Behind the Scenes: Black United Front Nude Dancing 3 Mile Island The Last Salmon and much much more . . .
Edited by: Joel Weinstein, Joe Uris and Lenny Dee A d Safes by: David Milholland Cover A r t by: Isaac Shamud-Din Logo by: Delohnette CLINTON ST QUARTERLY Contributing Artists: Sharon Torvik, Isaac Shamud-Din, Steve Sandstrom, Henk Pander, Jerry Harley, Bill Dodge, DeJohnette, Barry Curtis, and David Barrios Cadillac-Fairview Fight is On An Oregon Journal poll has confirmed what the Clinton Si. Quarterly reported last issue: most Portlanders do not like, or want, the proposed Cadillac-Fairview Development which has been proposed for Downtown. Journal readers voted by a 198-60 margin that the proposal was bad for Portland. They voted 222-36 disapproval of using the city’s condemnation power to acquire land for the project. Portlanders opposed the “ sky- bridge” concept of linking together blocks within the project, by a 201-49 margin. Finally, by an overwhelming Vol. 1, No. 3 Fall 1979 222-31 vote, people objected to using city money to subsidize the development. Responses were highly emotional, as they usually are when you talk of destroying a large part of a people’s culture and history. "Tell Cadillac-Fairview Corp. Ltd. to tear down buildings in Canada.” “ Subsidies should be for low-income people and should be for the public good, not to help a multinational Clinton St. Quarterly is published free to the public by Clinton St. Center for the Arts, Inc., 2522 S.E. Clinton St. Portland, OR 97202. © 1979 Clinton St. Quarterly. corporation enlarge its fortune.” “Small business and not big business; local, not foreign.” However, the fight still rages, as the city council is not yet convinced that this project isn’t in the best interests of Portland. While the Cadillac- Fairview proposal has been on the back burner as the city council busied itself with selecting a new mayor, the project is expected to come up for a vote in council sometime in the next month. Now is the time to express your opposition to the idea. Remember, the Cad-Fair developers have been hard at work lobbying the council. If you are in opposition to this plan, call up all of the city council members and tell them so. Or, attend the anti-Cadillac meetings on Thursday nights at the First Congregational Church, 1126 SW Park (enter Madison St.) at 7:30 p.m. If you would like further information or wish to join SOLD (Save Our Liveable Downtown), call 284- 4810. Sunday at the Bagel Ladies Morning for a great take-home brunch. We have lox and cream cheese, too. Every Sunday 9-1. Cinnamon-raisin bagels (and all our other varieties) baked fresh Sunday ' i 'O N .E . FREMONT • PORTLAND • 2 8 2 -8 6 2 7 • OPEN TUES.-SUN. 5829 S. E. Milwaukie Portland 97202 232-9440 Open Tuesday-Saturday 11:30-10 Fine German Pastries PAPA HAVDA Espresso Drinks Beer and Wine Lunch 2
H A R D N E W S The Golden Fleece, or Why Taxes Are So High Call Girl Date Book Fingers VIP’s Headlines of both major Portland daily papers in June were filled with reports of alleged mishandling of vice investigations by the Portland Police Department. D.A. Hari Haas accused the police of improper conduct. Officers apparently had sexual relations with a key prosecution witness. The witness was loaned $200 by the head of the vice squad. The police responded to Haas' accusations by suggesting that the D.A. was covering for important clients of local whores. What was never made clear, however, are these facts: Two trick books were in the possession of the police and the D.A.'s office. According to informed sources the books contained the names of some of Portland and Oregon’s most important business and political leaders. Allegedly the “ trick” books detailed sexual preferences of at least one judge and a major elected figure in Portland City government. The “trick" books, according to our sources, were last in the hands of the D.A.’s office. No one will say where the books are now. But they are probably great bedtime reading for someone. Some Like It Hot A retired navy officer and his wife are believed to be the first Americans to simmer to death in an overheated hot tub. Deputy coroner Margo Martin ruled that the couple passed out and died of extreme overheating at the spa in their home in Simi Valley, a suburb of Los Angeles. For sheer futility, it’s hard to imagine a government agency compiling a sorrier record than that of the New York office of the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS). During the fiscal year ending in October 1978, 200 INS investigators in New York spent $23.6 million locating a total of 10,607 “ deportable aliens” —or roughly $2,225 for every man, woman and child that the INS, . in its own vernacular, deemed “ wet.” If this doesn’t sound like too high a Machine SNAFU Causes Needless Patient Death In early June, the Clinton Street Quarterly has learned, a patient died because of equipment failure in the operating room of a major westside hospital. The patient was undergoing a routine surgical knee repair. In the course of the operation, the victim was given too much oxygen. The respiratory center in the brain failed and the patient’s lungs, heart and circulatory system malfunctioned. Efforts at open chest massage failed. Like one in every 100,000 bounty, then consider one more fact: Of these more than 10,000 “ deport - ables,” maybe half are actually sert out of the country. The others manage to elude deportation somehow— by jumping bail, marrying an American, or tying up proceedings against them long enough to establish permanent residence, or citizenship. And even the total number of aliens apprehended is but a fraction of the estimated 750,000 to 1.5 million living in the New York metropolitan area. anaesthetized persons undergoing surgery, the patient failed to survive what was supposed to be a very safe procedure. The Clinton Street Quarterly also learned that the patient's family was not informed of the real cause of death. They were simply told that the patient had died while undergoing surgery. Thus the anaesthcsiologist, the surgeon, and the hospital were able to avoid a possible malpractice suit. Recycling Supporters Sought Portland Recycling, a long-time environmental activist organization in the Portland community, has announced that they will be conducting a membership drive and public awareness campaign during the months of July and August. The purpose of the membership drive will be to raise money to pay off some long-standing debts, and to purchase trucks and other equipment to make Portland Recycling a self-sufficient organization. Portland Recycling, a non-profit company, began offering recycling services to Portlanders in 1970, and since 1974 they have recycled more than 30,000 tons of paper, glass, aluminum and other recyclable materials, making them one of the largest recyclers in the nation. Today, Portland Recycling has six full-time, 24-hour-a-day recycling drop-off centers, which offer community recycling and education programs to more than 20 residential areas from Tigard to the Coast, The organization is trying to move as quickly as possible to complete self- sufficiency and a position of being able to pay their employees and continue their operations and education program, through the sale of recyclable materials to re-use markets, and by generating public support for their organization through the sale of public memberships. At press time the exact details of the membership drive were not available, although it is reported that it will involve a large outdoor concert later this summer, co-sponsored by KGON- FM radio, with all proceeds from the concert going to Portland Recycling. Members of Portland Recycling will receive admission to this concert, a monthly newsletter, and a window decal. Memberships are expected to cost between $5 and $10. For more details on how to join Portland Recycling, cal) 228-5375. The Only Full Service Restaurant in the John’s Landing Area 6:30 a.m. - 8 p.m. Everyday Live Music Thurs.-Sun. Nights Beer and Wine 6439 S.W. Macadam 246-5108 DeNICOLA RESTA URANT Mrs. DeNicola and her family invite you to the DeNicola's Restaurant. The DeNicola's prepare each entree with fine ingredients. . from recipes they brought with them from Italy. They serve tne kind of Italian food you've been looking for. TAKE OUT 234-2600 BANQUET FACILITIES 3520 SE Powell 4:00-11:00 Tue-Thur 4:00-12:00 Fri-Sat 4:00-11:00 Sun. 3
Why Neil Can’t Win By M.G. Horowitz A balmy Sunday evening during Rose Festival was hardly any time to talk polities. But it was the first Sunday of the month and it was once again Neil Goldschmidt’s turn to appear on KGW TV's “Open Line". Hardly ten minutes had elapsed when host Paul Linnman popped the question. "Are you ready now, Mr. Mayor, to tell us whether you will run for the U.S. Senate?" The Mayor smiled. He allowed that he had traveled around the state to lest the waters for a candidacy. Before he could declare, however, he needed to decide whether “ this is really what I want" and whether Washington was "really where my family and I want to live." But the Clinton Street Quarterly had another question for the Mayor: is this an election you can really win. Your Honor? No one doubts that Neil Goldschmidt can excite urban voters in Portland and Eugene: he’s shown that ability in two previous elections and in past appearances in both cities. But how would he fare outside the urban nexus — in semi-urban yet telling comities like Jackson. Marion, Deschutes. and Umatilla? Io ask the question is to also ask its twin: how is Bob Packwood doing in those counties? Has the two-term Senator endeared himself to the voters in those regions? "As long as he doesn’t make any obvious blunders — and he's avoided that — any awareness of his lack of a record would have to be created," Bend columnist Jackman Wilson told Ihe Quarterly. “He's been a Senator for two terms, he hasn’t been indicted! — it may be easy for people to think that he’s doing all right. They may not be aware of his stand on issues but they haven't heard of him in any kind of unpleasant context so they have fairly neutral feelings towards him, which is really not too bad the way things are." “ In Central Oregon, then,” we inquire, “no news is good news?" “Yeah. A) Ullman keeps getting elected time after time and he hasn’t really done all that much for the district. About ah he's delivered is a Visitor Center six miles south of here." "What about Goldschmidt’s image in this region?" Wilson pauses. “ If people have any awareness of Goldschmidt at all, he’s perceived as a liberal Portland politician and people would question his understanding of problems in this part of the state.” I glance at a recent editorial about Goldschmidt in the Bend Bulletin. Its title: "His Interest” . The report is much the same from southern Oregon, where Medford reporter David Force appraised a possible Packwood-Goldschmidt match. “ Packwood hasn’t been especially successful at becoming personally identified with pork barrel projects in southern Oregon," Force wrote us, "but he has a name familiarity edge, which is probably adequate to win the election all by itself. Goldschmidt is known in a relatively positive sense in Medford, for cooperating in the city's efforts to develop a viable downtown area based on Portland’s experiences. But southern Oregon also includes rural counties where Goldschmidt’s association with Portland and urban issues might be a negative factor no matter how successful his involvement in them." As political observers, both Wilson and Force can conceive, of course, of a Goldschmidt upset. “ If there was a good campaign,” allows Wilson, “good enough to where names and faces and issues became familiar to the voters, I think Goldschmidt could win here.” “Goldschmidt might make considerable capital," adds Force, “by emphasizing Packwood as a member of the Washington establishment. But name familiarity gaps can be overcome only with heavy campaign spending. Goldschmidt would need an extremely well-financed campaign. Yet Packwood is already winning the 1979 Money Election.” Ah, money, the icon of post-war politics. Why is it so necessary for upsetting an incumbent or repressing a challenger? "A political campaign," one veteran campaigner explained to us. “ is an educational process. The educating that goes on is to educate the voters to vote for your guy instead of the other guy. If I had a choice between hiring a psychologist or a political scientist, I would take a psychologist every time because at least hopefully he understands human nature. People will give you all kinds of reasons why they vote for you but the real reason is that they like you better." “How do you get them to like you better?” we ask. “ I’ll mention some things you spend money on that you might not think about. The first money you get in a campaign has to go to staff, people don't even think about that. In addition to that, you're going to have headquarters expenses. You’re going to have travel expenses. You got all that — and we could be talking now of $100,000 easy — before you even think of spending any money on media. If you want to have billboards, billboards are expensive. You’re going PORRETTA PIZZA 2239 SE Hawthorne 232-2812 TAKE OUT ONLY BEERANDW INE TOGO PORTLAND SATURDAY MARKET BEST PIZZA IN PORTLAND Whole Wheat or White Crust Subs-Salads Hours: Tue, Wed, Th. Sun 4-10 Eri-Sat 5-12 SPECIAL SUMMER HAPPENINGS JULY8 CRAFTS DAY Free demonstrations by master craftspeople AUGUST 11-12 WATERFRONT WEEKEND The whole Market moves to Waterfront Park for a weekend of merriment. Sunshine guaranteed. Quality handcrafts • International food Local produce ■Free entertainment Every Saturday and Sunday till Christmas Under the Burnside Bridge in Old Town 4
to have fundraising letters, brochures — you gotta have at least three brochures, then you have bumper strips, newspaper advertising, radio advertising, and we haven’t yet talked about television commercials. And remember before you start buying T.V. spots, you gotta produce the damn things; we’re talking about thousands of dollars...” “How much does it cost these days to run for the U.S. Senate in Oregon?” Our informant doesn 't blink. “About a million dollars. You don’t raise your big money for a statewide campaign within Oregon, of course; you get it from national sources.” “Which ones?” “Lobby groups, special interest groups, labor, industries.” But is David Force right? Does Packwood already have a decisive jump on any Democratic opponent regarding major funding sources? Any analysis of the Senator’s fiscal efforts must be made in the context of his legislative record. Bob Packwood was born 46 years ago in Portland, attended Willamette University, and received his law degree from New York University in 1957. In the sixties, Packwood served three terms in the State Legislature representing Multnomah County, before his election to the Senate in 1968 (against Wayne Morse) and his re-election in 1974 (against Betty Roberts). Packwood’s decade in the Senate has been essentially colorless but, if you think hard, a few things about his record come to mind: his opposition to the Longshore strike in 1971, his early call for Nixon’s resignation in 1974, his consistent identification with women’s rights, and his second-term support for certain labor measures: i.e. situs picketing, cargo preference, aind the union-backed Labor Reform Act. As modest as this record is. Packwood has set out to make the most of it. His support of situs picketing has endeared him to building trades workers while his endorsement of cargo preference has continued his friendship with the maritime associations. The national headquarters of the building trades union, for example, threw an “ appreciation dinner” for the Senator last winter in Washington. Packwood’s advocacy of women’s rights has been long-standing. In 1970 he introduced legislation to legalize abortion nationally; in 1977 he was the only Senator to vote against the confirmation of HEW Secretary Califano because Califano deplores abortion. These actions inspired Gloria Steinem last spring to endorse the Senator for re-election and help raise funds for his campaign. “Bob Packwood is a man of integrity and compassion,” wrote one of the founders of Ms. Magazine in a letter to friends. “That’s why I’m doing something I’ve rarely done before. I’m writing you personally to ask that you send a political contribution to Senator Packwood’s re-election campaign.” Within two months, Steinem’s letter has netted Packwood $200,000; before the campaign is over, observers expect that figure to more than double. With Packwood receiving labor and feminist backing, what’s a good Democrat to do? In Jackson County, for example, David Force notes that, even at this early date, “ Packwood has co-opted traditional Democratic financial bases. An opponent would either have to build a fund-raising system based on individual givers or attack Packwood froi>.the right on issues like abortion and labor.” (Attacking from the right, of course, is not something Neil Goldschmidt is likely to do.) Yet the situation for a Democrat is not completely hopeless. Not every labor union is in Packwood’s pocket. Mike Hereford of the Retail Clerks union points out that Packwood’s voting record, as computed by the national office of the AFL-CIO, is less than 50 percent effective and that “each of those votes was important. Goldschmidt would need to appeal to Labor is a social movement,” said many of the very labor leaders he Hereford, “and Packwood's record on alienated by his opposition to the Mt. social issues isn’t good.” Referring to Hood Freeway. And not without a next June’s state convention of the competitive message to liberal women, AFL-CIO, Hereford warned. “ If the convincing them that it would be vote were held today, he wouldn’t have better for them in the long-run to vote enough votes to win an endorsement.” for a socially-liberal Democrat than a Which means a Democrat could get moderate Republican who happens to that endorsement, with the likely constand with them on a few issues. sequence of over a quarter of a million “There may be some singular addollars funding support from the vantages to his not running,” an old national headquarters of the AFL- friend of the Mayor's informed us at CIO. press time. “ It may give him a chance Can Neil Goldschmidt beat Bob to recover some psychic energy after Packwood in 1980? Not without a two terms as Mayor. And it may give well-financed campaign to overcome him some time to deal with downstate an unfamiliar name. Not without a elements that associate him with Portstatewide effort to persuade semi- land. If he passes this one up, he could urban and rural voters that he can lay out for a couple of years and take think beyond Portland and Eugene. on the incumbent governor in 1982.” Not without an eleventh-hour drive to Can Goldschmidt beat Packwood? reverse Bob Packwood’s headstart in Not without an uphill fight. And most gaining AFL-CIO endorsement; in observers think that, at 39 years old, this last-minute push, incidentally. he does not have to wage that fight. GOOD MORNING. OREGON. WOULD YOU L IK E ME TO PLAY CHESS WITH YOU OR WOULD YOU RATHER I CALCULATE WHAT A PACKWOODGOLDSCHMIDT RACE WOULD BE L I K E . . .OKAY , HERE S MY EOREOAST EXPECTED TURNOUT - 70? COUNTY REG. VOTERS PACKWOOD GOLDSCHMIDT MULTNOMAH 3 4 8 , 1 2 1 4 8? 52? LANE 1 5 9 , 5 9 5 4 7? 53? CLACKAMAS 1 3 5 , 4 6 1 54? 46? WASHINGTON 1 2 9 , 8 7 5 58? 42? MARION 1 0 6 , 9 2 1 56? 44? JACKSON 7 0 , 9 8 7 5 3? 4 7? DOUGLAS 4 8 , 3 6 0 55? 4 5? L INN 4 4 , 2 9 1 52? 4 8? OTHERS 4 3 8 , 7 2 8 54? 46? TOTAL 1 , 4 8 2 , 3 3 9 52? 48X CONCLUSION - PACKWOOD BY •4X OR MY NAME A IN T C L IN T WILD CARD - T . KENNEDY 5
Junk Food Makes You Kill By Michelle Hall Williams Mayor George Moscone. Re-loading his gun, Dan White proceeded Do you sometimes feel withdrawn? through City Hall to the office of his Lacking energy because of your poor former colleague, San Francisco diet and irregular sleeping habits? Do Supervisor Harvey Milk. Supervisor you sometimes refuse tb shave and Milk smirked at ex-Supervisor White. instead lie in bed for hours on end? Dan White maimed and executed Get moody and depressed? Do you Harvey Milk, then drove to a nearby sometimes feel frustrated by your Doggie Diner and called his wife. financial and personal problems? Eat * * * Twinkies, cupcakes and Three Mile Island Chocolate Bars? Dan White became the first person Well, bubie, you may be mentally to test California’s new special cirill. Able to murder with impunity. cumstances death penalty law: murder of a public official, with intent. Dan * * * White was all for the death penalty Take your all-American rigidly last fall; this spring, his defense lawyer moral upbringing and (shove it? No.) was not. couple it with the paramilitary backThe defense said Dan White ground of being a boy scout, cop and cracked under pressure. He didn’t fireman. Win a local election and dis- ' mean to kill anyone. He was mentally cover that the world or urban politics ill. The defense played a tape of his is unfair. Suffer stress and pressure/ anguished and dramatic confession. Eat junk food, triggering a bioPeople wept. The defense trotted in a chemical change in your brain. Quit prominent Marin County psychiatrist your job as a San Francisco Superwho said, “ It is possible to lose your visor because your wife just had a grip on basic information if you are baby, your french fry stand is failing sufficiently emotionally discombobuand you need more money. Change lated.” Yes, discombobulated. your mind and want your job back. Continue an exclusive diet of junk * * * food. * *• * The jury agreed. Voluntary manslaughter. No intent. Diminished On the morning of November 27, capacity, in fact. Aggravated by an 1978, ex-San Francisco Supervisor exclusive diet of junk food. Dan Dan White went to see the Mayor White’s just deserts? Eight years max. about a job. He took a gun and a But I know he did it. Next time you pocket full of bullets to City Hall and visit the Bay Area, I’ll take you to the crawled in a basement window to Dan White Memorial. It’s his french avoid the main entrance metal fry stand near Fisherman’s Wharf. detectors. Called the “Hot Potato." You’d better Failing his interview, Dan White come soon as the last time I passed by. maimed and executed San Francisco business was real slow. ONE MORE TIME IMAGE CONSULTANTS KyNG HARVEST NATURAL FOODS AN ALTERNATIVE CLOTHING STORE FOR MEN & WOMEN 1114 N.W. 21st 223-4167 6
The Quarterly has been made privy to a harrowing story o f red tape asphixiation that might sn u f f out the breath o f 9-year-old Jack Nunn. CLINTON STREET EXPOSE By Lenny Dee Every day of the week, ace Chicago columnist Mike Royko writes of horrible asphixiations of simple justice at the hands of bureaucratic Catch-22s. He'll break your heart over the legless man who panhandles to find a permanent place of residence in order to receive Social Security benefits and then have the bureaucrats tell him that his increased income from panhandling will cut his Social Security benefits to the point where food and shelter are unaffordable. Or Royko might infuriate you with other tales of young punks threatening the lives of decent, hard-working citizens, yet are allowed to roam the streets on six months’ probation while a Windy City family makes a fortress of their apartment. Most Oregon chauvinists live here under the assumption that these bureaucratic snafus are relics of the older, decaying East. Lately it seems this myth might have as many holes in it as the Oregon State line. In the last month, the papers have detailed a depressing account of a young black man’s first days on a construction job in Central Oregon that in ugliness can be compared to James Meredith trying to integrate the University of Mississippi—yet neither the union nor the human rights commission felt empowered to help this beleaguered lad. Recently the Quarterly has been made privy to a harrowing story of red tape asphixiation that might snuff out the breath of 9-year-old Jack Nunn, who, for six years, has depended on expensive oxygen machinery to help his badly scarred lungs breathe. At age 3 Jack contracted viral pneumonia, which permanently scarred his lungs and required him to be on 24-hour oxygen supply. At that time, Jack's father's health insurance covered the crisis. Shortly thereafter Jack’s mom and dad got divorced. Mrs. Nunn remarried in the interim and Mr. Nunn quit his job, dropping their health insurance policy. His new stepdad could obviously not find an insurance company willing to provide coverage. Therefore, the State picked them up on the ADC stepfather grant. So the stepfather grant became crucial to Jack’s survival. This spring, Proposition 13 fever hit the legislature, and the stepfather grants were discontinued, leaving Jack’s lungs high and dry. The family continues to pile up huge bills while they frantically search for assistance. (The portable and home oxygen supply runs them $1,000 a month.) Jack’s mom contacted Congressman Les AuCoin’s office, and they tried to get help from the State Emergency Medical Care, without success. On her own, and with AuCoin’s office’s help, she contacted the Red Cross—who has no funding for such cases—the Oregon Lung Foundation (funded by Easter Seals), which only does research and education and does not provide direct assistance: Social Security: and the Shriners Hospital. Some of these agencies are not chartered to help such cases. Others, because the stepfather makes a moderate income, cannot help even though the monthly cost of the machines is three-fourths of his income. One charity could have helped only if the lung disease was a nonprimary illness, but Jack’s lung problem is very prim a ry . . . . Ironically, the only plan that could have helped is Multnomah County's Project Health (with only one year to live, thanks to Proposition 13 fever), but since Jack lives in Washington County. . . . All this activity is compounded by governmental officials flying around in circles and getting stuck on the flypaper. Senator Ed Fadeley, who introduced part of the welfare cutback legislation, was assured by Keith Putnam —Director of Adult and Family Services—that the State would find assistance. Marlene Haugland, Mr. Putnam's Executive Assistant, assured the Quarterly that they have been aware of the family for many years and that the branch office worked for many weeks in helping— there just wasn’t anything available. According to Ms. Haugland, it's frustrating to have need determined by the black and white on paper when there is a lot of gray in this world. Terry Anderson, who works at the Tri-County Community Council, helped the AuCoin office in their search for assistance and found local charities unwilling or unable to help, and the Washington County welfare workers slowed to a standstill by inertia and disappointment in the bureaucracy, without confidence in taking the case to higher offices. Caught in a Catch-22, Jack’s mom feels that no one would dare take the machine from her son despite all ’he “hot air" being blown her way by those concerned. To her, it's a matter of setting a precedent that might help others caught in the red tape nightmare of our bureaucracy. The last time I called Jack's house, it took every ounce of hjs lung power to call his mother to the phone before a heartbreaking wheezing cough set in. For what reason does government exist if it cannot aid a Jack Nunn? / / w we buy used records ARTICHOKE MUSIC 10:30-5:30 ♦monday-saturday ♦722 northwest 21st ♦243*0356 1____________________________________________ F 7
Scoop's Power Bill Shafts The No rthw es t Friends: I am a former Portlander living in Eugene, where I have the honor and responsibility of being one of the five elected commissioners that make policy decisions for Oregon’s largest customer-owned utility, the Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB). This utility is known nationally for innovative leadership in energy conservation and development of decentralized renewable energy sources— hydroelectric, geothermal, cogeneration, wind, and biomass. EWEB is also Portland General Electric Company’s silent pardner, along with the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) in the Trojan Nuclear Power Plant. I was elected to help get EWEB out of that program sponsored hy BPA, The Clinton St. Quarterly recently asked me to contribute an article about the controversial Northwest regional electric power bill currently before the U.S. House of Representatives. This bill, also known as the Jackson Bill or Grandson of Peenuck. has been introduced and successfully managed in the Senate during the present and two previous Congressional sessions by the senator from Boeing, Henry “Scoop" Jackson. This bill would allow BPA to hock the entire federal Columbia River Power System as collateral to back construction bonds sold to pay for completion of nine Trojan-sized nuclear power plants. This plan to spend at least $12 billion on these nukes and then repay it with interest by soaking the ratepayers of the Northwest through the wholesale rates of BPA would be enforced by the federal government if this bill is passed. This vast conspiracy to put the electric utility ratepayers of the Northwest into billions of dollars of debt that would mean electric utility rates so high we cannot even imagine them now. This plan was hatched up by BPA. its “direct service" aluminum company customers, and the Pacific Northwest Utilities Conference Committee (PNUCC) in a high-pressure atmosphere of thinly veiled economic blackmail where the publicly owmed and investor-owned utilities were brought together for shuckin’ and jivin’ by BPA and the Atomic Energy Commission about everything from construction costs to disposal of high- level radioactive waste. But that’s also another story. By John Bartels Here is my testimony before the House Water & Power Subcommittee at their hearing on the Jackson Bill on September 8, 1979. I also describe here an ongoing movement toward utility reform that has been called the “ unfinished agenda” of the 1979 Oregon Legislature. It would create an Oregon alternative to the federal model of electric power ownership and control BPA has cooked up in the Jackson Bill. I’ll also discuss Oregon's new' law on formation of customer-owned “ People’s Utility Districts,” and the comic opera that accompanied the successful formation election campaign that created the Emerald People's Utility- District in November 1978, Pacific Power & Light, the investor-owned utility the committee of rural Lane County people sought to take over, spent $300,000 on the campaign. The Emerald PUD Committee spent $3,000 and won, creating the opportunity to make Lane County an allpublic-power county when the Emerald PUD energizes. If you arc interested in bringing our energy future under democratic control, please contact the Ratepayers’ Union in Portland. In the next issues of The Clinton St. Quarterly’ I’ll go into the Oregon model of local democratic control of our energy systems and supplies, and the vision of an energy future they see for us in Washington, D.C. The Testimony Members of the Committee, my name is John Bartels. I am one of five elected commissioners of the Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB). EWEB has not yet taken an official position on these bills. I speak today as a single publicly owned utility commissioner representing part of the second largest urban area in Oregon. This area is experiencing rapid growth of both population and demand for electric power. In 1970 the ratepayer-owners of EWEB responded to an initiative campaign by voting in a four-year moratorium in nuclear power investments and set EWEB on its present course of bringing on decentralized and renewable sources of generation that are cost effective, environmentally acceptable, and acceptable to our customerowners. We are successful and will continue to be successful in achieving these difficult standards for new electric power generation if and only if such federal legislation as you are considering today is laid to rest. These bills, and indeed all bills introduced in earlier sessions, would expand the authority of the Administrator of the Bonneville Power Administration to allow him to rewrite all the long-term BPA contracts for federal hydropower with the investor-owned utilities and the large industrial customers—mainly aluminum companies. In addition, these bills would allow this federal marketing agency to contract to purchase power from plants that are not built and thereby assume the financial responsibility to pay the debts incurred in construction of very large steam electric power generating plants, either coal or nuclear fired. S 885, the Jackson Bill, would make the ratepayers of the Northwest, who ultimately assume the debt, pay even if the plants never work. BPA was created to perform a limited function; that was to sell the power generated at federal hydroelectric projects in the Northwest to publicly owned utilities to provide an economic “yardstick” by which to judge the rates charged by the investor- owned utilities and to build electric power transmission facilities in such a manner as to expand the electrification of the Northwest in the rural areas and in the industrial and agricultural sectors. During the era of plentiful hydroelectric power supplies, the BPA Administrator wrote 20-year contracts with both the aluminum industry and the investor-owned utilities. Now BPA intends to rewrite these contracts for federal hydropower on the basis of promises to increase the power supplies by adding nuclear and coal-fired plants. These plants, however, are years behind schedule, and the cost overruns are gargantuan. All this cost has been mixed in with the federal hydropower. Although this has been going on for years, these construction costs are just going to hit the BPA wholesale power rates in January 1980. The effect of this has been to mask the true EDIBLES LIVE MUSIC SPIRITS MONDAY Coffee Lolita and Kamora $1.50 Russell Street Special $1.95 (Our Giant Hamburger loaded with everything starting at 6:30 PM THE BEST IN LIVE MUSIC every thursday, friday and Saturday TUESDAY Buck Night Well Drinks Only Steamers Speca' $3.25 Bucket of Steamed Clams starting at 6:30 PM WEDNESDAY Tequila Night All Tequila Drinks $1.50 THURSDAY Ladies Night Cover $1.50 Ladies $.50 1st. Drink For Ladies Free Mile North of the Coliseum - 1 Block off Interstate Avenue 8
costs of huge, central station multimegawatt coal and nuclear plants and send a false economic signal to the consumers. This has, until recently, kept alternative, renewable energy resources from being cost effective because the real costs of coal and nuclear were disguised. After 1973, though, when the BPA contracts with the investor-owned utilities ran out. the coal and nuclear plant construction costs directly impacted the private utility rates. The rates doubled in five years, and Oregon ratepayers responded by voting in a ban on including construction work in progress (CWIP) in private utility rates by an overwhelming 67 percent. BPA has been attempting a federally controlled solution to the problem of scarce energy supplies in the future for the past 10 years with their Hydro- Thermal Power Program. We know what their results have been: plants that are not cost effective and not reliable. plants that are environmentally unacceptable, plants that are too large to live around, take far too long to build, and rely on fuels that are not renewable and are always escalating in This vast conspiracy to put the electric utility rate payers o f the Northwest into billions o f dollars o f deb t.. . cost. The ratepayers of the Northwest were not consulted on this program and are finally recognizing the disastrous economic impact it will have on this region if it is continued. These bills have always promised vague solutions to concrete local problems. The results have been and will continue to be negative. These energy questions must be resolved from the bottom up, not from the top down. Expanding the authority of the BPA Administrator is not what we need to solve our problems. Already the BPA Administrators have used their authority to bully the public utilities into slicking with this bankrupt energy program. The BPA Administrators have refused to reallocate the federal power according to law after the 20-year contracts with the private utilities ran out in 1973. Instead. BPA served the customer-owned utilities with a “ notice of unsufficiency," stating that BPA would not be able to renew the contracts the public bodies have now when they expire in the late 1980s. However, BPA also had their Hydro- Thermal plan, which would solve the problem by getting BPA involved in coal and nuclear power projects and also mix the public and the private utilities in generation projects together by exempting the private companies from some provisions of the Public Utility Holding Company Act, which was passed in the 1930s to prevent the conglomeration of utilities into holding companies prior to their financial collapse in 1929. This is another example of BPA trying to get around the law. This entire approach of having the federal government “ fix" the energy shortage is characterized by pie-in-the- sky theory. For instance, the pass- through of federal power to the investor-owned utilities is described as the way to lower the electric rates for the majority of Oregonians who are presently served by private utilities. The facts are that BPA already has authority to sell to the investor-owned utilities on an annual basis and did sell to Portland General Electric Company during the nine-month period their Trojan Nuclear Power Plant was closed last year. The PGE rates did not go down 20 percent the way the investor-owned utility advertising promises their rates will go down if the Jackson Bill is passed. The Administrator is still trying to get the public and investor-owned power supplies together. Local control over power supplies and rate making, of course, disappears and becomes vested instead in one federal appointed official—the Administrator of the BPA. Rather than expand the authority of the Administrator, 1 want to cut it back and force this agency to obey the law. The publicly owned utilities should have sued BPA for reallocation of power in 1974 and never allowed themselves to be blackmailed this way. This idea is bad economics, filled with prejudices about the technology, and generally out of touch with what the people in Oregon want. During the 1979 session of our state legislature, we revised the statute on formation of People’s Utility Districts. Committees are now working to form new PUDs and energize old ones in several parts of the state. In July our legislature passed an 18-month moratorium on nuclear power plants to allow time for an initiative to be placed on the general election ballot in 1980 that would ban construction of nuclear power plants until the federal government licenses a nuclear waste disposal plant. In addition, an effort was also made in our state legislature to activate dormant powers of the state constitution to create an Oregon Energy Development Commission to bring the bonding power of the state behind the decentralized, renewable energy projects of the Oregon publicly owned utilities. This measure will also be taken to the initiative with the nuclear moratorium. Polling done both during and after the Oregon legislative session indicate Oregonians are going to make their minds up about both their energy future and ownership of electric utilities in the general election in 1980. This is exactly the wrong time to impose a federal program that will usurp this local control. You have heard enough about these bills already to know that there are many other conflicting uses of Columbia River water to be worked out. howto get the depleted fishery into the cost-benefit analysis, and how to coordinate the multiple agencies involved with all these issues. At EWEB we have found the only federal legislation we need to proceed with bringing on decentralized, renewable energy sources that are part of our local economy and not arbitrary economic penalties externally imposed, has been dealt with on a problem-by-problem basis very effectively by our Congressman Jim Weaver. These things can be done in much simpler ways, much quicker, than with these regional, omnibustype efforts. Let us lay aside this idea of a big federal solution controlled by federal bureaucracy, take what we have learned in the five years about energy in the Columbia Basin, and start again from the bottom up. Thank you very much for coming to Oregon to see how the ratepayers view this legislation, and thank you for not holding this hearing at the Bonneville Power Administration headquarters. Two days after this Congressional hearing, EWEB voted unanimously to oppose passage of the Jackson Bill until BPA allocates the federal hydropower according to the present federal law. More later, John Bartels Fuadty KeigkMcW State pWucc al fempriced Kaiwiaf Jwwid Rodd fiuit Ca. S IV. (Mett &IVkitaken Yesterday’s Paper 324S .W .9 th 227-6449 Custom Framing—Ready Made Parrish. Icart, Fisher, Russell, Vanity Fair, Currier & Ives, Old ads and art prints postcards, books, mag’s Vintage radios and tubes maps, stock certificates cigar and fruit labels and more Visa — Masterchargc Wed.-Sat. 11:30-5:30 The Only Full Service Restaurant in the John’s Landing Area 6:30 a m. - 8 p.m. Everyday Live Music Thurs.-Sun. Nights Beer and Wine 6439 S.W. Macadam 246-5108 AN EXPERIENCE IN H IG H QUAL ITY BROWS ING PLEASURE BOOKSHOP Mon.-Sat. 10:30-6:00 Sun 1-5 On Fountain Court Mon., Wed., Fri. Eves, t i l l 9:30 220 NW Davis 228-2747 9
Economic Conversion bc/big dipper studio Churning Guns Into Butter by Lloyd J. Dumas According to President Carter's budget for fiscal 1980, the Department of Defense will get appropriations totaling some $138 billion next year, up from $128 billion during the current fiscal year. Thal increase—coming at a time o f "austerity" and cutbacks in nondefense programs—represents a hike o f 3 percent over and above the projected rate o f inflation. I f the budget is passed intact, defense spending will consume about one-third o f the federal budget. That amounts to about $680for every man, woman and child in the United States. Does military spending need to be so high? Hawks and doves argue endlessly about how much national security a $138 billion defense budget actually buys. But there is one point on which both sides agree. Much of the support for high military spending stems not from a concern for national security but from a concern for jobs. in the debate a year or two ago over the B-l bomber, for example, the number o f jobs due to be lost i f the B l was cancelled was much more important politically than the bomber's potential strategic value. And virtually every newspaper account o f a military base closing or a canceled defense contract begins with an estimate o f how many people will be thrown out o f work. If jobs were somehow not at issue, those who advocate arms control and reduced military spending would gain an edge in their continuing battle with the advocates of "preparedness.” The debate on weapons systems and defense budgets could then focus not on the need to maintain employment but on America’s legitimate military requirements. Advocating the B-l, the MX, the cruise missile, and other expensive weapons systems on the grounds of their contribution to national security might not be so easy. Doubtless the military knows this: that's why jobs figure so prominently in Defense Department arguments for continued high spending. If the link between jobs and defense expenditures is to be broken, people must be convinced that they would be better off economically if the government spent its money on other things. A practical mechanism must also be created for planning the conversion of defense-related industries and facilities to nonmilitary operation. It is not surprising, of course, that Americans associate high defense budgets with a healthy economy. It was World War II that finally pulled the country out o f the Depression, and in the two decades o f growth that fo llowed the war, the federal government spent a large chunk o f its budget on defense. Military spending since World War II has varied from its current high to a low of $20.3 billion (1972 dollars) in 1948. But it has never dropped below 30 percent of total federal spending. Now, there is no doubt that government spending of any kind creates jobs; if Washington paid people to dig ditches and fill them up again (the classic example), that, too, would put a lot of people to work. The trouble is that jobs by themselves don't necessarily contribute to people’s material well-being. Military goods and services, unlike consumer goods, are not something that people can use and enjoy; they are not part of the "standard of living.” Nor do they contribute to the economy’s capacity to produce —as do roads, bridges, and other public works. In this sense, they are economically unproductive.* They consume, however, enormous amounts of land, labor, and equipment, which otherwise could be u^ted for consumer goods or capital investment. In the short term, military spending (or any other government spending) reduces unemployment, adds to purchasing power, and creates the illusion of prosperity. In the long term, resources used unproductively will be a drain on the economy. Other things that need doing will not be done, and the society as a whole will suffer. It is possible, in fact, to trace a number o f our current economic ills to the extraordinary diversion o f productive resources to military uses in the decades since the end o f World War II. The unprecedented combination o f high inflation and high unemployment in the 1970s is the predictable result o f a cumulative, long-term process o f economic deterioration that resource diversion on such a large scale is bound to produce. Because the flow of money to military firms is not “balanced,” in the economist’s scheme of things, by a corresponding production of goods and services that the firms’ employees can buy, defense spending creates the classic inflationary situation of too much money chasing too few goods. Theoretically, this part of the problem could be corrected by increasing taxes, thus drawing the “excess” money out of the economy. But increasing taxes to cover increases in military spending is generally considered politically unworkable, and so has not been done. The internal operation or the weapons procurement system aggravates the inflationary impact of the defense budget. Virtually all military contracts include incentives for producers to hold down costs. But the incentives are poorly designed and enforced; in practice, military contracts turn out to be cost-plus. No firm that knows its customer will cover ail of its costs— including guaranteed profits—will hold back on spending. The inevitable freewheeling attitude bids up the prices of the productive resources the various firms buy—resources also needed by civilian firms. In this way the defense budget fuels “cost push” inflation. Internationally, the outflow of dollars resulting from U.S. military spending abroad has played a major role in undermining the value of the dollar. Over the 20-year period from the mid-1950s to the mid-1970s, the total net inflow of foreign currencies to the United States on trade (exports and imports) was nearly $49 billion. During the same period, according to Commerce Department figures, more than $54 billion flowed out of the United States for military purposes alone. Military spending thus turned a positive trade situation into a negative overall flow, and caused dollars to pile up overseas. As with any other commodity, the “price” of a dollar (measured in other currencies) drops when the supply increases. That, in turn, makes every good imported into the United States more expensive: the price of a Toyota, for example, has risen several hundred dollars in the past year simply because more dollars are needed to equal a given number of yen. Since America imports large quantities of consumer goods—cars, television sets, shoes, and so on—the dollar’s decline contributes directly to the rate of inflation. Since we also import a wide variety of producer goods (oil and steel, for example), a rise in the price of imports will be felt indirectly as well. Government officials and commentators alike frequently tell us that the troubles of the dollar are attributable largely to the OPEC-induced oil price hike. Anyone inclined to believe this should consider the fact that the dollar was first devalued in 1971—more than two years before the embargo and price hikes of 1973. The most inflationary effect o f the high U.S. defense budget is indirect: it lies in the technological deterioration o f U.S. industry brought on by the arms race. Each year since the 1950s, the military budget has exceeded the after-tax profits o f all U.S. corporations combined. It has, thus, in effect, preempted a huge amount o f the capital that could have been used for productivity-increasing investments in new technology, equipment, and facilities. The military sector has also claimed the considerable talents o f between 30 and 50 percent o f all U.S. engineers and scientists. That alone would be enough to throw civilian 10
technological progress into low gear. To be sure, engineers and scientists who are trying to solve problems relating to the design of nuclear warheads or the accuracy of missile guidance systems occasionally come upon some bit of knowledge that is relevant to civilian production. But such an occurrence is rare, and each one is extraordinarily costly. Improving productivity in nonmilitary areas requires the concerted, continuous upgrading o f production techniques, processes, and machine designs. Without improvements in productivity, any increase in a firm s costs has to be passed on in the form o f higher prices. And that generates both inflation and unemployment. “Cost pass-along’’ behavior, in fact, has priced U.S. industries out of more and more markets, both domestic and worldwide. The role of military spending in these problems is not generally understood, but the severity of the problems themselves is widely recognized. Late last fall, Barry Bosworth, director of the Council on Wage and Price Stability, told a congressional committee, “We’re turning into the British situation of the early 1970s, where they had almost no productivity growth.” (In the same testimony, Bosworth called the slowdown a “ real puzzle.” ) Earlier, the cover story of the July 3, 1978, issue of Business Week (called “Vanishing Innovation") focused on the failure of U.S. industrial technology. As early as 1976, the annual report of the National Science Foundation had expressed the same concern. If the twin curses of inflation and unemployment are to be overcome, there is simply no substitute for substantial cuts in military spending. Putting those resources to more productive use, however, will require careful plans for converting defense-related plants to nonmilitary production. The mechanics of such a process are not hard to imagine. One model is provided by the Defense Economic Adjustment Act, introduced in the Senate by George McGovern (D-S.D.) and Charles Mathias (R Md.) in November 1977, and in the House by New York Democrat Theodore Weiss (and a number of co-sponsors) in January 1978. Essentially, the bill has three parts. The first establishes a Defense Economic Adjustment Council (in the executive office of the President), made up of one-third each cabinet members, representatives from nondefense business, and union representatives. The council would encourage both civilian federal agencies and state and local governments to prepare concrete plans for various nonmilitary public projects; it would pull together, in effect, a laundry list of potential government markets for any group wanting to convert a military facility. The council would also prepare and distribute a "conversion guidelines handbook,” a kind of how-to-do-it manual (not a set of requirements) for groups that wanted to develop such projects. The next section of the bill would establish an “alternative use” committee at every military facility of any size —bases, industrial plants, think tanks, laboratories, and so on—as a condition of eligibility for defense contracts. These committees—one-third each from management and labor, plus one-third from the surrounding community—would be independently funded. They would be responsible for drawing up specific conversion plans and would be entitled to all the information they needed for that purpose. The bill’s third section creates a ‘‘Workers’ Economic Adjustment Reserve Trust Fund,” funded by 1.25 percent of the gross revenue of every defense contract. This fund would provide any workers displaced by conversion to nonmilitary production with up to 90 percent of their first $20,000 —and 50 percent of the next $5,0 0 0 - in income for a period of up to two years. It would also allow for two-year continuation of fringe benefits tike pensions. And it would provide both retraining benefits and relocation allowances for workers permanently displaced by the changeover. Politically, of course, a bill like this one is some distance away from being passed. And conversion—in this year of a rising defense budget and the growth of organizations like the Committee on the Present Danger—is not exactly the most popular issue around. Still, there are some straws in the wind. A group called Members of Congress for Peace Through Law, which includes roughly 175 Senators and Representatives (approximately one-third of each house) has established an economic conversion task force. Some of those who are most interested in the defense dependency issue, like Representative Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.), are from areas that are heavily loaded with defense contracts. At the grass roots, a number of activist groups are keeping the issue alive. The April 1978 demonstrations aimed at converting the nuclear weapons plant at Rocky Flats, Colo., for example, brought together groups like the Clamshell Alliance, SANE, the Fellowship of Reconciliation, Environmental Action, and a number of religious organizations. In California, the MidPeninsula Conversion Project, located in the heart of a dense concentration of military industry in the nation’s largest defense contracting state, is working with a variety of constituencies on the possibility, of converting from military production to solar energy production(among other options). Connecticut's Trident Conversion Campaign and Colorado's Economic Conversion Project are engaged in similar activities. Nationally, potential support for conversion of defense facilities to nonmilitary uses may come from church groups, unions, and eventually from business itself. The June 1978 annual convention of Southern Baptists issued a call for transferring funds from "nuclear weapons to basic human needs.” (The New York Times reported that “the gesture was the latest in a series of signs that the disarmament issue is stirring religious leaders in evangelical circles as well as in the Roman Catholic Church and liberal Protestant denom ina tions .’’) The International Association of Machinists—one of the largest unions representing workers in defense-related industry—has come out for conversion. The United Auto Workers, a second large defense worker union, has also been quite supportive, and a number of other major unions have at least begun to dip their toes in the waters by taking part in discussions on conversion. The union interest in conversion, of course, is a direct reflection of the instability of most defense work. State and local officials may at some point soon see a similar interest. Even areas with high concentrations of military spending have witnessed the Defense Department’s fickleness; in spite of a record military budget last year, for example, the Pentagon announced plans to cut back another 107 military bases. Without conversion, cutbacks and contract cancellations can wreak economic havoc on a community and its region. With conversion, the effect may be exactly the reverse. A Defense Department report on the employment effects of 22 base closures around the United States shows a gain of nearly KING of ROME ELECTED HIGH QUALITY PRE-READ BOOKS PRINTS; OLD (LEAD) TOY SOLDIERS; MILITARIA 231-9270 8133 S.E. 13TH OLD SELLWOOD PORTLAND, OREGON 97202 BILL MATTHEWS ECECELES 2 1 0 8 N .W . G L I S A N S T . P O R T L A N D . O R E G O N 9 7 2 1 0 P H O N E 1 5 0 3 ) 2 4 R - 9 1 4 2 R O N H I N C K L E Y M A T T L A B A D IE 27,000 jobs after the facilities were converted—though years were required for the process because there had been no advance planning. Perhaps the most important constituency when it comes to planning for conversion is the workers at each defense plant. The best example of worker mobilization for this purpose comes from Britain. In 1974. faced with the prospect of immediate layoffs and long-term decline, the Lucas Aerospace Shop Stewards Committee began to develop a plan for nonmilitary production for the firm, which is Europe’s largest designer and manufacturer of aircraft systems and equipment. The committee, representing all 13 trade unions from 17 Lucas locations in the United Kingdom, circulated questionnaires to workers, asking for an inventory of job skills, available plant and equipment, and suggestions about alternative products. The result came to be known as the Corporate Plan. It was released, after 18 months of data collection, analysis, and evaluation, in early 1976. The plan includes a total of roughly 150 products. All meet a criterion of social usefulness—and many meet market standards of profitability. Among the product ranges specified in the plan are alternative energy sources, medical equipment, transport systems, and braking systems. Management at first refused to discuss the plan, or even to meet with the committee, on the grounds that it was not a recognized union organization. When the company announced in March 1978 that it would close several factories and lay off some 2,000 workers over the next two years, however, members of Parliament and other in- fluentials began to intervene. Finally, in late June of 1978, management agreed to meet with the Confederation of Shipbuilding and Engineering Unions, which had conveyed official status on the committee representatives through formal election at a delegate conference. According to the union side, the company agreed at this meeting to postpone its plant closures and layoffs, to provide facilities and information to help develop alternative product plans for two plants due to be closed, and to provide services such as market research. Management, however. has announced that the plant closures will be carried out regardless of any alternative production plans that may be developed. Economic conversion is a strategy for making peace possible—no more, no less. It is a hard-nosed approach, appealing to people’s self-interest as much as to their idealism. The nation’s economy must be relieved of the crippling burden of heavy military spending if it is to recover permanently from its present doldrums. And national security will continue to be an elusive goal as long as we persist in the fantasy that we need to add ever more sophisticated weaponry to the nearly incomprehensible pile we have already amassed. Yet until the fear of unemployment and other severe economic disruption can be laid to rest, the transfer of resources from the military sector to civilian production will continue to hit a political roadblock. That’s where planning for conversion comes in. Without it, we won’t get far. Lloyd J. Dumas is an associate professor of industrial and management engineering al Columbia University. Reprinted by his permission and Working Papers May-June 1979. Deco 30’s and 40’s collectibles and useables 316 SW 9th 223-0767 Mon.—11-7 Tues.—closed Wed.-Fri— 11-7 Sa t—2-7 *a state of insanity characterized by delusions of a pleasing nature GJEEVBU^ V 11
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NTc4NTAz