Candidates for the United States Senate and House of Representatives were asked the following questions by The Washington Post:
Freeze: Do you favor a nuclear freeze? If not, do you support other forms of control?
Services: Should additional federal funds be appropriated for social services?
Social Security: Does Social Security need to be changed, and if so, how?
Budget: Do you favor a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget?
William A. Albaugh (R), 59, of 2600 Queens Chapel Rd., Hyattsville, is an investor-inventor who has spent 20 years protesting what he sees as the illegal removel of the District from Maryland.
Freeze: I oppose a nuclear freeze because I feel it will slow down overall nuclear technology. Nuclear engineers and scientists should be subjected to some civilian control to avoid accidental world suicide, but I favor directing 10 times as much money and effort to nuclear research and development.
Services: I would vote in favor of spending much more general revenue funds to provide free (no direct cost) medical care for all residents, guaranteeing a federal job for any job seeker who is otherwise unemployed and giving very generous grants to all promising students of all ages.
Social Security: I favor a major change in the Social Security system to guarantee widespread health and job security to all residents together with generous grants to students.
Budget. I would oppose such an amendment on the grounds that it fails to address the real problem of guaranteeing that the dollar does not lose any of its buying power over a long period of time. If you want to maintain or increase the value of the dollar, it is a simple matter to back it with an asset that appreciates or a constant credit (CC) currency unit that is tied to the productivity of a worker per hour. Placing a direct 20 percent inflation tax on over-priced goods and services will stop inflation fast. This sales tax can be made very progressive by rebating the total tax revenue in CC notes which can be used to buy goods. The way to stop inflation is to adopt such price-wage controls.
Donovan B. Finch (R), 46, of 1318 Apple Tree Ct., Frederick, a retired Army chief warrant officer, is a biomedical engineering consultant. He is a member of the American Legion, Veterans of Foreign Wars, National Rifle Association and a Howard Community College's advisory committee.
Freeze: I support the Jackson- Warner bill. I do not think any agreement with verifiable inspection will be signed by Russia.
Social: We must reduce our spending while taking care of the truly needy. Why should my great grandchild have to pay for social programs and expenses for 1982.
Social Security: Yes, back to its original position of a fund to supplement retirement. Take the other programs out and [change them] to a general fund status.
Budget: I support the principle. However, I would have to see the final amendment to see if I would support it. But we cannot wait for an amendment to become law before we balance the budget. And we must balance it by reducing spending, not increasing taxes.
Lawrence J. Hogan (R), 53, of 8400 Hillview Rd., Landover, has been county executive of Prince George's County since 1978. Previously, he was a member of the U.S. House for six years. He has been an FBI agent and a University of Maryland professor and has managed a public relations and advertising firm.
Freeze: Yes. I support a reduction in arms with the Soviet Union that is truly mutual and genuinely verifiable. However, it cannot be unilateral. We must make sure that the Soviet Union will comply with verification provisions. More importantly, we cannot lock the U.S.S.R. into a position of permanent superiority.
Services: Federal involvement in social welfare programs should be limited to those that are truly national in scope. All too often, programs have been created or expanded that while laudable in purpose have had little actual impact, except to create massive bureaucracies, inflexible rules and regulations, opportunities for massive fraud and abuse and dependency on government. I am opposed to expanding the federal role in this area. Increased federal spending will only lead to higher inflation and deficits. Those needing government assistance will not benefit from that. The Johnson administration's "War on Poverty: was not only ineffective but also extremely costly and seriously undermined our federal system. These programs need to be scrutinized from the viewpoint of effectiveness, administrative efficiency and which level of government has appropriate responsibility. I believe that many can and should be assumed by the states, localities and charitable organizations.
Social Security: The Social Security system is in serious financial jeopardy; it is losing $17,000 each and every minute, and even with inter-fund borrowing may be broke by this time next year unless something is done. We must act to preserve the integrity of the trust funds and the basic benefits structure for current recipients. Current abuses and equities must be examined, as well as long-range issues. We must begin to take the steps necessary to preserve Social Security and make it financially sound.
Budget: Yes, I wholeheartedly support the legislation recently adopted by the Senate. As one who has operated for the past four years under one of the most strict taxing and spending limitations in our country, I believe this proposal is reasonable, flexible and workable. It will also provide needed accountability. A constitutional amendment is the only way to give politicians the backbone to say "no" to the special interests constantly seeking more spending and more programs. To revitalize our economy, we must continue to reduce the growth in federal spending and the size of the deficit. Requiring a balanced budget will be an integral tool in those efforts.