Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
1554445
label
Third Debate: Press Clippings
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
1554445
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Third Debate: Press Clippings
citationUrl
collections
White House Special Files Unit Files
Ford - Carter Debates Files
subjects
Campaign debates
Presidential campaign, 1976
Public opinion polls
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
1554445
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1976-10-31
month
10
year
1976
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1976-10-01
month
10
year
1976
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
47e73a2a42b8b970
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box 3, folder "Third Debate: Press Clippings" of the
White House Special Files Unit Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Copyright Notice
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of
photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald Ford donated to the United
States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.
Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public
domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to
remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid
copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Digitized from Box 3 of the White House Special Files Unit Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
AL, FRIDAY, OCT. 15, 1976
nuclear Program-wher?
Undue Alarm Over Nuclear Spread?
By ERNEST W. LEFEVER
clear technology spreads, but nuclear
American commitment. The anxiety is
In his accelerated effort to slow down
bombs do not "proliferate" from one coun-
sharpest In Seoul because of occasional
the spread of nuclear arms technology,
try to another like reactors or power sta-
congressional demands for the withdrawal
President Ford last August sent Secretary
tions. As far as is known, not a single
of U.S. forces, and in Taipel because of
of State Kissinger to Pakistan to persuade
bomb has ever been transferred from one
pressure for Washington to normalize rela-
Prime Minister Bhutto not to buy a pluto-
government to another by loan, gift, sale,
tions with Peking. Their fear of being
nium reprocessing plant from France. The
or theft, in spite of rare attempts, such as
abandoned virtually compels them to seek
mission was backed by thinly velled con-
that of Libya's Khadafy to purchase them
a substitute for the problematical U.S.
gressional threats to withhold development
from Peking. The chances of terrorists
commitment, a substitute of their own
of security assistance if Pakistan persisted
stealing a bomb or bomb-grade nuclear
making and under their own control. And
in the French deal. On the same trip, Mr.
material have been exaggerated.
what better vehicle of self-rellance than a
Kissinger pressured Paris to cancel the ar-
If additional governments acquire nu-
national nuclear deterrent?
rangement. Just a few days ago, the
clear forces they will be of their own man-
Any nuclear force is a two-edged sword.
French government Indicated a new will-
ufacture. Any decision to go nuclear is the
Just like conventional arms, nuclear weap-
ingness to discuss limits on nuclear ex-
result of a protracted, agonizing cost-bene-
ons can deter or provoke, but the post-Hi-
ports.
fit analysis, especially for a country with
roshima experience demonstrates that nu-
Mr. Kissinger sought to achieve in Paki-
scarce human and technical resources.
clear arms have never provoked a nuclear
stan what he achieved in South Korea last
Once a decision is made, the road is long,
war, or even a conventional war. To ac-
January. A congressionally-supported
knowledge that nuclear arms to date have
State Department threat to withhold Ex-
had a stabilizing impact is not to assert
port-Import Bank financing for a $292 mil-
that they always will, but it surely sug.
lion Westinghouse power reactor forced
Two assumptions-that
gests that the apocalyptic voices predicting
Seoul to cancel the planned purchase of a
additional national nuclear
nuclear war by the 1950s or 1960s were
French plutonium reprocessing plant. In
dead wrong.
1975 Washington failed to prevent the con-
forces will increase the
One does not have to love the bomb to
summation of a comprehensive nuclear as-
caution against undue alarm over addi-
sistance agreement between West Ger-
likelihood of nuclear war
tional nuclear forces. The alarm was
many and Brazil which in time will provide
the latter with the technology for making
and that the most effective
sounded in the case of France, but where
is the evidence that the strategic balance
nuclear weapons, though U.S. pressure
way to prevent nuclear
of terror was weakened by France's Inde-
helped to ensure the stiff safeguards against
pendent deterrent? Has China's member-
"weapons application" written into the pact.
acquisition by the Third
ship in the nuclear club or India's 1974 ex-
plosion made the world more dangerous?
A Widely-Held Assumption
World is to deny them the
Does Israel's presumed possession of a
The continuing U.S. efforts to halt, de-
dozen nuclear bombs enhance or detract
ter, or slow down the manufacture of nu-
technology-deserve more
from stability in the Middle East?
clear arms by additional governments is
criticial examination.
Looking to the future, the burden of
rooted in the widely-held assumption that
proof certainly rests with those who would
the danger of local or strategic war or nu-
argue that additional national nuclear ar-
clear blackmail will inevitably rise with
senals would be good for local and world
the increasing number of governments that
hard, costly, and replete with political
stability. But an equal burden of proof
possess them. The chief corollary of this
risks, as the cases of France, China and
rests upon those who maintain-as most
assumption is that the U.S. and the other
India demonstrate.
spokesmen in the arms control community
nuclear-competent countries (the big nu-
It took New Delhi 15 years and perhaps
seem to-that all further acquisitions any-
clear powers plus West Germany, East
$3 million to conduct its modest explosion:
where and in all circumstances are equally
Germany, Sweden, Belgium, Italy, and Po-
this expenditure was only a small part of
dangerous.
land) should refrain from exporting repro-
India's extensive nuclear research program
The Nub of the Matter
cessing plants, enrichment facilities, or
which only a handful of Third World states
other weapons-related nuclear technologies
can match. Working at maximum speed,
In pursuing its non-acquisition objec-
to states which do not now have them.
it would take years for India to build a small
tive, Washington has overemphasized mul-
Failing that, such exports should be ac-
force capable of reaching targets in Pakis-
tilateral instruments such as the Non-Pro-
companied by vigorous legal and physical
tan. A force capable of striking China would
liferation Treaty and the suppliers' consor-
safeguards against weapons applications.
require a sophisticated missile-delivery
tium and neglected efforts to deal with the
In mid-1975, Washington established a con-
system.
basic motivation of exposed states to go
sortium for these purposes along with the
J. Robert Oppenhelmer once said of the
nuclear. This is the nub of the question. We
Soviet Union, Britain, West Germany,
hydrogen bomb: "It was so technically
cannot prevent the spread of nuclear tech-
France, Japan and Canada.
sweet, we had to do it." But the assump-
nology, which is needed by many countries
This denial-of-capability effort is seen
tion that a technical nuclear arms capabil-
as a source of energy. But we can help un-
by the participants as a more effective de-
ity always (or usually) leads to nuclear
dercut the impulse to make nuclear arms
terrent to new nuclear forces than the Nu-
arms has not been ratified by recent his-
by continuing or increasing the U.S. secu-
clear Non-Proliferation Treaty which em-
tory. Six or more European states have
rity commitment to several crucial states.
long had this capability, but for political
The extension of a nuclear guarantee, de-
braces 100 adherents, but not some of those
reasons they have refrained from exercis-
fense pact, or military assistance-and in
most inclined to go nuclear, such as Israel,
Ing it.
some cases the provision of U.S. troops-is
Egypt, India, Pakistan, Argentina and Bra-
Neither Prime Minister Gandhi nor her
the single most effective way to encourage
zil. (India had its first nuclear explosion
father pressed ahead with their costly nu-
nuclear abstinence.
in May 1974 and informed observers be-
clear effort because It was "technically
As Fred C. Ikle, director of the U.S.
lieve that Israel has a small, but militarily
sweet," but because they felt severely
significant nuclear force.)
Arms Control and Disarmament Agency,
threatened by China. Likewise, Israel's nu-
said in 1975:
Two assumptions-that additional na-
clear force was built to enhance its secu-
"For many non-nuclear powers, pro-
tional nuclear forces will automatically in-
rity and ensure its survival. The pro-
tection against nuclear threat or attack
crease the likelihood of nuclear war and
foundly political decision to go nuclear is
rests on American commitments. Ameri-
that the most effective way to prevent or
rooted in fear and nourished by the ever-
ca's self-interest dictates that we sustain
deter nuclear acquisition by Third World
present desire for prestige.
our alliances. If we withdraw our protec-
governments is to deny them the necessary
The four governments today that proba-
tion-or if confidence in it were shaken-
technology-deserve more critical examin-
bly feel most strongly the need to develop
strong internal pressures would arise in
ation.
a nuclear deterrent, or to make prepara-
many countries to acquire nuclear arma-
The stubborn problems of "nuclear pro-
tions for exercising that option. are con-
ments for their own protection.
To the
liferation" are made less tractable by the
fronted by remarkably similar external
degree that we appear to turn inward, we
imprecise and often apocalyptic language
threats. Each faces 8. nuclear adversary
encourage non-nuclear nations-from Asia
in which they are discussed. The very
and each lacks confidence that Its chief
to Europe and the Middle East-to create
term "proliferation" has confused the issue:
ally, the United States will come to its aid
their own nuclear (orces,
Borrowed from biology. proliferation im-
if It is attacked. South Korea faces a bellig-
plies a natural or automatic multiplication
erent North Korea backed by China and
Mr. Lefever is director of the Ethics
of members of a certain species, e.g. the
the Soviet Union, Taiwan faces China, Pak-
and Public Policy Program of the Kennedy
spread of the Swine Flu virus.
istan faces India, and Iran faces the Soviet
Institute at Georgetown University and a
Union.
former Senior Fellow at the Brookings In-
There is nothing natural or automatic
Since the fall of Saigon, each of these
stitution where he studied U.S. policy to
about the spread of nuclear weapons. Nu-
exposed states has felt an erosion of the
ward nuclear arms in the Third World.
Ct
as, analysis 10/3/76
OCTOBER 21, 1976
TWO OTHER Carter troubles have
Harris Survey
also grown rather than diminished in
the course of the campaign. Despite two
debates, a 49-to-41 per cent plurality
Is anyone
now feels that Carter "makes me un-
easy because I can't tell what kind of
person he really is." After the first de-
bate, only 44 per cent felt that way
winning
while 46 per cent did not. In addition, a
49-to-37 per cent plurality still feels that
Carter "has ducked taking stands on
issues to avoid offending anybody and
debates?
that is wrong"-which represents virtu-
ally no change from the 49-to-34 per cent
plurality who felt that way before any of
the debates.
By any measure, it is clear that the
By Louis Harris
debates have added to, rather than dis-
pelled, the troubled feelings voters have
JIMMY CARTER has , serious prob-
about Jimmy Carter. It is also evident
lem facing him in the third of the presi-
that in the debates the public is sizing
dential debates Friday night. Whether
up Carter in terms of his style and char-
Carter wins or loses each specific de-
bate, the doubts about him continué to
acter far more than on the specific
stands he is taking on issues-which
increase, the most serious of which is
clearly has not helped him.
the 52-to-32-per cent majority feeling
By contrast, President Ford has
"that he doesn't have enough experience
gained marginally from the debates,
in national and world affairs."
even though he clearly lost the second
Carter lost the first debate by 40 to 31
one by 54 to 30 per cent, mainly because
per cent, but in the process the number
he goofed on the Eastern European is-
of his own voters who said they were
sue. However, it is significant that the
"very strongly" for him went up from
35 to 46 per cent. He lost that debate
predebate majority of 56 to 30 per cent
primarily because he dwelled too long
who felt that Ford "is not very experi-
enced in foreign affairs, and that is his
on endless statistics and did not seem
forceful enough.
weak point" turned into a 47-to-40 per
In the second debate, Carter was the
cent plurality who now disagree with
clear-cut victor by a decisive 54-to-30
this charge. And the mistake he made
about Eastern Europe did not increase
per cent margin. The Democrat took a
calculated gamble that by changing his
the number who think "he is not very
style to an aggressive stance-openly
smart about the issues facing the coun-
attacking the President-he could rattle
try." This was denied by 50-to-38 per
cent before the second debate and now
his opponent and force him into a griev-
is denied by an only slightly smaller 48
ous mistake. He succeeded when Ford
made the patently ludicrous claim that
to 40 per cent now.
Eastern European countries were not
IN ADDITION, ON "working for
under Soviet domination. A thumping 74-
peace in the world," Ford holds a 46-to-
to-10 per cent majority of the voters
36 per cent lead over Carter; on "han-
thought that was a "bad mistake."
dling relations with the Russians," the
President is ahead by 48 to 29 per cent;
IRONICALLY, HOWEVER. Carter's
and on "keeping the military defense of
vote went down instead of up following
the country strong," he is preferred to
the second debate. His lead over Ford
Carter by 48 to 32 per cent. Even though
declined from nine points in a two-way
Ford lost the debates, on every major
test down to five points, and from seven
foreign policy and defense issue, he
down to four points with third-party can-
outscores Carter.
didate Eugene McCarthy in the trial
The most crucial public attitude for
heat. Furthermore, the number of Car-
Ford in these debates is the 59-to-27 per
ter voters who felt "very strongly"
cent majority who believes he has "the
about him declined from 56 to 37 per
better experience to be President," and
cent.
the 48-to-29 per cent plurality who says
The latest Harris Survey, conducted
"he seems to act and look more like a
nationwide among 1,503 likely voters,
President. In short, incumbency seems
clearly indicates why Carter has not
to be working for Ford in the debates,
benefitted from the debates. Before the
while doubts about Jimmy Carter ap-
first debate, a 48-to-29 per cent plurality
pear to grow.
worried about his "lack of experience."
In 1960, John F. Kennedy scored close
After the first debate, in which Carter
to a knockout over Richara Nixon in the
reeled off a long string of statistics
first debate and Nixon never did catch
about the economy, the number who had
up to him. In 1976, IL is now beginning
doubts about his experience declined to
to appear that the victor in the debates
45-to-41 per cent.
could well be President Ford by attri-
After the second debate, when Carter
tion. His presidential presence has been
was less factual, more assertive, and
reinforced by each debate, while Carter
more argumentative, doubts about his
continues to slip after each encounter.
"lack of experience in national and
However, Friday's debate is likely to be
world affairs" rose to 52-to-32 per cent.
the most decisive of the three, and per-
More importantly, by 59 to 26 per cent,
haps Jimmy Carter can correct what up
a majority of the voters thinks that
to now has been his failure to establish
President Ford, not Jimmy Carter, "has
greater credibility with his debate per-
the better experience to be President for
formances.
the next four years." This finding shows
how crucial it is for Carter to overcome
this feeling that he does not have ade-
quate experience.
0005
Bnr Edit Page Tues Makup
0006
0007
Pls prf to Dave Hardin
THE PRESIDENT HAS SEEN
The Country Needs
Kin morrell
Editor
President Ford
0012
0013
THE NASHVILLE BANNER today endorses Gerald
0015
R. Ford for President of the United States.
0016
The choice, of course, is between two men - but
0017
there also is another aspect to that choice: what role
0018
government should play in our lives.
0019
An overwhelming majority of the American public
0020
has reached the point where it wants less federal
0021
government, less intrusion into their lives and liber-
0022
ties, less tax burden and fewer grandiose programs
0023
which cost billions of tax dollars.
0024
President Ford shares that view. His opponent does
0025
not, promising more and more costly federal pro-
0026
grams which must be paid for by the people.
0027
The Banner's Editorial Board of publisher, editors
0028
and key news and editorial staff members directly
0029
involved with the coming elections made its decision
0030
based on the strength and character Mr. Ford has
0031
displayed in the performance of his duties in the White
0032
House and from the sharply contrasting views of the
0033
two men, the party platforms they are pledged to
0034
carry out and our opinion of the mood of the
0035
country.
0036
0037
In the two years he has held the Presidency, Mr.
0038
Ford has restored integrity to an office left in
0039
shambles by Watergate; despite opposition of
a
0040
Democratic Congress, he has served as a check
0041
against the liberalism that rants for greater deficit
0042
spending yet is deaf to the pleas of the taxpayer; he has
0043
been the encouraging force behind attempts to bring
0044
peace abroad; he has been instrumental in steering an
0045
economy - stricken by war and big government
0046
spending - back onto a course of eventual health.
0047
Mr. Ford is a leader. Mr. Ford has brought a new
0048
dignity to the office. But dignity does not mean
0049
aloofness; it does not mean that he is blind to the
0050
concerns of those who truly need the services of
0051
government. He has made it clear that cities, that
0052
individuals, will continue to be beneficiaries of gov-
0053
ernment. The key is that it be done responsibly. He has
0054
pledged more tax cuts, not more increases.
0055
Government largesse, that would cut off one leg to
0056
help buy its owner a pair of shoes, is opposed by
0057
him.
0058
0059
By staying away from government-contrived, arti-
0060
ficial cure-alls, Mr. Ford's administration has re-
0061
duced double-digit inflation. Although unemployment
0062
still is higher than anyone wants, it is less than it was.
0063
Further, total employment is at an all-time high.
0064
Productivity is up.
0065
The gross national product is up.
0066
We are not at war with anyone anywhere.
0067
We are not reassured by his opponent, former Gov.
0068
Jimmy Carter of Georgia. He, too, has made pledges
0069
of tax reductions and more efficient government
0070
spending. But he supports a Democratic platform that
0071
is solidly contrary to those pledges. It includes heavier
0072
government spending in the area of unemployment,
0073
thus increasing the tax load. While advocating a more
0074
tightly-run government, the programs that he sup-
0075
ports could push the deficit well above $100 billion, the
0076
most serious economic problem the country faces. His
0077
own record as governor saw state expenditures rise by
0078
50 per cent. It is a Neverland of promises, and he has
0079
made serious errors in attempting to explain who he
0080
would tax, who he would abort, who he would forgive.
Troop
0081
A Carter presidency would seem to open the door to a
0082
welfare state that Mr. Ford has been able to block.
0083
Unlike the sincere, conservative, responsible image
0084
Mr. Carter was able to portray in the primaries, he
0085
now emerges as something different a calculating
huded
0086
politician who already has cheapened the presidency
0087
he seeks with his public use of gutter language, even
0088
while quoting the Scriptures, in a blatant grab for
0089
votes.
He
anomal.
0090
The thought of entrusting to his care the defense of
0091
this country and its foreign policy horrifies us only
0092
morethan the thought of the economic ruin that surely
0093
awaits if the high-spending promises he dictated in the
0094
Democratic platform are carried out.
0095
0096
Mr. Ford is what President Nixon was not - and he
0097
is what Mr. Carter is not. A humble, non-scheming
0098
man who believes that the power of government
0099
belongs to the people, Mr. Ford has restored public
0100
confidence in the highest office in the land and in the
0101
total government once more.
0102
Mr. Ford is the country's guarantee against fiscal
0103
irresponsibility, against confiscatory taxes on work-
0104
ing people, against free-wheeling concepts that would
0105
bring only more inflation, more unemployment, more
0106
indebtedness. He is the country's guarantee against
0107
forfeiture of a workable foreign policy under which the
0108
United States is at peace.
0109
We endorse Gerald Ford because the country needs
0110
him. And because he already has proved that he is
0111
worthy of that trust.
IMM
UNClas
FOR COMMCENTER USE ONLY
PRECEDENCE
CLASSIFICATION
DEX
FROM: The SituatioN ROOM/KIOS
0611
DAC
014 GPS
TO: Bud Me Farlane, for
LDX
PAGES 1
Gen Scoweroft
TTY
CITE
INFO:
DTG: 2312107
REL DN BASED BY:
TOR: 231221211 2312217 70
ECIAL INSTRUCTIONS:
1976 GCT 23 12 05
WHCA FORM 8, 22 FEB 74
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
APB103
SCOWCROFT, 11YLA.
089
PULL- (TOPS)
(RADNOR, PENNSYLVANIA) -- THE ASSOCIATED PRESS POLL SAYS THE FINAL
FORD-CARTER DEBATE WAS A TOSS-UP WITH THE BROADCAST AUDIENCE. FORD WON
THE DEBATE, TECHNICALLY SPEAKING, BUT THE MARGIN OF ERROR IN THE
STATISTICS AND OTHER FACTORS MAKE IT A VIRTUAL DRAW. OF
ONE-THOUSAND-27 VOTERS POLLED, 35-POINT-FIVE PER CENT SAY FORD WON THE
DEBATE, 33-POINT-ONE PER CENI GIVE IT TO CARTER, AND 31-POINT-FOUR
PER CENT DON'T KNOW WHICH OF THE CANDIDATES WON.
06:19AED 10-23-76
APB104
090
DEBATE (TOPS) TAKE 2
THE MARGIN OF ERROR FOR A SAMPLE OF THIS SIZE IS ABOUT TWO AND
WINE-TENTHS PERCENTAGE POINTS IN EITHER DIRECTION. THAT MEANS THE
1NO-POINT-FOUR PERCENTAGE POINTS SEPARATING CARTER AND FORD CANNOT BE
RELIABLY PROJECTED TO STAND FOR THE NATION AS A WHOLE.
THE INTERVIEWERS FOR THE A-P SURVEY FOUND A SMALLER PERCENTAGE OF
THE SAMPLE AT HOME AND HAVING WATCHED THE DEBATE THAN AFTER THE TWO
PREVIOUS DEBATES. THOSE VOTERS WHO DID WATCH TENDED TO BE OLDER AND
TERE SLIGHTLY MORE LIKELY TO BE REPUBLICANS THAN DEMOCRATS.
THE A-P RESULTS APPEAR TO BE IN CONFLICT WITH A SURVEY OF 353
'IEWERS TAKEN FOR THE PUBLIC BROADCASTING SYSTEM WHICH FOUND THAT 40
PER CENT THOUGHT CARTER WON, 29 PER CENT WERE FOR FORD AND 31 PER CENT
CALLED IT A DRAW.
HOWEVER, THE MARGIN OF ERROR IN THE P-B-S SAMPLE IS SIX PERCENTAGE
POINTS IN EITHER DIRECTION, MEANING THAT THE RESULT COULD BE 35-T0-34
FOR FORD.
06:26AED 10-23-76