Assessment\n6,624,000\n8,000,000\nthat despite the committee's vote he would bring the\nController\nthe space squeeze in other buildings.\nCangressional Budget Office\n9,319,200\n9,319,200\nprivileged resolution to the House floor, as he was per-\nJonathan C. Angier\nI. D. Fuller (Manager)\nHollings said that the existing space limitation in the\nArchitect of the Capitol\n37,638,000\n85,479,500\nmitted to do under House rules. (Earlier story, Weekly\nKathleen E. Walsh (Asst. Manager)\nSenate was so bad that it violated federal regulations on\nBotanic Gardens\n1,164,900\n1,164,900\nReport p. 1961)\nhealth and safety standards for workers.\nLibrary of Congress\n135,415,100\n139,260,000\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY NC\nReproduction prohibited whole or except by editorial clients\nSept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2495\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC.\nPAGE 2494-Sept. 11, 1976\nReproduction prohibited whole or part except by editorial clients\nCONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY\nof\nC\nCONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY\nWeekly Report\nWeekly Report\nSeptember 11, 1976\nPages 2453-2496\nVol. XXXIV No. 37\nPages 2453-2496\nSept. 11, 1976\nEconomic Affairs\nSupplemental Security Income Program 2477\nBudget Resolution\n2455\nLaw Enforcement and Judiciary\nCongress neared final action on a budget for the\nLaw Enforcement Agency Authorization 2479\nfiscal year beginning Oct. 1 that called for more\nspending, higher taxes and about one million\nTransportation/Communications\nmore jobs than the plan proposed by President\nCommunications Commission Nominees 2481\nBudget\nFord eight months ago.\nCoast Guard Authorization\n2481\nTax Revision Conference\n2456\nMaritime Authorization\n2482\nCongress nears final action on budget\nEnergy and Environment\nAgriculture\nLate Action on Legislation\n2457\nPeanut Subsidies\n2483\nas House, Senate pass resolutions (2455)\nWith time running short, Congress struggled\nThe 95th Congress is expected to consider a\ntoward final action on key environmental\ngeneral farm bill including a revision of a\nbills-clean air and toxic substances. And the\nprogram that has been criticized as one of the\nRules Committee put off granting rules on two\nbiggest boondoggles in U.S. agriculture.\nDefense Money\nmore measures-strip mining and synthetic fuels.\nNew River Bill Cleared\n2458\nInside Congress\nConferees agree to record $104-billion\nLegislative Branch Appropriations\n2492\nForeign Policy/National Security\nHorton Released from Jail\n2494\nappropriations for Pentagon (2459)\nDefense Department Appropriations\n2459\nRep. Hinshaw Status\n2495\nMajor Weapons Funded\n2460\nForeign Arms Sales Resolutions\n2463\nStatus of Appropriations\n2454\nConsumer Affairs\nSenate Votes (555-568)\n2487\nCampaign Issues\nSenate Passes Modified Antitrust Bill\n2464\nHouse Votes (528-535)\n2490\nCandidates cannot easily avoid pitfalls\nPolitics\nCarter and Ford-A Contrast in Styles 2465\non Social Security, welfare reform (2467)\nCandidates' Travel Schedules\n2465\nLegislative Action\nNonvoters Poll\n2466\nCommittee\nNational Issues: Welfare, Social Security .2467\nPrimaries\nPeanut Subsidy Program (HR 12808)\n2433\nThe second in a series of articles detailing the\ndifferences between President Ford's and Jimmy\nFloor\nResults in Arizona, Florida, Connecticut;\nCarter's positions on major issues likely to face\nAntitrust Bill (HR 8532)\n2464\nthe 95th Congress.\nBudget Resolution (S Con Res 139)\n2455\noutlook in Washington, Wyoming (2470)\nPrimary Results\n2470\nFCC Nominations Approved\n2481\nArizona\n2470\nLEAA Extension (S 2212)\n2479\nFlorida\n2471\nLegislative Branch Funds (HR 14238)\n2492\nGeorgia\n2473\nSupplemental Security Income (HR 8911)\n2477\nPeanuts\nConnecticut\n2473\nConference\nNorth Dakota\n2473\nPrimary Outlook\n2474\nDefense Appropriations (HR 14262)\n2457\nCarter's livelihood helps focus attention\nTax Revision (HR 10612)\n2456\nWashington\n2474\nWyoming\n2475\nFinal Action\non $163-million subsidy program (2483)\nFiling Completed\n2475\nCoast Guard Funds (HR 11670)\n2481\nDay Care Centers Bill (PL 94-401)\n2476\nHealth/Education/Welfare\nMaritime Programs Funds (HR 11481)\n2482\nLabor-Health Appropriations Bill\n2476\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC.\nNew River Preservation (HR 13372)\n2458\nFord Signs Day Care Center Bill\n2476\n1414 22nd Street, N.W.\nWashington, D.C. 20037\n(202) 296-6800\nPAGE 2496-Sept. 11, 1976\nof\nEconomic Affairs\nAppropriations in 2nd Session, 94th Congress\nBudget Conferees Approve\nCon Res 109) cleared in May that set targets for spending\nFor fiscal year 1977, in thousands of dollars\nand revenues. Since Congress had largely stayed within\nthose targets and the economic recovery had proceeded\nAS OF SEPT. 10, 1976\n$413.1-Billion Ceiling\nclose to expectations, there was no need to make dramatic\nchanges in the binding totals, the Budget Committees ex-\nplained.\nBudget Authority (authority to obligate funds) in this type.\nOutlays (funds provided by these bills to be spent in fiscal 1977) in this type\nOn Fiscal 1977 Spending\nMany of the adjustments in the second version were\ndue to re-estimates in spending rates for various programs.\nSOURCE: Congressional Budget Office\nCongress neared final action on a budget for the fiscal\nIn some areas, such as defense, totals were down slightly to\nyear beginning Oct. 1 that called for more spending, higher\nreflect congressional action on appropriations bills. In\ntaxes and about one million more jobs than the plan\nothers, such as Medicare, adjustments had to be made\nproposed by President Ford eight months ago.\nupward because program reforms and savings anticipated in\nWeekly\nBoth the House and Senate passed resolutions Sept. 9\nMay had not taken place.\nAdministration\nFinal\nReport\nsetting binding levels for outlays and revenues for fiscal\nRequest\nHouse\nSenate\nAction\nPage\n1977. They varied only slightly, and conferees quickly\nUncertainty of Recovery\nsettled the differences Sept. 10, clearing the way for final\nWhile both the House and Senate committees\nLegislative Branch (HR 14238)\n$\n2492\ncongressional approval by the Sept. 15 deadline set by the\n968,733\n$\n780,267*\n$ 971,141\nremained hopeful about the nation's continued recovery\n1974 congressional budget act. The budget resolution does\n899,619\n727,449\n880,296\nfrom one of its worst recessions, they made clear they were\nnot require the President's signature.\nwilling to consider a third budget resolution if economic\nAgriculture and related agencies\n11,464,892\n11,703,438\n12,181,232\n$11,542,998\n1845\nThe conferees on the resolution (S Con Res 139) settled\nconditions worsened in the coming months.\n(HR 14237-PL 94-351)\n11,752,613\n11,169,399\n11,970,830\n11,211,904\non revenues of $362.5-billion; outlays of $413.1-billion;\n\"The committee is prepared to consider a subsequent\nbudget authority of $451.5-billion and a deficit of $50.6-\nDistrict of Columbia (HR 15193)\n396,894\n372,707\n400,422\nconcurrent resolution early next year if the economic data\nbillion.\n352,197\n333,526\n355,035\nreceived by then do not indicate that the recovery is\nFord, in his mid-summer budget revision, had proposed\nproceeding satisfactorily,\" stressed the Senate committee\nTransportation and related agencies\n5,220,471\n5,280,656\n5,395,718\n5,296,418\n2139\nrevenues of $352.5-billion; budget authority of $431.4-\nreport, after noting the uncertainty of the recovery un-\n(HR 14234-PL 94-387)\n3,737,800\n3,737,180\n3,903,681\n3,842,469\n(\nbillion; outlays of $400-billion and a deficit of $47.5-billion.\nderway.\nHousing and Urban Development, Space\n45,306,198\n42,982,730\n43,336,200\n43,284,615\n2065\nIn Full Operation\nThe House report said additional economic stimulus\nScience, Veterans (HR 14233)\n21,078,656\n20,711,721\n20,750,391\n20,721,251\nmeasures should be considered early in the 95th Congress if\nAdoption of the final budget resolution would mark the\nthe slowdown in the recovery experienced in the second\nLabor, Health, Education and Welfare and\n54,661,665\n55,977,862\n56,896,639\n56,390,858+\n2344\nfirst full implementation of the budget procedures Congress\nquarter of 1976 continued the rest of the year. Even if the\nrelated agencies (HR 14232-PL 94-378)\n43,057,210\n43,949,818\n44,234,401\n44,136,059\napproved in 1974 to bring some control to its previously\nresolution's goals were met, unemployment would remain at\nfragmented process of setting federal spending. Members in\nInterior and related agencies (HR 14231\n5,748,054\n5,660,897\n5,797,965\n5,641,379\n1970\nvery high levels, and any great slowdown in the recovery\nboth chambers used debate on the resolution to con-\nPL 94-373)\n3,895,661\n3,980,411\n3,878,247\nwould produce \"severe hardships\" for millions of citizens, it\n3,917,114\ngratulate themselves for making a success of the new\ncontinued.\nState, Justice, Commerce, Judiciary\n6,313,251\n6,541,128\n6,880,147\n6,680,314\n1852\nsystem, which had been partially tested in 1975. (Trial run,\nCommittee economists estimated that the similar\nand related agencies (HR 14239-\n4,785,524\n4,874,964\n4,989,813\n4,935,180\n1975 Almanac p. 120)\nresolutions approved by the two houses should result in un-\n\"Perhaps the most important aspect of the final budget\nPL 94-362)\nemployment of about 7 per cent by the end of 1976 and 6 per\nresolution of fiscal year 1977 is the fact that it contains the\ncent by the end of 1977, and an average inflation rate below\nDefense Department (HR 14262)\n107,936,172\n105,397,343\n104,014,226\n104,343,835\n2459\nbudget of Congress and not that of the President,\" said\n6 per cent in 1976 and about 5.5 per cent in 1977.\n72,534,173\n71,535,718\n70,928,245\n71,214,699\nHouse Budget Committee Chairman Brock Adams (D\nWash.) Sept. 8. \"...The important thing is that Congress\nForeign Aid (HR 14260)\n5,817,770\n4,833,498\n5,353,265\n1950\nfaced up to the challenge, decided upon a course of action\nSenate Action\n2,485,682\n2,218,443\n2,348,945\nand followed it through to a successful conclusion despite\nMilitary Construction (HR 14235-\n3,472,400\n3,293,118\n3,426,891\n3,338,759\n1829\nthe doubts of the cynics and the occasional setback.\"\nThe Senate passed S Con Res 139 on Sept. 9 by a vote of\nPL 94-367)\n911,327\n903,632\n910,035\n906,604\nThe final figures, when agreed upon by the two\n55-23 after limited debate in which no opposition was ex-\nchambers, will set a binding floor under revenues and a ceil-\npressed to the budget levels. No changes were made in the\nPublic Works, Energy (HR 14236-\n9,398,895\n9,645,609\n9,718,885\n9,703,713\n1756\ning on budget authority and outlays. Any bills that would\nPL 94-355)\n5,342,126\n5,536,110\n5,590,175\n5,586,224\nbreach those levels could be ruled out of order.\nTreasury, Postal Service and General\n8,004,892\n8,267,636\n8,301,470\n8,313,119\n1851\nAs Adams noted, the congressional budget differed\n\"Perhaps the most\nGovernment (HR 14261-PL 94-363)\n7,721,226\n7,979,106\n8,015,214\n8,022,403\nsharply from the approach favored by the White House,\nimportant aspect\" of\nwith an emphasis on programs to fight unemployment. Ford\nPublic Works Employment\n1,138,308\n1,638,300*\n2328\nhad proposed larger tax cuts and a lower level of outlays\nthe resolution \"is the\n(HR 15194)\n962,300\n987,300\nthan favored by Congress, as well as consolidations and\nfact that it contains\nreductions in domestic programs. (Ford budget, Weekly\nthe budget of Con-\nHouse\nSenate\nReport p. 111)\ngress and not that\nConference committee figures, not approved by Congress.\nDemocrats\n286\n62**\nFew Changes\n*Recommended by House or Senate Appropriations Committee, but not yet brought to the floor.\nRepublicans\n145\n38***\nof the President.\n*Includes Harry F. Byrd elected as on independent.\nVacancies\n4\n0\nThe overwhelming approval given the two versions of\n*Includes James L. Buckley elected - Conservative.\n-Rep. Brock Adams\nthe resolution Sept. 9 was somewhat anticlimactic because\n(D Wash.)\nthey were similar in all major respects to the resolution (S\nPublished weekly by Congressional Quarterly. Inc., 1414 22nd Street, N.W.\nphotocopy, recording or any Information storage and retrieval system. Second rights\nWashington D.C. 20037. reproduction rights, quotations, broadcasting. publication,\nare reserved. including use of Congressional Quarterly material in campaign\nreserved for current editorial clients. No part of this publication may be reproduced or\nsupplements, advertisements and hardbooks without permission. Rates are furnished\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL INC\ntransmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including\non request. Second class postage paid at Washington, D.C.\nReproduction prohibited whole except by editorial clients\nSept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2455\nEconomic Affairs 2\nresolution reported Sept 3 (S Rept 94-1204). (Vote 567,\nEnergy and Environment\np. 2489)\nThe resolution provided for:\nConferees Agree on Tax Bill\nRevenues of $362-billion.\nHouse-Senate conferees on the tax revision bill\nBudget authority of $447.5-billion.\n(HR 10612) settled the last of their 251 differences Sept.\nOutlays of $412.8-billion.\n9, clearing the way for final approval by Congress.\nA deficit of $50.8-billion.\nAfter nine sessions that lasted all day and often\nCongress Struggles Toward\nwould stop growth in vast areas of the country and retard\nBudget Committee Chairman Edmund S. Muskie (D\nprogress toward energy independence. President Ford also\ninto the evening, the conference committee approved a\nMaine) called the resolution an \"economic recovery budget\"\nbill that was estimated to result in a net gain in tax\ndesigned to produce jobs and restrain inflation, and head\nFinal Action on Key Energy,\nopposed the provision, for similar reasons. Environmen-\nrevenues in fiscal 1977 of $1.6-billion. That figure was\ntalists supported the nondegradation concept and had\nthe nation toward a balanced budget by 1980.\nconsidered a victory for the House conferees; the bill\npassed by the House in 1975 would have raised that\nEnvironmental Legislation\nworked for even stronger protection than provided in the\nJames B. Allen (D Ala.) told Muskie he doubted a\nHouse bill.\nbalanced budget was possible in either four years or four\nChappell's amendment would have deleted the non-\namount, while the Senate version passed in August\ndecades, given Congress' proclivity to spend any additional\n1976 would have resulted in a net tax revenue loss of\nWith the time left for legislative action rapidly\ndegradation provisions from the bill and directed a new\nrevenues that became available. Muskie agreed that each\n$300-million. The revenue pickup also met the total set\ndwindling, Congress struggled during the week of Sept. 6 to\nNational Commission on Air Quality to conduct a one-year\nsenator must be willing to show fiscal discipline to reach\nby conferees on the second budget resolution (S Con\ncomplete action on a number of key energy and en-\nstudy of the issue. The Senate had rejected a similar\nsuch a goal, but was optimistic the projections could be\nvironmenal bills. Besides the pressure of the planned Oct. 2\namendment, offered by Frank E. Moss (D Utah), by a two-\nRes 139). They had called for a $1.6-billion tax revenue\nachieved. Another committee member, Pete V. Domenici (R\ngain in setting the binding floor of $362.5-billion for\nadjournment deadline, some of the bills faced possible\nto-one margin, 31-63.\nN.M.), told Allen that with the budget process \"at least we'll\nvetoes by President Ford.\nThe House also turned down Sept. 8 an amendment\nfiscal 1977 revenues. (Budget, p. 2455)\nknow when we're moving off line\" in trying to reach a\nIn action on major provisions during the week of\nThe House took up its long-delayed clean air act\noffered by Andrew Maguire (D N.J.) that would have\nbalanced budget.\namendments bill Sept. 8 and adjourned Sept. 10 without\nSept. 6, the conferees increased the taxes imposed on\nstrengthened the nondegradation provision from the en-\nThe only committee decision questioned on the floor\ncompleting action. Conferees held two lengthy meetings on\nwealthy individuals by approving several changes in\nvironmentalists' viewpoint and brought it closer in line with\nwas its decision to omit $500-million for an extension of the\ntoxic substances control legislation, resolving many issues\nthe minimum tax. They included raising the minimum\nthe Senate version. It was opposed by Rogers and rejected\nemergency unemployment federal supplemental benefits\ntax rate to 15 per cent from 10 per cent, lowering the ex-\nbut recessing for the week with some important differences\n107-247. (Vote 528, p. 2490)\n(FSB) program beyond its March 31, 1977, expiration. The\nremaining.\nThe House took up the clean air bill again late in the\nisting exemption of $30,000, and adding new tax\ncommittee had explained in its report that continued im-\nHouse sponsors of a solid waste measure similar to one\npreference items to those subject to the minimum tax.\nafternoon of Sept. 9 and worked until 10 p.m. on\nprovement in the economy and the funding of approximate-\npassed by the Senate rushed their bill through committee in\nSimilar changes also were made for corporations.\namendments to the stationary source provisions. Auto emis-\nly 500,000 jobs through the Comprehensive Employment\nConferees also approved new provisions aimed at\nhopes of getting it to conference next week also. The House\nsion deadlines were the subject when the House reconvened\nand Training Act (CETA) would relieve the problem of ex-\nRules Committee considered two controversial bills, one\ncracking down on the use of tax shelters to shield in-\nat 10 a.m. Friday, Sept. 10, with debate on an administra-\ntended unemployment and make an extension unnecessary.\ncome from taxation. The House-passed limitation on\nregulating strip mining and one providing guaranteed loans\ntion and industry-backed amendment by John D. Dingell\nAn extension had been assumed in the first budget targets.\nartificial losses (LAL) was dropped in favor of\nfor development of synthetic fuels, but postponed final\n(D Mich.) to extend the deadlines and another by Henry A.\nUnder the FSB program, unemployment benefits are paid\nprovisions that would limit deductions for losses from\ndecisions on whether to send them to the floor until Sept.\nWaxman (D Calif.) to tighten them. No votes were taken\nfor up to an additional 26 weeks to workers who have used\n15.\nan investment to the amount a taxpayer actually had at\nbefore the House adjourned for the week. The House was\nup their 39 weeks of ordinary unemployment payments,\nscheduled to resume consideration of the bill with votes on\nrisk, combined with other curbs for each of the tax\nClean Air\nwhen certain conditions are met.\nshelters addressed-real estate, farming, oil and gas,\nthose amendments Sept. 15, and possibly get to final\n\"We are by no means out of the woods\" in reducing\nmovies, equipment leasing, sports franchises, and cer-\nThe House began general debate in early August on its\npassage the same day.\nhigh unemployment, said Jacob K. Javits (R N.Y.). He\ntain partnership operations.\nclean air bill (HR 10498), reported in May. But in what its\nwanted to make sure funding would be available if high un-\nThe conference bill also included changes in estate\nchief sponsor Paul G. Rogers (D Fla.) called \"ludicrous\nToxic Substances\nemployment made an extension necessary. Muskie and\nand gift taxes. The Senate had included revisions in the\nscheduling\" by the leadership, the measure had been\nHouse-Senate conferees on the toxic substances control\nranking minority member Henry Bellmon (R Okla.) assured\ntax bill, while a separate bill (HR 14844) approved by\nshunted aside for the rest of the month.\nbill (S 3149) held their second and third sessions Sept. 8 and\nhim the Budget Committee would \"watch this with a very\nthe Ways and Means Committee had run into dif-\nThe Senate passed its version of the bill (S 3219) Aug.\n9. They recessed until Sept. 14 or 15 with much ac-\nsensitive eye\" and that an extension, if necessary, could be\nficulties on the House floor. (Weekly Report p. 2417)\n5, and time was running short for the difficult conference\ncomplished and a number of significant differences left to\naccommodated in a third resolution or within the income\nThe conferees also decided to restrict an existing\nnegotiations that would be required to resolve differences\ncompromise.\nsecurity levels set by S Con Res 139.\nexclusion for sick pay, to provide a 20 per cent tax\nbetween the complex bills. (Senate action, Weekly Report\nThe legislation, which would tighten federal regulation\ncredit for child care and to restrict deductions for\np. 2107; House committee action, Weekly Report p. 1441)\nof industrial and commercial chemicals and for the first time\nattending foreign conventions. (Weekly Report p. 2415)\nThe measures, the first comprehensive revisions of the\nrequire premarket testing of potentially harmful sub-\nHouse Passage\n1970 Clean Air Act (PL 91-604), represent over a year's work\nstances, died in two previous Congressses because of un-\nby House and Senate committees. They extend deadlines\nresolved House-Senate differences.\nThe House passed its version (H Con Res 728) Sept. 9\nThe House rejected Sept. 9:\nby a vote of 227-151. (Vote 533, p. 2490)\nAn amendment offered by John H. Rousselot (R Calif.)\nand otherwise modify the strict auto and industrial clean-up\nThis year, the bills are closer. The consumer-\nschedules established in the law, but not to the extent re-\nthat would have set revenues and outlays at $362.5-billion\nenvironmental-labor coalition backing strong legislation\nIts levels, too, were unchanged from those reported by\nquested by the Ford administration or many of the affected\nprefers the Senate version, while a major chemical industry\nthe Budget Committee Sept. 1 (H Rept 94-1457):\nfor a zero deficit, by a vote of 111-264. (Vote 532, p. 2490)\nindustries.\nAn amendment offered by Delbert L. Latta (R Ohio),\ngroup, the Manufacturing Chemists Association, endorsed\nRevenues of $362.5-billion.\nThe House bill was brought back on the floor to begin\nthe House-passed bill. (House action, Weekly Report pp.\nBudget authority of $452.6-billion.\nranking minority member of the Budget Committee, to set\nthe amending process after Rogers complained publicly\n2339, 1969; Senate action, Weekly Report p. 764)\nOutlays of $413.2-billion.\nrevenues at $354.9-billion and outlays at $399.2-billion,\nabout the leadership's lack of urgency in scheduling, and\nStill to be decided when the conferees reconvene is the\nA deficit of $50.7-billion.\nbased on a 5 per cent cut in spending in 13 of the 17 budget\nothers charged that the leadership had been influenced by\nquestion of whether the Environmental Protection Agency\nDebate on the resolution, which had begun Sept. 8,\ncategories, and a reduction in personal income taxes, by\nutility industry lobbyists who oppose the measure.\n(EPA) should have authority to withhold suspicious\nturned into an opportunity for conservative members to dis-\nvoice vote.\ncuss the merits of a balanced budget for fiscal 1977 and to\nAn amendment offered by Clarence E. Miller (R Ohio)\nRogers won an important victory Sept. 8 when the\nchemicals from the market through administrative action as\nHouse rejected, 156-199, an amendment offered by Bill\nin the Senate bill, or whether the EPA should go to court for\npress for reductions in the spending levels approved by the\nto reduce budget authority for discretionary program\nChappell Jr. (D Fla.) to knock out a highly controversial\nsuch an action.\ncommittee. The House easily rejected three efforts to lower\nspending (as opposed to mandatory spending) by 5 per cent,\nsection of the bill aimed at protecting the air over national\nSome compromise is likely. But if key House\nthe budget levels after arguments from Budget Committee\nfor a savings estimated by Miller at about $6.5-billion, by a\nparks and other regions where it is cleaner than required by\nRepublicans such as James T. Broyhill (N.C.) are unhappy\nmembers that the amendments were unrealistic, would\nstanding vote of 20-39.\nFollowing passage of H Con Res 728, the House passed\nnational air quality standards. (Vote 530, p. 2490)\nwith the outcome, the chances of a veto may increase. The\ndestroy the fiscal policies carefully devised by Congress\nUtility and other industry groups had fought hard\nFord administration favors toxic substances legislation that\nthrough the new budget procedures, and would jeopardize\nS Con Res 139 substituting the House provisions.\nagainst this \"nondegradation\" provision, arguing that it\nis weaker than either the House or Senate bills.\nthe success of the entire procedure.\n-By Judy Gardner\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC\nReproduction prohibited except by editorial ciients\nSept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2457\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC\nPAGE 2456-Sept. 11, 1976\nReproduction prohibited in whole or part except by editorial clients\nEnergy and Environment 2\nSolid Waste\nAmerican Electric Power, the parent company, threatened\nThe House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Com-\nto sue the government for about $500-million in damages\nbecause of the cancellation.\nof\nForeign Policy/National Security\nmittee Sept. 9 approved a bill (HR 14496) tightening federal\ncontrol of hazardous waste disposal, providing grant money\nThe struggle over the New River pitted utility and labor\nfor state solid waste management programs, and beefing up\nspokesmen who supported the project against environmen-\nEPA solid waste programs. A report (H Rept 94-1491) was\ntalists, prominent North Carolinians and residents of the\nfiled the same day, and the House Rules Committee was\nstate's endangered river valleys. Those opponents said the\nConferees Approve $104.3-Billion Defense Bill\nscheduled to consider the bill Sept. 10.\nproject would destroy the natural ecology of the second\nThe Transportation and Commerce Subcommittee\noldest river in the world and the farms that supported about\n3,000 state residents.\nThe House Sept. 9 approved the conference report on\nreported the bill after dropping a provision, strongly op-\nposed by environmentalists, to provide $2.5-billion in loan\nThe labor and industry supporters of the project, joined\nlegislation (HR 14262) appropriating $104.3-billion for the\nDefense Department in fiscal 1977. The vote was 323-45.\nFord Warships Request Denied\nguarantees for development of new waste recycling techni-\nby members of the Virginia congressional delegation, said it\nwould provide needed energy, new construction jobs and\nSenate approval, which would clear the bill for the\nques. Staff members on the panel say they have been work-\nnew recreation and tourist attractions. The North Carolina\nPresident's signature, was expected to follow quickly\nThe House Armed Services Committee Sept. 8\ning with Senate staff to work out differences between HR\ndelegation, including conservative Republican Jesse A.\nwithout difficulty. (House vote 534, p. 2490)\nkilled on a voice vote an administration request for a\n14496 and a Senate solid waste bill (S 2150) passed in June.\nHelms, was united against the project.\nThe bill appropriated the $948-million requested for\nsupplemental authorization totaling $1.1-billion for\nThey are optimistic that if the bill clears the House, a con-\nproduction of the first three B-1 bombers, but it barred until\nwarships. The funds were denied by Congress in\nference agreement can be reached quickly. (Senate bill,\nThe Ford administration joined the project's opponents\nFeb. 1, 1977, a production contract for the controversial\napproving the fiscal 1977 weapons procurement\nWeekly Report p. 1819)\nshortly before the North Carolina presidential primary in\nplane, produced by Rockwell International Corp. Produc-\nauthorization bill (HR 12438).\nMarch, with Interior Secretary Thomas S. Kleppe\ntion of the plane, designed to replace the B-52 in the U.S.\nThe panel's Seapower Subcommittee\nOther Bills\ndesignating the 26.5-mile stretch as part of the wild and\nscenic system. But legislation still was necessary to resolve\nnuclear strike forces, was favored by President Ford but op-\nrecommended approval of the request for four missile\nThe House Rules Committee heard hours of testimony\nthe issue, because a federal appeals court upheld the con-\nposed by Democratic presidential nominee Jimmy Carter. If\nfrigates ($521-million)-in addition to the eight already\nSept. 8 on a bill (HR 12112) providing federal loan\nthe winner of the November election wanted to kill the B-1\nauthorized in HR 12438-and for $170-million to begin\ntested license in late March.\nguarantees for private development of synthetic fuels.\nThe New River dispute was fought within the FPC until\nprogram without obligating the money appropriated in HR\nwork on a nuclear-powered strike cruiser. The subcom-\nChairman Ray J. Madden (D Ind.) complained that the bill\nthe agency granted the license in 1974, and then shifted to\n14262, he would need congressional approval of a bill\nmittee also proposed authorizing $420-million of the\nwas too complex and far-reaching to be brought up so late in\nrescinding the appropriation. (B-1 compromise, Weekly\n$858.5-million requested for an anti-aircraft missile-\nCongress. The Senate passed a New River protection bill in\nthe session, especially when four House committees ad-\nReport p. 2434)\nfiring destroyer.\n1974 but it died in the House Rules Committee. After\nvocated different versions. A final vote was set for Sept. 15.\nvigorous lobbying on both sides, the panel sent the 1976 bill\nThe only major weapons requests not funded by the bill\n\"We need the ships,\" insisted Seapower Subcom-\n(Weekly Report p. 2340)\nto the House floor by a vote of 10-6. (House action, Weekly\nwere six warships sought by the Navy to counter the threat\nmittee Chairman Charles E. Bennett (D Fla.). He said\nProspects were equally uncertain for an amended ver-\nReport p. 2215; background on issue, Weekly Report p.\nof Soviet anti-ship missiles. Congress had denied authoriza-\nthat the Navy was particularly anxious to begin work\nsion of the controversial strip mining bill (HR 13950), on\n1665)\ntion for the vessels because of disagreement between the\non the cruiser and the destroyer; both vessels would\nwhich the Rules Committee also promised to vote Sept. 15.\nSenate and House over the relative priority of large,\ncarry the Aegis anti-aircraft system to counter the\nSupporters said the twice-vetoed bill had been modified to\nnuclear-powered warships versus smaller, conventionally\nSoviet Union's armory of anti-ship missiles.\nmeet the President's objections, and hoped members would\nSenate Floor Action\npowered vessels of more limited capability.\nBut the committee's former chairman, F. Edward\nbe reluctant to vote against it so close to an election. (Week-\nThe House Armed Services Committee Sept. 8 rejected\nHebert (D La.), a veteran Pentagon ally, dismissed the\nly Report p. 2343)\nan administration request to authorize the six ships: a\nadministration's request as \"idiotic, idealistic and im-\nThe Senate passed HR 13372 by a vote of 69-16 Aug. 30\nAlso on the Rules panel's schedule for Sept. 10 was HR\nnuclear-powered strike cruiser and a conventionally\npractical.\" Charles H. Wilson (D Calif.) charged that\nafter rejecting, 13-72, an amendment intended to gut the\n15069, a forest management bill that environmentalists con-\nbill. (Votes 534, 535; Weekly Report p. 2437)\npowered destroyer, both carrying the Aegis anti-aircraft\nthe request was politically motivated, noting that it\nsider too weak, particularly on the issue of clearcutting. A\nsystem to escort carrier task forces, and four missile frigates\nhad been made just after President Ford's\nThe amendment, offered by William L. Scott (R Va.),\nconference will be necessary to compromise it with a stronger\nwould have upheld the FPC license for the Blue Ridge Proj-\nto protect supply convoys and amphibious forces. (Com-\nrenomination.\nSenate bill (S 3091) passed in August. (Weekly Report p.\nect. Scott and Harry F. Byrd Jr. (Ind Va.) argued that the\nmittee action, box this page)\n2450)\nproject would provide needed energy without cost to tax-\n-By Prudence Crewdson\n$14-Billion Increase\npayers or damage to the environment. Byrd warned that the\nhad cut President Ford's $97.9-billion fiscal 1976 Pentagon\nAppropriations Committee Chairman George Mahon\nappropriations bill by $7.4-billion, a reduction of more than\nbill would have \"a chilling effect on the willingness of\nprivate enterprise to invest in this type of project in the\n(D Texas) told the House that the $14-billion increase over\n7.5 per cent. (Fiscal 1976 appropriations bill, 1975 Almanac,\nfuture.\"\nthe fiscal 1976 defense appropriation was necessary because\np. 873)\nSenate Action:\nSounding very much like the environmentalists he\ninflation would absorb $7-billion of the increase and Soviet\nusually opposed, Helms said Congress had to \"face up to the\nmilitary strength was continuing to grow.\nSoviet Threat Seen\nfact that the FPC decision is based on data that is eight or\n\"I cannot accept a position of military inferiority for the\nCongress' endorsement of the major elements of the ad-\nNew River Bill Cleared\nten years old, and that has been outdated by intervening\nUnited States,\" he said, \"and I do not believe many\nministration's request was based on growing congressional\nevents.\" He added that attitudes toward conservation and\nmembers of the House, if any, could.\" He added that the\nsuspicion of increasing Soviet military strength, particular-\nThe campaign to save the New River in North Carolina\nenergy had changed, and \"our awareness of citizens' rights\nbill's $104.3-billion was \"sufficient to prevent an erosion of\nly in view of Soviet diplomatic adventurism in Africa and\nfrom inundation by a huge hydroelectric project\nhas been sharpened.\"\nour military position.\"\nthe Middle East. The near success of Ronald Reagan's\ntriumphed Aug. 30 when the Senate passed and sent to the\nHelms was joined in his support for the New River bill\nBut Edward I. Koch (D N.Y.) argued that the con-\nstridently hawkish campaign to wrest the GOP presidential\nWhite House legislation (HR 13372) invalidating a federal\nby two other well-known Senate conservatives-James B.\nference report did not cut enough fat from the Pentagon re-\nnomination from President Ford further dampened con-\nlicense for construction of the project. President Ford is ex-\nAllen (D Ala.) and Barry Goldwater (R Ariz.). Goldwater\nquest. Citing presidential candidate Carter and House\ngressional willingness to impose major funding cuts on the\npected to sign the measure.\ncommented that \"of all the votes I have cast in the 20-odd\nBudget Committee Chairman Brock Adams (D Wash.), he\nPentagon.\nPassed by the House Aug. 10, HR 13372 designated a\nyears I have been in this body, if there is one that stands out\nsaid: \"Even the more moderate members of my own par-\nNo major reductions in weapons programs were serious-\n26.5-mile stretch of the New River in North Carolina as part\nabove all others that I would change if I had the chance it\nty...have advocated a $5-billion to $7-billion reduction.\"\nly contemplated by either the House or the Senate. Op-\nof the Wild and Scenic Rivers System. That had the effect\nwas a vote I cast to construct Glen Canyon Dam on the\nThe final appropriation of $104,343,835,000 was $1.05-\nponents of various major weapons proposed by the ad-\nof cancelling a Federal Power Commission (FPC) license\nColorado While the Glen Canyon Dam has created the\nbillion less than had been approved by the House June 17\nministration-the B-1, a fifth nuclear-powered aircraft\nissued in 1974 for construction of a pumped storage power\nmost beautiful lake in the world and has brought millions\nand $330-million more than was voted Aug. 9 by the Senate.\ncarrier, 60 additional Minuteman missiles-argued instead\nproject involving two dams on the Virginia side of the\nand millions of dollars into my state and the state of Utah,\n(House passage, Weekly Report p. 1651; Senate passage p.\nfor deferral of funds for the programs until the next ad-\nVirginia-North Carolina border.\nnevertheless, I think of that river as it was when I was a boy\n2207)\nministration took office. Only with the B-1 did this tactic\nThe Blue Ridge Power Project, first proposed in 1962,\nand that is the way I would like to see it again.\"\nI\nThe administration's amended request of $107.9-billion\npartially succeed. Funds for the carrier and the missiles\nwas to be built by the Appalachian Power Company.\n-By Prudence Crewdson\nwas cut by $3.6-billion, a reduction of 3.3 per cent. Congress\nwere provided without restriction.\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC.\nPAGE 2458-Sept. 11, 1976\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC\nReproduction prohibited whole except by editorial clients.\nSept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2459\nReproduction prohib whole part except by editoria clients\nForeign Policy/National Security 2\nForeign Policy/National Security 3\nProvisions\nDistribution by\nAmong the significant financial and management in-\nmonth until Feb. 1, 1977. The effect of the limitation was to\nOrganizational Component\nitiatives contained in the bill were:\ndelay until February signature of a contract for production\nA separate appropriation of $5.6-million, as\nof the plane.\nArmy\n$26,005,882,000\n$25,488,887,000\nrecommended by the House, for executive branch oversight\nFor advanced research on intercontinental ballistic\nAs approved by the conference committee, HR 14262\nNavy\n37,882,712,000\n35,910,529,000\nof the intelligence community. The separate appropriation\nmissiles (ICBMs), including the new M-X missile, conferees\nappropriated the following amounts for Defense Depart-\nAir Force\n31,584,974,000\n30,765,835,000\nwas intended to ensure that the Intelligence Community\nrecommended $69-million, the amount approved by the\nment spending in fiscal 1977:\nDefense Agencies\n3,969,204,000\n3,762,984,000\nStaff and the National Foreign Intelligence Board main-\nSenate. The administration had requested, and the House\nRetired Military Personnel\n8,493,400,000\n8,381,700,000\ntained policy independence from those intelligence agencies\nprovided, $84-million. (Both houses had approved the re-\nRelated Agencies\n28,300,000\n33,900,000\nthat they were charged with supervising.\nquested $317-million for procurement of 60 Minuteman\nDistribution\nAmended\nThe bill funded Pentagon manpower at approximately\nA productivity enhancement program to finance the\nICBMs, the models currently in service.)\nby\nAdministration\nFinal\nthe levels requested by the administration. The only major\npurchase by defense contractors of capital equipment that\nFor continued development work on the Trident\nProgram\nRequest\nAppropriation\ndeparture from the President's request was the rejection by\nwould reduce production costs by reducing manpower re-\nsubmarine-launched ballistic missile, the bill provided\nconferees of Ford's proposal to cut the Naval Reserve to\nquirements; $19.3-million was appropriated for the\n$569-million, the amount approved by the Senate. Both\nMilitary Personnel\n$ 25,497,907,000\n$ 25,418,408,000\n52,000, from its current strength of 102,000. Conferees\nprogram and the Pentagon was directed to link future\nhouses had agreed to appropriate $723-million for procure-\nRetired Military Personnel\n8,493,400,000\n8,381,700,000\nrecommended funding the Naval Reserve at an average\nfunding requests to specific projects.\nment of the first 48 Trident missiles, an amount to which\nOperations and Maintenance\n32,285,400,000\n31,655,444,000\nstrength in fiscal 1977 of 96,500, the level recommended by\n$6-million earmarked for evaluation of foreign weapons\nthe administration had agreed after its initial request to\nProcurement\n30,601,400,000\n28,416,300,000\nthe Senate. The amounts approved by the conference com-\nor weapons components for possible use by U.S. forces.\npurchase 80 missiles was thwarted by delays in the missile\n(transfer from other accounts)\n(82,600,000)\nAn administration-sponsored program to stabilize\ntest program. Both houses had also agreed to appropriate\nResearch and Development\n11,054,400,000\n10,434,418,000\nmittee would provide personnel levels for Pentagon com-\nponents at the end of fiscal 1977 as follows:\nprices paid by the armed services during the fiscal year for\n$729.7-million for construction of the fifth Trident-missile\nSpecial Foreign Currency\ncommercially sold commodities such as petroleum\nsubmarine.\nProgram\n3,665,000\n3,665,000\nOrganizational\nAdministration\nFinal\nproducts. The bill provided $548-million for a surcharge on\nFor continued research on the Seafarer (formerly\nRelated Agencies\n28,300,000\n33,900,000\nComponent\nRequest\nAppropriation\nprices paid by the services to stock funds-revolving ac-\nSanguine) system for communication with submerged mis-\nTotal, Department of\ncounts through which the services purchase commercially\nsile submarines, conferees agreed to $14.8-million, the\nDefense (new obliga-\nArmy\n790,000\n789,000\nvended commodities.\namount approved by the House. The administration had re-\ntional authority)\n$107,964,472,000\n$104,343,835,000\nNavy\n554,000\n540,600\nThe final version of the bill also:\nMarine Corps\n196,000\n192,000\nquested $29.8-million and the Senate had approved $27.1-\n(transfer from other\nAir Force\n571,000\n571,000\nRejected an administration proposal to consolidate at\nmillion.\naccounts)\n--\n(82,600,000)\nTotal, Active\nthe Army's Ft. Rucker, Ala., base all basic helicopter flight\nConferees accepted the Senate-passed amount of\nDuty Military\n2,111,000\n2,092,600\ntraining for the services.\n$119.8-million for development of the sea-launched cruise\nTotal, Funding Available\n$107,964,472,000\n$104,426,435,000\nReserve and Guard Forces\n836,500\n877,700\nContinued the subsidy for military commissary payroll\nmissile. The administration had requested $182.4-million\n(transfer authority)\n(750,000,000)\n(750,000,000)\nCivilian Employees\n1,035,800\n1,031,000\ncosts, with an appropriation of $281-million for fiscal 1977.\nand the House had allowed all but $20-million. Both houses\nLimited to 60 days the unused leave time for which pay\nhad approved the requested $79.2-million for research on\ncould be collected by a person leaving the service and\nthe air-launched cruise missile.\nlimited the lump sum terminal leave payment to basic pay,\nFor research on defenses against ICBMs, conferees\nthus excluding additional allowances for housing and sub-\napproved $203-million. The administration request for\nMajor Weapons Appropriations for Fiscal 1977\nsistence.\n$224.9-million was cut to $206.9-million by the House and to\nProhibited payment by the Civilian Health and\n$178-million by the Senate.\nMedical Program of the Uniformed Services (CHAMPUS)\nPentagon\nFinal\nfor religious, family, child or marital counseling of military\nRequests\nAppropriation\ndependents, unless the dependent was referred for treat-\nGround Forces\nment by a medical doctor.\nProcurement: (some of the amounts include funds\nQuantity\nAmount\nQuantity\nAmount\nAdministration requests designed to offset Soviet\nfor spare parts or for items that will\n(amounts in millions of dollars)\nConference Action\nnumerical superiority in tanks and aircraft were, in general,\nbe procured in fiscal 1978)\nsupported by the final version. Production of some items\nTrident missile\n48\n$ 720.3\n48\n$ 720.3\nB-1 bomber\n3\n1,037.0\n3\n1,037.0\nIn contrast to the prolonged and hard-fought con-\nwas deferred because of inadequate testing, but the major\nclash with the administration was over an administration-\nM-60 tank\n886\n472,8\n886\n462.8\nference on the weapons procurement authorization bill, the\nimposed pause in a program to develop a new tank.\nTrident submarine\n1\n791.5\n1\n791.5\nconference on the appropriations measure was completed in\nBoth houses had recommended $35.6-million to begin\nAttack submarine\n3\n958.7\n3\n958.7\nthree meetings. The conference report was filed Sept. 3 (H\ntooling-up for production of the new XM-1 tank. But con-\nAircraft carrier\n1\n350.0\n1\n350.0\nRept 94-1475).\nferees voiced concern that the administration's\nStrike cruiser\n1\n170.0\n-\n-\nStrategic Weapons\nmodifications in the program could increase its cost and\nAegis (anti-aircraft) destroyer\n1\n858.5\n-\n-\ndegrade its performance. The Pentagon Aug. 4 delayed un-\nMinuteman ICBM\n60\n317.0\n60\n317.0\nThe final version had the effect of slowing some\ntil November selection of a contractor for the new tank in\nMissile frigate\n12\n1,732.9\n8\n1,179.5\nstrategic weapons projects while endorsing the ad-\norder to allow modifications to be made in the tank to per-\nTankers and tenders (support ships)\n4\n726.6\n3\n623.6\nministration's basic policy of maintaining and modernizing\nmit use of an engine and the armament used in a new\nA-6E all-weather attack plane\n-\n-\n6\n65.8\nthe \"triad\" of three independent nuclear strike forces com-\nGerman tank. Conferees said the modified program was\nA-10 ground attack plane\n100\n575.9\n100\n575.9\nprising land-based missiles, submarine-launched missiles\nsubstantially different from the one Congress approved and\nF-14 carrier-based fighter\n36\n693.7\n36\n693.7\nand bombers. Commitment to production of the B-1\nthat funds for the new arrangement would have to be for-\nF-15 fighter\n108\n1,386.6\n108\n1,378.0\nbomber was delayed until after the presidential election,\nmally reprogrammed, subject to approval by the Armed\nF-16 lightweight fighter\n16\n360.6\n-\n151.5\nand the development of a strategic version of the sea-\nServices and Appropriations Committees.\nAWACS radar-warning and command plane\n6\n474.7\n6\n474.7\nlaunched cruise missile was blocked. But the bill funded ini-\nBoth houses had agreed to provide $450.9-million to\nResearch and Development:\ntial production of a new sea-launched missile and the\npurchase 886 M-60 tanks, the current front-line weapon.\nICBM Advanced Technology (including M-X)\n84.0\n69.0\ndevelopment of a new land-based missile.\nConferees agreed to reduce the appropriation by $27.8-\nCruise Missiles, Navy\n182.5\n119.8\nThe conference version appropriated $948-million, the\nmillion, to be made up by unspent funds appropriated in\nXM-1 tank\n35.6\n35.6\namount requested for procurement of the first three regular\nprevious years.\nF-18 lightweight fighter\n346.9\n346.9\nproduction B-1 bombers. But it provided that the funds\nEndorsing the Senate's position, conferees approved an\ncould be obligated at a rate of no more than $87-million a\nadministration request for $74.5-million to procure 360 non-\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERL INC\nPAGE 2460-Sept. 11, 1976\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERL INC\nReproduction prohibited whole Of part except by editorial clients\nSept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2461\nReproduction prohibited in whole or part except by editorial clients\nForeign Policy/National Security 4\nForeign Policy/National Security 5\nnuclear Lance battlefield support missiles. The House had\nThe conferees approved the funding as authorized, but\nlimiting to 60 days the amount of accumulated leave for\nof $6-billion worth of U.S. arms offered for sale by the Ford\ndenied all funds for the program.\nstrongly criticized the arrangement as a violation of the\nwhich a person leaving the service could collect pay and 2)\nadministration to 11 foreign governments.\nFor the Advanced Concepts Laboratory, an armored\nprinciple of \"full-funding\"- practice, followed by the\nnot funding the 1 per cent \"kicker\" on cost-of-living in-\nUnder the veto procedure, Congress has 30 days from\nwarfare think tank, the bill included $1-million. The Senate\nAppropriations Committees, of considering only funding re-\ncreases in military retired pay. Repeal of the kicker was con-\nSept. 1-the date President Ford submitted the proposed\nhad voted $2-million; the House had denied funding.\nquests that covered the entire cost of a weapon. They\ntingent on congressional action to impose the same reduc-\ncontracts to Capitol Hill-to halt the sales. The concurrent\nAll funds for procurement of the Stinger, a one-man\nwarned that by partially funding the initial group of F-16s,\ntion on pay increases for federal civilian retirees, a move\nresolution process-requiring a majority vote by both\nanti-aircraft missile, were deleted, but funds for continued\nCongress obscured the total cost of the program, thus mak-\nbacked by the Senate Aug. 8 during action on the legislative\nhouses-does not give the President authority to reject\ndevelopment of the missile were increased to $25.3-million,\ning congressional oversight more difficult.\nbranch appropriations bill. (1 per cent kicker repeal, p.\nCongress' decisions. (Nelson arms sale veto amendment,\nthe policy recommended by the House. Both houses had\nConferees also agreed on minor adjustments in funding\n2492)\n1974 Almanac p. 533)\nagreed on funds for continued purchase of the Hawk long-\n108 F-15 fighters, recommending $1.3-billion. Both houses\nConferees provided $8.4-billion for pay of military\nIn related action, Sen. William Proxmire (D Wis.)\nrange anti-aircraft missile ($87.5-million) and the\nhad approved the amounts requested for 100 A-10 ground\nretirees, thus rejecting a Senate move to delete $346.2-\nSept. 1 submitted 24 resolutions to disapprove $5.3-billion\nChaparral short-range anti-aircraft missile ($59.1-million).\nattack planes ($537.7-million) and for six AWACS radar\nmillion for anticipated cost-of-living increases. The bill in-\nworth of sales to five governments covered by the Nelson\nThey also agreed on funding for development of the SAM D\nwarning and command planes ($384.6-million).\ncluded no funds for the 1 per cent \"kicker\" on cost-of-living\nmeasures.\nlong-range missile ($179.9-million) and the Roland short-\nincreases in retired pay.\nA long-time critic of the U.S. role in the international\nrange missile ($85-million).\nAirlift\nBut conferees followed the House in rejecting another\narms race, Nelson told the Senate that the 1976 Ford\nFor advance procurement of a new tanker/cargo plane\nmajor element of the administration's program, the phase-\npackage of contracts represented the equivalent of 13.7 per\nNaval Forces\nthat would use a commercial wide-body jet, conferees\nout of the subsidy for payroll costs of military commissaries.\ncent of all arms sale shipments made by the United States\nThe bill's major break with the administration's\napproved $28.8-million. The Air Force had requested, and\nThe administration had requested a three-year phase-out\nsince 1951. (Sales figures, 1975 Almanac p. 356)\nweapons policy was in shipbuilding, on which Senate and\nthe Senate allowed, $37.2-million; the House appropriated\nand the Senate had approved a phase-out over six years.\n\"I do not expect or wish to see all the sales stopped,\"\nHouse conflict over the relative merits of expensive, multi-\n$11.7-million Conferees said they sought to slow down the\nThe final version included $281-million for the commissary\nNelson said, explaining that his resolutions would give the\npurpose nuclear-powered vessels versus cheaper, single-\nprogram because the Pentagon was reviewing its current\nsubsidy in fiscal 1977.\nForeign Relations Committee and other panels time \"to\npurpose ships led to a standoff having a major impact on the\nreliance on airlift to reinforce U.S. troops and allies abroad\nFollowing action by the Senate, the bill included $18.3-\nhold hearings and call administration witnesses to explore\nadministration's program for the Navy.\nand was considering placing more emphasis on sea transport\nmillion for Army enlistment bonuses and $7-million for\nin detail the underlying rationale for so extensive an arms\nBoth houses had agreed to provide $350-million for the\nand on permanently stocking a larger amount of equip-\nArmy personnel sent to their home towns to serve as\nsales plan.. this particular moment.\"\npowerplant of a fifth nuclear-powered aircraft carrier and\nment overseas.\nrecruiting aides. Conferees announced that Congress would\nAmong the contracts submitted by the administration\n$745.6-million for three attack submarines.\nThe Senate and House had approved the amounts re-\ntake no further action on the administration's July 28\nwas the proposed sale of 160 F-16 jet fighters to Iran at a\nA principal facet of the Senate-House stalemate in-\nquested for development of a new, short takeoff/landing\nbudget amendment requesting $39.3-million for enlistment\nprice tag of $3.8-billion and an order from Saudi Arabia for\nvolved construction of ships to carry the Aegis anti-aircraft\ntransport ($29.3-million) and for modification of the giant\nbonuses.\n$701-million worth of military equipment, including 850\nsystem designed to protect U.S. fleets against the Soviet\nC-5A transport, including a rebuilding of the plane's wing\nReasoning that alcohol abuse was more widespread in\nSidewinder air-to-air missiles and 650 Maverick air-to-\nUnion's vast array of anti-ship missiles. The administration\n($43.5-million). Both houses also had denied $29.3-million\nthe military than drug abuse, the House had directed the\nground missiles.\nhad asked for two ships carrying the system, a nuclear-\nrequested for modification of civilian jetliners to facilitate\nPentagon to shift half of the $56.4-million currently spent on\nHearings on the Iranian deal are tentatively scheduled\npowered strike cruiser favored by the House and a conven-\ntheir conversion to military duty in time of emergency.\ndrug-abuse programs to combat alcoholism. Conferees\nfor Sept. 16, and the Saudi Arabian transaction is expected\ntionally powered destroyer supported by the Senate. Unable\ndirected the Pentagon to halt the random urinalysis of\nto receive committee scrutiny Sept. 24 because of the con-\nto agree on these ships, Congress authorized neither.\nCommunications Systems\nmilitary personnel to detect drug use and to channel the\ncern over the Maverick's offensive capability. The ad-\nConferees accepted a Senate proposal to mount the Aegis\nFor communications scattered across several funding\nfunds thus freed to the alcohol-abuse program.\nministration's proposed arms sales package follows:\nsystem on the 15-year-old nuclear-powered cruiser Long\naccounts, conferees agreed to an overall reduction of $85.9-\nBeach at a cost of $371-million.\nmillion, nearly splitting the difference between the $112-\nOperations and Maintenance\n(amounts in millions of dollars)\nBoth houses had agreed to fund eight missile frigates to\nmillion cut by the House and the $60.2-million cut of the\nThe bill included $548-million for an administration\nescort supply convoys and amphibious forces ($1.1-billion).\nSenate.\nIsrael\n$ 241.4\nprogram to protect against inflation the amounts budgeted\nFor the Defense Satellite Communications System II,\nSaudi Arabia\nConferees agreed to reject a House-passed provision that\n701.6\nfor training activities and maintenance vital to the services'\nIran\n4,458.0\nwould have canceled four missile-launching hydrofoil patrol\nthe bill approved $179.9-million of a requested $200.1-\ncombat-readiness. The funds would enable the services to\nPakistan\n79.5\nboats that had been funded in previous years.\nmillion. The Senate had allowed $195.4-million, the House,\npay a surcharge on prices paid to the stock funds. The cash\nSouth Korea\n116.7\nFor six A-6E all-weather attack planes, the conference\n$172.6-million. Conferees agreed to the House action cutting\nbalances generated by the surcharge would allow the stock\nNorway\n100.0\ncommittee provided $65.8-million, the amount approved by\nto four the requested six satellites for the system.\nfunds to absorb the cost of commodity price increases in the\nPhilippines\n61.4\nthe Senate. Conferees followed the House in deleting all\nConferees also followed the action of the Senate in\ncourse of a fiscal year. This would ensure that the services\nAustralia\nconfidential\nfunds requested ($102.8-million) for six US-3A planes to\napproving the requested $30.6-million for development of a\ncould actually purchase the amount of supplies for which\nGermany\n38.8\ntransport men and equipment to aircraft carriers. Conferees\nnewer, more advanced Defense Satellite Communications\nMorocco\nthey had been budgeted. In recent years sharp price in-\n88.9\nalso agreed to terminate the Rockwell-manufactured Con-\nSystem III. The House had allowed only $10.6-million.\nSingapore\n109.7\ncreases after passage of an appropriations bill had led to\ndor television-guided missile program, thus endorsing the\nFor development of an airborne command post to con-\ncuts in the amount of supplies that the services could ac-\nposition of the House.\ntrol U.S. forces in case of a nuclear war, the bill\ntually afford.\n.\nNelson expressed particular hostility to the F-16 sales,\nBoth the Senate and House versions approved funding\nappropriated $69-million, the amount approved by the\n-By Pat Towell\nasserting that \"it will take a great deal of convincing to\nfor procurement of 36 F-14 carrier-based fighters ($571.2-\nSenate. The administration had requested $79-million and\nprove to me that the United States must commit itself this\nmillion), 30 A-7E attack planes ($212.5-million) and six EA-\nthe House allowed $65.2-million.\nSept. 30 Deadline:\nmonth\" to the sales. \"Telling Congress that this decision is\n6B electronic warfare planes ($116-million). Both houses\nin the national interest just will not wash,\" he added.\nalso approved $346.9-million for continued development of\nIntelligence Programs\nRecalling that the weapons sales program originally\nthe lightweight F-18 carrier-based fighter.\nThe House had cut intelligence and intelligence-related\nResolutions to Block\nwas intended to supply U.S. NATO allies, Nelson said that\nprograms by $149.7-million (including $28.3-million for the\nIran and other so-called Third World countries currently\nTactical Air Forces\nCIA retirement fund that had not been authorized when the\nThe weapons procurement authorization bill had\nForeign Arms Sales\nwere the principal buyers. \"Such sales have major foreign\nHouse acted). The Senate restored $104.2-million of the cut.\npolicy implications, but there is little if any evidence that\ndenied all funds requested for the purchase of the first 16\nThe conference version reduced intelligence and\nthe administration has given adequate thought to the long-\nmodels of the F-16 lightweight fighter, but increased to\nintelligence-related programs by $89.7-million. It included\nIntroduced in Senate\nrange diplomatic or military considerations of the weapons\n$174.9-million, from $23.4-million, the amount for ad-\nthe $28.3-million requested for the CIA retirement fund.\ntransactions,\" he said.\nvanced procurement of components for planes to be\nActivating a procedure he devised in 1974 to give\nBoth Nelson and Proxmire criticized the \"chaotic\npurchased in future years. The change had been proposed\nPersonnel Costs\nCongress an opportunity to veto proposed sales of U.S.\nmanner\" in which the contracts had been submitted to\nby the Senate Armed Services Committee, which argued\nThe bill endorsed two major elements of the ad-\nweapons to foreign countries, Sen. Gaylord Nelson (D Wis.)\nCongress.\nthat the F-16 purchases would not occur until 1978.\nministration's package of personnel cost reductions by 1)\nSept. 7 filed 37 concurrent resolutions to block the shipment\n-By David M. Maxfield\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC\nPAGE 2462-Sept. 11, 1976\nReproduction prohibited in whole or in part except by editoriel clients\nReproduction prohibited in whole or part except by editorial clients\nSept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2463\nof\nConsumer Affairs\nPolitics\nSenate Passes Modified Antitrust Bill, 69-18\nCarter and Ford Offer Contrasting Styles\nWith the summer preliminaries behind them, President\nOvercoming a second filibuster, the Senate passed and\nDole (R Kan.), voted for the bill. Dole had voted against the\nFord and Jimmy Carter moved into the final, eight-week\nwelfare, inflation, Medicaid-the captain hides in his\nreturned to the House Sept. 8 an antitrust enforcement bill\noriginal Senate bill in June.\nphase of their campaigns for the presidency.\nstateroom and the crew argues about who is to blame.\"\n(HR 8532) Congress has been struggling with all year. The\nThe contrast in the ways they moved could hardly have\nCarter also invoked the meinory of President Kennedy,\nSenate passed its compromise version, drafted informally to\nProvisions\nbeen more distinct. Carter, the Democratic challenger,\nwho had spoken at Warm Springs during his 1960 cam-\nshort-circuit further delaying tactics, by a vote of 69-18.\nstuck with tradition and gave a rousing, emotional Labor\npaign. Slightly modifying the Kennedy slogan of 16 years\nAs passed by the Senate Sept. 8, the \"Hart-Scott-\n(Vote 559, p. 2487)\nDay speech on Sept. 6. Then he headed into a strenuous\nearlier, Carter said that it was time \"to get our country on\nRodino Antitrust Improvement Act of 1976\" (HR 8532) in-\nThe measure authorizes state attorneys general to bring\nthe move again.\"\ncluded the following major provisions:\nweek of travels to industrial cities of the Northeast and\nantitrust suits (\"parens patriae\") on behalf of citizens, re-\nTitle I: Antitrust Civil Process Act Amendments.\nMidwest.\nHis biggest applause from the crowd on the lawn of\nquires large companies to notify the government of planned\nAuthorized the Justice Department's Antitrust Division to\nFord, the Republican incumbent, attempted to\nRoosevelt's \"little White House\" came from this statement:\nmergers and strengthens the government's antitrust in-\nissue civil investigative demands (CIDs), in the course of in-\ncapitalize on the prestige of the presidency. He remained at\n\"As a political candidate, I owe nothing to special interests.\nvestigatory powers. It is backed by consumer and state at-\nI owe everything to the people.\"\nvestigating potential antitrust violations, to natural persons\nthe White House and left the travel up to his running mate,\ntorney general groups, and opposed by business groups.\nand third parties (such as competitors or suppliers) and to\nKansas Sen. Robert Dole. But he still found time to use the\nThe House and Senate had passed differing versions of\nRose Garden and the press briefing room to score some par-\nPresidential Offensive\ncompel production of oral testimony and answers to written\nthe legislation by early August, and a conference was\ninterrogatories. CIDs also could be issued in connection with\ntisan points against his opponent.\nDeliberately emphasizing his incumbency, Ford\nplanned to resolve differences. But James B. Allen (D Ala.),\ninvestigations of planned mergers and regulatory agency\nNeither side was without its problems. Carter ran into\nremained in Washington over Labor Day, combining work\nwho led a time-consuming filibuster against the Senate bill\nproceedings. (Existing law limited the reach of CIDs to\nsome unexpectedly vehement opposition from anti-abortion\nwith relaxation-but making no speeches.\nin June, threatened to filibuster again on the motion to ap-\ndocumentary evidence obtained from corporations being in-\ngroups in North Philadelphia and Scranton, Pa. Dole was\nThere was an element of irony in the President's\npoint conferees and on the conference report. (Weekly\nvestigated for violations, not including illegal mergers.)\npushed onto the defensive by reports of oil-company con-\nposture at this stage of the campaign. Harry Truman is one\nReport p. 2424)\nTitle II: Premerger Notification. Required notice to\ntributions to past campaigns.\nof his acknowledged idols, and Truman made history in\nTo avoid two filibusters so late in the session, Senate\nthe Antitrust Division and the Federal Trade Commission\nEven as the campaign was hitting its stride, a sense of\n1948 by touring the country, \"giving 'em hell\" and\nand House sponsors worked out a compromise version which\n(FTC) 30 days in advance of mergers involving companies\nexpectancy prevailed as plans continued for the first of four\nsnatching victory away from Republican Thomas E. Dewey.\nwas introduced in the Senate Aug. 27. The Senate invoked\nworth $100-million or more and companies worth $10-\ntelevised debates. Philadelphia was chosen as the site of the\nFord, far from emulating his hero, delayed the start of\ncloture on it Aug. 31 and reached agreement to take a final\nmillion or more, providing the transaction involves acquisi-\nfirst debate between Ford and Carter, to be sponsored by\nhis campaign until a week later, when he was scheduled to\nvote Sept. 8.\ntion of more than $15-million in stock or assets, or 15 per\nthe League of Women Voters and held at 9:30 p.m. Sept. 23.\nkick it off in his home state of Michigan. During Labor Day\nBefore approving the compromise bill, the Senate re-\ncent of the voting securities of the acquired company. A 20-\nCarter went on the attack immediately in his speech\nweek, he did not make any openly political utterances until\njected 22-66 a substitute proposal offered by Allen which\nday extension could be granted. Material filed with the\nfrom the steps of the house in Warm Springs, Ga., where\nSept. 7, when he appeared twice before White House\nwould have retained the original Senate version of the bill\ngovernment under this provision would be exempt from dis-\nPresident Franklin D. Roosevelt had died in 1945.\nreporters, and Sept. 8, when he held another impromptu\nand thus required a conference. (Vote 558, p. 2487; original\nclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.\nPlaying the Roosevelt theme for all it was worth, Carter\npress conference. Ford's first appearance on Sept. 7 was a\nSenate action, Weekly Report p. 1591)\nTitle III: Parens Patriae. Authorized state attorneys\ncompared Ford with the Republican President, Herbert\nbill-signing ceremony in the Rose Garden of the executive\nThe bill still faces two uncertainties-the House and\ngeneral to bring triple damage suits in federal court on\nHoover, in 1932. \"This year, as in 1932, our nation is\nmansion. He used the occasion to defend himself against\nPresident Ford. Several members of the House Judiciary\nbehalf of state citizens injured by violations of the Sherman\ndivided, our people are out of work and our national leaders\nCarter's past criticism of his vetoes.\nCommittee complained that they did not approve the final\nAntitrust Act.\ndo not lead,\" said Carter. \"Our nation is drifting without in-\nAs he signed a bill on child day care standards-he had\n\"compromise\" bill, and that provisions important to them\nIn cases involving price-fixing, the state could prove the\nspiration, without vision and without purpose.\"\nvetoed a previous version-he said: \"It is a better bill\nwere left out. Of utmost concern to those members were\namount of damages to be awarded \"in the aggregate by\nThe former Georgia governor took his hardest slap at\nbecause my veto exerted a balancing influence on the\nHouse provisions that would have imposed an absolute ban\nstatistical or sampling methods, by the computation of il-\nFord in a comparison with Harry Truman. \"When Truman\ndeliberations of the Congress in this important area.\non contingency fees for outside attorneys in state parens\nlegal overcharges\" or other reasonable system approved by\nwas in the White House, there was never any doubt who was\nWithout this constitutional check and balance, the original\npatriae suits and permitted single instead of triple damages\nthe court-instead of proving the exact amount of each in-\ncaptain of the ship,\" he said. \"Now, every time another ship\nbill might now be law and making day care services more\nfor \"good faith\" violations in parens suits.\ndividual claim.\nruns aground-CIA, FBI, Panama, unemployment, deficits,\ncostly to the taxpayer and increasing the federal intrusion\nThe dispute between those members and Committee\nStates could notify citizens of a parens suit by general\ninto family life.\nChairman Peter W. Rodino Jr. (D N.J.), who supports the\npublication, but courts could require other forms of notice.\nA few days earlier, in a speech in Kansas City, Mo.,\nSenate compromise bill, may be aired in the House Rules\nStates could not pay outside attorneys conducting\nCandidates' Travel Schedules\nDole had answered Carter's criticism of the vetoes with\nCommittee before the issue goes to the floor.\nparens suits a contingency fee based on a percentage of the\nsome comparative arithmetic. He said that Ford had\n\"I have serious doubts that the Senate proposal can\nexpected damage award or on any other basis, unless the\nFollowing are the tentative schedules of the\naveraged 26.5 vetoes annually during his two years in office,\nclear the House floor and the President's desk in its present\ncourt approves the amount as reasonable. Courts could\nRepublican and Democratic presidential candidates for\nwhereas the average for Truman had been 35 a year and for\nform,\" Tom Railsback (R III.) said Sept. 2. \"They are play-\naward reasonable attorney's fees to a prevailing defendant if\nthe week starting Monday, Sept. 13, as made available\nRoosevelt, 52 a year. As Georgia governor between 1971 and\ning a dangerous game in asking us to accept what we have\nthe state suit was brought in bad faith.\nby their campaign offices Sept. 9:\n1975, Dole said, Carter had averaged 38 vetoes a year, with\nalready rejected,\" warned Robert McClory (III.), a senior\nRecovered damages must be distributed according to\nFord\n53 his last year in office.\ncommittee Republican.\ncourt order or treated as general state revenue.\nSept. 15-Ann Arbor, Mich.\nFord made a second appearance Sept. 7 in the White\nSenate sponsors insisted that they gave up more than\nThe U.S. Attorney General would be required to notify\nCarter\nHouse press briefing room, read a statement denouncing the\ndid their House counterparts. \"I hope we can meet across a\nstate attorneys general of federal antitrust cases that could\nSept. 13-Birmingham, Ala.; Norman, Okla.; Phoenix.\nNorth Vietnamese government for being \"callous and cruel\"\nconference table in the next Congress to discuss even\ninspire state parens suits, and to provide state attorneys\nSept. 14-Billings, Mont.; Bismarck, N.D.; Sioux Falls,\nand demanding a \"full accounting\" of some 800 American\nstronger antitrust laws, and tighter amendments to the one\ngeneral with relevant materials upon request.\nS.D.\nservicemen still listed as missing in action in Southeast\nwe will vote on today,\" Edward M. Kennedy (D Mass.) said\nA state could pass a law invalidating the authority to\nSept. 15-Minneapolis; Crystal Lake, Minn.; Dearborn,\nAsia.\nSept. 8.\nMich.\nbring parens suits. Suits could not apply to violations com-\nHe appeared again on the south lawn of the White\nAlthough talk of a Ford veto persisted, backers of the\nmitted before enactment.\nI\nSept. 16-Indianapolis; Baltimore; Washington, D.C.\nHouse on Sept. 8 at another quickly summoned press con-\nantitrust bill pointed out that his running mate, Robert\nference.\n-By Prudence Crewdson\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC.\nPAGE 2464-Sept. 11, 1976\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC\nReproduction prohibited whole or in part except by editorial clients\nReproduction prohibited whole or part except by editorial clients.\nSept. 11, 1976-PAGE 2465\nPolitics 2\nOn Sept. 4, Ford had decided neither to discipline nor\nto dismiss FBI Director Clarence M. Kelley for accepting\nNonvoters on the Rise\ngifts and favors fromithe agency he heads. On Sept. 7, Carter\nsaid he thought Kelley should be dismissed; but he declined\nFor the first time since 1924, a majority of eligible\nto say whether he would dismiss him if he were elected\nvoters may stay away from the polls in this year's\nPresident.\npresidential election, a comprehensive survey of non-\nAt the Sept. 8 press conference, Ford attacked Carter\nvoting Americans has concluded.\nfor \"flip-flopping\" on the issue and for showing \"lack of\nContrary to a common belief, however, the prin-\ncompassion.\" Kelley's wife was dying of cancer at the time\ncipal reasons for the low turnout will not be procedural\nKelley accepted the gifts and favors.\nimpediments such as registration laws or getting to the\npolls. The principal reasons will be disenchantment\nwith candidates and alienation from the political\nThe Abortion Problem\nsystem.\nAfter his campaign kickoff in the South, Carter headed\nThe survey, released Sept. 5, was conducted by\ninto the ethnic enclaves of the North in an effort to build\nPeter D. Hart Research Associates Inc. of Washington,\nsupport among Catholic blue-collar workers. But he con-\nD.C., for a nonpartisan project, the Committee for the\ntinued to encounter hostility because of his refusal to en-\nStudy of the American Electorate. The committee is\ndorse a constitutional amendment banning abortion.\nfinanced by businesses, unions and foundations.\nBecause the abortion issue was not on the agenda of a\nHart's pollsters had 90-minute interviews with 1,-\nSept. 7 meeting at a Catholic church in North Philadelphia,\n486 nonvoters nationwide between July 16 and July 31.\nthe meeting was moved to a Lutheran church. And that\nNonvoters were defined as voting-age persons who had\nnight, Carter was jostled by a shouting crowd of anti-\nvoted in two or fewer previous federal elections; who\nabortionists outside a hotel in Scranton.\nhad not registered this year; or who said their chances\nNot until Sept. 8, when he visited \"Polish Hill\" in\nof voting Nov. 2 were less than 50-50.\nPittsburgh, did Carter receive a genuinely cordial welcome\nUsing a similar definition for political dropouts-\nfrom a predominantly Catholic crowd.\npeople who had voted occasionally since 1968 but do\nFord, in an apparent shift in his position, said at his\nnot intend to vote this year-Hart estimated that some\nSept. 8 press conference that he supports the abortion\n10 million voting-age Americans had dropped out of the\nplank in the Republican platform. The plank endorses a\nelectoral system in the past eight years. \"These are\nconstitutional amendment. Previously, Ford had stated his\npeople who participated in the electorate in 1972 or\npersonal opposition to abortion-as had Carter-but had\nprior to that time and who since then have become dis-\nnot supported a constitutional amendment.\nillusioned with politicans and dispirited with the direc-\nTwo reported Senate campaign contributions from Gulf\ntion of the country,\" he said.\nOil Corp., one in 1970 and the other in 1973, distracted\nThe proportion of young nonvoters is far larger\nattention from Dole's vice presidential campaigning.\nthan the proportion of young people in the population\nThroughout the week, press reports appeared about a\nas a whole, Hart found. Forty-six per cent of the non-\n$2,000 contribution to Dole from Gulf in 1970, for distribu-\nvoters are under age 35, compared with about 33 per\ntion to other Republican Senate candidates that year, and\ncent of the total eligible population.\nabout a $5,000 Gulf contribution to Dole in 1973 for his 1974\nAbout 55 per cent of the eligible voters voted in\nSenate re-election campaign. Dole denied knowledge of the\n1972, continuing a decline that began after 1960, when\ncontributions.\nthe figure was 64 per cent. But much of the drop in 1972\nBut he acknowledged being questioned by a federal\nwas due to the extension of the franchise to 18-21-year-\ngrand jury March 8 about Gulf's contributions to Senate\nolds. Had the 18-year-old vote not become law, a Hart\nMinority Leader Hugh Scott (R Pa.).\nspokesman estimated, the 1972 turnout would have\nClaude C. Wild Jr., the former Gulf lobbyist who had\nbeen about 58 per cent.\ndistributed the money, changed his story Sept. 8 and\nPersons interviewed for the survey were given lists\napologized to Dole for saying earlier that he had given him\nof 21 reasons for not voting and were asked to rank the\nthe $2,000. He did not mention his allegation that he had\nimportance of the reasons.\ngiven Dole's former administrative assistant $5,000 for the\nSixty-eight per cent said they believed that \"can-\n1974 campaign. The former aide said he had no recollection\ndidates say one thing and then do another.\"\nof receiving the money.\nFifty-five per cent said they thought \"it doesn't\nFord said Sept. 8 that he was satisfied that Dole had\nmake any difference who is elected, because things\nreceived no questionable or illegal campaign money as a\nnever seem to work out right.\"\nsenator. And the Republicans hoped the matter would end\nFifty-two per cent rated as important their belief\nthere, without further damaging reverberations.\nthat \"Watergate proved that elected officials are only\nout for themselves.\"\nCarter's Taxes\nWhich politicians, living or dead, do the nonvoters\nThe Democrats, too, had their personal money\nadmire most? The dead won by a landslide. John F.\ntroubles. Carter disclosed Sept. 3 that he had paid federal\nKennedy was the choice of 50 per cent; Franklin D.\ntaxes of 12.8 per cent, or $17,484, of his 1975 income of $136,-\nRoosevelt, 20 per cent; Dwight D. Eisenhower, 10 per\n138 and that he had received a $41,702 tax credit for install-\ncent; and Harry S Truman, 10 per cent.\ning a new peanut sheller.\nAnd this year's nominees? Both President Ford\nThe disclosure brought a biting attack from Dole, who\nand Jimmy Carter were the first choice of only 1 per\nquestioned Carter's dedication to tax reform. Carter said\ncent.\nthe tax break \"illustrates vividly the need for tax reform.\"I\n-By Mercer Cross\nPAGE 2466-Sept. 11, 1976\nCOPYRIGHT 1976 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC\nReproduction prohibited in whole or in part except by editorial clients"
}