ustxtxb_obs_1984_04_20_50_00010-00000_000.pdf

10 APRIL 20, 1984 BEHIND THE TARPON INN PORT ARANSAS OPEN DAILY the_ legendary RAW DEAL Steaks, Chops, Chicken open lunch and evenings 605 Sabine, Austin No Reservations help keep the other candidates loyal to the traditions of our party the traditions of Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, and Franklin Roosevelt. At best, it will give us, for the first time in many years, a candidate who can rouse a crowd with a speech, an advantage in a campaign against an over-the-hill actor. In Texas, Jackson will make a good showing. We have put together a true Rainbow Coalition. We are well organized, with offices and organizations not only in the major cities, such as Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, Fort Worth, and Austin, but also in places like Uvalde. We have been putting on delegate training schools around the state, which thousands have attended. Few of the students have ever attended their precinct conventions before many have never even voted before. So we are bringing new people into the political process. If you agree with me that adhering to the traditional Democratic concern for the disadvantaged, and bringing the downtrodden into the system are worthwhile objectives, I urge you to help us by signing on for Jackson, contacting your local Jackson group, or contributing your money and your time to the Jackson campaign. Cl Talented and inspired artists have been publishing their work in the Observer for years some of them for many years and our files are getting dogeared from cartoonists and illustrators to send samples of their art to Alicia Daniel, 600 W. 7th, Austin, TX 78701. Austin AHUGE BUDGET DEFICIT caused by exorbitant military spending is a sign that America’s economy is still in crisis. Gary Hart and Walter Mondale have taken positions which have not satisfactorily addressed this central issue. They are still dangerously close to Ronald Reagan, and the Democratic Party will suffer if they are not pulled away. A vote now for Jesse Jackson moves the Party away from Reaganism and closer to those political values which ought to guide our resolution of the deficit problem. Consider our pathetic options. Reagan’s plan is to avoid the deficit issue until after his re-election and then to unveil a package of sharp cuts in domestic spending, coupled, most likely, with a national sales tax. The two Democratic frontrunners offer only the promise of piecemeal chipping away at domestic spending and scattered tax increases, all selected in accordance with the time-honored Congressional principle that every group with power and organized influence gets a piece of the pie; all others wait at the door. On the other hand, if the Democratic nominee runs explicitly on the deficit issue and brings forward a strong fiscal remedy, he will be elected and that plan will pass. The prominence of the issue, the seriousness of the crisis, and the principle of “the mandate” will guarantee it. A Democratic deficit reduction plan must meet several requirements. 1. It must begin with FY 1986 deficit reductions of at least $125 billion. Reductions of this size permit spending increases for infrastructure rehabilitation and the restoration of needed domestic programs, and still meet Fed Chairman Paul Volcker’s announced goal of a $100 billion down payment. Steve Bayer was the Texas coordinator of the 1984 McGovern campaign. 2.It must be simple, comprehensible, and credible to the electorate and to the press. Mondale’s poor showing in early debates testifies to the danger of complicated and obscure programs, overly dependent on arcane details, some of which \(his health cost containto wishful thinking. 3.It must define Democratic priorities and reflect a commitment to the welfare of the majority of our citizens. It is unfortunate that the two Democratic frontrunners have failed so far to present such a plan. Former Senator George McGovern did offer one in his short-lived campaign. It comprised two major features: enactment of the Bradley-Gephardt simple tax and a reduction in defense spending of 20-25%. The Bradley-Gephardt bill would recover revenues of $70 billion without raising taxes for the majority of Americans; for a large minority, it would raise taxes by amounts less than those now spent for tax preparers and accountants. The political appeal of tax reform and simplification is a potential asset the Democratic Party should not ignore, the possible wrath of the lobbying community notwithstanding. A 25 % reduction of defense spending would leave the defense budget at $207 billion, a 30% increase over the last Carter administration defense budget, but $70 billion lower than the Reagan proposal for FY 1985. The Reagan defense budget is founded on a National Security strategy which postulates unlimited threats to our security, requiring unlimited responses a National Security strategy that has aroused great concern among most Americans for the tuture of the planet. The present proposals of Hart and Mondale do not address those concerns. Both candidates decry the military build-up of the Reagan Administration, yet both advocate further increases in military spending. In numerous conversations with staff members of both campaigns, as well as with party officials in Texas, I have heard McGovernite for Jackson A Decisive Alternative By Steve Bayer