Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (Feb. 1, 1983)
DAMN! Do you remember last Monday how proud we were of our "new toy,” the Compugraphlc 8400 typesetter which gave the Emerald its new look? Unfortunately the little bugger is tempermental and has a few minor problems. To meet deadline we were forced to use our good old trusty TXT typesetter to finish the paper Hopefully, our "new toy” should be back on line for Wednesday's paper. We are sorry for the inconven ience Oregon daily _ _ emerald Tuesday, February 1, 1983 Eugene, Oregon Volume 84, Number 90 Professor finds veterans7 billing error By Frank Shaw Of ttw Emaratd A recent increase in veterans’ mor tgage payments has been ruled invalid due to a University law school pro fessor's efforts. John Bonine, a professor at the law school, last week accused the state Department of Veteran's Affairs of violating state laws and mortgage agreements. In a 10-page legal memo to state attorney general Dave Frohnmayer, Bonine says the depart ment also violated an attorney general’s ruling last November with its intended methods for collecting the property tax money Frohnmayer’s office ruled on Friday that the veteran department’s methods were invalid. “What it came down to is a $27 million-dollar mistake," Bonine says The dispute arose when veterans received higher mortgage bills for the upcoming year than they expected. The increase resulted from a system the veteran's affairs department used in the past to assess taxes The department paid taxes to the counties and cities on behalf of the veteran in November Afterward, the veteran was billed one-twelfth of the amount (plus interest) which would be repaid each month of the following year. This year the agency computed the increase in taxes paid in 1982 over the 1981 tax bill for each loan and also pro rated that increase over the next 12 months. “They would have recovered the full amount anyway by the end of 1983 if they had followed their old system," Bonine says "What they were trying to do was build a reserve, and that was clearly illegal " Bonine says the department also signed a contract stipulating they would collect the bill after the veterans pay, and the government is obligated to follow that contract. "A deal is a deal," he says. Bonine says the new rule also didn't provide for adequate public comment on the new system. The veteran's af fairs department gave only 15 days notice on the new ruling and mailed the information concerning the ruling by third-class mail As a result, the new regulation didn’t arrive until Jan. 20 or 21, almost past the deadline Bonine says the regulation attempt would cost the state $150,000 — the cost of repealing the regulation, re issuing the payment coupons and mail ing the new coupons to the veterans. The attorney general's ruling will roll back the veterans' payment. The department is asking veterans to pay the amount shown on their coupons until April when it can send the new coupons out. Photo by Bob Baker Law school professor John Bonine revealed errors in a new mortgage payment plan for veterans. Weapons ban proposal uncertain, say teachers By Michele Matassa Ol th« fmm aid University professors are reacting calmly to Presi dent Ronald Reagan's most recent call for U S.-Soviet negotiations to ban "intermediate-range, land based nuclear missile weapons from the face of the earth ” Reagan’s plea was made in an open letter to the peo ple of Europe that Vice President George Bush read while speaking in Berlin. University history pro fessor Roger Chickering and political science pro fessor Arthur Hanhardt agree with deputy White House press secretary Lyn don Allin’s statement that Reagan was merely repeating the “zero option,” a proposal which the Kremlin already has refused. Chickering describes the zero-option as a move in which "everybody wipes the slate clean.” And the history professor criticizes Reagan’s state ment for its ambiguity. “The rhetoric sounds pretty nice, but I think if you look closely you'll see it’s the same position the Americans have had all along," Checkering says Hanhardt also says the proposal is not a substan tial move. "It doesn't sound as if it's much of a breakthrough It's not a pro posal than can be a basis for serious negotiation.” Hanhardt says Reagan’s purpose for repeating the proposal underlies his meaning for sending Bush to Europe. That purpose is to gain support for an American proposal to base missiles in Europe, he says. Hanhardt says Reagan focused on West Germany because the deployment issue has become a major one in that country’s May elections. Chickering explains the United States wants to deploy more than 570 Per shing missiles in Western Europe unless the Soviets discontinue their SX20 missiles. In Berlin, Bush defended this movement as a method of deterrence, not prepara tion for war. “Nothing infuriates the president and me more than the suggestion we are preparing to fight a nuclear war, because we are not preparing to fight a nuclear war. We are preparing to deter war..Bush said. Reagan asks for nuclear pact BERLIN (AP) — In an open letter to the peo ple ot Europe, President Reagan said Monday he was willing to meet with Soviet leader Yuri Andropov to sign a pact "banning U S. and Soviet intermediate range, land-based nuclear missile weapons from the face of the earth.” In Washington, deputy White House press secretary Lyndon Allin said Reagan was not making a new proposal but was simply stating a willingness to sign a pact with Andropov if the Soviet Union accepts the U S. “zero-option” proposal — already rejected by the Kremlin. Vice President George Bush read Reagan’s letter after delivering a speech of his own in Berlin on the second day of a European tour. The new element in the proposal was Reagan’s willingness to meet with Andropov “wherever and whenever he wants” in order to m* mr** T r* Pres. Ronald Reagan sign such a pact. "I make this offer out of a conviction that such an agreement would serve the interest of both sides and, most importantly, that the peo ple of Europe want nothing more. I urge Mr. An dropov to accept it,” Reagan said in the letter. “Just as our allies can count on the United States to defend Europe at all costs, you can count on us to spare no effort to reach a fair and meaningful agreement that will reduce the Soviet nuclear threat.” Bush, in his own speech, said Western Europe must be willing to station hundreds of new nuclear rockets on its soil to deter war. “If we are to be credible in our arms negotiations, the alliance must be united in its determination to deploy the intermediate force system if necessary,” he said. Bush warned the growing European peace movement that Moscow’s plans for limiting missiles would legitimize the "awesome levels of nuclear fire power directed by the Soviets against Europe.” The Bush trip is designed to counter grow ing opposition in Europe to the deployment of the new U.S. missiles. The plan has become an issue in the March 6 West German election. West German Chancellor Helmut Kohl told reporters he was grateful for the open letter and "this readiness for a summit falls on an open ear and finds an outstretched hand." Bush spoke at a dinner given by West Berlin Mayor Richard von Weizsaecker and at tended by about 600 dignitaries. Berlin was the second stop on Bush’s 12-day European tour. Bush hammered the Soviets throughout his speech, calling the Berlin Wall, which he is to visit Tuesday, "a monument to a great evil,” and reminding listeners of Soviet intervention in Hungary* and Afghanistan.” He also said a sound agreement must preclude the Soviet Union from returning mobile missiles to European bases on short notice.
