European Stars And Stripes (Newspaper) - July 24, 1986, Darmstadt, Hesse                                Page 10 the stars and stripes thursday july 24,1986 columns Tom Wicker it s time for . To abandon Gramm Rudman happily for the Economy the supreme court has invalidated the Central gimmick of the Gramm Rudman Hollings Boondoggle. But the court could not eliminate the danger that Congress in its Iommi Glike urge to do something about he deficit will do exactly the wrong thing Cut expenditures further raise taxes or both. Predictably the justices ruled out the automatic budget cuts congressional dreamers had fondly imag ined would shield them from political responsibility for those cuts. The comptroller general the court prop Erly said is an official of the legislative Branch forbid Den by the Constitution from the executive function of ordering the automatic spending reductions. A splendid Little dilemma thus arises. Congress does t want to shift the comptroller general to the executive Branch because his function in other matters is too important to the legislators and it does t want to Shin the automatic budget cutting to the director of the office of management and budget because he s an officer of an administration that Congress does t Trust to make honest economic forecasts honest budgets or honest apportionment of the automatic cuts. It seems unlikely that this dilemma can be solved no should it be by either of the actions described. But if no solution is found the Buck will have been handed Back to Congress. In an election year members will have to vote for the spending cuts or tax increases needed in order to meet the deficit targets dictated by Gramm Rudman. Or. If reason prevailed Congress could take the alternative course suggested last feb. 4 repeal Gramm Rudman in its entirety. That would make even More sense today because of the lagging state of the Economy. Economic growth obviously is Down from the optimistic estimates of january with Gross National product feeble in the Sec Ond Quarter and no reason that it should improve As yet discernible. Inflation also is Down and that Means there s room for economic stimulus. Stimulus is the real need because of the obvious Slack in the Economy and because no matter what spending cuts might be made the deficit will increase if the Economy worsens and revenues decline further. Bui if. As current economic predictions suggest the destructive Gramm Rudman deficit targets Are not William Buckley going to be met Congress will be forced 19 Cut spend ing further or raise taxes or both deflationary Steps that would be seen for what they arc if it were not for Gramm Rudman and the deficit hysteria that produced it. That s Why the deficit targets should follow the automatic gimmick into oblivion. The real need is for the Federal Reserve to move toward an easier monetary policy. Neither Congress nor the president of course can Force the Federal Reserve to act. But both can bring Strong pressures for such action and in any Case the fed can hardly be unaware of the slumping Economy. Easier Money not incidentally would have a Salu tary effect on the huge debt service sector of the Federal budget because it would reduce interest rates. With no excess demand to reignite inflation progressively in creasing the Supply of Money and credit also would stimulate business investment Speed up the Economy and boost Federal revenues ultimately that s the Best Way to attack the  Money also would drive Down the value of the Dollar. That s Good economic Medicine too since the . Trade deficit remains at a record High  Gramm Rudman and the harsh Mea sures it would dictate Morecr probably would be Good politics for members of Congress. They May Pic Ture themselves As under heavy pressure to do some thing about the deficit but such pressures usually Are More apparent than real they certainly made no differ ence in 1984. Both the empirical evidence and Exten Sive political experience suggest that further budget cuts in an election year would be at least As dangerous As refraining from them in who Kirin mystique Clouds common sense in abm Issue the owl track arms rao6third in a three part abm treaty Seri Sall the arguments with hair on their Chest Point to the advisability of ditching the abm treaty. Briefly reviewed they Are 1. Ever since 1972, the soviet Union has been aggressively engaged in self Protection in violation of the idea of Mutual assured vulnerability. 2. Eve r since 1972 up until president Reagan s initiation of the strategic defense initiative the United states has been Meri allowing a Complete dissipation of its defensive potential. 3. The soviet Union has violated the treaty by building its radar site at Krasnoyarsk in Siberia. 4. Our scientists should be free to Chart or to re Chart a space shield research program unencumbered by any of the prohibitions fancied or real imposed by the abm treaty. It would All appear to be Clear Cut but there is a mystique that surrounds treaties with the soviet Union that touch on arms and even people wonderfully Situ ated to remark the deterioration in our position since signing the abm treaty have become choirboys in the disarmament chorus. The Best example of this is ambassador Gerard Smith who did much of the negotiating at the time the treaty was signed. Although he served Public notice on the soviet Union at the direction of the Nixon administration that any prolongation of the abm treaty five years Down the Road would probably not harmonize with . Interests just recently he was writing nervously and sarcastically in the Washington Post deploring any consideration of repealing the treaty he had said prob ably should be repealed if Progress was not being made in the reduction of strategic weapons Back when the abm treaty was signed. And where there is Gerard Smith there is bound to be Paul Wamke not far be Hind and then Robert Mcnamara and the whole Dis armament lobby that appears to be afraid of every thing save the mounting Power of the soviet Union a to bring off a first strike and b to defend itself against retaliation. Now it is generally supposed that if the moment should come when Gen. James Abrahamson who is in charge of the ski program should approach the presi Dent in the company of Caspar Weinberger and say we have reached a Point beyond which we simply can t travel so Long As abm is still on the books that at that Point Reagan would proceed to repeal the treaty. But there Are difficulties Here. The first is that the longer we go without repealing it the More it will Rise in symbolic importance making it harder and harder to annul. Who is talking now about deploying the Neu tron bomb or about repealing the Helsinki accords not Only would Reagan find it harder in 1988 to repeal the treaty than he d find it to do now following say a rip snorting speech on soviet violation of the same treaty he ought to consider this the Choice May not be his. The strategic defense initiative is a program that will take Many years fully to explore let alone deploy. The time is bound to come when we will need to test and this we can t do under the prevailing read ing of the abm treaty. Certainly there would be shrieks of pain if we abandoned the abm treaty. If you get hooked on a Placebo you Are going to have withdrawal symptoms when they take away that Placebo. But the abm treaty is worse merely than a Placebo. Under its hypnotic spell we have lost years during which we might gradually have dug our Way out of the Mutual assured destruction that continues to serve As the spinal column of our deterrent posture. Those who look on the abm treaty As an instrument that contains the soviet Union Are or should be struck dumb by the Mere mention of Krasnoyarsk an almost exhibition Stic Vio lation of the treaty by the russians. C in Luerul pint syntax a