Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (June 6, 1979)
Viewpoint The Battalion j# Texas A&M University Wednesday • June 6 ? 1979 HUD denies urban flight over By DAVID E. ANDERSON United Press International WASHINGTON — A growing number of commentators say U.S. cities are recov ering from the decade of turmoil, aban donment, white flight and decline that gave the nation the phrase “urban crisis.” The government department responsi ble for the cities says this diagnosis is far too optimistic; that the flight from the cen tral cities continues. Those who detect new life in the old cities point to movement by young, white professional “urban pioneers,” the re building and renovation of older residen tial neighborhoods and the revitalization of some downtown commercial areas. These observations, leading some to conclude that the urban crisis is over, has so shaken the Housing and Urban De velopment department that HUD’s Urban Policy Staff has produced a 44-page rebut tal to one of the most influential “myth of the urban crisis” articles. The article, “The Urban Crisis Leaves Town,” by T.D. Allman appeared in the December 1978 Harper’s magazine and has been widely cited by columnists and urban affairs writers. HUD said the article “presents a mis leading, often inaccurate and inconsistent portrait” of the nation’s cities. Accurate generalizations about the state of the cities are not easy to come by be cause their status involves a number of elements including jobs, housing condi tion and supply, population movement and fiscal trends. Much of the current optimism about the state of the cities, reflected in the views of Allman and other commentators, stems from the behef that cities are once again attracting affluent whites from the suburbs while upwardly mobile blacks are increas ingly moving to the suburbs. Proponents of what is being called “gen- tification” point to renovation and re vitalization of Washington’s Capitol Hill neighborhood, some areas of New York, Boston, Philadelphia and New Orleans, as examples of the “urban pioneer” move ment. HUD concedes that this is happening in a few cities. In a separate report on displacement — the involuntary removal of low and moderate income minorities — HUD noted that the so-called “inmovers” are “generaly upwardly-mobile young couples or single individuals without children whose income range from $10,000 to $30,000 a year.” But the report also indi cated that many had rented in the central city before buying homes. According to HUD, “overall population migration patterns continue to sap the economic and social vitality of cities.” Between 1975 and 1977, HUD says, one million more families moved from central cities to suburbs than moved into the cen tral cities from suburbs. In a separate study supporting the HUD view, John L. Goodman Jr., of the Urban Institute said while suburbanites moving back into the city have increased, “the in crease has occurred because of the grow ing number of suburbanites and not be cause any given suburbanite is more likely now than before to move to the city.” Goodman said it was a misconception that those moving to the city were white, childless professionals. “Most of the movers from the suburbs to the cities are neither childless nor profes sionals,” he said, and except for age and race (there are few black suburbanites) the back-to-the city movers “are quite similar to those already in the city.” “Contrary to popular opinion, suburbanite-to-city movers do not sub stantially raise the average socioeconomic status of city populations,” he said. HUD said that it has found that because of net outmigration and the lower average income of in-migrants, “central cities lost over $17 billion in family income from 1975-1977. Furthermore, the poverty rate in cities was higher in 1977 than in 1969. ” Some optimists looking at the cities also see a major shift in black moves to the suburbs, indicating for them that the bar riers of suburban racial segregation in More Americans investing abroad to hedge inflation By KAZUO MIKA MI United Press International NEW YORK — Foreign investment is in vogue among individual American in vestors as a hedge against domestic infla tion and Japan is emerging as a lucrative market. At the end of 1977 American holdings of foreign securities totaled $49.3 billion, compared with $27.4 billion at the end of 1973, according to U.S. Commerce De partment figures. More than half this investment is in Canada — $26.9 billion at the end of 1977. Although the figures have not yet been adjusted. Commerce estimates that Americans increased their holdings by $3.4 billion last year. Investment in Japanese securities by Americans totaled $1.2 billion at the end of 1978 and there are indications U.S. in vestment in Japan is increasing, partly be cause of the dollar’s depreciation against the yen and partly because of the low Japanese inflation rate. “I’m extremely bullish on the future of American investments in the Japanese stock and bond markets,” said Daniel Schrimph, president of the Convertible Fund of Japan, Ltd. The open-end mutual fund — an in vestment company that issues an unlim ited number of shares and redeems them on demand — invests in the convertible bonds (those exchangeable into common stock) of major Japanese industrial corpo rations. While Europeans have been quite act ive in the Japanese market in the last 15 years, Schrimph said, “this has not been quite the case in America.” “Yet today we do see a huge trend to wards American investments abroad. “American investors are recognizing that foreign investment is a way to hedge against inflation and that international di versification of their assets is a way of re ducing risks,” Schrimph said. The American investor has been hurt in the U.S. market, he said. He sees his as sets being eaten away by domestic infla tion. If he owns a small business, Schrimph said, he sees his margins eroded by in creased labor costs and decreased worker productivity. Statistics show, according to Schrimph, that over the last 10 years investment of U.S. dollars in Japanese securities has yielded about 17 percent annually. “About a year ago,” he said, “we de cided to form a group of very wealthy in vestors — mostly individuals — convinced that there was a need in the United States for a service to the individual that seems to be available only to big institutions, namely to have a vehicle whereby he could diversify his assets.” “So far, we have been very successful,” he said. The fund’s current portfolio is diver sified over some 25 companies in 10 indus tries — including construction, food, opti cal, and shipping and air transport. Japanese securities are governed in much the same way as those in the United States, Schrimph said. For example: —Information is as readily available as it is here. —The rules of exchange are more or less similar to the ones in this country and dis closure requirements also are similar to those in the United States. —There are few restrictions on Japanese companies. As yet, there is no OSHA or EPA and the mood of capitalism is overwhelming. “So long as Japanese inflation is lower than America’s and productivity is higher,” he forecast, “the yen will con tinue to appreciate” in value against the dollar. Therefore, growth is anticipated from current income, capital gains and currency appreciation, Schrimp said. Japans economy has lesson for U.S. By DONALD H. MAY United Press International WASHINGTON — More than two dec ades ago, the United States taught a de feated Japan how to make its post-war economy more productive. Now the pupil has done so well, the teacher is taking les sons from it. Congress’ Joint Economic Committee Tuesday began an inquiry into how Japan has has been able to make its productivity grow four times faster than that of the United States since the 1950s; France, Italy and Germany more than twice as fast as the United States. Productivity — in this case, output per hour of work in the private economy — is becoming less and less a subject discussed only among businessmen and more and more a public issue. Economists generally agree that it is only by increasing the rate of growth of productivity that the United States can, in the long run, solve its problem of inflation and achieve a higher real standard of living for its people. Productivity is involved in the health of the dollar and the extent to which U.S. jobs are lost to foreign competition. In 1950, according to committee chair man Sen. Lloyd Bentsen, D-Texas, it took seven Japanese workers to produce what one American produced. By 1977, it took less than two Japanese to match one American. In 1950, it took three German workers to equal the production of one American worker; now it takes 1.3 Germans. Japan’s productivity grew 8 percent in 1978; that of the United States only 0.3 percent. So Bentsen called to the witness table Joji Arai, manager of the U.S. office of the Japan Productivity Center, established with U. S. help in 1955, and asked him the secret. During the 1950s and 1960s, Arai said, Japan gave preferential tax treatment to its export industries in order to earn foreign exchange with which to buy technology and new equipment from abroad. Twenty-nine percent of Japan’s output between 1962 and 1972 was invested in plants and equipment, Arai said, com pared to 13 percent for the United States. Japanese companies spent $10 billion on research and development in 1977, about half the amount U.S. firms spent. But the Japanese economy is half the size of this country’s. And all Japan’s research was commercial, Arai said, while the U.S. re search figure includes space and defense. Japan, Arai said, has less of an adversary system of collective bargaining. It loses 1.5 million person-days per year to strikes compared 35 million for the U.S. in 1977. housing are being broken. Allman, looking at population shifts in congressional districts found that black suburban movers are “now a significant demographic pattern.” Others, however, question the op timism. “The flow of blacks to the suburbs is thus far a very limited one,” according to HUD. It said that between 1975 and 1977, ap proximately 170,000 black family heads of household were central city to suburban movers — 4 percent of the 4.4 million black families living in central cities and their suburbs in 1977. At the same time, whites moved out of the central city at a considerably higher rate so that while the number of blacks in the central city may have declined slightly, the percentage of central city res idents who were black increased from 22 percent in 1970 to 23 percent in 1977, HUD said. HUD officials are not without optimism with regard to the state of the cities. “Some American cities are doing bet ter,” according to HUD. But they still see the basic issues that gave rise to the urban crisis — poverty, unemployment, racial segregation, com mercial and business disinvestment in central cities — as all too pervasive. t The Lighter Side Nixon: a non-person in U.S.? By DICK WEST United Press International WASHINGTON — In the Soviet Union, discredited government leaders sometimes are relegated to “non-person” status and treated as though they never existed. We Americans like to tell our selves it couldn’t happen here. But what does one make of a recent sur vey conducted by Public Interest Opinion Research? The survey was based on a three-part question phrased as fol lows: “Some people say in recent years that the wives of presidents were as capable as their husbands and might have even made better presidents. Do you think this is true or not true in the case of Betty Ford? “How about Lady Bird Johnson? “And, how about Rosalynn Car ter?” To end the suspense im mediately, only 21 to 26 percent of those interviewed replied affirma tively. Ending the suspense, how ever, does not terminate curiosity about the survey. Do you get a feeling someone is missing from this particular group ing of first ladies? Wasn’t there another first lady of recent vintage who fitted in there some place? My memory is about as reliable as a Three Mile Island reactor valve, but it was my recollection there was a first lady between Mrs. Johnson and Mrs. Ford. Whipping out my trusty almanac, I quickly ascertained that Mrs. Johnson’s husband was the 36th president, and Mrs. Ford’s husband the 38th. That strongly indicated the wife of the 37th president had been excluded from the survey as cleanly as if her husband had never been in the White House. I now felt certain enough of the omission to call up the polling com pany and inquire about it. The official I talked with con firmed my suspicions. However, I was not able to elicit the cause of the omission. The firmest answer I got was “no real reason.” Which could mean anything from an oversight to a policy decision. Two thoughts arise from this in vestigation. One is that the survey can hardly be considered a model of scientific opinion sampling. For had the other first lady been included, the overall results might have been different. In that husband-wife capability comparison, the majority opinion might have been on the distaff side. My other thought is that here we have a good illustration of why dis credited leaders can’t be turned into . non-persons in America. For that sort of thing to work, all mention of the name would have to be suppres sed. In this country, when a former first lady whose husband fell from grace is ignored by one medium, other media call attention to it. Could anyone writing such a ex pose be so absent-minded as to forget the identification? Senate hesitates on some states’ rights GRADU4 dered ' p.m. vs APPREN' Deparl appren ters, e tronic 1 tomotr cal Pla f AMU SI By CHERYL ARVIDSON United Press International WASHINGTON — Seventy years ago, agitation for the election of U.S by the people instead of state legislatures reached a peak. But the Senate fc rH ()v | ' constitutional amendment providing direct election of its membership. ( ^ , i Advocates of a popularly elected Senate decided to try to bypass the ‘ ™ a method of amending the Constitution. They petitioned Congress for a tion under the constitutional provision that says “on the application of the leas of two-thirds of the several states, Congress shall call a convention for pi amendments.” At the point when only one more state was needed to activate the provi direct election amendment was approved by the traditional process: two-thiri] of approval in the House and Senate followed by majority vote ratification b\ fourths of the legislatures. Even though the convention method of amendment has been available Constitution was written (by a constitutional convention), all 26 amendmi proved since then have started in Congress. Ratification by three-fourths of the legislatures also would be a requireraejIlE^j*^,^,* amendments proprosed by a constitutional convention. But beyond that, thereife agreement among legal scholars about the ground rules of the convention amendment. There is debate on virtually every point — from which state petitions!) counted toward the required 34 to the system of voting to be used by a com About 400 petitions for a constitutional convention on various topics hi approved by legislatures over the years Congress came closest to having to face the issue in recent times in themiji when 33 states sought to overturn the Supreme Court’s “One-Man, One-Votfj sion on legislative reapportionment. The 33rd request for a convention was approved in 1967. Would Congress still be bound to call a convention if a 34th state asked for it now? Some scl petitions on a single topic are valid forever; others say a reasonable timelimit apply - Other “close calls” have included an effort to repeal the 16th Amendment ing income taxes launched by 28 states between 1939 and 1955; and a conveol to prevent polygamy passed by 27 states between 1907 and 1915. Now, the drives for amendments requiring a balanced federal budget and A) ing abortion have constitutional scholars and legal experts squirming. So far, 28 states have asked for a convention on the general topic of a budget, 14 on abortion. The budget proposals vary widely in detail. Some states include the wordiii| amendment they want considered; others just ask for a convention on a budget. One petition forwarded to the Senate asks for a convention to growth of federal spending. “The question that would have to be faced at some point is, are all thoa counted in the same pot?” said Kevin Faley, chief counsel for the Senate Cons^ Subcommittee, which is collecting state petitions. "L Other questions of procedure — how delegates would be chosen, wtej MIDNIG1 amendment should be passed by a simple majority or a two-thirds vote of thee* Grove, tion, whether each state will get only one vote as was the case in 1787 or 0EADLII voting should be weighted according to population — are also up in the air j. But the biggest controversy is over limiting a convention to a single topic. 1* and conservatives alike fear there is no way, even by law, to guard against a“roB convention.’’ B—__ “It would put the Constitition back on the drawing board where everyB" crackpot or special interest group would have a chance to write the supremeB the land, said Howard Jarvis, the author of California’s Proposition 13 that be) so-called “taxpayers’ revolt.” GROVE McDo\ egistf ing nes ree ur the fir: held in EMOR1 game f< dent, t bridge is $1.5( tion cal NATION/ 7:30 p. Grove \ I will be The Senate has passed bills twice that would spell out procedures for a com tional convention, including limiting the convention to a single topic. The How* never acted. g-j rV-jq Legislation has been introduced in both the House and Senate again this yet3 it is unlikely that it will be considered unless the magic number of 34 is reacl? “We’ve been closer before, quite closer before,” Faley said. “Each state| * tougher and tougher as you get closer. On a controversial issue like this and dm) ^ ^ Jj you may get a lot of states real fast, but it becomes tougher to get those eitB states you need, so you can’t automatically make the assumption thatitisML happen.” 1 nJUSTIN - B a Tax Relief Chinese army read and confident: PekiiE approvei A spokesir B said Cle >ill. which \ Icmse-Senat ithou kend. Binder the -Bers will ; BY W. WINFIELD MILLER rom schoo United Press Internationa) fegleowners HONG KONG — China’s month-long border war against Vietnam - Brian additi battlefield test since the Korean War — has left Peking confident and readycHexemptio again. Western military analysts say. B^ e m eas Despite Peking’s admission that 20,000 of its troops were killed or wounded*, ranch the February fighting, China is ready to launch another “punitive’ in axed on its j Vietnam if that appears necessary to halt Hanoi’s “expansionist moves in IncOarket value the analysts say. Having tested its rusty war machine, “The Chinese really believe they call the Vietnamese army and the Soviets (Vietnam’s strongest ally),” says onef diplomat. The Chinese have warned that hostilities will erupt again if the Vietnamese] abandon their policy of regional hegemony and anti-Chinese policy.” But China also is aware that the Soviet Union, which played only a mind supporting the Vietnamese in this winter’s fighting, may not stand on thes the war breaks out again. This and a buildup of Soviet pressure on China’s northern border, lu| increased concern by Chinese leaders over their outmoded military ha Western military experts say China’s military equipment is 10 to 20 y« date and they believe it will take Peking at least 10 years to modernize itsi “What they have is not that modem, but it is adequate,” says one military^ “The artillery they used in the border war is basically the same used in Kort is damned effective.” China’s awareness of its outmoded equipment is shown by its frequents trips abroad for hardware — mostly to France, Britain and the United Sta China needs new anti-aircraft missiles, tanks and jet fighters. Its aging* MiG-19 and the Chinese-designed F-9 fighters were considered too valual vulnerable to risk their being shot down during the border war, the analystl The Chinese military has been impressed by the French Mirage 2000 jet is j tor and the British Barrier jumpjet, the military experts say. They also ? interest in France’s “Hot” and “Milan” anti-tank weapons. No contracts for military hardware have been signed with foreign nations the Western experts say could indicate less than full agreement among C leaders on how rapidly modernization of the Chinese army should proceed To launch its punitive attack against Vietnam, China relied on the age-old - wave” tactic — sending thousands of troops surging across the border intoVif ( five northern provinces at 26 points. “The Vietnamese were stunned by the overall scope of the thing,” says a" diplomat specializing in Chinese affairs. “If the Vietnamese were not humb’ were made at least a lot more wary of the prospect of future fighting.” China has admitted 20,000 of its troops were killed or wounded in thel and estimates of Vietnamese casualties run as high as 50,000. Western experts say China’s high casualty rate and the threat of Sovieti tion if a second round of fighting erupts could give China second though launching another invasion. The Battalion LETTERS POLICY Letters to the-editor should ncH exceed 300 words and are subject to being cut to that length or less if longer. The editorial staff reserves the right to edit such letters and does not guarantee to publish any letter. Each letter must be signed, show the address of the writer and list a telephone number for verification. Address correspondence to Letters to the Editor, The Battalion, Room 216, Reed McDonald Building, College {Station, Texas 77843. Represented nationally by National Educational Adver tising Services, Inc., New York City, Chicago and Los . Angeles. The Battalion is published Monday through Friday from , September through May except during exam and holiday periods and the summer, when it is published on Tuesday through Thursday. Mail subscriptions are $16.75 per semester; $33.25 per school year; $35.00 per full year. Advertising rates furnished on request. Address: The Battalion, Room 216, Reed Opinions expressed in The Battalion are those of the editor or of the writer of the article and are not necessarily those of the University administration or the Board of McDonald Building, College Station, Texas United Press International is entitled use for reproduction of all news dispatches Rights of reproduction of all other matter hei Second-Class postage paid at College Station, MEMBER Texas Press Association Southwest Journalism Congress Editor Karen News Editor Debbie Sports Editor Sei City Editor Campus Editor Keith Staff Writers Robin Regina Moehlman, Carolyn David Boggan Photo Editor Clay Photographer Lynn Regents. The Battalion is a non supporting enterprise operated by as a university and community Editorial policy is determined by ^