Page 4-Thursday, June 4, 1981-The Michigan Daily
Lefever denies
reported slur
against ,blacks
4
In Brief
Compiled from Associated Press and
United Press International reports
WASHINGTON (AP) - Despite fresh
White House backing, Ernest Lefever,
President Reagan's embattled choice
as human rights adviser, confronted
new questions yesterday after he was
portrayed by two of his brothers as
believing that blacks are intellectually
inferior to whites.
Lefever "categorically" denied ever
saying that "blacks were genetically
inferior," according to a statement
released by the State Department.
BUT IN AN interview with The
Associated Press, John Lefever, 55,
said brother Ernest made such a
statement in family conversations
about seven years ago.
"I was somewhat dismayed to learn
that he (Ernest) held an opinion which
he says is statistically well-founded
that blacks are inferior, intellectually
speaking," John Lefever said.
Asked about John's statement,
another brother, Donald, indicated that
Ernest Lefever had in the past ex-
pressed support for the theories of
William Shockley, a Nobel Prize-
winning physicist who argues that
blacks are genetically less intelligent
than whites.
ON TUESDAY, Reagan reaffirmed
his support for Lefever's nomination to
be assistant secretary of state for
human rights, saying, "I haven't
retreated one inch from wanting
him.".
Republican leaders concede that
Lefever is likely to be rejected by the
committee and that he faces a tough
fight on the Senate floor to win confir-
mation.
Lefever
... denies racism
YESTERDAY, Sen. Alan Cranston
(D-Calif.), a committee member, said
"Mr. Lefever's slur against blacks as
reported by his brothers adds still
another doubt to a growing mountain of
doubts as to his fitness to be assistant
secretary of state for human rights."
Rep. William H. Gray III (D-Pa.),
vice chairman of the congressional
Black Caucus, said the latest disclosure
"simply confirms that we're dealing
with a person who is basically racist."
Lefever's "appointment would be an
insult to the overwhelming majority of
nations in the world that are nations of
color," Gray said.
Congress may change law;
'living in sin' less profitable
WASHINGTON-Congress is moving toward changing a law that, from a
tax viewpoint, makes it move profitable for millions of people to be divorced,
single or "living in sin" than to be married.
Under the law, marriage can cost $391 for a couple making $20,000 a year.
If the couple jointly earns $60,000, the "marriage penalty" amounts to as
much as $3,654.
A clergyman in Maryland is advising his parishioners against marriage
because tying the knot could impoverish them.
"There was no way that I, as a pastor, could advise them to become man
and wife under the present tax structure."
With two-job marriages becoming increasingly more common, pressure is
intensifying to eliminate or at least ease the marriage penalty.
It was created 12 years ago when Congress revised the tax laws. The
lawmakers' purpose then was to reduce a sizable penalty imposed on single
taxpayers, but the correction created a new problem: The tax on the com-
bined income of a husband and wife with comparable salaries is con-
siderably higher than it would be if the earners were single and reported
their incomes seaparately.
3 resign from Pro-Life PAC
in opposition to 'hit list'
WASHINGTON-A senator and two congressmen resigned in protest
yesterday from an advisory board of the National Pro-Life Political Action
Committee after it targeted nine members of Congress for defeat in 1982.
Sen. Jake Garn (R-Utah) and Reps. Henry Hyde (R-Ill.) and Robert
Young (D-Mo.) said they did not like the tactic of issuing what are commonly
called "hit lists."
"If we can knock off some highly visible officeholders, it sends a signal to
the mushy middle, as I call them," Peter Gemma, executive director of the
National Pro-Life Political Action Committee headquartered in Falls Chur-
ch, Va., said at a news conference.
Members of Congress are increasingly sensitive about "hit lists" issued by
special-interest groups. Since all congressmen are susceptible to being listed
by one group or another, at one time or another, the tactic is often decried as
unsavory.
Among those targeted for defeat by the anti-abortion group was Sen.
George Mitchell (D-Maine), even though the group said he had opposed
using federal money for abortions in four of five Senate votes.
Parrot smuggler apprehended
LONDON-British customs officers, became suspicious when a man
arriving from Venezuela walked through the green "nothing to declare"
channel at Heathrow airport with his overcoat pockets bulging and a muffled
squawking sound coming from inside.
The man, a Greek national, was found to be carrying six parrots, each
about two weeks old and three inches long, authorities said Tuesday. They
said the man told customs officials he had put the birds in his pockets to keep
them warm.
Featherless and close to death, the parrots were placed into quarantine at
the airport, where they will stay for a month before being sent on to Athens.
White supremacist off ballot;
petitions ruled invalid
DETROIT-White supremacist Gerald Carlson, seeking to run for
Congress from Pennsylvania and for the Michigan House from Wayne
Township, was ruled off the state ballot yesterday as a result of invalid
petition signatures.
The Board of State Canvassers, acting on the advice of aides to Secretary
of State Richard Austin, ruled Carlson had filed only 111 valid signatures for
the special state House election-five short of the minimum required.
'Wherry' claims first victim
in National Spelling Bee
WASHINGTON-Twenty-two youngsters were eliminated in the first two
rounds of the National Spelling Bee today, but 98 were letter-perfect in the
morning session.
"Wherry," a type of barge, claimed the first victim, Angelique Hessoun of
Akron, Ohio. The 37th young person to face the judges, she spelled it
"whery."
For at least three of the contestants, English is their second language.
Dominador Gobaleza, 14, of Anchorage, Alaska, learned English after
arriving from the Philippines with his parents five years ago.
German is spoken in the home of Claudia Mueller, 10, one of the youngest
contestants. A West German native, she started learning English at age 3
rand now liv'enithfrerparents ifitaPorte Ind.
Proposed tax cut
rejected by Reagan
WASHINGTON (AP)-Democrats on
the House Ways and Means Committee
agreed yesterday on the outlines of a
two-year tax cut, but President Reagan
rejected it as "not good enough."
Deputy White House press secretary
Larry Speakes said "there has been
rapid movement" toward the position
of the president, whose aides are
prepared to try to put together a con-
servative coalition on behalf of a three-
year, 25-percent tax cut bill.
Speakes said the Democrats'
proposed bill fell "far short" of the
president's favored three-year, 30 per-
cent cut.
BUT REAGAN reacted even before
Rep. Dan Rostenkowski (D-Ill.),
chairman of the tax-writing committee,
announced the Democratic majority's
proposal.
"That's not good enough," Speakes
quoted the president as saying.
Rostenkowski said the panel will
begin formally writing the bill next
Wednesday. It would provide $41 billion
in tax relief during the budget year that
begins Oct. 1, compared with $54 billion
under President Reagan'splan, . -. ,
Earlier in the day, House Democrats
agreed in caucus to support whatever
Rostenkowski and his panel could
produce. The big question is whether
Reagan will go along, since the com-
mittee proposal contains neither the
three-year term nor the 30-percent cut
in tax rates that the president wants.
REAGAN WANTS the same 30-
percent rate cut for all income levels,
contending that upper-income
Americans will invest more of their tax
reduction in ways that will help the
economy. Democrats say a propor-
tionately larger share should go to
families with incomes between $20,000
and $50,000.
The outlines, parts of which may not
be in the final bill, include:
* A cut in tax rates of about 5 percent
starting Oct. 1, and another cut of about
10 percent on July 1, 1982. Reagan wan-
ted a 10-percent cut each year for three
years.
y Raising the standard deduction. The
current $2,300 deduction for single per-
sons would go to $2,500; the $3,400
deduction for couples would be raised to.
$3,800.
* Increasing the earned-income
eredit, which encouragesypoor, working-
families to stay off welfare.