Editorial opinio Many 'voters think that the presidential candidates are so much like Tweedledum and Tweedledee that they have no obligation or incentive to vote. The fact is that Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter are vastly different in outlook and in policy. Ford is a believer in passive government; Carter preaches for activism. Ford, like all conservative Republicans, has a balanced budget mentality which went out of vogue back in Hoover's day. Car ter wants the federal government to intercede on behalf of Americans in order to enrich their lives, education, health and peace of mind. Ford plans to continue on his do-nothing path of inflation and unemployment while blindly main taining that 8 million unemployed are relatively unimportant and that current welfare standards are opulent. Carter knows that the economy is worsening not only for Parties push money for The differences between the Republicans and the Democrats are so invisible that Carter and Ford might as well be running mates. And I'm voting Socialist Workers Party until they change their tune. Talk is cheap. So instead of nit-picking our candidates' promises or cosmetics, let's examine how their parties have spent our money over the years. ' Meaningful facts can only be•found in the federal budget not in rosy campaign commercials, not in our cozy miscon ceptions, and certainly not In our tedious and dim news media. WELFARE FOR THE RICH Under the Democrats and Republicans, 30 per cent of our federal budget (some $36 billion a year) is devoted to paying interest on tax-free bonds. Often called welfare for the rich, this figure does not include transfer funds like Social Security. . This huge expenditure, which is about three times what poor welfare recipients receive from federal, state and local governments, could be easily justified if these bonds were owned by the average working family. But it isn't the average family which Can afford the thousand-dollar investment required to - buy bonds. In fact, more than 95 per cent of this $36 billion is "earned" every year by less than two per cent of the population. The Democrats and Republicans consistently veto or severely dilute any project (like mass transit or health care, for instance) Who will you vote '';'!•l7. .r' • , • •.••• • • • • Jim Ryan [Pine Grove Mills resident] • "I'm voting for Carter.' The strongest reason is because if something happened to him I'd rather see Mondale than Dole as president. Carter has more of a direct direction to lead thr country although Fort did a good Job in his two years, but It's Important to change." Out of 36 people randomly chosen to respond to the question, 12 could not answer because they 'were not registered to vote, 9 were for Ford, 7 were for Carter, Dave Cranmer [State College resident] "Probably Ford. From what I've seen, he's done a respectable job in the last two' years. Carter is relatively unknown and I think he's liable to be a turkey." 5 were for McCarthy, 2 supported the socialists'-candidate Camejo, and 1 was ,undecided. By JOHN CHILD Collegian Staff Writer THE WAR MACHINE Nelson Wood [assistant professor of English] "I'm voting for Carter hoping there will be some change. With a democratic congress and a democratic president he can't pass the buck." In the winners' circle... the poor,, the unemployed and the undereducated but for all seg ments of America. He will take positive action to ease the nation's pain. Supporters of Ford cry that their candidate is trustworthy and can restore faith in government. Two years after inheriting the of-. fice, however, Ford has instilled only boredom, not confidence. Republicans say that, for the first presidential election since 1960, the nation is at peace, somehow implying that Ford is responsible for this. Ford, however, is no foreign policy genius. He brought us perilously close to military intervention in Angola, created an international blunder in the re-taking of the Mayaguez from Cambodians, has generated ill will in Panama and proved his clumsiness in eliminating foreign policy balance and Arthur Schlesinger from his HAPPY DAy5 ARE I•15R that is designed to benefit a large segment of society, dubbing the proposals too costly or unrealistic.- Yet the Republicans and Democrats, even in the hardest of times, will manage to scrape together $lOO billion every year to encourage or sponsor the building of guided missiles, atomic bombs and chemical death most of which we export for profit. In fact, a full 60 per cent of our federal budget is devoted to an asinine, multi-billion dollar war machine that will never enhance our community's well-being or brighten our lives in the least. In order to fully understand the complexity and sophistication of this incredible waste of our national resources, we need to examine its history. At the end of World War II we possessed both the ability to produce nuclear weapons and a genuine fear of international Communism or Soviet expansion. So by the mid - 50's we had established hundreds of military bases and airfields all over the world to garage, service, and deploy our nuclear arsenal. In addition to the constant improvement of our more con ventional weapons, we also developed a complex series of new and exciting weapons like the nerve gases, herbicides, and napalms. But It was the invention and mass production of the missile that signaled the dawn of a new era in military spending. At long last we were able to send our nerve gases, nuclear and biological weapons sailing towards our many enemies without having our boys leave home. Robin Furman [llth marketing] "Ford. I thought Carter came off radical in the debates. I didn't think what he was saying could be ac complished In Washington." administration. Only through a series of fortuitous accidents has candidate Ford dodged in ternational war. Ford wants to . expand the military in preparation for the day his luck runs out; Carter plans to pare the defense budget, forsake the B-1 bomber and turn his at tention and his action to domestic affairs. Carter is the man for the presidency. He has the potential to lead America out of the quagmire in which Ford seems content to wallow. We need a president who will spark Americans into solving our problems, who will construct new avenues for- economic and social improvement. Carter is the man. Unfortunately, the race be tween John Heinz and Bill Green for the U.S. Senate is only the dif ference between Tweedledee and Tweedledum. Both candidates are BuY r • f 1 p//, Yvonne LeFever [7th history] "Ford because I don't care for Carter. I think Ford. might be better in foreign policy and I don't think Carter is - ex perienced enough." young, liberal heirs of regional power machines. But Republican Heinz is tainted with the misuse of big money not only his own pickle fortune but the oil money slipped him by Gulf. This questionable money alone makes us wary of Heinz; when coupled with his out-of-pocket campaign expenditures to the tune of $2 million it does indeed look as if Heinz is buying the Senate seat. Green has responded to this spending by making money and in dependence the only issues in this campaign. Heinz and Green are forward looking men with equally valid claims to our votes. Both have ' good records in Congress and either would make a good senator. But Heinz, because of shadowy money which has marred his can didacy, is not the best choice. On general principle we endorse Bill Green for U.S. Senate. Letters to the Editor Veto or alpine TO THE EDITOR: On election day be sure to think before you vote. Consider the fact that the Democratic Party has con trolled Congress since early in Eisenhower's administration. Remember that the economic recovery of the United States is well ahead of that of the rest of the world. Recall that more women (due to women's liberation), and more young people (due to the post-war "baby boom") are looking for em ployment. . When the Democrats last controlled the White House they did not face the situation of having to supply this vast number of jobs. When the Democrats last had control of the executive branch we had over 500,000 men involuntarily employed in Vietnam, plus many more who were in the army via the draft. Fortunately we no longer have a war or the draft, and men and women who would otherwise be employed in the military, and perhaps killed in a war, must look elsewhere for a job. When the Democrats last held the White House we had no checks and balances between the President and the Congress. Lyndon Johnson abused power with the virtual consent of the House and Senate. Nixon was caught due to our system of checks. Twenty-two years of Democratic Congressional control is enough! You realize that Ford pardoned Nixon, but iou should also consider that the Democratic Congress has virtually pardoned Wayne Hays. They have refused to investigate Ford Motor Company's ,$0 tax payment since that particular com pany's, president supports Carter. They provided themselves a hefty raise last year. rich and war machinesrt First we built the short-ranged ballistiC missiles, and the long-ranged intercontinental. ballistic missiles (ICBM); then the anti-ballistic missiles (ABM) allowed us to shoot missiles at the missiles; and finally we developed the multiple-warhead missile (MIRV) or seven guided missiles in one. We were then able to put all of these missiles into our planes, battleships, submarines, tanks, etc. What's next? Inter-planetary missile systems? Despite the fact that this is an incredible waste of our national resources, time and money, the Democrats and Republicans will never attempt to change it because the American War Machine adds up to big money and big profits for big business. After all, what's good for business is good for America. Every time we vote for the Republicans and Democrats we are not only condoning lavish welfare payments to the rich but supporting the military madness that is used by every non- Communist dictatoi•shlp to tyrannize and suppress people all over the world: Greece, Korea, Argentina, Chile, etc. But the real effect that these two spending absurdities have on the average American can best be seen during a recession. During recessions the Republicans and Democrats will never hesitate to cut our social services (like educational loans, ' school - and hospital subsidies, while the $lOO billion subsidy to the defense budget is never touched. During recessions the Democrats and Republicans will always ask average working families (who need all the money they can earn) to spend less, eat less and generally do without. Never has that two per cent of our population which receives for? " . . , N , i ti i.. i. , : 11 7+ z ... , 1 ~. • , 410111147 rl: I ' ' Ai.. iiiii ~~~,~~ t~:'~,, Ralph Waechter [State College resident] "I'm voting for McCarthy for a little bit of protest, a little cause I like him." Principle also enters heavily in our decision to endorse State Senator Joe Ammerman over the incumbent U.S. Congressman Albert Johnson. Johnson, who by all indications lives in the past cen tury, has been blacklisted by the Dirty Dozen for his reprehensible voting record on environmental issues. This environmental record is matched only by his votes against social legislation, for strict mon etary control and against most student interests. He avoids students as if they were infested with the plague. He deserves their scorn—not their vote. It is difficult to imagine a John son opponent who could be neo lithic enough to force a Johnson endorsement. Luckily, Ammerman is a fairly progressive man who is responsive to students. He would be a much better and much more reasonable representative of this district than Johnson has proved Why? Mlckby VanSummern [7th -agriculture] "We're campaigning for Peter Camejo and Willie Mae Reid, the Socialist Workers Party Candidates because this is the only party that offers a real alternative In '76 and we're , a party against sexism, racism, and an oppressive economic system." We won't be able to change Congressional control this: election, but we must certainly prevent another period of government imbalance. Carter states that he wants to bring' back the good old days of L8J..1 say let him have his nostaiNc: dreams of 1988. I prefer the more peaceful year 1976. Forci j or: Carter it's the veto versus the potential for abuse. 1 Kurt Kocher: graduate-history: dtatzCollegiari SHEILA McCAULEY Editor BOARD OF EDITORS: EDITORIAL EDITOR, Brenda Turner; EDITORIAL ASSISTANT, ' Deanna Finley; NEWS EDITOR, Pamela Reasner; ASSISTANT NEWS EDITOR, Phil Storey;: STATE-NATIONAL EDITOR, Leah Rozen; CONTRIBUTING, EDITOR, Jerry Schwartz; COPY EDITORS, Mike Joseph, Jim' Lockhart, Charlene Sampedro; OFFICE MANAGER, Laura Shemick; FEATURES EDITOR, Janie Musala; SPORTS' EDITOR, Brian Miller; ASSISTANT SPORTS EDITORS, Torrl McNichol, Barb Parmer; PHOTO EDITOR, Julie Cipolla;, ASSISTANT, PHOTO EDITORS, Eric Felack, Barry Wyshinskl;; GRAPHICS EDITOR, Lynne Maimed. ' 1 $36 billion a year in welfare been asked to spend less or eat less or do without. The simple reason that Ford, Carter and even McCarthy ask us to be satisfied with mere subsistence and personal sacrifice, during these recessions is so they can continue to pay thiri super-rich their outrageous profits. ' During recessions the Republicans and Democrats actually have us convinced that we don't deserve our meager social services; that we are a soft and lazy people; that these cut backs will, in the end, make us better people. Incredible. In fact, none of the things this country needs will ever become a reality as long as the Republicans and Democrats anj, in control of the public purse. There is no money in social services. There is no profit in a good bus system, or in a car that runs on steam and chicken dung, or in products that stay together. There is no profit in community health centers, teachers of the handicapped, clean rivers or fresh air, low cost housing, day care centers, mass transit or tax reform. i The reason our confused, apathetic, bitter and angry natio n' is today wallowing.in a pool of cynical helplessness is because our leaders have us convinced that to hope for a.change is naive or inappropriate, and that to work for a change is futile. The past two decades of inconsequential liberal reform is perfect evidence. The Republicans' and Democrats' rationale for economic recovery is dull and intolerable. So on Nov. 2 I'm pulling the lever for the party which makes sense, Socialist Workers Party and voting for what I want instead of a lesser of-two evils. Interviews by Dorothy Hinchcliff Photos by Amy Maxwell:. Bill Tis [State College resident] "Jimmy Carter. His stands on abortion, the defense spending, and unemployment are probably, the three most important things I agree with." himself to be The race for the local state con gressional seat may. be the most , important for students who wish : to direct an increase in state sup- , port of education, a lowered drink 4 .! ing age, decriminalization ,of mar- ~ ijuana, landlord-tenant reform and the extension of civil rights to ho mosexuals. Two very good peo- , ple are running for this seat. Each candidate is open to students andt, i , willing to help in many ways. Hel- " '• en Wise, University Board of Trus tees member, gets our vote. Asa member of the state house, Wise would be in an excellent po sition to act as an intermediary be : tween the legislature and thu' board, the administration and the students. She is a good, liberal candidate attuned to student needs and willing to be aggressive in their interests. Wise - is the best choice for the state house of re- ,. presentatives. ..,,,, NADINE KINSEY Business Manager 1, :•••: -1-:;4-.‘,!
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers