European Stars and Stripes (Newspaper) - October 02, 1985, Darmstadt, Hesse                                Page 10 columns Tom Wicker the stars and stripes wednesday october 2, 1985 now s fhe time for . Negotiators to negotiate the new soviet proposal for a 50 percent reduction in superpower offensive weaponry has made it Clear that no serious arms control agreement can be readied unless president Reagan s strategic defense initiative is on the table at gun co. All of the details have not been Dis closed and probably won t be known for some time but the new soviet position obviously is considered constructive even by the usually sceptical Reagan administration. Reagan himself said that the proposals outlined to him by Eduard Shevardnadze the foreign minister and in a letter from Mikhail Gorbachev could Lead to serious bargaining and that Progress can be made in the arms control talks. The other Side of the Coin is that the new russian approach was coupled with a demand for a cessation of work apparently including Laboratory research on the strategic defense initiative to develop a space based missile defense. Yet Shevardnadze was scarcely out of the White House before Reagan was Tell ing report Lars that we Are determined to go Forward with the strategic defense Ini  George Shultz. The Secretary of state reiterated that position in a later news conference. If the soviet proposal really is As prom Ising As the administration has suggested. Reagan cannot credibly sustain his insistence on the ski. He says for example that when the detailed soviet plan is Laid out at Geneva. We Hope it will be free from preconditions and other obstacles to  his insistence that the ski re search continue could Well become the most crucial obstacle to Progress on the deep reductions in offensive weapons that he also advocates. Moscow before and particularly since Gorbachev s ascent to Power has clearly established its powerful opposition to strategic defences. The latest evidence is in its willingness not yet detailed and probably not yet As comprehensive As necessary to pay the Price of drastic reductions in its offensive Arsenal. The reasons for the russians Adamant stance Are numerous. They have Good cause to fear that Superior Csc enology James Kilpatrick Ltd a also bar a gig Mandry of cuddles Mere might give the United slates serious advantages in a defensive arms race. Security considerations As Well As inc Sovil determination to remain an equal super Power with inc uni cd Stales would drive Moscow to match a space based . De sense but soviet leaders can have Lillic desire to make the huge investment and undergo the economic adjustments such an undertaking clearly would require. Just As Likely the revolutionary shift from offensive deterrence to strategic de sense would Force equally drastic changes in inc slur Cluro and Power centers of the soviet military a Prospect the civilian leaders probably Don l savor and military leaders May strongly resist. The serious Domestic problems both eco nomic and structural hiking Gorbachev should cause him moreover to seek an improved climatic in .-soviet relations which is unlikely to result from a new defensive arms race but might Well begin in an agric Mcnol to reduce offensive Aram cols. Thai inc russians for Good reason oppose a strategic defense docs not entitle them to i hair own precondition thai inc ski be abandoned before negotiations begin. Nor can they rationally insist on halting Laboratory research. Deploy Mcnol of a Sara logic defense May be As Richard Nixon has slated the ultimate bargaining Chip one that properly used could yield  greatest accomplishment of Reagan s administration. What will be necessary however is that he Soflin his refusal expressed in his last news conference even to consider any form of Trade off involving inc ski. After All even if the ski were placed on the Laboc Al Geneva the re sult would not necessarily be total abandonment of Sara logic defense. Whal inc new Sovil position has made Clear is not thai a simple Deal can be quickly had. Bul Hal it s now up Lorea Gan Loicl his Nugo Lialos no Goliath. New York Slowi meal Servic fair pay for Federal judges and skilled executives the Story has been attributed to Socrates who supposedly met an acquaintance one Day on the Sorc Cosof Al Hans. How s your wife asked the Friend. Compared to what inquired the Sage. So it is in the difficult matter of the salaries paid to members of Congress Federal judges and lop officials in the exec Sivc Branch. The lawmakers now earn $75.100 a year a District judge makes $76.000 a cab inet Secretary gets $86.200 and a level in assistant Secretary grosses s72.000. The first question is arc these salaries too High or too Low the second question is. Compared to what in its report a few weeks ago. The commission on executive legislative and judicial salaries made its own View Clear the pay Scales arc much too Low. In 1969 we paid senators and represent Ives $42,500. Be cause of inflation they now make the equivalent of $25,724 in 1969 dollars. Their purchasing Power has dropped by nearly 40 percent. A Federal District judge earns less than half the salary of a Law partner in a major City. The executive Branch cannot recruit the top notch managers in sorely needs potential managers can not live on a level in income and put their sons an daughters through College. Such comparisons Are As statistically valid As they Are politically unimpressive. To the Ordinary voter $70,000 is a Fortune. The Ordinary Voler has other things in the Back of his mind. He knows generally if not precisely that members of Congress Benefit from All kinds of perquisites in addition to i hair salaries. The voter often regards Federal judges securely tenured fur life As tyrants on the Bench. As for  inc very word carries a scornful ring. Besides the Voler asks Aren t these 3,147 members judges and officials supposed to be Public servants Why should servants earn so very much More than their masters these considerations historically have weighed heavily upon the conscience or the courage of the Congress. In 1789, Congress fixed its pay scale Al $6 n Day while silting. In 1816. A few reckless Fellows Man aged to change this to $1,500 a year but the move created such a storm thai the acl speedily was rescinded. The process was repealed in 1873, when con Gress marched up the Hill to a substantial increase and then marched Back Down again. Every subsequent Effort to increase congressional pay has seen the same conflict Between equity and expedience. In 1967, members sought bravely to gel them selves off a political Hook. They created inc commission on executive legislative and judicial salaries and gave in authority to recommend new pay Scales every four years. The commission would Send its recommendations to the president. He could accept or modify them bul if either House of Congress voted formal disapproval within 30 Days the new Scales would no take effect. Ii was a Nice idea. It worked admirably in 1969 in 1973, no raises were approved. Bul in 1977. When the Ting a voice vote of disapproval. Since Ihen matter have drifted and the problem has worsened since Mem ours of Congress lied nay raises for top executive officials to pay raises for themselves. Because of a supreme Couri opinion in what in known As inc Chadha Case of 1983, the  i procedure no longer can be employed. Presidents mint have an Opportunity to veto substantive legislation. The commission proposes a sensible solution in the future in  t t a a y adjust my to the president the a v v de a him to cd the Congress will tinn rudys " we h 1 to h houses May Send a re la lion of disapproval to the president for his signature or Nam h " " Resol i. The presidential no. E Presena a Man canons could then take effect. This is a kind of k slide around inc Chadha decision bul in Mighels judicial Muster. In any event some mechanism needs to be devised to a Scales out of the limit hands of Hoo Pas Ems r. � Congress. They arc politically fearful voting themselves a salary of. Say $90000 a year � reluctance operates directly upon juju h of a