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
1515734
label
Politics - General (1)
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
1515734
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Politics - General (1)
citationUrl
collections
James M. Cannon Files (Ford Administration)
James Cannon's Political Files
subjects
Political affairs
iiifBase
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
1515734
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1976-05-31
month
5
year
1976
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1974-12-01
month
12
year
1974
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
url
mediaId
c4935ceaddd4337b
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box 41, folder "Politics - General (1)" of the James
M. Cannon 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States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.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 41 of the James M. Cannon Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
He
March 11, 1975
MEMORANDUM FOR:
JIM CANNON
FROM:
KEN LAZARUS
SUBJECT:
Hatch Act
You are correct in your understanding that you are personally
exempt from the provisions of the Hatch Act (5 U.S.C. 7321,
et seq.) insofar as it relates to active participation in political
management and political campaigns. The Act specifically
exempts from its ban on partisan political activity by Executive
Branch personnel any "employee paid from the appropriation for
the office of the President." Thus, the sole test in determining
the applicability of the Act is which appropriation is used to pay
the employee's salary. While the Civil Service Commission
has interpreted this provision to exempt persons paid from
appropriations to the White House Office and Special Assistance
to the President (Office of the Vice President), it has determined
that employees paid from other appropriations for the Executive
Office of the President, including those of the Domestic Council,
OTP, OMB and NSC, are subject to the Act. Likewise, all
detailed employees are fully subject to the Act.
While you are paid from funds appropriated to the White House
Office, I understand that the remainder of the Domestic Council
staff is paid from its own appropriation and is, therefore, subject
to the Act. In addition, all Executive Branch employees, regard-
less of how they are paid, are expressly prohibited from using
their "official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering
with or affecting the result of an election
"
The attached materials from the Commission should be of some
assistance in determining what conduct is permissible by employees
subject to the Act.
Attachment
GC-46°
federal
employees
political
participation
odmooz
AR
zon
taxen
N
AS
I
A
N
A
A
ELECT
K
UIDA
A
VOTE FOR
N
S
UNITED STATES CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
federal
employees
political
participation
UNITED STATES CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
1972
GC-46
CONTENTS
COVERAGE
1
Types of employees covered
1
Employees on leave
1
Exemptions
1
BASIC STATUTORY PROVISIONS
2
ACTIVITY UNDER THE STATUTE
2
In general
2
Use of official authority of influence
2
Political management
2
Political campaigns; candidacy
3
Political campaigns; campaigning
3
Contributions
3
Public office
3
EXCEPTED LOCALITIES
4
ENFORCEMENT AND PENALTIES
4
EDUCATION PROGRAM
5
CHAPTER 73, TITLE 5, UNITED STATES CODE
6
LIST OF EXCEPTED COMMUNITIES
9
GRAPHIC PRESENTATION
11
NOTE: This pamphlet is a summary of laws and regu-
lations governing the political activities of Federal
employees. It is solely intended to give an overview of
the subject; it is not meant to go beyond this basic
purpose. The pamphlet should provide a quick answer
to many of the more common questions concerning
political activity. For more difficult or unusual situa-
tions, it is strongly urged that the reader write or
call.
Office of the General Counsel
U.S. Civil Service Commission
1900 E Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20415
(Telephone: Area Code 202, 632-7600)
COVERAGE
Types of Employees Covered
With very few exceptions, all Federal employees in the executive branch of
the Government (including employees of the Postal Service) are subject to the
political activity provisions of Federal law. These provisions apply to full-time
and part-time employees in both the competitive and excepted service. Those
who are employed on an intermittent or occasional basis, such as experts or
consultants, are only covered by the restrictions for the entire twenty-four
hours of any day of actual employment.
Employees on Leave
A Federal employee subject to the political activity laws and regulations con-
tinues to be covered while on annual leave, sick leave, leave without pay,
administrative leave, or furlough.
Exemptions
The law, by its own terms, does not apply to an individual employed by an
educational or research institution, establishment, agency or system which is
supported in whole or in part by the District of Columbia or by a recognized
religious, philanthropic or cultural organization.
The law exempts all officers and employees from the prohibition on taking an
active part in political management or in political campaigns in connection
with a nonpartisan election. This is an election (and the preceding campaign)
in which none of the candidates is to be nominated or elected as representing
a political party whose candidates for presidential elector received votes at
the last preceding election. Also exempted is activity relating to a question
which is not specifically identified with a National or State political party,
such as constitutional amendments, referendums, and approval of municipal
ordinances.
The law also exempts certain specified officers and employees from the pro-
hibition on taking an active part in political management or in political cam-
paigns. These are:
a. An employee paid from the appropriation for the office of the
President;
b. The head or assistant head of an Executive department or military
department; and
C. An employee appointed by the President, by and with the advice and
consent of the Senate, who determines policies to be pursued by the
United States in its relations with foreign powers or in the nationwide
administration of Federal laws.
1
BASIC STATUTORY PROVISIONS
in a profession or business, such as a musician in a band or orchestra which
participates in parades, public events and similar functions, he may perform
A covered officer or employee may not-
in that capacity even though the particular event is politically sponsored.
1. Use his official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering
with or affecting the result of an election; or
Political Campaigns; Candidacy
2. Take an active part in political management or in political campaigns.
An employee may not be a candidate in a partisan election for any public
office.
ACTIVITY UNDER THE STATUTE
Primary and run-off elections to nominate candidates of political parties are
In General
partisan even though no party designation appears on the ballot.
The law does not prohibit an employee from voting as he chooses or from
Political Campaigns; Campaigning
expressing his individual opinion, privately and publicly, on political subjects
and candidates. What is prohibited generally is activity which prominently
As noted above, an employee may express his individual opinion on political
identifies the individual with the success or failure of a partisan group, candi-
subjects and candidates. This is frequently done by the employee wearing
date, or political party.
a badge or button on his person, or displaying a sticker or poster on his car
or house. While the law does not prohibit this, regulations of the employing
Under the provisions of a new law [42 U.S.C. 1973aa-1] every citizen of the
agency may limit or restrict it. For example, the agency may logically dif-
United States may vote for President and Vice-President without regard to
ferentiate between an employee whose work requires that he constantly meet
lengthy residence requirements or where he may be at election time. The
the public and one who seldom, if ever, meets the public in performing
his duties.
law abolishes length of residence requirements in presidential elections and
requires States to have absentee registration and voting procedures for such
An employee may not campaign for a candidate in a partisan election by
elections. Employees should contact their agency voting representatives for
making speeches, writing on behalf of the candidate, or soliciting voters to
information concerning State voting provisions as well as specific information
support or oppose a candidate.
on the presidential elections.
An employee may attend a political meeting or rally which is open to the
Use of Official Authority or Influence
general membership of an organization or the public, including committee
meetings of political organizations. However, he may not serve on a com-
These prohibitions are aimed at activities such as threatening to deny pro-
mittee that organizes or directs activities at a partisan campaign meeting
motion to any employee who does not vote for certain candidates; requiring
or rally.
employees to contribute a percentage of their pay to a political fund ("2%
Club"); influencing subordinate employees to buy tickets to political fund-
An employee may sign nominating petitions for candidates in a partisan
raising dinners and similar events; and matters of a similar nature. These
election for public office, but may not originate or circulate such petitions.
prohibitions principally affect supervisors.
An employee may drive members of his family, his friends, and his neighbors
to the polls as a convenience to them, so long as this service is furnished
without regard to political affiliation. He may not engage in transporting voters
Political Management
to the polls as part of the effort of a candidate or political party to win a
partisan election.
Membership in a political party, organization, or club is permitted, but the
employee may not hold office in the party, organization, or club, or be a
Contributions
member of any of its committees. He may attend meetings open to the gen-
eral membership and vote on candidates and issues, but he may not take an
An employee may make a financial contribution to a political party or
active part in the management of the club, organization, or party.
organization. However, he may not solicit or collect political contributions.
Attendance as a spectator at a political convention is permitted. However,
the employee is not allowed to take part in the deliberations or proceedings
Public Office
of the convention or any of its committees. He may not be a candidate for,
The law that prohibits political activity does not prohibit holding a public
or serve as, a delegate, alternate, or proxy at such a convention.
office. Hence, if an employee holds an elective office at the time he is
Volunteer work for a partisan candidate, campaign committee, political party,
appointed to a Federal position, he may continue to serve, but he may not
or nominating convention of a political party is prohibited, whether the work
be a candidate for reelection in a partisan election. Likewise, an employee
involves contact with the public or not. If however, an employee engages
may accept appointment to fill a vacancy in an elective office, or serve if
2
3
elected in a nonpartisan election, unless his agency determines that a con-
the charges, including a right to a hearing. The employee may be repre-
flict of interest or interference with the performance of his Federal duties
sented by counsel at all stages of the proceedings.
will result.
After consideration of the entire record, the Commission makes its decision
An employee may serve at the polls as an election official or clerk provided
and notifies the employee and the employing agency. If the Commission finds
he represents the jurisdiction which conducts the election and discharges
that the employee violated the law, the penalty is removal from the service,
the duties of the office in an impartial manner as prescribed by local and
unless the Commission unanimously agrees upon imposing a less severe
State law. He may not serve as a checker, watcher, or challenger for a political
penalty. The minimum penalty that may be assessed is suspension without
party or a party candidate in a partisan election.
pay for 30 days. The removal penalty carries a bar against reemployment
In many jurisdictions it is required that election officials be chosen from
under the appropriation from which the employee was paid at the time of
the violation.
more than one political party. In such cases the political party furnishes the
appointing authority with certificates or recommendations from which the
election official is selected. This endorsement does not convert the election
official into a party official and an employee is not prohibited from serving
EDUCATION PROGRAM
pursuant to such selection.
To acquaint Federal employees with these provisions, attorneys from the
Office of the General Counsel will meet personally with groups of top-level
EXCEPTED LOCALITIES
Federal executives and personnel officers, to brief them on the applicability
In certain communities a Federal employee may take an active part in a
of the political activity laws, and to answer any questions they may have.
partisan election. The law provides that the Civil Service Commission may
Past experience has shown that the briefing program is most effective when
designate as an excepted locality a municipality or political subdivision in
these groups are composed of from 30 to 60 people.
Maryland or Virginia in the immediate vicinity of the District of Columbia or
Arrangements can be made to obtain this informational service by writing
a municipality in which the majority of registered voters are employed by the
to the Office of the General Counsel, or by telephoning: Area Code 202,
Federal Government, when the Commission determines that, because of
632-7600. It will be most helpful if written requests for briefings include
special or unusual circumstances, it is in the domestic interest of employees
information as to the nature and size of the groups to be involved, the cities
to participate in local elections.
where the briefings will be held, the preferable dates, and any specific prob-
In the communities designated by the Commission, employee-residents may
lems or questions which should be dealt with.
actively participate in political management and political campaigns in con-
nection with partisan elections for local offices provided that:
1. Participation in political activity shall be as an independent candi-
date or on behalf of, or in opposition to, an independent candidate;
2. Candidacy for, and service in, an elective office shall not result in
the neglect of the employee's duties or create a conflict of interests.
A list of the communities which have been designated "excepted localities"
by the Commission can be found on page 9
ENFORCEMENT AND PENALTIES
Reports or complaints indicating violations of the political activity restric-
tions by employees in the competitive service are investigated by the Office
of the General Counsel, United States Civil Service Commission, Washing-
ton, D.C. (Questions concerning this law and its enforcement should be
directed to that office.) In cases involving employees in the excepted service,
the employing agency is responsible for enforcement, and the employee may
appeal the agency's decision to the Commission. By agreement with the
Postal Service, the Commission investigates and adjudicates cases of alleged
violations of the law by Postal Service employees.
If investigation indicates a violation of the law, written notice specifying the
violation is given to the employee. Full opportunity is provided to contest
4
5
TITLE 5. UNITED STATES CODE
on political subjects and candidates.
(c) Subsection (a) of this section does not apply to an individual
CHAPTER 73-SUITABILITY, SECURITY, AND CONDUCT
employed by an educational or research institution, establishment, agency,
or system which is supported in whole or in part by the District of Colum-
SUBCHAPTER III-POLITICAL ACTIVITIES
bia or by a recognized religious, philanthropic, or cultural organization.
(d) Subsection (a)(2) of this section does not apply to-
Sec.
7321. Political contributions and services.
(1) an employee paid from the appropriation for the office of the
7322. Political use of authority or influence; prohibition.
President;
7323. Political contributions; prohibition.
(2) the head or the assistant head of an Executive department or
7324. Influencing elections; taking part in political campaigns; prohibitions; exceptions.
military department;
7325. Penalties.
(3) an employee appointed by the President, by and with the consent
7326. Nonpartisan political activity permitted.
7327. Political activity permitted; employees residing in certain municipalities.
of the Senate, who determines policies to be pursued by the United
States in its relations with foreign powers or in the nationwide admin-
§ 7321. Political contributions and services
istration of Federal laws;
The President may prescribe rules which shall provide, as nearly as condi-
(4) the Commissioners of the District of Columbia; or
tions of good administration warrant, that an employee in an Executive
(5) the Recorder of Deeds of the District of Columbia.
agency or in the competitive service is not obliged, by reason of that
employment, to contribute to a political fund or to render political service,
§ 7325. Penalties
and that he may not be removed or otherwise prejudiced for refusal
An employee or individual who violates section 7324 of this title shall be
to do so.
removed from his position, and funds appropriated for the position from
which removed thereafter may not be used to pay the employee or indi-
$ 7322. Political use of authority or influence; prohibition
vidual. However, if the Civil Service Commission finds by unanimous vote
The President may prescribe rules which shall provide, as nearly as condi-
that the violation does not warrant removal, a penalty of not less than
tions of good administration warrant, that an employee in an Executive
30 days' suspension without pay shall be imposed by direction of the
agency or in the competitive service may not use his official authority or
Commission.
influence to coerce the political action of a person or body.
$ 7326. Nonpartisan political activity permitted
§ 7323. Political contributions; prohibition
Section 7324 (a)(2) of this title does not prohibit political activity in con-
An employee in an Executive agency (except one appointed by the Presi-
nection with-
dent, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate) may not request
(1) an election and the preceding campaign if none of the candidates
or receive from, or give to, an employee, a Member of Congress, or an
is to be nominated or elected at that election as representing a party
officer of a uniformed service a thing of value for political purposes. An
any of whose candidates for presidential elector received votes in the
employee who violates this section shall be removed from the service.
last preceding election at which presidential electors were selected; or
(2) a question which is not specifically identified with a National or
§ 7324. Influencing elections; taking part in political campaigns; prohibi-
State political party or political party of a territory or possession of the
tions; exceptions
United States.
(a) An employee in any Executive agency or an individual employed by
the Government of the District of Columbia may not-
For the purpose of this section, questions relating to constitutional amend-
ments, referendums, approval of municipal ordinances, and others of a
(1) use his official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering
similar character, are deemed not specifically identified with a National
with or affecting the result of an election; or
or State political party or political party of a territory or possession of the
(2) take an active part in political management or in political cam-
United States.
paigns.
$ 7327. Political activity pemitted; employees residing in certain munici-
For the purpose of this subsection, the phrase "an active part in political
palities
management or in political campaigns" means those acts of political man-
(a) Section 7324 (a)(2) of this title does not apply to an employee of
agement or political campaigning which were prohibited on the part of
The Alaska Railroad who resides in a municipality on the line of the rail-
employees in the competitive service before July 19, 1940, by determina-
road in respect to political activities involving that municipality.
tions of the Civil Service Commission under the rules prescribed by the
(b) The Civil Service Commission may prescribe regulations permitting
President.
employees and individuals to whom section 7324 of this title applies to
(b) An employee or individual to whom subsection (a) of this section
take an active part in political management and political campaigns involv-
applies retains the right to vote as he chooses and to express his opinion
ing the municipality or other political subdivision in which they reside,
6
7
to the extent the Commission considers it to be in their domestic interest,
when
LIST OF EXCEPTED COMMUNITIES
(1) the municipality or political subdivision is in Maryland or Virginia
In Maryland: Annapolis, Berwyn Heights, Bethesda, Bladensburg, Bowie,
and in the immediate vicinity of the District of Columbia, or is a munici-
Brentwood, Capitol Heights, Cheverly, Chevy Chase, Martin's Additions,
pality in which the majority of voters are employed by the Government
Chevy Chase View, College Park, Cottage City, District Heights, Edmons-
of the United States; and
ton, Fairmont Heights, Forest Heights, Garrett Park, Glenarden, Glen
(2) the Commission determines that because of special or unusual
Echo, Greenbelt, Hyattsville, Kensington, Landover Hills, Montgomery
circumstances which exist in the municipality or political subdivision
County, Morningside, Mount Rainier, North Beach, North Brentwood,
it is in the domestic interest of the employees and individuals to permit
North Chevy Chase, Northwest Park, Prince Georges County, Riverdale,
that political participation.
Rockville, Seat Pleasant, Somerset, Takoma Park, University Park,
Washington Grove.
In Virginia: Alexandria, Arlington County, Clifton, Fairfax County, Town of
Fairfax, Falls Church, Herndon, Loudoun County, Portsmouth, Prince
William County, Vienna.
In Other States: Anchorage, AK; Benecia, CA; Bremerton, WA; Centerville,
GA; Crane, IN; Elmer City, WA; Huachuca City, AZ; New Johnsonville, TN;
Port Orchard, WA; Shrewsbury Township, NJ; Sierra Vista, AZ; Warner
Robins, GA.
8
9
notes
FEDERAL WORKFORCE ANALYSIS
- 3,000,000
WORLDWIDE
WORLDWIDE
2,881,247
2,881,247
UNITED STATES
- 2,900,000
TOTAL CIVILIAN
OVERSEAS
- 2,800,000
191,402
EMPLOYMENT
*
2,674,384
- 2,700,000
- 2,600,000
- 2,500,000
- 2,000,000
UNITED STATES
EXECUTIVE
2,689,845
BRANCH
2,840,947
COMPETITIVE
- 1,500,000
SERVICE
2,375,887
- 1,000,000
LEGISLATIVE
- 500,000
BRANCH
32,374
- 400,000
+
JUDICIAL BRANCH
- 300,000
WASHINGTON, D.C.,
7,926
METRO. AREA
EXCEPTED
- 200,000
328,424
SERVICE
40,300
298,497
- 100,000
-
CIVILIAN EMPLOYMENT
CIVILIAN EMPLOYMENT
(AUGUST 1971)
(AUGUST 1971)
JUNE 1971
Source: Federal Civilian Man Dower Statistics, USCSC, October 1971
11
GPO 878.170
10
ZEZ
02DF-CPD3
02
CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS
Title 5
ADMINISTRATIVE PERSONNEL
(6) Attend a political convention, rally,
fund-raising function; or other political gath-
PART 733-POLITICAL ACTIVITY OF
ering;
FEDERAL EMPLOYEES
(7) Sign a political petition as an in-
dividual;
(8) Make a financial contribution to a
Subpart A- The Competitive Service
political party or organization;
GENERAL PROVISIONS
(9) Take an active part, as an independ-
§ 733.101 Definitions.
ent candidate, or in support of an independ-
In this subpart:
ent candidate, in a partisan election covered
(a) "Employee" means an individual who
by § 733.124:
occupies a position in the competitive service;
(10) Take an active part, as a candi-
(b) "Agency" means an executive agency
date or in support of a candidate, in a non-
and the government of the District of Columbia;
partisan election;
(c) "Political party" means a National
(11) Be politically active in connection
political party, a State political party, and an
with a question which is not specifically
affiliated organization;
identified with a political party, such as a
(d) "Election" includes a primary, special,
constitutional amendment, referendum, approval
and general election;
of a municipal ordinance or any other question
(e) "Nonpartisan election" means-
or issue of a similar character;
(1) An election at which none of the candi-
(12) Serve as an election judge or clerk,
dates is to be nominated or elected as repre-
or in a similar position to perform nonpartisan
senting a political party any of whose candi-
duties as prescribed by State or local law;
dates for presidential elector received votes
and
in the last preceding election at which presi-
(13) Otherwise participate fully in public
dential electors were selected; and
affairs, except as prohibited by law, in a
(2) An election involving a question or
manner which does not materially compromise
issue which is not specifically identified with
his efficiency or integrity as an employee or
a political party, such as a constitutional
the neutrality, efficiency, or integrity of
amendment, referendum, approval of a municipal
his agency.
ordinance, or any question or issue of a similar
(b) Paragraph (a) of this section does
character; and
not authorize an employee to engage in politi-
(f) "Partisan" when used as an adjective
cal activity in violation of law, while on duty,
refers to a political party.
or while in a uniform that identifies him as an
employee. The head of an agency may prohibit
or limit the participation of an employee or
class of employees of his agency in an activity
PERMISSIBLE ACTIVITIES
permitted by paragraph (a) of this section,
§ 733.111 Permissible activities.
if participation in the activity would ihterfere
(a) All employees are free to engage in
with the efficient performance of official duties,
political activity to the widest extent consis-
or create a conflict or apparent conflict
tent with the restrictions imposed by law and
of interests.
this subpart. Each employee retains the right
to-
(1) Register and vote in any election;
(2) Express his opinion as an individ-
ual privately and publicly on political subjects
PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES
and candidates;
733.121 Use of official authority; prohibition.
(3) Display a political picture, sticker,
An employee may not use his official
badge, or button;
authority or influence for the purpose of inter-
(4) Participate in the nonpartisan acti-
fering with or affecting the result of an election.
vities of a civic, community, social, labor,
or professional organization, or of a similar
organization;
733.122 Political management and political
(5) Be a member of a political party or
campaigning; prohibitions.
other political organization and participate
(a) An employee may not take an active
in its activities to the extent consistent
part in political management or in a political
with law;
campaign, except as permitted by this subpart.
GC 41
FEBRUARY 1972
March 5, 1975
±
TO:
9hil Buchen
FROM:
Jim Cannon
SUBJECT:
Hatch Act
1
I understand that all members of the
Domestic Council staff, with the exception of
myself, come under the Hatch Act.
Can you give me your opinion of this?
If the staff members do come under the Hatch Act,
could you have someone on your staff give me a
memorandum telling what they can and cannot do
in a political way.
Many thanks.
JMC: jm
bcc Peter Wallison
DERMA S. FORD GEBARY
[1976]
This is not a big margin, given Brock's incumbency and Hooker's iffy reputation.
The Democratic primary broke down as follows: Hooker, 33%; Franklin Haney, 18%;
Ned McWherter, 2%; James Sasser, 3%.
3. 1976 HOUSE RACES (SMALL STATES): Outside the big states already
surveyed, roughly 15 GOP seats are vulnerable to varying degrees. In Maine,
freshman David Emery may get a break if ex-Rep. Peter Kyros (D) runs again.
Kyros, who could win the primary in an eight-way race, would probably lose in
November. Otherwise, Emery is shaky. Ex-GOP National Committee official Tom
Evans is the early favorite to replace Pete duPont (R) in the House from Delaware
Marjorie Holt (R) of Maryland is favored partly because the district includes two
counties with rival Democratic organizations. In Virginia, two shaky seats:
(Fourth District) State Rep. J. W. O'Brien (D) is challenging two-term Rep. R. W.
Daniel (R). Popular ex-football player O'Brien represents a district almost as
large as the Fourth District. He'll have a good chance unless black civil rights
leader Reverend Curtis Harris splits the Democratic vote with another indepen-
dent candidacy. (Ninth District) Rep. Bill Wampler (R) may be a bit stronger
against Charles Horne (D) whom he narrowly beat in 1974. In Iowa, Rep. Charles
Grassley (R) a target of liberal interest groups, is an early favorite. In the
Nebraska seat being vacated by Rep. John McCollister (R) an Omaha World-Herald
Poll finds Douglas County Commissioner P. J. Morgan the frontrunner for the GOP
nomination with 28% to newscaster Lee Terry's 22%, but 37% were still undecided.
But either loses to the Democratic candidate, State Sen. John Cavanaugh (Morgan
loses 50-35%, Terry loses 53-37%). Colorado's Jim Johnson (Fourth District) has
primary problems and is a possible November loser. In Oklahoma City, where Rep.
John Jarman is retiring, conservative Mickey Edwards and moderate conservative
G. T. Blankenship are fighting for the GOP nomination. Either would have a good
chance of holding the seat. Idaho's George Hansen (R) is in trouble, but Idaho
is unpredictable and half of the local congressional candidates seem to be named
Hansen. In Arizona, two GOP seats are expected to be open: (Third District) GOP
Senate leader Fred Koory has announced his candidacy to replace Senate candidate
Sam Steiger (R). Koory should be the favorite. (Fourth District) assuming Rep.
John Conlan runs for the Senate, Maricopa County Supervisor Eldon Rudd is expect-
ed to be the GOP nominee, with Phoenix lawyer Tony Mason for the Democrats. Rudd
would be favored.
In the smaller states as in the major states, there aren't too many
vulnerable Democrats in the Northeast. Massachusetts Rep. Robert Drinan is one.
..he faces conservative Catholic opposition in the Democratic primary and then,
in the general, moderate GOPer Arthur Mason who will appeal to co-religionists in
the substantially Jewish eastern part of the 4th District. In suburban New
Jersey's 7th District, Rep. Andrew Maguire, a strong liberal, is thought to be
too liberal for his district. Ninth District Rep. Henry Helstoski (D) is in
legal hot water that could open up a seat.
Looking southward, two Virginia districts are vulnerable: (8th Dis-
trict) Rep. Herbert Harris, regarded as one of the least impressive Democratic
freshman, is a GOP target. One GOP candidate announced is Fairfax businessman
and educator Robert Thorburn. (1st District) Conservative Democrat Thomas Down-
ing is retiring here. Local press reports list Essex County attorney Paul Trible
as the frontrunner for the GOP nomination, with a large Democratic field includ-
ing Delegates Robert Quinn of Hampton, Alan Diamonstein of Newport News and
liberal George Grayson of Williamsburg, plus State Senator William Fears of Acco-
mack and State Democratic official Jessie Rattley of Newport News. The Democrats
are favored to retain the seat. South Carolina Republicans are not optimistic
about toppling their state's three freshman Democrats John Jenrette, the most
vulnerable (and liberal) is thought to have the November edge over former Rep.
GERALD
LIBRARY
Edward Young (R). Moving west to Tennessee, Freshman Marilyn Lloyd of Chatta-
nooga is favored to turn back challenge from ex-Rep. LaMar Baker (R). With Joe
Evins retiring in Tennessee's 4th District, Albert Gore, Jr. is a heavy favorite
to win the seat held by his father, ex-Senator Albert Gore. Even in his losing
1970 Senate race, Gore Senior swept this district. In the 5th District of Ala-
bama's seat being vacated by veteran Rep. Bob Jones, press reports name State
Sen. Gene McLain (D) of Huntsville and State Sen. Ronnie Flippo (D) of Florence
as frontrunners. The Birmingham News lists Wallace Standfield of Florence and
former State Rep. Doug Hale of Huntsville as possible GOP 5th District candidates
Wilbur Mills' retirement in Arkansas' 2nd District has lured a dozen candidates,
with State Attorney General Jim Guy Tucker described by the Arkansas Gazette as
"the man to beat." The same article reports a poll showing Tucker strong, but
other prominent Democrats (more conservative than 1972 McGovern supporter Tucker)
may yet get in the race. No Republican is likely to make a strong showing.
Turning to Kansas, 2nd District Rep. Martha Keys will face a tough chal-
lenge from insurance executive Ross Freeman, who announced March 6. Keys is
considered one of the most vulnerable Democrats. In Colorado, two Democrats are
targeted: (1st District) Rep. Patricia Schroeder, locked in an embarassing fight
over relocating the Denver Mint, has drawn a number of GOP challengers, but
remains the early favorite. (2nd District) Freshman Rep. Tim Wirth, an Ivy
League liberal, is vulnerable. Three Republicans have entered the race State
Rep. Larry Hobbs, Baptist Minister Bob Dugan and broadcasting executive Ed Scott.
The GOP has a chance to retake this seat. In Wisconsin and Minnesota, states
with September 14 primaries and still-vague candidate situations, the two Demo-
crats rated vulnerable are Rep. Richard Nolan (7th Minnesota) and Rep. Alvin
Baldus (3rd Wisconsin). Both Montana districts present a degree of GOP opportun-
ity. Second District Rep. John Melcher's Senate bid makes Lt. Gov. Bill Christ-
ansen or State Sen. Tom Towe the leading Democratic possibilities there, with
several Republicans interested in the race (rancher Ron Marlenne, State House
Minority Leader Johnny Lockrem). First District Rep. Max Baucus may also be
vulnerable. In Iowa, 5th District Freshman Rep. Tom Harkin, extremely liberal,
could lose to GOP State Sen. John Murray.
In Utah, 2nd District Rep. Allan Howe (D) is rated marginal, and could
lose, but top GOP candidates have shown little interest, The Salt Lake Tribune
reports that relatively strong 1974 GOP nominee Stephen Harmsen will run again
if no one else steps forward. Two GOP seats were lost in Oregon in 1974, but
local political observers expect both to remain Democrat. The Eugene Register-
Guard (March 7) says that Rep. James Weaver (4th District) is a clear favorite
for re-election because no good GOP opponents emerged. Rep. Les AuCoin (D)
seems well ahead in the 1st District. One Hawaii seat might possibly fall to
the GOP -- that being vacated by Spark Matsunaga. Former State Sen. Fred Rolf-
ing is given a chance to win here. Several Washington seats could change hands.
Third District freshman Don Bonker (D) seems safe, but Republicans have targeted
Fourth District Rep. Mike McCormack. GOP hopefuls include Jim May (son of
former Congresswoman Catherine May) and agricultural economist Bruce Cone. The
Sixth District (Tacoma) seat being vacated by Floyd Hicks (D) should remain in
Democratic hands. Candidates include Norman Dicks, former chief aide to Senator
Warren Magnuson, and former Pacific Lutheran University President Gene Wiegman.
We'll pick up in the next issue with Illinois prospects in light of the
March 16 primary, and from here on, congressional race information will be
handled on an update basis until late summer, when we'll run another national
overview. At this point it still looks to us like GOP gains are unlikely to
exceed 15-25.
[1976]
File '76
A. THE FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN ACT.
Financing is basic to every aspect of a campaign. The Act creates a
new and radically different financial framework to which every aspect
of the campaign must be accommodated. Thus an understanding of the
Act is essential not only to the financing of a campaign but to its
organization, and especially to the timing of its organization.
The following summary of the Act's provisions is greatly over-simpli-
fied. It embraces highlights that point up the practical problems
that the Act creates.
1. Limits on Giving.
a. Individual giving is limited to $1000 for each stage of
a candidate's campaign.
b. There is an over-all limitation of $25,000 in total
contributions by any one person in any calendar year
to all candidates and committees. The $25,000 can
all be given to a national committee, a state committee
or a highly technical "multi-candidate committee", or
split between such committees and individual candidates
(up to $1000 each for the latter).
A "multi-candidate committee" must have been registered
for 6 months, have received contributions from more than
50 people and have made contributions to 5 or more Federal
candidates. Such a committee can give up to $5000 to each
stage of a candidate's campaign.
C. A Presidential or Vice Presidential candidate and his family
can contribute up to $50,000 of his own and his family's
money to his campaign.
2. Limits on Expenditures.
a. Election Campaign.
(1) A Presidential candidate (and his running mate) are
limited to $20 million.
(2) At the option of a candidate, his campaign will be
wholly funded by the Federal government.
(3) In addition, a national committee can spend up to 2¢
times the voting age population of the U.S. on a
Presidential election.
b. Primary Campaign.
(1) A Presidential candidate may spend up to $10 million.
(2) He may spend another million to defray his fund-raising
costs.
(3) Providing a candidate fulfills a "threshold requirement",
the government will match up to $250 of every contribution
he receives.
-2-
(4) To fulfill "threshold requirement" a candidate
must (i) declare his candidacy and (ii) raise
$5000 in contributions of $250 or less in each
of 20 states.
B. ANALYSIS.
Under the Act the President would have to depend for the financing of a
primary campaign on
1. Contributions from himself and the Vice President and their
immediate families up to a total of $50,000 for each family.
2. Direct solicitation of individual gifts not exceeding $1000,
or $2000 for a husband and wife combination.
Even at these figures a well-organized solicitation in every
state can raise substantial sums country-wide. The $1000
dinners of the Nixon campaign raised a lot of money. Lang
Washburn, who ran those dinners with great success, should
be available to run them again. He was unscathed by Watergate.
3. Direct mail solicitation.
4. The government's matching gifts, up to a potential total of
$51/2 million (1/2 of $10 million plus the $1 million allowance
for the cost of fund-raising).
5. The "multi-candidate committee" does not appear to be a
practical concept for us. At the cost of a disproportionate
amount of delay, time, expense, and trouble, each such com-
mittee could give only $5000 for the primary campaign.
6. It must be recognized that far less money will be available
than needed for the primary campaign and than has been
raised in the past. However, any other potential contenders
will be laboring under the same restrictions.
C. TIMING.
There are urgent reasons why the above categories of fund-raising
should be launched immediately. We are now less than a year away
from the first primary. Immense and time-consuming efforts must
be set afoot in the following areas, among others:
1. Campaign organization. Concept. Organizational chart.
Recruitment of leadership and staff.
2. Issue research and formulation directed to projecting a
positive leadership image for the President. Polling would
be desirable in arriving at such a formulation.
3. The immense job of legal and political research and analysis
on each of the primary states (presently 32 in number); which
of them should be entered; how each of these should be organ-
ized; the development of such issues as are distinctive to
each. Here again polling would be desirable on all aspects.
-3-
4. Similar attention to the delegate selection process in the
non-primary states.
5. The development of the finance effort itself. Before any
of the above efforts can proceed, money must be raised to
get them off the ground. This in itself will be a slow
process. Principal reliance will have to be on direct mail
and the government's matching funds. Reputedly it has taken
years and over a million dollars of investment to develop
Wallace's present direct mailing lists of over 2 million
addressees. His emotional following made that easier than
it would be for others.
Thus it is apparent that it is very late in the day. It is
clear, or so it seems to us, that if we are to have any
hope of success in contested primaries the money raising
must start immediately.
Questions:
Where will the seed money to start the
effort to raise the money to start the
campaign, come from?
And how long will all this take?
If we start now, can we do it in time?
Sadly, the day is gone when several million dollars could be
readily and quickly raised on the telephone for a sitting
President. We are speaking of a finance effort that will
take large amounts of seed money, if we can find it, and
many months of time to implement fully. Only after start-up
money is raised can the real work of the campaign begin.
Thus, in all reason, we should start the finance effort
now.
But there is a catch.
D. CANDIDACY.
Under the Act, the moment contributions are received or expenditures
made by a person "with a view to bringing about his nomination for
election, to (such) office", he is a candidate under the law.
It possibly could be argued that we were raising money initially for the
purpose of canvassing the issue of whether to run or not. But in all
the circumstances here, especially, the President's firmly announced
intention to run, and the use to which we know the money is really
going to be put, the argument is just not credible. We could not in
honesty advance it.
Thus it seems clear that the raising or spending of money would auto-
matically make the President a candidate under the law.
Being a candidate, he would:
-4-
1. Come under the rigid, expensive and burdensome reporting
requirements of the Act.
2. Be subjected to the limitations, restrictions and penalties
of the Act.
3. Be put under the equal time provisions in respect to media
projection and suffer some limitation on free time accorded
a non-candidate by the media.
4. Be subject to the suspicion of political interest in all
his actions and pronouncements.
5. Possibly lose continued funding by the National Committee
of the President's and Vice President's travels for the
party. We believe, however, that there would be a solid
basis for arguing that this could and should be continued,
even after candidacy. We are talking about the President
and the Vice President. The President is the head of the
party. The purpose of the trips is to strengthen the party
and to raise money for its National Committee as well as
the state committees.
6. Require him immediately to set up an extensive and detailed
accounting system to meet the onerous record-keeping and
reporting requirements of the Act.
In these respects, delay in candidacy is desirable.
The question is, can we delay. For the reasons stated under
"C", we do not think that we can, notwithstanding the weight
of the above considerations.
E. A PARAMOUNT CONSIDERATION - RECOMMENDATION.
There is a paramount consideration, above all others, why we believe
candidacy should be announced firmly and soon.
That consideration is the important and perhaps decisive effect it
will have in discouraging others from competing for the nomination.
All these horrendous problems of financing a primary campaign under
this Act, as well as many other problems, would, of course, be
avoided if the nomination of the President were uncontested.
A firm announcement at this time, plus the follow-up steps outlined
below, would present the reality of a sitting Republican President
running seriously and vigorously for re-nomination. It would have
to have a powerful negative impact on the potential competition.
We therefore recommend an early, positive declaration of candidacy.
F. GETTING GOING.
In preparation for this, the following steps would have to be con-
templated immediately.
1. The selection and public announcement of an outstanding
national figure as Chairman of the President's campaign
for the nomination.
Among other qualifications the Chairman should be one who
has a close and cordial rapport with the National Committee.
-5-
2. The selection and public announcement of nationally
recognized powerhouses as Finance Chairman, Co-Chairman
and Vice Chairmen.
The Finance Chairman, his Co-Chairman, Vice Chairmen
and staff would have to go into operation immediately
in the solicitation of $1000 contributions to provide
start-up money.
Simultaneously they would have to move immediately to
fulfill "the threshold requirement" for the government's
matching funds.
In a third area, direct mail solicitation, there is not
time to set up an effective program from scratch. However
the National Committee has perhaps the most effective
direct mail program in the country. The possibility of
piggy-backing on that should be immediately canvassed
and effectuated. The same service would undoubtedly have
to be made available for the same purpose to other bona
fide candidates. That is all right. It will serve the
President better than the others.
The Finance Chairman, Co-Chairman and Vice Chairmen should
be old hands. There is no time for on-the-job training.
Suggestions for consideration --
For Chairman and Co-Chairman:
Jerry Milbank (New York) and
Lil Phipps (New York and Florida).
For Vice Chairmen:
Pat Wilson (Tennessee)
Max Fisher (Michigan)
Dave Packard (California).
3. An immediate start on the organizational concept and staff
structure and recruitment.
4. An immediate start by the President on the formulation of
a substantive program projecting a positive leadership
image that he can carry into the campaign.
5. An immediate start on the massive job of analyzing the
primary options, making choices of primaries to enter and
determining strategy and organization for each; also on
the delegate selection process in the non-primary states.
In the interest of saving time and conserving money, we
wonder if here again, much of the data could not be obtained
from the National Committee. The Committee is well-financed.
It is a service organization to Republicans. It has field
men in each section of the country. It has a large research
operation which presumably is keeping itself current on the
law and political profile of each of the states.
At least it would seem worthwhile to examine and appraise
-6-
the Committee's operation in this respect and to canvass the
possibility of getting immediate access to its data and staff
help.
The Committee also does polling. Perhaps we could take advan-
tage of this, both in respect to issue formulation and judgments
relating to the primary states, thus saving substantial amounts
of time and money.
Again these services, if made available to us, would have to
be made available to all bona fide candidates for the nomination.
6. The immediate resumption by the President and Vice President of
active help to the state parties in fund-raising and inspirational
leadership. The state parties are broke, demoralized and disturb-
ingly indifferent to the national administration.
This can be changed. The situation is to a very large extent
the result of neglect. Since succession to their present offices
both the President and the Vice President have been totally and
properly preoccupied with the problems of the country. But
during this period, the party has been passing through some of
its. darkest hours. It was badly defeated in November. There is
Watergate. There is a recession. There is international disarray.
There are all the political finance scandals, prosecutions, con-
victions, and all the new and confusing laws, rules and regula-
tions that have turned off so many givers and reduced fund-raising
to a trickle.
This is serious. A strong, vibrant, enthusiastic party marshalled
behind the President is essential to nomination. It is also im-
portant to effective government.
Thus, a revitalized party is a high priority.
The Vice President has a special problem. It is the traditional
role of the Vice President to tend the party. Because of this
Vice President's preoccupation with pressing problems, he has
not been doing it. When, in a time of great party need and dis-
tress, he declines invitations to help with fund-raising, there
are resentments.
Thus we urge, both as a high priority in the strategy of the
campaign and substantively as well, that the Vice President,
and the President himself to the very fullest extent possible,
come to the aid ofthe party.
This should not wait until the Fall. Here again a prompt and
intensive series of party appearances by the President and
the Vice President throughout the country now and the enthu-
siastic receptions that will be accorded them now, will be
powerful dissuaders to potential competition. If, as is quite
possible, such appearances are successful in discouraging com-
petition, they will have saved no end of time, effort, trouble,
expense - and party disunity - later.
ADVITORY
MORE
NOIS
Pres.
ADVISORY
COMMISSION ON INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20575
STATE
February 27, 1976
The President
The White House
Washington, D.C.
Dear Mr. President:
I happened to be in Washington and read the article about you in
the February 20, 1976 issue of The Washington Post by Douglas
Watson entitled "Another Eisenhower".
The article triggered my memory, and I went back through some of
my old files and found my notes of a meeting I held with the
General in the summer of 1964. As you undoubtedly recall, he had
asked me to organize and conduct a series of meetings in various
parts of the country to discuss major issues of that year, and to
report on them to the Republican Platform Committee Hearings in
San Francisco. This program was called Party-to-People.
The first forum, as you will again recall, was held in Los Angeles
with the subject being our Foreign Policy. General Eisenhower had
agreed to participate in the Forum, and in the course of discussing
who else should be involved he said most emphatically, and I para-
phrase, "I want Jerry Ford to be the chairman of this meeting and
to get the exposure it will bring him. Some day he should be
President of the United States".
I do not think I have ever told you this story, and probably would
not have recalled it if not for the article in The Washington Post.
I do not know whether Mr. Watson meant to be flattering or not in
his comparison of you with President Eisenhower, but to me - and
-more-
FORD is GERALD LIBRARY
REPLY TO:
MR. ROBERT E. MERRIAM
EXECUTIVE VICE-PRESIDENT
URBAN INVESTMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CO.
SUITE 800, WATER TOWER PLACE, 845 N. MICHIGAN AVE., CHICAGO, ILL. 60611, (312) 440-3385
The President
February 27, 1976
Page #2
to many millions of Americans - it was a high compliment.
Sincerely yours,
BotWevia
Robert E. Merriam, Chairman
REM/em
(B/C) James Cannon
Bryce Harlow
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
ct
wi
Douglas Watson
a
Another Eisenhower
C
When he took office President
dump and to whom the President
with a natural ease. One observer
be also talking about social disinte-
le
Ford suggested that he was the
was not personally close.
then judged, "Ike does by instinct
gration," the former President said
P
GOP's version of the open, unas-
The former Republican chief ex-
what professional politicians take a
in one speech.
W
suming Harry S. Truman, even
ecutive also had an extraordinarily
lifetime to cultivate. This is so be-
As with Ford, Eisenhower's sym-
hanging Truman's portrait in the
powerful Secretary of State who
cause he is a passionately honest
pathy for business, especially big
or
Oval Office. Others saw him as
was far more than a mere foreign
man."
business, was undisguised. As one
R
more a latter-day Calvin Coolidge
policy adviser. John Foster Dulles,
The two Republican Presidents
correspondent noted of the ex-Presi-
or Herbert Hoover, trying to keep
like Henry Kissinger, also set rec-
certainly would have agreed on
dent, "He is a man of the right by
R-
the government doing as little as
ords as a diplomatic globetrotter
most issues. Eisenhower began his
Instinct and conviction; his admira-
possible.
while drawing fire for running too
1952 campaign in Abilene, Kansas,
tion for the business community
However, a better comparison
much of a one-man show.
by noting that a party declaration
seems to know no bounds."
than any of these is Eisenhower, a
Like William Simon, George
of principles entitled "Liberty ver-
Like Ford, Eisenhower was un-
$
Id
President who, like Ford, also was a
Humphrcy, Eisenhower's Secretary
sus Socialism" best described his
willing to see military spending sub-
product of Middle America, a nice
of the Treasury, had a conservative
own philosophy and by declaring he
stantially reduced, recalling at one
b.
guy and decent fellow with a
businessman's horror of deficit
would rid the American economy of
point that his faith in a strong de-
friendly smile and outgoing man-
"artificial direct legislative con-
fense "demanded a military budget
ner, a chief executive with whom
trols" and would rely on the free
SI
millions of his fellow citizens felt
Mr. Watson is OIL the metro-
that would establish, by its very
market.
size, a peacetime precedent."
comfortable.
politan staff of The Post.
Eisenhower undoubtably would
As with Ford, Eisenhower's rela-
President Eisenhower, like Presi-
have applauded President Ford's
tions with Congress were relatively
dent Ford, was a former football
State of the Union declarations
friendly, even though the Demo-
player and an enthusiastic golfer
spending and was much better
that, "We unbalanced our economic
crats almost always controlled both
who belonged to the Burning Tree
known for his sermonizing about
system by the huge and unprece-
Houses. Eisenhower, too, was not
Country Club but also tried for par
balanced budgets than for his
dented growth of federal
one for 100 days of memorable en-
on courses around the nation. And,
achievement of them.
expenditures
We must introduce
actments.
as Ford hopes to be, Eisenhower
Like Earl Butz, Ezra Taft Benson,
a new balance in the relationship
Similarly. nobody thought Eisen-
5
was the choice of the Republican
Eisenhower's Secretary of Agricul-
between the individual and the gov-
hower was the smartest man in
moderates and middle-of-the-roaders
ture, also was a straight-laced man
ernment-a balance that favors
Washington. But people were confi-
over the favorite of the party's
dedicated to freeing the farmer
greater individual freedom and self-
dent that he listened to' his advisers.
right-wing. Like Ronald Reagan. for-
from government controls. Butz,
reliance."
Like Ford, Eisenhower would no
mer Sen. Robert Taft (R-Ohio), then
like Benson was, may be the most
An emphatic expounder of the im-
more consider relaxing by attending
"Mr. Republican," was seen by
unpopular member of the cabinet.
portance of a balanced budget, Ei-
a symphony concert than he would
many in the GOP as a much more
Of course, there are differences
senhower. as an aide noted. rc-
by visiting an art gallery.
consistent conservative than his op-
between Ford, the carecr politician.
buffed attacks "against his basic
Eisenhower's administration. too,
ponent.
and Eisenhower. the career military
economic belief in the need to
despite its undisputed concern to re-
But while Taft, like Reagan. had
man. Our present President appears
check threatened inflation and to
turn the nation to economic pros-
his legions of loyal followers, Eisen-
to enjoy campaigning far more than
hold his government's budget near
perity, also slogged slowly through
hower, like Ford. was recognized by
the old warrior did. Yet, Eisenhow-
balance."
months of recession and inflation.
N
many other Republicans as the par-
er's continued popularity over eight
Eisenhower, like Ford, supported
Even so, Eisenhower was the kind
ty's best hope for winning the inde-
years in the White House is evi-
the federal courts' authority in civil
of leader whose familiar, smiling
pendent voters needed for victory
dence that in his own way Eisen-
rights confrontations, while demon-
face encouraged folks to call him by
in November.
hower was an even better politician.
strating less than total enthusiasm
a friendly nickname, not by a set of
Eisenhower, like Ford, had a con-
In 1952 when Eisenhower shucked
for school desegregation. "It's all
initials, In these days of Jerry
troversial Vice President who many
his Army uniform and plunged into
very well to talk about school inte-
Ford's presidency, it is hard not to
in the GOP detested and wanted to
politics, he handled the transition
gration, if you remember you may
recall Ikc.
Politica
This Copy For
NEWS CONFERENCE
#472
AT THE WHITE HOUSE
WITH RON NESSEN
AT 11:45 A.M. EST
APRIL 5, 1976
MONDAY
MR. NESSEN: We have quite. a few events today,
including some that didn't appear on the original schedule.
Let me run through them quickly.
At 1:30 there will be a ceremony at which Ambassador
Strausz-Hupe takes his oath as the new Ambassador to NATO.
That will be in the Rose Garden, with the President attending
and speaking.
As you see, at 2:15 there is a ceremony in the
Rose Garden at which the President will sign one of the parts
of his energy program approved by Congress; that is, approving
the production of oil from the Naval Petroleum Reserve at
Elk Hills, California.
At 3:00 the President will sign a proclamtion on
a month devoted to old Americans.
At 3:30 the President will sign a Rural Development
Act coincidental with a visit by the Kansas Farm Bureau.
All of those events will be in the Rose Garden and
all are open for coverage, if you desire it.
Q Even the Older Americans Proclamation?
MR. NESSEN: Yes.
Q
So, he is not going over to see Buendorf?
MR. NESSEN: That Treasury Department award to
Buendorf?
Q Yes.
MR. NESSEN: At the moment he is not.
MORE
#472
- 2 -
#472-4/5
Q
Ron, is he going to make a speech tonight
to a dinner of Greek Americans?
MR. NESSEN: The AHEPA dinner?
Q
Yes.
MR. NESSEN: There hasn't been any decision I can
announce on that yet.
Q
Will you know by this afternoon?
MR. NESSEN: Yes, by this afternoon I will know.
Q
Is it likely?
MR. NESSEN: I can't tell one way or another.
Q
What is the dinner?
MR. NESSEN: The AHEPA Greek-American organization
dinner. He has been invited, and I don't know whether he
will go or not.
There is one event tomorrow I can tell you about;
that is, the opening ceremonies of the Lyndon B. Johnson
Memorial Grove on the Potomac, across the river, tomorrow
morning. The President will leave the White House about
10:55, with open coverage over there and a travel pool going
with the President. The President will speak briefly and
be back at the White House about 11:55, which will delay
my briefing I guess until probably about 12:30.
Q
Will Lady Bird, Lucy Bird and Linda Bird be
there?
MR. NESSEN: Mrs. Johnson and other members of the
Johnson family will be there. I don't have a complete break-
down. The National Park Service announcement of the event
just says Mrs. Johnson and other members will be there.
Q
Will Mrs. Ford be there?
MR. NESSEN: I am not sure Mrs. Ford will be back
from Wisconsin by then.
Q
She will be back tonight.
MR. NESSEN: Let me check on Mrs. Ford then.
I don't know if you recall, but in September of
1974 the President and Mrs. Ford attended the ground-breaking
ceremonies for the grove. It is across the river between,
say, the Memorial Bridge and the 14th Street Bridge. It is
somewhere in there. That is tomorrow.
MORE
#472
- 3 -
#472-4/5
Q
There was something about a monument that was
going to be sculpted there that was stopped over a dispute
on design.
MR. NESSEN: I thought the grove itself was the
memorial.
Q
There was to be a big pink granite monument
there.
MR. NESSEN: Yes, I remember that. It says the 15-
acre site is dominated by a 45-ton granite rock from the
Texas hill country. The rough hewn rock carved by sculptor
Harold Vogel is surrounded by four quotations of the late
President -- one on education, civil rights, the environment
and the Presidency.
Do you want us to have this National Park Service
press release Xeroxed so you can write overnighters on it?
Q
Yes.
MR. NESSEN: I don't have anymore announcements.
Q
Ron, Senator Tower has challenged Ronald
Reagan to a debate, and I was wondering, does the President
feel this would be useless because the positions of Tower and
Reagan are well known, or does he feel Senator Tower has been
wise in asking Reagan to debate the issues face to face?
MR. NESSEN: I don't know how he feels about that
particular debate, Les. I will have to check.
Q
Will you check so we can find out tomorrow?
MR. NESSEN: Yes.
Q
When will we find out about the Texas trip?
MR. NESSEN: I think you can look forward to a
Texas trip on Friday and Saturday, but I don't have the
details. I will probably have them by tomorrow, at least a
rough outline.
Q
Is he going to El Paso on Saturday?
MR. NESSEN: That is probably a real possibility.
Q
Gold Star mothers and cattlemen dinner?
MR. NESSEN: The fact is, the pre-advance team is
still down there, so the precise events have not been decided
on yet.
MORE
#472
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
- 4 -
#472-4/5
Q
What do you have to say about Rogers Morton's
remarks that Secretary Kissinger will not be in the next
Ford Cabinet?
MR. NESSEN: I don't really have much to say, Walt.
The President was asked almost precisely the same question
at Green Bay on Saturday, and gave his answer, and I would
refer you to that answer. It is fairly lengthy, and it
really is the President's --
Q
I know the President's answer, but it seems
Kessunge
to be somewhat at odds with the quotes attributed to both
Morton and Mel Laird. The President said Kissinger can stay
as long as he wants. The Morton quote seems to suggest that
perhaps Henry might have worn out his welcome by then.
MR. NESSEN: I can only tell you what the President's
position is, and he stated it I thought quite clearly in Green
Bay.
Q
Ron, Morton's comment, it seemed to me, went
more along the lines that Secretary Kissinger himself may
not want to stay beyond November. The President has always
said, as you say, that he is welcome to stay as long as he
wants. Morton seems to be saying Henry Kissinger probably
won't want to stay on in the Administration beyond January.
That is one way to read it, anyway.
Do you know what the basis for saying that was?
Has Kissinger communicated to the President, for example, or
anyone here, that he probably will decide to do something
else come next year?
MR. NESSEN: Not that I know of.
Q Does Rog just imagine it?
MR. NESSEN: I don't know. All I know is what
the President's position stated less than 48 hours ago is.
Q I assume this was brought up in your meeting
with the President this morning, and I would like to know
what the President's reaction to Rog Morton's statement was.
MR. NESSEN: Phil, the President has stated his
position on Doctor Kissinger on Saturday, which was the
latest in the long series of statements, and he has not
obviously changed his mind since Saturday.
Q Would I be wrong in interpreting the President
to mean when he says Henry can stay on as long as he wants
that Henry is indeed welcome to stay on as Secretary of State
for a full .four-year term should the President win in November?
MORE
#472
GERALD FORD VIBRARY
- 5 -
#472-4/5
MR. NESSEN: You should look up what the President
said on Saturday, or we have transcripts almost finished.
It is on the bottom of page 6, and the top of page 7, and
that is the President's view.
Q
Does the President believe the Secretary
should not be a campaign issue?
MR. NESSEN: What do you mean, a campaign issue?
MORE
#472
- 6 -
#472-4/5
Q Reagan is making the Secretary a campaign
issue itself. Does the President welcome this? Does he
think it is wrong? Does he mind?
MR. NESSEN: I don't know. I haven't heard him
answer that specific question.
Q Rogers Morton was not speaking for the
President, is that what you are saying?
MR. NESSEN: The President spoke for himself
Saturday, Helen.
Q
Who is Monton speaking for? He is his
campaign manager.
MR. NESSEN: Yes. I am not precisely sure what
Rog said. I have seen a number of versions of it.
Q I can give you an exact quote. I can go get
it for you right now.
MR. NESSEN: It is immaterial because the President
has spoken for himself.
Q Ron, I don't think you answered my question.
My question was, directly, what did the President say this
morning when you asked him to respond to Rogers Morton's
statement? Did he say, "See my Green Bay speech"? (Laughter)
MR. NESSEN: The President's views on Secretary
Kissinger are as stated on Saturday, Phil.
Q Was he aware that Morton would be saying this?
MR. NESSEN: That Morton would be saying --
Q That Kissinger would probably be leaving?
MR. NESSEN: -- what he is reported to have said?
I would like to simply stick to what the President's views
on Secretary Kissinger are.
Q
Ron, is it true the President expressed no
irritation over what Morton said?
MR. NESSEN: Is it true?
Q Yes.
MR. NESSEN: Has that been printed?
Q
You have been asked twice what the President
said, and you haven't answered it. My question is, did the
President indicate any displeasure over what Rogers Morton
was quoted as saying?
MORE
#472
GERALD FORD VIBRARY
- 7 -
#472-4/5
MR. NESSEN: The President believes everyone in
his Administration or connected with his campaign should
understand his views on Secretary Kissinger as stated on
Saturday and should follow that same line because that is
the President's view.
Q
Does he plan to talk to Rogers Morton about
this, Ron?
MR. NESSEN: I think Rog will understand that is
the President's position.
Q Who is going to relay the word, do you know?
MR. NESSEN: I don't know whether the President
will have a chance to do it himself or --
Q Mr. Cheney?
MR. NESSEN: No. Probably Roy Hughes.
Q Who is that?
Q
Ron, is this possibly the same kind of thing
we saw with Nelson Rockefeller some time ago when Howard
Bo Callaway started bad-mouthing Rockefeller and the
President saying Rockefeller is still my guy? It went back
and forth until Rockefeller handed in his letter asking not
to be considered. Isn't this the same sort of thing?
MR. NESSEN: I don't want to make any connection
between the two things. Really, you know what the President's
views on Kissinger are. I have said today that the President
feels that everyone in the campaign and in the Administration
should know his view and should take the same position, and
I don't see any analogy with the other situation.
Q Are you saying he is going to be reprimanded?
MR. NESSEN: No, I didn't say that.
Q
You are saying he is going to get the word
from the President that he shouldn't have said what he said?
MR. NESSEN: And each person in the Administration
and the campaign will get the same word.
Q How? By a general memo?
MR. NESSEN: No, by my saying it here publicly.
Q
That the Secretary can stay on as long as
he wants?
MR. NESSEN: Look it up in the Green Bay Q & A.
MORE
#472
FORD & LIBRARI
- 8 -
#472-4/5
Q
Ron, who is going to go back to California
and tell the audience in California that Rog Morton is
wrong? Who is going to do that?
MR. NESSEN: I am not sure what Rog said to the
group because I guess it was in private.
Q
You are pretty sure. My question is, who
is going to correct this error with the audience in California?
MR. NESSEN: I don't know that it was an error
and I don't know who, if anyone, will get back to that group.
Q
In other words, the impression will be left
that there are two positions in the President's Administration;
is that right?
MR. NESSEN: There is only one position and that
is the President's.
Q
Obviously, there are two, because you are
not going to correct that statement made out there that
was absolutely the opposite. If you are not going to make
an effort to correct that, then there must be two positions.
MR. NESSEN: There is only one position.
Q
Will Rogers Morton retract that statement if
there is only one position? This is exactly the opposite.
We are puzzled, Ron.
MR. NESSEN: I don't think it is exactly the
opposite --
Q
It is not the same.
MR. NESSEN: Each person in the Administration and
in the campaign will now know, I think, what the President's
position is and that they should follow it.
Q
Ron, do you know whether the Secretary of
State has discussed this Morton statement with the President?
MR. NESSEN: I don't know that, Dave.
Q
Did they see each other or talk together
today?
MR. NESSEN: Yes, they did.
Q
When?
MR. NESSEN: For about an hour, from 9:15 to 10:15.
That is the regular -- I don't want you to say Henry came
rushing in here to talk about this. It is his regular couple
of times a week meeting with the President on foreign policy.
MORE
#472
- 9 -
#472-4/5
Q
Was he alone or were Rumsfeld and Scowcroft
there, too?
MR. NESSEN: General Scowcroft was there, as normal.
Q Ron, the funny thing about it is the President
has made this statement about Kissinger not just at Green
Bay, but the President made his statement before about his
confidence in Kissinger so it is rather peculiar --
MR. NESSEN: I tried to say that last week, Sarah,
when a somewhat similar issue came up regarding the President's
opinion and views of Dr. Kissinger. I said then that it
comes up almost everywhere he has a question and answer
session so there should be no --
Q
Why do you think Rogers Morton, who is
supposed to know everything the President feels politically,
did not know it?
MR. NESSEN: I don't know, Sarah.
Q
Ron, for the sake of updating our stories,
would you mind stating what the President's position is today?
MR. NESSEN: No, but I will provide you with a
transcript of his remarks in Green Bay.
Q
That leaves us at an awful disadvantage. If
you could read it, then we would know that you are really
not trying to ease Henry out.
MR. NESSEN: The Xeroxes are on their way.
Q
Isn't there some way to express the
President's position --
MR. NESSEN: You mean, isn't there some way I can
give you a fresh story saying the President rushed to Henry
Kissinger's defense today against Rogers Morton?
Q
I am not trying to get that at all, but Morton
made --
MR. NESSEN: I will give you a Xerox of what he
said in Green Bay.
Q
But Rogers Morton made his statement, I
understand, after the President made his.
MR. NESSEN: Did he? I don't know. This was
Saturday in Green Bay, wasn't it?
Q
But Morton spoke later. It would be helpful
if you could say what the President's position is today.
MORE
#472
- 10 -
#472-4/5
MR. NESSEN: I think it would be best to give
you a Xerox of what he said so you will have it accurate.
It is on the machine now.
Q
Which stop was that in Green Bay?
MR. NESSEN: It was the one there in the big arena
where the people asked questions.
Q
Ron, since you are using us to pass the
President's word to all the people on the Administration
and in the campaign, did the President tell Kissinger
personally this morning that he still has his full confidence
and wants him to stay aboard as long as he likes?
MR. NESSEN: Phil, I didn't attend that meeting.
It is one of his regular meetings several times a week to
discuss foreign policy matters.
Q
Did they discuss this at all?
MR. NESSEN: I don't know.
Q
Didn't you ask the President?
MR. NESSEN: No, I didn't.
Q
Ron, can I pursue the matter of how many times
a week Kissinger meets with the President? It was my
understanding when they had the Sunday shuffle that Kissinger
still would meet with the President an hour a day. Was I
incorrect and would it have slipped to a couple or three
times a week and who else advises the President on foreign
policy?
MR. NESSEN: I think this is old stuff, Dick.
Q
I have been away for a while and want to check
these points. Can I get an answer?
MR. NESSEN: I don't want a story rehashing Henry
losing all his power at the White House.
Q
So my editor can decide which story we do.
MR. NESSEN: I think everybody here knows Dr. Kissinger
has a meeting two or three times a week with the President,
or more, if needed, to carry out his job.
Again, we have said here before many times that
Don Rumsfeld also meets a couple of times a week with the
President, George Bush does, and there are other meetings
in which all three of them, as well as General Scowcroft,
attend. This is old stuff. It is not anything I am saying
today in relation to the Morton story.
MORE
#472
- 11 -
#472-4/5
Q
Will you deny that Henry is being eased out?
MR. NESSEN: Yes.
You have it. Now you have a lead.
Q
Ron, did you get a call from Dr. Kissinger
or somebody in his office right before this meeting?
Q
Will you deny there is an element in the
President's political campaign among the strategists that
Kissinger should go, particularly in view of the new possible
areas of conservative antagonism to him?
MR. NESSEN: I missed the first part.
Q
Is there an element in the political campaign
structure that would like Kissinger to go? A lot of this
has come out in different ways and Morton seems to be
speaking --
MR. NESSEN: I don't know, Helen. You will have
to ask the campaign people. I know what the President's
position is and I know he wants everyone to understand his
position and to reflect his position.
Q
Ron, quite apart from Kissinger's ability
as Secretary of State, does the President agree with
Morton's statement that it would be bad politics to get
rid of him now?
MR. NESSEN: All I can give you is the President
said what he wanted to say on Saturday.
Q
Did Henry threaten to resign this morning?
Q
Did he call or somebody from his office call
you just a minute before you came out?
MR. NESSEN: No.
Q
Brent Scowcroft?
MR. NESSEN: Brent Scowcroft was talking to me about
another matter.
Q
Why is it that you can't give us any indication
whether or not he plans to stay beyond this year if the
President is elected?
MR. NESSEN: You need to ask Henry that question.
Q
You have told us before the President has
discussed this with him. You have never answered that
question at all.
MORE
#472
- 12 -
#472-4/5
MR. NESSEN: I have told you what the President's
position on Kissinger is.
Q
That doesn't really respond to the question
as to whether or not he expects Kissinger to stay on in a
Cabinet of his if he is elected to another term.
MR. NESSEN: All I can do is refer you to what
he said publicly.
Q
Does he want all his Cabinet members to
stay on?
MR. NESSEN: Now, Helen, stop fishing. There
is nothing there to fish for.
Q
Really, I think that is a valid question.
Q
He said he is welcome to stay. Does he
expect Henry to stay?
MR. NESSEN: I think, as the President said himself,
as you will see in the transcript -- he said, "I would like
Kissinger to be Secretary of State as long as I am President,
and I can't expand on that.'
Well, if the President can't expand on that, I
can't expand on that. That is a quote from the Saturday
thing. It is nothing fresh.
Q
If Henry resigns at the end of the year --
let's assume the President is elected, Henry will have to
resign like all other members of the Cabinet. The question
there becomes, will the President accept Henry's resignation?
MR. NESSEN: We are trying to read the future. I
can't read the future. Nobody can.
Q
Every Cabinet member has to turn in a
resignation at the end of the term. Henry will then send
in a perfunctory letter or a real letter. If it is a
perfunctory letter, will the President accept it?
MR. NESSEN: I don't think I can go quite that far.
Q
Ron, is the President concerned that Dr.
Kissinger wrote to Senator Buckley charging that Evans
and Novak "severely distorted what actually happened in the
Sonnenfeldt conversations"? Sulzberger, of the New York
Times, said he talked to a number of people who were there
for the Sonnenfeldt conversations and he claims Evans and
Novak are accurate. Kissinger says it was severely distorted
by Evans and Novak and then he tells Derwinski it was due
to some junior clerk and transmission difficulties.
Does the President see any slight conflict in all
of this and why doesn't the President ask the Secretary to
give out the copy of the Sonnenfeldt cable and end all of the
mystery on this?
MORE
#472
- 13 -
#472-4/5
MR. NESSEN: I think that is the question you
asked Funseth on Friday and I think I would give you the
same answer he gave you.
Q
I hope you will give me a better answer
than that. I am used to getting better information here
than at the State Department, much better.
MR. NESSEN: It is the answer, Les, that, if you
formed a pattern of every time somebody leaked in full or
in part a classified document, that the response was to make
public the entire document, you can see where that would lead
and that is the reason, I understand, the State Department
has decided against releasing the summary of Sonnenfeldt's
remarks to the Ambassadors.
Q
How about the inconsistency of telling
Senator Buckley one thing and Derwinski the other?
MR. NESSEN: I don't see and don't know what
difference there was, if any, between what Henry wrote to
Buckley and what was told to Derwinski. I think the
President talked about this issue in Milwaukee and I have
here, and I tried to tell you what the American policy --
the President's policy is toward Eastern Europe, which is
really the issue.
Q
Ron, the fact that the President gets this
question constantly on the campaign trail --
MR. NESSEN: Which question?
Q
The question on Kissinger's survival. Whether
he likes it or not, he has to admit Kissinger has become
a campaign issue.
MR. NESSEN: I don't know what makes a campaign issue.
Q
I mean, the fact it crops up at every Q & A --
MR. NESSEN: And the President gives the same
answer.
Q
So it has become a problem in that he doesn't
seem to be able to convince people.
MR. NESSEN: I don't know. Just because the
question is asked, it doesn't mean it is a problem.
Q
Ron, this morning Zumwalt held a news
conference and said he had talked to some diplomats during
his just-completed European tour and they told him a message
was sent out from Kissinger, or the State Department, on
February 1 of this year which outlined the U.S. policy
toward Eastern Europe, and it was, in effect, the same thing
that we had heard about in the so-called Sonnenfeldt document.
MORE
#472
- 14 -
#472-4/5
My question is, does the President know of a
February 1 message sent to our diplomats regarding Eastern
Europe?
MR. NESSEN: This is getting to be a more and
more tangled tale. Let me see if I can untangle it. I
don't know precisely what Zumwalt was talking about, but
I assume what he was talking about was the five- or six-page
document that we talked about here last week, or maybe it
was the week before last we talked about it.
This is a summary of Hal's remarks to the
Ambassadors which took place in December and, as the State
Department said last week or the week before, the five- or
six-page summary was prepared about eight weeks later and
was sent out to the American diplomatic posts throughout
the world and, as is traditional or as is the procedure at
the State Department, any cable that goes out to the
embassies is signed with Kissinger's name, whether he
personally writes the cable or not.
My guess is that is what Zumwalt is talking
about and it is the five- or six-page document, I guess,
that the Economist was reported to have published and that
Evans and Novak say they have seen and Bernie Nossiter has
written about, Steve Rosenfelt and so forth. So I don't
think it is a new document that Zumwalt was talking about.
I think it must be the five- or six-page document we talked
about last week.
Q
He also said that this so-called message that
went out February 1 was much different than the message
that went to Congress last week. The Buckley letter, he
said that had been doctored -- it was a different policy than
had been outlined in February.
MR. NESSEN: No, it is not a different policy.
Obviously, they were in two different forms. One was a
summary prepared about eight weeks later by someone down
the line at the State Department, summarizing what he
thought was the thrust of Hal's remarks to the Ambassadors.
The other was a letter from the Secretary to Senator Buckley
setting straight what the President's policy toward Eastern
Europe is.
Q
Not to belabor this, but Zumwalt seemed to be
saying the Buckley letter put a little different spin on all
of this.
MR. NESSEN: Yes.
Q
Does that mean -- is that right or indeed was
the first cable somewhat garbled and did not correctly state
U.S. policy?
MORE
#472
- 15 -
#472-4/5
MR. NESSEN: The first cable -- if it is the same
one we are talking about -- was a summary of Hal's remarks
and, as I think I said here and the State Department has
said for the last two weeks, taken in its entirety Sonnenfeldt's
remarks did accurately state American foreign policy toward
Eastern Europe.
The letter to Senator Buckley was something
entirely different. It was a very brief summation of American
foreign policy.
Q
I can't remember. I heard you say most of
it, but I can't recall. Did you leave the impression that
perhaps some parts of that cable could be taken to mean --
could be incorrectly, or could state -- I have my own troubles
here this morning.
In other words, could parts of that cable have
incorrectly stated foreign policy? Could there have been
parts that could have been misinterpreted by the diplomats
that got it?
MR. NESSEN: I don't think it could have been
misinterpreted by the diplomats that got it because they would
have read the entire thing. I think if somebody leaked a
sentence here or there without the entire cable being read,
it obviously led to misinterpretation because Evans and Novak
misinterpreted it, whatever portions they were shown. But,
taken in its entirety, you could not mistake --
Q
Have you read the summary, Ron?
MR. NESSEN: I have read the summary and I have read
the Buckley letter from Kissinger. I think I have read
all the pertinent documents.
Q
Did Sonnenfeldt say in his summary that the
United States should support and encourage a policy of peaceful
so-called "organic union" between the Eastern European nations
and the Soviet Union?
MR. NESSEN: Jim, I don't have the document in
front of me. As I say, I think part of the original mistake
here was being shown a sentence or two -- a sentence or
two being shown to some people did get everybody pointed in
the wrong direction. Since I don't have it in front of me,
I am not going to say, yes, that is in there --
Q
Why are you more entitled to receive this
than Congressman Derwinski, who asked for it and was turned
down? Why is a Press Secretary or a News Secretary more
entitled to this document that is denied to a Member of
Congress of the United States?
MR. NESSEN: I don't know that it has been denied.
MORE
#472
- 16 -
#472-4/5
Q
It has. Derwinski said he asked for it and
was denied. Why?
MR. NESSEN: I don't know myself that he was
denied. I know a lot of people have talked to Congressman
Derwinski to set his mind at ease as to what American policy
is.
Q
He is not at ease because he said he has
been denied the thing.
Q
Ron, is this right? This confusion occurred
because of a classified action taken, classifying Sonnenfeldt's
remarks after they were made, and the refusal then of
the Administration to declassify those, when they could
easily have, and then a restatement of policy about two
months later in a cable out to Ambassadors that is not made
public, and then a brief summary to one Senator, right?
MR. NESSEN: I don't think so, Sarah. I don't know
where the confusion came in and I don't really think I should
try to sort it out. But I have tried and the President,
more to the point, laid out in a very carefully prepared
statement to the luncheon in Milwaukee the other day his
policy in Eastern Europe, and that is the pertinent question.
What this reporter heard or saw, whether he might
have misinterpreted -- I mean, the State Department reporter
writing a summary eight weeks later did violence to what
Hal said and so forth, these are somewhat periphery issues.
What the President said in Milwaukee the other day is the
American policy toward Eastern Europe and that is the
important thing.
Q
Morton, on Friday, said he would ask the
President to do more campaign traveling. Has Morton done
so, and will the President do more traveling?
MR. NESSEN: I don't know whether he has told that
to the President or the President's advisers. At the moment,
the pace of the campaign will be about as it has been in the
past.
Q
Ron, no increase in the traveling?
MR. NESSEN: So far there has been no decision
made like that.
Q
Ron, on another matter, last Thursday, I
believe it was, a Senate Judiciary Subcommittee passed an
oil divestiture bill. Appropriate to that, I am wondering,
has the President taken a position on this matter in any
of his Q & A sessions out on the road? I don't remember
him saying anything.
MORE
#472
- 17 -
#472-4/5
MR. NESSEN: That did come up briefly at the senior
staff meeting this morning and he was told the Energy
Resources Council was examining the bill, which I believe
was approved by one vote by the committee, and will have
its view to express to the President, at which time, I
assume, he will take a public position on it.
Q
Ford hasn't taken a public position on the
general idea of doing that?
MR. CARLSON: He has said a few words here and
there in press conferences around the country. We can
probably pull something out of that.
Q
I am interested in the answer, and I didn't
quite get it.
MR. NESSEN: John thinks maybe here and there
the President has had a few words to say on it. We don't
recall precisely what they were but we will try to get them
out of the Research Office, to find out what he said.
Q
What about a press conference here? I
understand from what you said last week there would not be --
at least I inferred there wouldn't be one before
tomorrow's vote in Wisconsin. That leaves the rest of the
week.
MR. NESSEN: I didn't mean to leave the impression
that it had anything to do with the voting in Wisconsin.
Q
I said I inferred that.
MR. NESSEN: I don't anticipate one this week in
Washington. I think there is a good chance he will probably
meet some Texas reporters.
Q
What has happened to the Presidential press
conferences?
Q
You mean here?
MR. NESSEN: No, down there.
Q
I am aware this is an election year.
Nevertheless, both you and the President have been, over the
months, firmly behind the idea of frequent press conferences.
If I am not mistaken, he has not had one in Washington since
February.
MR. NESSEN: Yes.
Q
We are getting on about two months. One
more month and you will equal Nixon's record here -- three
months, or 19 weeks, I believe it was.
MORE
#472
- 18 -
#472-4/5
MR. NESSEN: You have had all of these out-of-town
news conferences and interviews, East Room Q & A's and
citizens forums --
Q
How do you like being President, Mr. President?
(Laughter)
MR. NESSEN: Walt, you know that the questions
are better than that.
Q
They are softballs, Ron.
MR. NESSEN: Wheaton College was no softball.
Q
They weren't asked by experienced people who
knew how to ask follow-up questions.
Q
Ron, what is the problem with the White House
Press Corps having a news conference?
MR. NESSEN: There will obviously be White House
news conferences.
Q
When?
MR. NESSEN: I don't have a date to give you, Helen.
Q
The point is, we are being by-passed and
with your everyday manning of the barricade in asking
questions we can't --
MR. NESSEN: The President is holding a lot of
news conferences.
Q
But why is he by-passing the White House
Press?
Q
This sounds like the Reagan citizens press
conference routine.
Q
Will he appear when we ask questions before
the ASNE next week?
MR. NESSEN: If it is possible to figure out a
way -- there is going to be 900 people here and nobody can
figure out how to get an orderly Q & A with 900 people.
Q
Why have it orderly, Ron?
MR. NESSEN: So we are trying to arrange a
disorderly Q & A session, which shouldn't be too hard.
(Laughter)
Q
There, again, we are being by-passed.
MORE
#472
- 19 -
#472-4/5
Q
He has done Q & A's with 4,000 people in
some of these setups.
Q
The answer is, you are trying to arrange it?
MR. NESSEN: Correct.
Q
Ron, could I try to get a yes or no answer
on Kissinger?
MR. NESSEN: Yes. (Laughter)
Q
Does the President expect him to serve in a
new Administration if he is elected?
MR. NESSEN: The President's position on Dr. Kissinger
was stated on Saturday and I will give you copies of it so
you are completely familiar with it.
Q
The question is, does the President expect
Henry Kissinger to serve as Secretary of State in a new
Administration if he is elected?
MR. NESSEN: I am going to give you what he said
less than 48 hours ago about Dr. Kissinger and you can be
sure that that is his view.
Q
That is not the question he was responding to.
MR. NESSEN: It is his statement.
Q Ron, 117 Members of Congress have written
the President of the United States asking him to take a
position on the regime in South Korea, the Government of
South Korea. May we have his reaction?
MR. NESSEN: Dick is asking about a report that
a letter was sent up here by 116 or 117 Members of Congress.
I guess you would have to say it was on the political
situation in South Korea. I checked this morning and
couldn't find that the letter had arrived yet.
Q
Was it sent by mail or delivered here?
MR. NESSEN: If it hasn't arrived yet, it isn't
likely it was sent by mail.
Q
The Supreme Court this morning refused
Lieutenant Calley's case and you recall the great uproar
in this country at that time when President Nixon said he
would review it and give a final determination. I would like
to know whether President Ford intends to get involved in the
Calley case?
MR. NESSEN: I didn't know about that decision.
I will have to check for you.
GERALD FORD LIBELEY
THE PRESS: Thank you, Ron.
END (AT 12:20 P.M. EST)
#472
Vernon Ehlers
Science Dept at Calvin College
Grand Rapids, Michigan
During the last few Congressional years ofGRF,
Vern Ehlers headed a Ford Science Advisory
Group in the 5th District, Michigan.
jus
4-13-76
File
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
4/9/76
TO:
BILL SEIDMAN
FROM:
JIM CANNON
Do you know who Vern Ehlers
is?
Would you please give my
warmest personal regards
to the president? thank you.
Vern Ehlers
(Grand Rapide)
EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE
APRIL 27, 1976
UNTIL 3 P. M., E.D.T.
TUESDAY, APRIL 27, 1976
Office of the White House Press Secretary
THE WHITE HOUSE
STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT
On October 15, 1974, I signed into law the Federal Election Campaign Act Amend-
ments of 1974 which made far-reaching changes in the laws affecting Federal
elections in election campaign practices. This law created the Federal Election
Commission to administer and enforce a comprehensive regulatory scheme for
Federal campaigns.
On January 30, 1976, the United States Supreme Court ruled that certain features
of the new law were unconstitutional. The Court allowed a total of 50 days to
"afford Congress an opportunity to reconstitute the Commission by law."
On February 16th, I submitted legislation to reconstitute the Commission and
urged Congress to enact quickly this required change so it could continue to operate
through the 1976 election. This is the simple and fair thing to do.
Instead, Congress has already spent over 70 days in its attempt to amend the exist-
ing law in many unnecessary areas.
Because of this delay, campaigns which were planned in accordance with the funding
and regulatory provisions of the election law now lack funds and lack ground rules.
The complex changes in the draft conference bill can only introduce added uncertainty
in the law, and thus create confusion for the candidates in the present campaigns
and jeopardize the conduct of this year's Presidential election.
Accordingly, I again urge the Congress to imme diately pass the simple corrections
mandated by the Supreme Court and proposed by me. The American people want
and deserve an independent and effective Election Commission. There must be a
fair and clear law on the books to guide the campaigns. All Presidential candidates
need the funds which are blocked by the Congressional inaction.
A Congressional conference committee is still working on the details of the Federal
Election Commission legislation. This legislation could have a major impact on how
Presidential elections are conducted in this country. This is not a subject that any
President can treat lightly, and I will not commit myself to sign or veto until the
Congress completes definitive action on the bill.
There is no question that the Congressional conferees can adopt a bill which
I can quickly sign into law. They should avoid objectionable and highly con-
troversial provisions by moving towards simple reconstitution suggested by
the Supreme Court and proposed by me in February.
#
#
#
inval
ORS GUILD
DATE 5/3
7750 Sunset Boulevard/Hollywood, C
(213) 876-3030/C
TO: Jim Confon
any specific
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
thick n can I
tim from who
May 6, 1976
simply refer them
to RNC. ? Thank you
TO:
MIKE DUVAL
Carmber Cerem
FROM:
JIM CANNON
2836
ful
For your appropriate handli
1110.00
time. "
Clearly Arts and Artists have
the political process. Now i
process to recognize that ass
Attachment
separate Arts Plank in the Re
Since the California Democrat
such a separate plank on the
decidedly non-partisan, it SE
California and national Reput
action at their National and кеугопие prurfum
We hope you will share in the enthusiasm which has already
been generated, and will work with us to make the Arts an
important separate plank in the Republican National Platform.
Since I will be filming on location for several weeks,
please contact my Co-Chair, Ms. Barbara Perry, for immediate
assistance. Her phone number is (213) 276-9609.
warmest regards.
Sincerely,
Kattlen Nalar SCREEN ACTORS
KATHLEEN NOLAN
President
FORD is LIBRARY GERALD
KN : CMH
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
May 11, 1976
Office of the White House Press Secretary
THE WHITE HOUSE
STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT
After extensive consultation and review, I have
decided that the Federal Campaign Act Amendments of 1976
warrant my signature.
I am therefore signing those amendments into law this
afternoon. I will also be submitting to the Senate for its
advice and consent the nominations of six persons to serve
as members of the reconstituted Commission.
Shortly after the Supreme Court ruled on January 30 that
the Federal Election Commission was invalid as then constituted,
I made it clear that I favored a simple reconstitution of the
Commission because efforts to amend and reform the law could
cause massive confusion in election campaigns that had
already started.
The Congress, however, was unwilling to accept my
straightforward proposal and instead became bogged down in
a controversy that has now extended for more than three
months.
In the process, efforts were made to add several
provisions to the law which I thought were thoroughly objec-
tionable. These suggested provisions would have further
tipped the balance of political power to a single party and
to a single element within that party. I could not accept
those provisions under any circumstance and I so communicated
my views to various Members of the Congress.
Since that time to my gratification, those features
of the bill have been modified so as to avoid in large
measure the objections I had raised.
Weighing the merits of this legislation, I have found
that the amendments as now drafted command widespread,
bipartisan support in both Houses of Congress and by the
Chairpersons of both the Republican National Committee and
the Democratic National Committee.
I still have serious reservations about certain aspects
of the present amendments. For one thing, the bill as
presently written will require that the Commission take
additional time to consider the effects which the present
amendments will have on its previously issued opinions and
regulations.
more
2
A more fundamental concern is that these amendments
jeopardize the independence of the Federal Election Commission
by permitting either House of Congress to veto regulations
which the Commission, as an Executive agency, issues. This
provision not only circumvents the original intent of
campaign reform but, in my opinion, violates the Constitution.
I have therefore directed the Attorney General to challenge
the constitutionality of this provision at the earliest
possible opportunity.
Recognizing these weaknesses in the bill, I have
nevertheless concluded that it is in the best interest of
the Nation that I sign this legislation. Considerable effort
has been expended by members of both parties to make this
bill as fair and balanced as possible.
Moreover, further delay would undermine the fair and
proper conduct of elections this year for seats in the
U.S. Senate, the House of Representatives and for the
Presidency. Effective regulation of campaign practices
depends upon the existence of a Commission with valid
rulemaking and enforcement powers. It is critical that
we maintain the integrity of our election process for all
Federal offices so that all candidates and their respective
supporters and contributors are bound by enforceable laws
and regulations which are designed to control questionable
and unfair campaign practices.
I look to the Commission, as soon as it is reappointed,
to do an effective job of administering the campaign laws
equitably but forcefully, and in a manner that minimizes the
confusion which is caused by the added complexity of the
present amendments. In this regard, the Commission will be
aided by a newly provided civil enforcement mechanism
sufficiently flexible to facilitate voluntary compliance
through conciliation agreements and, where necessary
penalize noncompliance through means of civil fines.
In addition the new legislation refines the provisions
intended to control the size of contributions from a single
source by avoiding proliferation of political action com-
mittees which are under common control. Also, this law
strengthens provisions for reporting money spent on campaigns
by requiring disclosure of previously unreported costs of
partisan communications which are intended to affect the
outcome of Federal elections.
Following the 1976 elections, I will submit to the
Congress legislation that will correct problems created by
the present laws and make additional needed reforms in the
election process.
#
#
#
#