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.