"Using this methodology," ,Mr. Aspin wrote in an article ttpublished today in Foreign U. S CHALLENGED Tolley magazine, "the largest {.single reason that Soviet de- lense spending exceeds our own -1 ON ARMS ESTIMATE • la sbeen the American deci- „sion to switch to an all- 8 1976 woluntee army and to pay —MAR- 'its servicemen civilian-level Proxmire and Aspin Charge ..wages. Administration Exaggerates Absurd Calculation "The absurdity of this cal- Soviet Military Outlay wculation then becomes clear: If :the United States were to NYTimes have its military pay scales, By JOHN W. FINNEY Soviet defense 'spending' Special to The New York Times :would fall.” WASHINGTON, March 7 - Mr. Aspin also objected in The Administration's contention 'an interview that in its com- parisons the Administration that the Soviet Union is out- was leaving out the defense spendixic the United States on ;spending of United States tins ittiso is neing challenged by -allies in the North Atlantic. Representative Les Aspin and • Using figures given to him Senator William Proxmire, who 'by the Defense Intelligence charge that the Administration Agency and the C.I.A.'s dollar- cost comparison methods, he is distroting and exaggerating, ',calculated that the NATO allies intelligence estimates of the So- were spending $140 billion on viet military budget. :defense compared with $121 As debate on the defense ,billion by the Warsaw Pact. budget nears a decisive point in • The Administration's figures Congress, the two Democrats show the Soviet Union spend- ing $114 billion and the United from Wisconsin are attempting States $80 billion in 1974. to rebut an Administration • Mr. Aspin also complained argument that has had consid- that in citing figures showing erable impact upon congres- that the Soviet Union was out- sional committees. The House producing the United States Armed Services Committee this in weapons, Defense Depart- ment officials were using a week is expected to approve a )iroduction period of 1972-74 defense program somewhat *that resulted in an "upward larger than requested by the bias" in favor of the Soviet Administration. Union. In justifying $112 billion in `Our Number Going Up' defense appropriations for the If more recent production coming fiscal year. the Admin- figures were used, he said, it istration has relied heavily upon would show that "our numbers Central Intelligence Agency es- Are going up while those of the timates showing that in terms Soviets are going down." Fig- of dollar-cost the Soviet Union ures supplied by the Defense is outspending the United States Intelligence Agency, for ex- on defense by about 40 percent. ample, showed that in 1975 Soviet production of tanks and Method Criticized armored personnel carriers de- Representative Aspin and ilined significantly from the Senator Proxmire maintain that 1972-74 level, he said, the method used by the C.I.A. • The Administration has also to compare the defense budg- emphasized that in noninfla- ets tends to overstate the size tionary terms the Soviet de- of the Soviet program. Also, fense program has been grow- Senator Proxmire complained ing an an annual rate of 2.7 in a Senate speech Friday that percent for the last decade, Administration officials have While the United States defense, "misused the information" in effort until last year had been the intelligence estmates "to declining by about 1 percent exaggerate the size of the annually since 1968. Mr. Aspin, Soviet military or to create il- responded that not all the in- lusions of gaps between Soviet creases in the Soviet defense and United States forces." effort directly threatened the In comparing the defense United States. programs, the C.I.A. attempts Using figures from the C.I.A. to calculate in dollars how and the Defense Intelligence much it would cost the United Agency, Mr. Aspin calculated States to duplicate the Soviet that much of the expansion in military establishment. The Soviet military spending wa re- C.I.A. acknowledged in its lat- lated to China, air defenses and est estimate that such a dollar- an increase in internal security cost calculation tended to forces and that only about half overstate the size of the Soviet of the annual growth was program, but it maintained that "threatening to America." rf`the degree of overstatement is clearly not large enough to alter the basic conclusion that the Soviet military program over-all is currently significant- ly larger than that of the Unit- ed States." A principal objection raised 'by Representative Aspin and Senator Proxmire was that the _cost of the 4.5 million-man So- wiet military establishment was being calculated on the basis of the much higher pay scales of 'the United States.