European Stars and Stripes (Newspaper) - July 7, 1991, Darmstadt, Hesse                                Sunday july 7, 1991 the stars and stripes Page 13 commentary Tom Wicker quota debate helping shape 92 elections it used to be said Down South that the Only Way to get a mules attention was to hit it Over the head with a two by four. If anyone doubted that a a quotas and the democrats alleged partiality to them will be a Republican theme in 1992, Jesse Helms got out his lumber last week and gave them a Good lick Helms the Well known a senator not from North Carolina is not a Man to let the voters wonder where he stands. In 1989, when some optimists doubted he would run again he dashed their Hopes by taking up arms against the Mapplethorpe show a As Good As an announcement of his candidacy. In 1990, it appeared for a time that senator no might be beaten by a Strong Black candidate Harvey Gantt. Close students of the senators Brand of politics never accepted this shining vision sure enough he turned the tide with a to spot depicting a White Man losing a Job due to a a quotas for Blacks. Now Helms has introduced an amendment to civil rights legislation that would bar employers from granting any kind of preferential treatment whatever in hiring compensation or promotion if based on race color religion National origin or sex. This after centuries of the most blatant preferences in every aspect of american economic life a preferences for Whites males usually for those of Western european Stock almost always for English speakers All too often for protestants. What blatant hypocrisy it would be for the Senate to say after such a record that preferences were no longer permissible. Now of course some preferences Are called quotas whether they Are or not and Are extended to Blacks hispanics asians women. Admittedly they might once in a while inconvenience or disadvantage a White protestant male. But in the face of a history of discrimination is rigid even handedness to be the test of a candidates or party a Devotion to american values if so its As distorted a View of history and reality As the argument that any deviation from the idea of a a Ocolor Blind America must be denounced. Since when was America Colo Blind when is it Ever Likely to be Colo blindness is an Ideal not a fair Standard of current action or employment rules. The Helms amendment is less a serious proposal than a typically shifty Helms device to ensure that those who Are to vote against it can be pilloried next year for a a favouring  even before its introduction president Bush had branded the civil rights Bill a a quota  he has stuck to this indictment against All arguments a not just by democrats and Black leaders but also the pleas of republicans like sen. John Danforth of Missouri who tried hard to get Bush to accept a Compromise and now describes the Adamant White House position As fostering Job discrimination. Bush is regarded As sure to veto the legislation As a a quota  with the Aid of the Helms amendment he can seek to establish himself and his party in 1992 As defenders against quota wielding democrats of an evenhanded Colo Blind non preferential american working life. In such an America the actuality soon would be pervasive preference Lor White males As it always was in the past. Education unfortunately could be another testing ground for the quota theme. Lamar Alexander the Secretary of Educa Tion told a House subcommittee the other Day that he feared cultural diversity policies and multicultural curriculum in higher education might Lead a to race based hiring quotas at educational institutions receiving Federal  that might happen in some cases. But even if it did those cases could be dealt with individually the possibility is insufficient reason to ban or even to discourage cultural diversity in higher education. That would be like taking up a two by four to get a mule s attention a or Esea lating the quota theme into a National crisis in order to win an election. C the new York time James j. Kilpatrick Nasa s space station really a pie in the sky by one of those Nice coincidences that come along now and then two publications dealing with the exploration of space recently turned up in the same mail. One was the report of a study group headed by Thomas p. Stafford a retired air Force general. The other was an article by Gregg Easterbrook in the new Republic for july 8. / the two pieces should be required Reading for All members of Congress before they appropriate funds for the National aeronautics and space administration. On june 6 the House agreed to throw another $2 billion into space station Freedom. This would amount to an irrevocable commitment to keep this indefensible project alive. Of particular interest is this remarkable fact the Stafford commission ignores space station Freedom almost altogether. The report mentions the space station in one paragraph on Page 102, and recommends its program in a single sentence on Page 113. That is it. If Ever a costly project were damned with faint Praise the space station surely qualifies. Nasal a people say. Their space station is a must. The Stafford people say their lunar base is a must. There is not Money enough in the Federal Treasury to finance both undertakings. Writing from a Low orbit of ignorance 1 am bound to say that the Stafford approach makes More sense to me. For Congress to put More Money into Freedom is to support a Job saving Boondoggle. It is pure Folly. Easterbrook writes with what someone once de scribed As the Bell like ring of authority. His criticism of space station Freedom is cogent concise and devastating. When Nasa proposed the space station in 1984, the project Wasa Cost $8 billion about $11 billion in 1990 dollars. Or was to serve As a kind of garage for satellite repair. It would refuel outbound spacecraft and undertake environmental studies. There would be new opportunities for astronomy. The station would House eight astronauts for months at a time. Under the heading of Quot life sciences a the project would accumulate data on the Long term effects of Zero Gravity. The Crew also would study manufacturing under conditions of microgravity. The grand plans of 1984 have shrunk. The pending design would House Only four persons. All missions except microgravity and life sciences have been eliminated and microgravity is about to go. Largely because of design changes mandated by Congress the Cost has soared into orbit. Now Nasa itself concedes a Basic construction Cost of $30 billion. The general accounting office says $40 billion. When the necessary expense of shuttle missions is figured into the calculus realistic estimates of this venture Rise to More than $100 billion. Easterbrook identifies problems that Are almost bound to result in disaster. The space station would have to revolve in a Low orbit a condition that will require periodic rebooting. The Complex components must be assembled in space. This will require 23 to 26 shuttle flights for delivery. A suppose another shuttle fails during the construction period and launches undergo the kind of lengthy suspension that followed challenger. The Freedom design can withstand one to two years of flight suspensions without falling Back into the atmosphere. Downtime after challenger was three  merely to keep the station in orbit will require a an unprecedented degree of  by one informed estimate Freedom will need 3,700 Man hours a year. A so far american astronauts have accumulated about 400 total hours walking in space and they found the experience profoundly exhausting. Under the current estimate each member of freedoms four person Crew would spend two hours per Day space walking with wrench and Hammer. In other words the main purpose of being on the space station will be to maintain the space  it needs to be said that the Stafford group offers no Cost estimates whatever for its series of lunar missions but Over the next 20 years a the anticipated life Span of the space station a the Stafford program clearly offers the taxpayers a better bargain. Nasal a defenders place great Reliance upon the a a inspiration that a space station would provide for youngsters who will be the space engineers of the next Century. This lofty rhetoric strikes me As so much hooey. If youngsters Are to be inspired and earthly jobs Are to be preserved lets go Back to the Moon. C Universal Presa Syndicate