I ' ni - 'n 01,
^ in 01,
P.ni;
welo
n ' in Hu^
>W.
11 ^ Ul
!l) nsW
The Battalion
Vol. 73 No. 133
10 Pages
Monday, March 6, 1980
College Station, Texas
USPS 045 360
Phone 845-2611
pentagon budget may tax U. S. families
Local families will pay $14,000 each over next 5 years in Carter's plan
United Press International
-hinColJ WASHINGTON — A non-profit con-
buditojwig firm figures President Carter’s
promsals to expand military spending over
jj | Shenext five years will compound the prob-
‘ s fMj of the cities and cost most families
lands of dollars in a so-called “Penta-
,)ur’
an-: nontax.
The " tax” will cost the state of Texas
than $58 million over the next five
. (See list at end of story)
Carter’s defense budget will push milit-
IrySpending to a total $1,016 trillion from
1981 to 1986, according to “The Tax
Cost of the Military Budget for the Next
^ Years,” a study prepared by Employ-
ient Research Associates, a nonprofit con
sultant firm based in Lansing, Mich.
The study said the defense budget would
cost an average family in Laredo, Texas,
$9,000 over the five years. The cost to a
family in Bridgeport, Conn., would be
$29,000. And in Chicago, the cost would be
$24,000.
“These figures tell us starkly and simply
that for the next five years the business of
America is no longer business,” said James
Anderson, who prepared the study. “The
business of America is getting ready for
war, or possibly getting into war.”
“For the metropolitan areas of the Un
ited States, the five-year military budget
has bad news, Anderson said. “Many of
the 260 metropolitan areas of the U. S. have
either existing or developing financial
problems or outright crises.”
Using information from the Census
Bureau and the Tax Foundation, Anderson
and the consulting firm figured what they
call the “Pentagon tax” for each of the 50
states and 266 Standard Metropolitan Sta
tistical Areas.
The family figures were arrived at by
determining an area’s share of total federal
taxes, calculating the Pentagon’s share of
the total budget, and dividing by the num
ber of “families’ using four as a base figure,
a spokeswoman said. The variation reflects
a difference in wealth, not a difference in
tax rates.
“For example,” Anderson said, “during
fiscal 1981, California taxpayers will be
asked to provide more than $18 billion for
the Pentagon. By 1985, California’s annual
military tax burden will be almost $28 bil
lion” and the five-year total for the state
“will be almost $114 billion.”
He said in 1981 the New York city area
will send the Pentagon $9 billion and its
five-year total will be “an almost incredible
$55.5 billion,” with each family making an
average $23,000 contribution to the Penta
gon over five years.
Anderson said Chicago, “whose central
city is presently struggling to find enough
money to pay vitally needed firemen and
school teachers, ” will deliver $6.7 billion to
the Pentagon in fiscal 1981 and $42 billion
over the five-year period with each family
contributing an average of $24,000.
Here is a list of how much the Pentagon’s
budget will cost Texas cities and families
over the next five years. It was compiled by
Employment Research Assoicates of Lans
ing Mich.
Amounts for each city are listed in mil
lions of dollars. The figures for families are
listed in dollars:
TEXAS: $58,340. Abilene, $571.2 and
$17,000;Amarillo, $795.8 and $20,000; Au
stin, $1,812.2 and $18,000; Beaumont,
$1,707.6 and $19,000; Brownsville, $458.4
and $10,000; Bryan, $250.0 and $14,000;
Corpus Christi, $1,208.5 and $16,(XX); Dal
las, $13,931.8 and $22,000; El Paso,
shby blends
facts with humor
3 H0US1
1HWYIJ
By PETE HALE
Campus Reporter
Mixing humor with facts and truth
nth fiction, Houston Post columnist
JLynn Ashby delighted a Rudder Thea-
Ber crowd of about 300 Friday afternoon,
the first John Miles Rowlett Lecture
Series came to a close.
Ashby, known for his newspaper
Columns, spoke on the future of Texas,
Ind asked the question, "What hap
pens now?”
A graduate of the University of Texas,
[Ashby said, “It’s always fun to come to
Aggieland, the states’ second greatest
university,” drawing a laugh and a half
hearted hiss from the largely student
browd.
Getting down to business, Ashby de
scribed Texas as a big and bountiful state
pth a lot to offer everyone.
He noted the large influx of people,
largely from the north, as a major
problem.
Many people feel the Border Patrol
|is watching the wrong river, he said.
Citing population figures, industrial
output figures and economic trends,
Uhby summarized the role that Texas
plays in the national economic picture.
“We are the third most populous state
fn the nation, he stated, adding that
Texas will soon be number two. Ashby
said his home, Houston, increased by
|1442 people every week last year, and
39 cars every day.
“If Texas were an independent re
public again, our gross national product
vould rank ninth in the free world,
lahead of Australia and Brazil. ”
Adding some not-so-pretty facts,
Ashby noted that among the other
states, Texas is in the bottom half in per
capita income, and last in state dollars
appropriated for the arts.
Ashby said his main concern is that
the large amount of newcomers to the
state “will recreate the very things that
made them leave their own home.
So many people are moving to Texas
to get away from problems in Chicago
and New York, “that soon, the small
towns of Texas will be gone,” he said.
Considering these coming problems,
he asked, “Where do we go from here?
Ashby said one major change will be
the flight from the big cities to the less
populated areas. “We’ve got to put all
these people somewhere, he said,
adding that places like Waco, El Paso,
San Antonio and others are prime areas
for tremendous growth.
A key point of his speech, he urged
Texans to band together, to stand up
and not let the rest of the nation take
advantage of them.
He said to do this we need to close the
gap between the rich and poor in the
state. “We all need to share the
goodies,” he explained.
The lack of water in some areas, edu
cation expenses, the fight against in
creasing government control, and en
ergy costs will all have to be dealt with,
he explained.
But Texas has always stood strong,
and “we are in the right place at the
right time to implement excellence, ” he
concluded.
Houston Post columnist Lynn Ashby spoke to a
Rudder Theater crowd of about 300 Friday after
noon. He discussed the future of Texas, and asked
the question, “What happens now?”
Staff photo by Lynn Blanco
ord: Reagan Hopes crushed
$1,369.1 and $13,000; Galveston, $939.2
and $21,000; Houston, $13,948.1 and
$24,000; Killeen, $817.2 and $16,000;
Laredo, $190.1 and $9,000; Longview,
$571.2 and $18,000; Lubbock, $825.3 and
$17,000; McAllen, $506.2 and $9,000; Mid
land, $444.2 and $26,000; Odessa, $480.8
and $20,000; San Angelo, $343.5 and
$18,000; San Antonio, $3,982.3 and
$16,000; Sherman, $337.4 and $17,000;
Texarkana, $437.1 and $15,000; Tyler,
$517.4 and $19,000; Waco, $672.9 and
$17,000; Wichita Falls, $650.5 and
$20,000.
Soviets take
4 former U.S
installations
United Press International
LONDON — Soviet troops have occu
pied four former U.S. military bases in
South Vietnam and dispatched more than
3,000 officers and soldiers to operate them,
a London newspaper reported today.
The Daily Telegraph, in a story by its
defense correspondent, said the most im
portant base taken over by the Soviets was
Cam Ranh Bay, a giant air and naval instal
lation built during the 1960s by U.S.
troops.
Other bases taken over recently by the
Russians were Danang and two near Saigon
— Sien Hoa and Tan Son Nhut, the former
U.S. Air Force base.
“Between March and November last
year, 200 Russian freighters, 120 small
arms-carrying vessels amd more than 70 oil
tankers discharged their loads in Viet
namese ports,” The Daily Telegraph said.
“There can be little doubt that the long
term plan is not only to secure Russia’s
hold on South Vietnam, but to extend
Soviet influence in Southeast Asia when
Cambodia has been finally subdued.”
All totaled, the newspaper said, between
3,000 and 4,000 Soviet officers and troops
man the four bases.
The Soviet moves have drawn some cri
ticism in South Vietnam, the newspaper
said.
“The Russians are now being compared
with the ‘American imperialists,’ according
to refugees arriving in Hong Kong,” the
article said.
an beat Carter
»
United Press International
WCHO MIRAGE, Calif. — Former
bsident Gerald Ford says Ronald Reagan
post surely will be the 1980 Republican
hdidate and, in time, polls will show the
Uifornian can defeat President Carter in
j November.
>rtatllBnan interview with UPI, Ford also said
and his former GOP rival should meet
n. Arrangements for the Republican
suinmit meeting are under way, he said.
M^PI'Ronald Reagan is certainly a heavy,
heavy favorite to win the Republican nomi-
nation. I think the odds are he’ll be the
f r nominee,” Ford said, adding the April 22
Pennsylvania primary will be crucial in the
process.
jWhen he was Considering entering the
GOP race last month, Ford said in a New
T York Times interview he doubted Reagan
i could defeat Carter.
“There have been major changes” since
</ thfcn, the former president said this past
week, seated at a desk laden with letters
and telegrams urging him to reconsider his
March 15 decision against seeking the GOP
nomination.
. £ "Economic conditions in the country
^ have worsened in the past month more
k than I thought they would. That, plus such
matters as the American hostages in Teher-
^ an, are making President Carter more vul-
nerable,” Ford said.
y “And I think the polls will show that
^ agan can beat Carter. ”
Ford said it would be “productive” if he
and Reagan were to “sit down and discuss
rtain things — productive and construc-
je.”
[Of arrangements for a Ford-Reagan
peting, he said, “We’ve had telephone
Jls that indicate Reagan would like to
leet. There have been preliminary meet-
js between the two staffs.
(“The sooner we have a strong, united
Onsensus the better it would be,” said
Ford, whose narrow loss to Carter in
November 1976 was blamed partly on a
lack of unity between his and Reagan’s
forces.
This was the most favorable view given
yet by Ford toward Reagan’s 1980 nomina
tion drive.
But the former president also said he has
long pledged not to endorse anyone for the
nomination before the Republican National
Convention in July — and he is sticking by
his word.
Would Ford accept the nomination if
drafted at the convention?
“It’s such a remote speculation. It is not a
realistic thing to be contemplating, ” he re
plied.
“Of course,’ Ford said, pausing to light
his pipe, “I’ve never ducked a responsi
bility.”
He stressed he does not regret his deci
sion last month against seeking the nomina
tion. He gestured toward some of the mes
sages asking him to reconsider, saying: “I
just hope they understand.”
Is he at peace with himself over the deci
sion?
“Yes, I have not regretted having made
it. As a matter of fact, the more I’ve thought
about it, the more I am certain it was the
right decision.”
Ford stood and looked through a glass
wall of his office, surveying the arid moun
tains in the distance, the golf green lawns in
the foreground and the three-story palm
trees in the middle distance.
His red sweater hung somewhat loose, as
if designed for a stouter fellow.
In a year he has lost 10 pounds and now
weighs 190 — “the least any time since I
played football” for the University of
Michigan decades ago.
Ford said his weight loss is due mostly to
giving up alcohol 10 months ago, including
the pre-dinner Martini that had been a
longtime habit.
Ford sat down, his mind back on politics.
He predicted Carter will defeat Sen. Ed
ward Kennedy for the Democratic nomina
tion.
“But the president has got to wrap it up
quickly,” he added.
Iran hostages will remain with militants
United Press International
Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini said today
the 50 American hostages should remain in
the hands of their militant captors until
Iran’s new parliament convenes, crushing
hopes the government would assume cus
tody of the captives, French radio networks
said.
The statement followed reports that, un
less favorable developments emerged soon
in Iran, President Carter might impose
sanctions against Iran much tougher than
the measures taken earlier in the crisis,
now in its 156th day.
There was no immediate reaction from
the White House on the reports of
Khomeini’s remarks.
The U.S. sanctions, which were delayed
last week when the ruling Revolutionary
Council appeared ready to assume custody
of the hostages, may be imposed as early as
today, a White House official said.
Radio Europe network asserted
Khomeini’s decision means a delay of about
two months in resolving the 5-month-old
crisis because the Iranian parliament is not
expected to convene until then.
The official Pars news agency said the
Revolutionary Council met Sunday night
and made a decision on the possible trans
fer of the hostages from militants occupying
the besieged U.S. Embassy in Tehran, but
it offered no details of what decision was
reached.
The key element, as it has been since the
50 Americans were seized Nov. 4, is
Khomeini.
Tehran Radio, in a broadcast monitored
by the BBC, said Iranian President
Abolhassan Bani-Sadr, Foreign Minister
Sadegh Ghotbzadeh, and other members
of the council met with Khomeini today,
apparently to be told of the council’s trans
fer proposal and to act as final arbitrator of
the plan.
Plane crash
kills four
United Press International
TOM BALL — Four people died in
the crash of a private plane that missed
on its second attempt to land at the
David Wayne Hooks Memorial Airport.
Names of the victims of the Sunday
evening crash were not available, the
Harris County Sheriffs Department
said early today.
Officials said the plane apparently
missed its first approach and then
crashed five miles north of the airport on
its second approach. There had been
reports the weather was bad, but au
thorities were unsure if that was a factor
in the accident.
Federal Aviation Administration and
National Transportation Safety Board
officials planned to investigate the crash
today.
Officials said the Cessna 172 was
traveling from College Station to Tom-
ball, which is about 30 miles north of
Houston.
Secret messages to Iran
just a confusion of words
United Press International
From the day the U.S. Embassy in
Tehran was seized, it has been difficult to
work out who among Iran’s revolutionary
leaders speaks with authority and what un
spoken implications any pronouncement
may hold for the 50 American hostages.
As the crisis dragged into its 154th day
Saturday, a new layer of confusion has been
added, this time involving Washington.
The latest flurry of secret messages be
tween the two capitals — and the denials
and “clarifications” accompanying them —
has made it difficult to know even what is
being said and who is saying it.
Confusion began creeping into White
House news briefings and Tehran speeches
when Iran asserted that President Carter
sent Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini an apo
logetic message expressing “understand
ing” for the militants who seized the
Embassy last Nov. 4.
The president’s spokesman, Jody
Powell, denied this in language that at the
time sounded categorical. “I can say that
the President sent no such message to
Khomeini or anyone else, ” Powell told re
porters.
When it was revealed there had indeed
been a secret exchange of messages, Powell
said that by “no such message” he meant
there had been no apology.
And there were more messages, Powell
admitted, messages that adminstration offi-
Analysis
cials stressed said nothing that had not
been said already in public, even though
their texts were deemed sensitive enough
to be kept secret.
Then last Wednesday, Iranian President
Abolhassan Bani-Sadr said Carter, in one
such message, had accepted Iran’s demand
to refrain from “provocation or propagan
da” in exchange for delivering the hostages
from the militants to the government’s con
trol.
Again, Powell rejected suggestions that
the United States was bowing to Iranian
demands. But responding to requests for
clarification, he added that the administra
tion intended “to continue to be restrained
in our words and actions so long as real
progress is made in resolving this crisis.”
“A game of words” is how one Washing
ton official described the confusion.
What the administration is saying may
not always be what Iran is hearing and for
the moment Carter does not want to deny
interpretations that could help Bani-Sadr
and bis moderate supporters gain custody
of the hostages, the official said.
At the same time. Carter does not want
to leave any domestic impression that he is
caving in to Iranian demands, which could
hurt him politically in the primaries.
Another reason for the diplomatic doub
lespeak appears to be rooted in caution.
Whether they are held captive by the mili
tants or by Iran’s Revolutionary Council,
the Americans are still prisoners.
And doublespeak or not, the only person
in Iran who speaks with real authority is
Khomeini. And the only time he has
spoken on the issue has been to support the
militants and to denounce the United
States.