Page 34 RAIN November/December 1985 PUBLICATIONS prohibit CUB from inserting this information in utility bills, saying that it would violate the free speech rights of the utilities. On September 10, Judge Owen Fanner handed down his decision in the case, ruling in favor of the utilities. Although Judge Fanner's decision has dealt CUB a serious blow, the organization plans to continue its fight to intervene in utility rate cases on behalf of Oregon voters and consumers. It has already intervened in a rate increase requested by General Telephone. CUB is also following rate increase requests by Facific Fower and Light and Facific Northwest Bell, and is considering investigating utility deposit fee guidelines. CUB'S effectiveness in these endeavors will depend on how many Oregonians support it. CUB is a public, nonprofit Oregon corporation, not a government agency. It receives no tax dollars or other governmental support. Its financial backing depends on its members. For more information, contact Citizens' Utility Board, FO Box 6345, Fortland, OR 97228; 503/227- 1984. (Source: The Alliance, October 1985) CUE'S New School of Management The Center for Urban Education (CUE) in Fortland has recently begun a new educational program, the School of Management, building upon CUE'S 18-year history of serving as an educational resource to Oregon's community organizations. The program is designed for people who want to develop or update skills in managing nonprofit organizations and public agencies. The philosophy of the School of Management follows CUE'S general mission of enabling people from diverse backgrounds to become effective agents of community change, responding to community needs and opportunities. The School of Management offers classes, a Certificate Frogram in Nonprofit Management, a nonprofit managers roundtable, and more. For additional information, contact Center for Urban Education, 0245 SW Bancroft, Fortland, OR 97201; 503/221- 0984. Choices for Puget Sound: Military Spending and Economic Health, by the Economic Impact Project of Sixth Sense, 1985, 26 pp., $4 from: Sixth Sense 2603V2 Sixth Avenue Tacoma, WA 98406 The success of the peace movement could spell economic ruin for the Fuget Sound region. Though never stated in this way, this dilemma is implied by the findings of a recent study of the extent and effects of military spending on the Fuget Sound economy. However, the findings also suggest that reducing military spending could bring a new vitality to the region if sound economic alternatives were found. Washington peace activists would do well to give some thought to these matters. The study. Choices for Puget Sound, is based on Department of Defense capital expenditures for fiscal year 1983 within a four-county area of Fuget Sound—Kitsap, Fierce, King, and Snohomish counties. It shows that the major industries of the region are highly dependent on military contracts. It calculates that approximately one out of five jobs in the region were generated by these contracts. In three cities—Seattle, Bremerton, and Kent—FY1983 DoD contracts translated into more than $6,000 per resident. And even these figures underestimate military spending totals, as they only include procurement contracts to commercial firms. They do not include much of the money put into the 10 large military installations on Fuget Sound, nor do they include military-related contracts with the Department of Ehergy or NASA. The military dependency of the region's industries has several implications. Federal policy-makers come to exert a strong influence over the economy as local control is diminished. Reliance on one buyer (the federal government) can induce severe economic swings, creating boom-bust cycles. Also, as firms concentrate on military sales, they may become less effective competitors in other markets and thus increase the vulnerability of the regional economy. Military contracts bring high profits, according to the study. This is well illustrated by looking at Boeing, the recipient of almost 70 percent of Washington's DoD contracts in 1983. While Boeing's profit margin on commercial sales was 1.5 percent, its profit margin on military sales was 10.5 percent. The study notes that such high rates of profit may decrease the incentive for corporations to find new markets, thus retarding diversification and increasing economic vulnerability. Also, such high profits create a purely economic incentive for expanding military programs and developing new weapons systems, which leads to a defense policy based on the pursuit of profit as well as national security. Finally, the study demonstrates that military procurement programs are very capital-intensive and therefore create relatively few jobs. Furthermore, the jobs that are created in high- technology military production generally require highly sHlled workers, bringing few opportunities to unsidlled and semi-skilled workers who comprise the greater portion of the unem-
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NTc4NTAz