100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

April 11, 1978 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
Michigan Daily, 1978-04-11

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

Page 4-Tuesday, April 11, 1978-The Michigan Daily

Eighty-Eight Years of Editorial Freedom
420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, MI 48109
Vol. LXXXVIHI, No. 152
News Phone: 764-0552
Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan
Deciphering the bomb rhetoric

The bearers of the tax burden

N EVER IN RECENT months has
one decision by the American
President created such an awesome
trail of confusion the world over and left
so many questions unanswered.
President Carter's noncommittal
approach to the neutron bomb issue, of-
fered as a sort of compromise to the
weapon's supporters and opponents
alike, will not by itself make debate on
the bomb any less intense. If fact, if
weekend reactions by the Soviet Union
are any indication, the issue may have
the same adverse effects on the stalled
Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty
(SALT) talks as did the Carter Ad-.
ministration's human rights campaign
over a year ago.
But Carter's decision to only delay
production of the neutron bomb instead
of banning the weapon altogether does
not have any of the high moral value at-
tached tothe human rights issue. Car-
ter's choice, in this case, was one of
strategic values over moral values. In
a moment of optimism in this space last
week, we said we hoped President Car-
ter would surmount all the pressure
which would inevitably be directed at
him to save the neutron warhead as a
means of defense. The President has
instead succumbed.
Leadership and moral questions
side, the latest rhetoric on the neutron
bomb issue has only deepened a
mystery.
In Washington, Carter's delaying
"compromise" does not really satisfy
anyone. Defense hawks in Congress and
the Pentagon fear even a short delay on
the bomb's production will malign the
overall defense blueprint. Some even
fear the delay will make it easier for
Carter to scrap the bomb later on. Sup-
porters of the neutron warhead want to
see a decision to produce the bomb now.
Ypponents, meanwhile, see Carter's
delay as a means of creating time to
garner more public and legislative sup-
port for the neutron bomb. They predict
the President will come backwith a
decision to produce the weapon,
If Capitol Hill is confused, American
allies overseas have even more reason
for confusion. In Western Europe,
where the ultra-high radiation bomb
would be deployed, leaders were led to
believe only last month that the U.S.
would begin building neutron warheads
for use by North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO) members, par-
ticularly West Germany. At the same
time, a NATO plan said, efforts would
be made to include the neutron bomb as
part of arms control talks with the
U.S.S.R. If the Soviets would not agree
Kelley the con

to the bomb's .inclusion in SALT, the
neutron warhead would be distributed
throughout West Europe. But the NATO
plan never got beyond preliminary
talks. President Carter intervened,
saying that he would not agree to such a
plan unless stronger support for the
neutron bomb was shown by the
European nations. The countries ap-
parently did not show the commitment
to the weapon Carter was seeking, and
the result has been the latest choice to
delay production of the warhead.
Needless to say, the President's
decision leaves nation's like West Ger-
many without any prospects for the new
weapon, where only a month before
they were practically assured .of its
production.
The most profound confusion
belongs - hands down - to Soviet
leaders. The latest U.S. policy change is
only'one in a long line of contradictory
statements which have been made sin-
ce the Carter Administration took of-
fice. SALT talks are in frustrating lim-
bo, and Soviet leader Leonid
Brezhnev's recent assessment that the
stalling is, in part, due to U.S. in-
decision and inconsistency may be an
accurate one. Brezhnev chastised Car-
ter and others for disregarding many of
the agreements already reached by
President Ford on SALT talks, and in-
stead trying to impose new pressure on
the Soviets.
The neutron warhead is a good
example of such pressure. In announ-
cing the delay on neutron bomb produc-
tion Carter asserted that a final
decision would be influenced by how
much the U.S.S.R. conceded in up-
coming arms limitation talks.,In effect,
the President is threatening the Soviets
with production of the weapon, should
they not give sufficient ground in SALT
talks: The threat is obviously a tactical
one. But such maneuvers could very
well backfire when Secretary of State
Cyrus Vance goes to Moscow for arms
negotiations on April 20. They did last
year.
It is an ironic postscript beyond all
the confusion that Brezhnev, at the
start of a major arms speech last
Friday, reiterated his aim to pave the
way toward eventual world disar-
mament. Carter, too, keeps on plugging
away at his "total elimination of
nuclear weapons" motif whenever he
appears in public.
The two men seem to agree totally in
terms of pure rhetoric. Now, if they
could only translate their agreement in-
to something of substance, it could
change the world.
sumer advocate

WASHINGTON - That un-
pleasant April rite, paying in-
come taxes, is accompanied this
election year, by a new catch-
phrase on Capitol Hill.
"The tax burden" seems to be
the latest topic for magazine and
newspaper analyses and political
debate - that is, the question of
which class of taxpayers is
shouldering the heaviest load of
those ugly taxes.
Depending on which set of
claims is put forward and which
class one belongs to, the answer
seems perfectly obvious - you
are paying more than your share
while the other guy is getting all
the breaks.
The genesis of the current
debate came in the 1976 presiden-
tial campaign when Jimmy Car-
ter said he would tax most
heavily those with higher than
the median income, apparently
without realizing he was talking
about everyone earning more
than about $14,000 a year. The
Republicans jumped all over him
for that, recognizing that people
earning $14,000 a year don't feel
wealthy, even though logic dic-
tates half their fellow Americans
were worse off.
Since his election, Carter has
backed new Social Security and
oil taxes and called for income
tax reform so that most of those
earning less than $30,000 a year
would pay less.

The reason middle

By Ira R. Allen
The Republican position, cent of income earners pay only
backed by statistics from the IRS four-tenths of 1 percent of the
itself, is that the lower and mid- total.
dle income groups have had their Carter's "tax reform" with its
share of taxation increased in aim of closing loopholes and en-
recent years, while the extremely ding certain deductions, Roberts

class people

pay
the

so great a share of taxes, goes
liberal analysis, is simply

because there are so many more of
them.

pay a higher percentage of in-
come.
The reason middle class people
pay so great a share of taxes,
goes the liberal analysis, is sim-
ply because there are so many
more of them.
The real villain, according to
critics of both the current system
and Carter's tax proposals, is in-
flation. As people earn more
money, they get pushed into
higher tax brackets, although
their higher incomes don't give
them any more wealth because
prices are rising at the same
time. Everything thus stays the
same except the taxes.
In some cases in this debate,
opponents are tossing statistical
apples and oranges at each other.
But inhany event, it does seem
clear the system is working as in-
tended - taxing those with
higher incomes at higher rates.
At the same time, inflation-
caused "bracket creep" is
leaving people worse off than
they were at lower incomes and
feeling abused by the tax system.
And the real problem for
politicians as they face reelection
is convincing people struggling to
raise a family on $15,000 or
$20,000 that - statistically, at
least - they are rich.
Ira R. Allen is correspon-
dent for United Press Inter-
.national.

rich and extremely poor get off
lighter.
According to Republican
congressional staffer Paul Craig
Roberts writing in the March
issue of Harper's, IRShstatistics
for 1975 show the top half in in-
come - those at about $9,000 a
year or more - pay alsmost 93
percent of the income taxes. The
top 10 percent, those with ad-
justed gross income of $23,420 or
more pay half.
Conversely, those earning over
$59,338 pay 18.7 percent of all in-
come taxes and the lowest 25 per-

says, hits the middle income
group harder than the rich and is
another indication of "runaway
greed in Washington.'
But a recent report based on
figures from the Treasury Depar-
tment and the Brookings In-
stitution, a liberal think tank,
shows that the middle income
family earning between $10,000
and $12,000 a year pays the lowest.
percentage of income - about 30
percent - for all taxes com-
bined: federal, state, local, in-
come, property and sales. All the
other groups, richer or poorer,

I1$D up ul US, t-QSOU
{ sTT
j "

M! I
x' 5 f O

GE'O$

I
.

OF weAt-% IM APD
S~iR\Y .Cosmic

_r & aFf' I.EAG Q. U1El
iu E nl6"

z

LETTERS TO THE DAILY

Anti-abortion article "manipulative'

N A PURELY
omy, competitio
open marketplace. C
commodity pricesl
high, because the p
has viable alternativ
producers who supply
priced products.
But in the state of
many other state
proaching a free m
for the purchaser of
by utility companies
Detroit and needs ele
cannot shop around
price. Detroit Edison
So the statenmust
consumer in an effort
deal -or at least a d
the one the utilities
the customer.
We are encourage
Attorney General,
recognizes it as his
prices increases byi
of the customer. Ove
weeks, Kelley has z
have overturned, v
creases by compar
state.
. On April 3, for exan

capitalistic econ- ecomony has been depressed for many
n is the key to an years, where the unemployment rate
noeis ioee runs high and where many senior
,ompetition keeps citizens live on fixed incomes.
low and quality Kelley has also moved to block a $15.2
urchaser always million electric rate hike granted Con-
es to buying from sumer's Power Company last month by
y inferior or over- may
the PSC. Kelley contends that the in-
f Michigan, as in crease is without legal basis and that,
s, nothing ap- rightfully, the rates should be cut, not
arketplace exists increased.
services provided The utility's most recent financial
s. If one lives in statement shows that it has over $150
ctrical power one million in unused cash.
forthchapoersonKelley also points out that the in-
for the cheapest terim hike was authorized contrary to
intervene for the the recommendation of both the PSC's
t toprocurea fair technical staff and a certified public
a torre fair accounting firm, which presented a
eal more fair than report at the request of the Attorney
would force upon General.
d that the state's Then, yesterday, Kelley filed with
drak th the PSC to oppose Consumer's Power' s
role to question request for a $76.2 million gas rate in-
utilities on behalf crease.
er the last several Hopefully, the Attorney General will
ealously sought to remain vigilant in his intervention on
various price in- the side of the state's pow consumers.
lies all over the It is good to see an official as important
as Kelley watching out for our in-
nple, the Attorney terests where the Michigan PSC seems

To The Daily:
We were truly appalled by
Greg Lynne's article "A deadly'
insurance policy" which ap-
peared on the editorial page of
the Daily on March 31. Mr. Lyn-
ne's comparison of abortion to
Hitler's genocidal mania is an
emotional play. We fail to seerthe
correlation and condemn Mr.
Lynne for the use of manipulative'
rhetoric.
In his article, Mr. Lynne is at-
tacking more than the student
health insurance plan; he is at-
tacking a womai is right to an
abortion. Mr. Lynne cites a quote
from 1919 to support his claim
that life begins at conception.
Yet, anyone who reads more
recent literature would realize
that the debate is not whether the
cells are living, but when those
living cells become a human
being. Mr. Lynne makes it sound
as though the argument has been
resolved; this is untrue. There
has been no definitive answer to
the question of when a fetus
becomes a human being. It is
dishonest to proceed as if there
were. Some major religious
organizations would have us
believe that life begins at concep-
tion. However, other religious
organizations and some mem-
bers of the medical and
philosophical professions do not
concur.
Anti-abortion groups accuse
people who believe abortions
must be available with a
'disregard for human life. In
doing this, they illustrate their
near sightedness - their moral
myopia. Right to lifers should
examine the facts and consider
whose life they ignore in their self
righteousness and accusations.
We revere life and agree with
Mr. Lynne that, "All human
beings require the proper
nutriments and the proper en-
vironment to grow and develop at
all stages of life." However,
unlike Mr. Lynne, we view all

and motherhood. The issue is not
one of irresponsibility. Con-
traceptive failures happen
regularly, even for the most
faithful of contraception users.
There is no such thing as the per-
fect contraceptive. The pill and
the IUD, the "safest" contracep-
tives in terms of preventing
pregnancy, have been shown to
cause serious side effects. Con-
sequently, many women are
resorting to physically safer but
statistically less effective
methods.
Anti-abortionists would deny
women their equitable role in
society. If women are truly to
achieve equal opportunity with
men, they must be able to control
if, when, and under what circum-
stances they bear children.
Legislation and policies which
prevent access to abortion result
in mandatory motherhood.
In closing, we would like to
chastise the Daily editorial staff.
We were extremely disappointed
since we thought you had better
judgment and would not publish
sensationalist rhetoric and
tasteless and inflammatory car-
toons.
Access to abortion is the bot-
tom line for women's rights.
Without the freedom to control
reproduction, all the rest is lip
service.
s .Deidre Feeney
Deborah Filler
Joan Gibson
Ann Arbor
funding clarification
To The Daily:
Vice President for Student Ser-
vices Henry Johnson has asked
me to clarify several points about
the funding proposal which will
be appearing on the student elec-
tion ballot, April 10, 11 and 12.
First, the MSA is presently sub-
ject to a negative checkoff
system in the collection of
student fees; the mandatory
64 -I - 1- I -11-4-. 411

I would also like to emphasize
that the ballot question calls for
one single $2.92 per student per
term required student gover-
nment fee. Of this amount, $1.74
would go to Campus Legal Aid
and the joint legal aid-MSA
Housing Law Reform Project,
15c would continue and improve
the Course Evaluation Project,
6c would go to the Tenants Union
legal service, and 97c would go to
fund all other proper MSA
programs and activities. The
ballot question will call on
students to evaluate all of the
programs as a package.
-Jon R. Lauer
President, MSA
MSA coverage
To The Daily:
I commend the Daily editors
and reporter Mark Parrent for
the extensive coverage of this
terms MSA elections. The stories
were informative and presented
a thorough explanation of the
issues and candidates running in
this MSA election.
In the past, those of us who
were active in campus politics
have blamed the Daily, in part,
for the low turnout of student
voters. Uninformed of the issues
or even the existence of a campus
election, most U of M students
never bothered to go to the polls
for campus elections. This year,
the students and their gover-
nment have no such excuse.
The strength of a student
government lies only in its sup-
port as a representative of the
student body. I urge all U of M,
students to go to the polls and
vote in the MSA elections today
and tomorrow.
-Debra Goodman
Student Government
President '75-'76
hash bash incident
To The Daily:

had just finished my third pic-
ture, a big Ann Arbor officer
came up to me. Pushing his chest
into mine, he kept walking,
saying, "If you take one more
picture, I'll stick that camera and
lens up your ass. Or better yet
take your film, camera, and len-
ses. Shocked and in a state of
disbelief, I backed off and stam-
mered, "Yes Sir," three or four
times. The crowd started yelling,
"Let him take his pictures." The
officer said, "You better turn
around and go home, and don't let
me see you here again." I turned
and ran. I could have stayed and
been arrested for disobeying a
police order, or inciting a riot, but
I didn't; I ran.
I understand that the officer is
human, he saw his friend being
beat up, but his actions were un-
called for. The police department
is supposed to work with thg
community, not against it. This
incident with me was un-
necessary.
I sincerely hope this officer will
think the next time before he lets
his temper override his better
judgment. On the whole, the
police did a fine job, except for
this one unfortunate incident.
This is not intended to be an anti-
police letter, but to point out that
this type of outburst is not helpful
to police-student relations.
NAME WITHHELD
UPON REQUEST
poor taste
To The Daily:
The Daily has once again
shown poor taste and true insen-
sitivity in its coverage of the
death Jeanine Boukai: The
"chainsaw mixer at the arb
featuring Ricky Wayne Wilson
and the Coed Killers" was a
totally repulsive and abhorrent
thought.
Needless to say, we at Steven's
House are outraged!

Back to Top

© 2020 Regents of the University of Michigan