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.
Source Description
This file contains material relating to Richard Nixon and the Runaway Pappy Bill.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
4525479
label
Ford Newsletter, February-March 1971
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
4525479
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Ford Newsletter, February-March 1971
description
This file contains material relating to Richard Nixon and the Runaway Pappy Bill.
citationUrl
collections
Gerald R. Ford Congressional Papers
Newsletters
subjects
U.S. House of Representatives. 3/4/1789-
Consumer protection
Debts, Public
Environmental protection
Health
Insurance
Labor disputes
Legislation
Old age
Revenue sharing
Social security
Supersonic transport planes
Transportation
Voting
Water pollution
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
4525479
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1971-03-31
month
3
year
1971
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1971-02-01
month
2
year
1971
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
42ac4036c6004686
ocrText
This document scanned from Box D2 of the Gerald R. Ford Congressional Papers at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Your Washington Review
KENT
5
IONIA
Congressman
JERRY FORD
February 1, 1971
The 92nd Congress has convened. President Nixon has delivered his State of
the Union Message. The Democrats in the House elected a new Speaker; Carl Albert of
Oklahoma has become the 49th person in America's history to hold the third highest
office in the federal government. Republicans in the House of Representatives re-
elected your Congressman as their leader for the 4th two-year term. I am deeply
grateful for this endorsement.
To the voters of Kent and Ionia Counties, I express my gratitude and apprecia-
tion for the opportunity to serve in the U. S. Congress. I welcome your observations
and recommendations. If there is any way in which I can be of assistance to you,
please do not hesitate to let me know.
COMMITTEE ON COMMITTEES: There was no business scheduled for the House last
week but the Committee on Committees did get under way. As Minority Leader I serve
as Chairman of this Committee which assigns Republican members to the various House
committees. Such assignments are significant because it is the committees which
first pass on and recommend bills for floor action.
Each state having at least one Republican Congressman is represented by one of
its members on the Committee. But the member has votes equal to the number of
Republicans from his state. Thus the member from Michigan casts 12 votes; California
has 18 votes and Utah one.
Prior to the meeting of the Committee we had to work out with the Speaker and
Majority Leader the number of minority members allocated to each legislative commit-
tee. This entailed a certain amount of bargaining.
THE SENIORITY RULE: Republicans in the House have modified their rules so that
Chairmen or ranking minority members of committees will not automatically be deter-
mined by seniority. The Republican Committee on Committees will select the Chairmen
(if Republicans control the House) or the ranking minority members. It is not
required to designate the committee member with the longest consecutive service. The
Committee's nomination must be confirmed by the entire Republican membership at a con-
ference (caucus) meeting. Should the conference not endorse the Committee's selec-
tion, a new name will be submitted by the Committee.
I fully supported this change in the seniority system. The new method pro-
vides party responsibility and will insure capable and vigorous committee leadership.
The Democrats also modified the seniority rule on their appointments but adopted a
slightly different approach.
THE 21-DAY OR 31-DAY RULE: The first floor fight of the new House involved an
attempt to restrict the authority of the Committee on Rules. This committee acts as
"the traffic cop of the House," scheduling legislation for floor action and sometimes
refusing to permit certain legislation to come before the House. It is composed of
ten Democrats and five Republicans but the Democratic leaders wanted to clip its
wings even though they dominate it by a 2 to 1 margin.
They proposed that if the Committee on Rules does not report a bill within ten
days, the Chairman of the legislative committee may file a request for action after
21 days. At the expiration of that time (which would be at least 31 days) the
Speaker of the House, at his discretion, could bring the legislation to the floor for
debate and a vote.
Following a lengthy discussion the House rejected the new proposal. The
majority, and it was bi-partisan, felt that the Committee on Rules serves a useful
purpose and that it would not be wise to give the Speaker dictatorial power over
legislation held by the Rules Committee. It was also pointed out that this Committee
had not abused its authority; in the past four years the Committee has refused to
grant a "rule" on only four out of 493 bills referred to it.
When I first came to Congress I voted for a 21-day rule which was adopted.
Two years later I voted against the rule when it was abolished. Experience has
demonstrated the need for an effective Committee on Rules even when it is dominated
by the opposition party.
LEGISLATION INTRODUCED: Among the bills I have introduced in the new Congress
is legislation which would prohibit federal officers or employees from dumping
dredgings or other refuse material into navigable water, and another bill modeled
after the Sax law in Michigan which would permit suits by citizens against those who
cause pollution of water, land, or air. This is called the "Environmental Rights Act
of 1971. "
I also introduced bills to require reflectors on railroad cars so that they
may more readily be seen at night at all grade crossings; to change the tariff duty
on certain leather work gloves; to provide for a Distinguished Citizens Award for
those who do an outstanding job of helping to solve national problems; and to increase
from $140 to $400 per month the amount a widow with children can earn without losing
her social security benefits.
AT HOME: I'm scheduled to be home on Friday to speak at Grand Valley State
College and to meet with County officers, the League of Women Voters, and Malta Lodge.
Two weeks ago I was at the Cherry Street office for a number of appointments.
Your Washington Review
KENT
5
IONIA
Congressman
JERRY FORD
February 8, 1971
HOUSE ORGANIZES FOR ACTION
The House of Representatives is ready for business.
Last week Democrats and Republicans finished handing out committee assignments
for new members and made changes requested by holdover members. The House cannot
begin dealing with legislation until this is done. It is in the committees that
legislation is shaped before it is sent to the House floor for a vote.
Members of the Congress press hard to get assigned to certain committees--places
where they feel they can do their people back home the most good.
I serve as chairman of the House Republicans' Committee on Committees, which
makes the committee assignments for GOP members of the House. This is a most diffi-
cult task that requires lots of backup work in my office. This year two Grand Rapids
interns from Aquinas College--Gail Wingard and Mark Marin--helped my regular staff
and at the same time learned how the committee assignment process works.
Now that the House is organized, we can begin work on the legislative agenda
outlined by the President in his State of the Union Message.
HEALTH A TOP PRIORITY
Both the President and the Congress are assigning top priority to health
legislation this year.
In his State of the Union Message, the President declared: "America has long
been the wealthiest nation in the world. Now it is time we became the healthiest
nation in the world."
The emphasis in the President's new health care program is on expanding the
supply of medical manpower and facilities. It does not make sense to talk about a
national health insurance scheme when the manpower and facilities to meet such a
demand do not even exist.
The President also will propose a plan to help those who cannot afford even
basic health care.
The President's approach would cost less than one-twentieth of what a cradle-to-
grave national health insurance plan would cost.
It seems obvious that if national health insurance were put into effect, the
demand for doctors' and hospital services would be so great it would push medical
costs out of sight. And we all know that medical costs are extremely high now.
The proper approach, it seems to me, is to increase the supply of medical man-
power and facilities and make more efficient use of those which now exist--rather
than create a vastly expanded demand for more health services.
SHOWDOWN TIME ON TRANSPORTATION STRIKES
It is time the Congress quit running away from the question of what to do about
national emergency labor disputes in the transportation industry.
That is what I told my colleagues in the House when the President again as he
did last year--sent the Congress his proposed Emergency Public Interest Protection
Act.
The Emergency Public Interest Protection Act would bring the railroads and the
airlines under the Taft-Hartley Act and would amend Taft-Hartley to give the
President three additional options for handling national emergency labor disputes
in transportation. The bill would give the President vital new authority to deal
with such disputes.
Under the bill, the President could extend the initial 80-day cooling off
period for another 30 days. Or he could order partial operation of the industry
instead of allowing a strike to shut it down completely while negotiations continued.
Or he could turn to the "final offer" alternative. Under that procedure, the final
offers of labor and management would be turned over to a neutral board. That board
then would pick one offer or the other was being more reasonable and would order they
dispute settled on that basis.
Two months ago the nation was drawn to the edge of a crippling railroad shut-
down because management and the unions could not reach agreement in the allotted
time. A few weeks from now another railroad strike is a distinct possibility.
I don't know whether even two members of the House agree at this moment on how
new legislation should read to improve the handling of national emergency labor
disputes in transportation. But I think it is a shameful shirking of responsibility
that the Congress has not even held hearings on the President's proposal.
I think this year hearings should be held promptly, and that Congress should
then formulate a solution to the problem.
AGED TO GET HELP
The first bill introduced in the House this year--and rightly so--is legislation
to increase Social Security benefits.
This bill would increase benefits 10 per cent across the board, retroactive to
Jan. 1. For instance, the minimum would go from $64 a month to $70.40 for an
individual and $106.60 for a family. The maximum would rise from $176.70 to $194.40
for an individual and $322.40 for a family.
195.00
At present a retired person suffers a loss of some Social Security benefits if
his earnings exceed $1,680. Under the new bill, H.R. 1, the earnings limitation is
increased to $2,000.
Widows also would benefit under the new bill. Where a widow now is entitled
only to 82.5 per cent of her late husband's Social Security benefits, she would
receive 100 per cent under the new legislation at age 65.
Early action is expected on H.R. 1, which includes President Nixon's Family
Assistance Program as well as Social Security changes.
We must act to help our elderly. Their crisis is growing. Recent figures show
that the aged have less than half the income of those under 65 years of age. Only
among the aged did the number of people living in poverty actually increase in the
past two years. Medical costs have risen 20 per cent in the last two years, while
Medicare continues to cover only half of all these costs.
A WAY TO STOP SMUT
Now, under a new law, the Post Office will put your name on an anti-obscenity
list aimed at keeping "sexually oriented" mail out of your mailbox. All you need do
is go to the Post Office and fill out a form which includes your name and address.
A list is compiled of those who fill out the no-smut forms and is offered for sale to
smut peddlers. If they send sexually oriented advertising to anyone whose name has
been on the list for 30 days they will face severe criminal and civil penalties.
1971 CALENDARS
Many of you have received our 1971 calendars. Because of an additional printing
we have about 200 more copies of this pictorial calendar. Written requests to Room
H-230, The Capitol, Washington, D.C., 20515, will be honored as long as the supply
lasts.
# # #
Your Washington Review
KENT
5
IONIA
Congressman
JERRY FORD
February 15, 1971
PRESIDENT AIDS MICHIGAN POLLUTION FIGHT
Michigan would continue to move out front under a presidential recommendation
for funding water pollution control in fiscal 1972.
President Nixon's budget asks $2 billion for municipal sewage plant construction.
Not all of the federal money would be used for new plants. Twenty-five per cent of
it would be earmarked to reimburse states which have gone ahead with sewage plant
construction in the absence of Federal contributions. This includes Michigan.
The State has advanced $100 million, and our local communities some $80 million.
President Nixon has proposed a $12 billion three-year program of sewage plant
construction, with the cost shared 50-50 by the Federal Government and the states
and local communities.
Under this plan, Michigan would be eligible for $120 million a year for three
years in reimbursements for money advanced to cover Federal cost-shares. This would
be more than enough to repay Michigan for its extra-ordinary water pollution control
efforts and would put the state way out ahead of the rest of the nation.
BOATER POLLUTING UNDER ATTACK
Members of the State Legislature's Conservation and Recreation Committee
recently met with Michigan's congressional delegation to talk over sewage plant cost
reimbursement and other water pollution problems.
As a result of that meeting, the Federal Water Quality Administration (FWQA) is
under fire from the Michigan delegation.
Michigan has a new law which requires all boats moored or operating on Michigan
waters to retain all sewage wastes until they can be disposed of at an approved
on-shore facility.
FWQA has drafted some preliminary regulations which would allow boats to make
pollutional discharges into the water if they use certain so-called pollution
control devices.
State legislators understandably are very disturbed about the inferior Federal
standard in such cases. I am backing a protest which has been filed with the FWQA.
Where states have more stringent standards than the Federal Government, their
standards should prevail.
DREDGE POLLUTION AT CRITICAL POINT
I have long sought to ban the dumping of polluted material dredged up from Lake
Michigan harbors back into the open waters of the lake.
Last December the Congress passed legislation which provides for on-shore dis-
posal of such polluted material. But it requires local communities in the Great
Lakes region to pay 25 per cent of the cost plus providing the land and the necessary
easements. This is a tremendous problem for our local communities.
One answer is that the Army Corps of Engineers has the power to waive the 25 per cent
cost-sharing requirement where local communities are engaged in water pollution
abatement programs. Further study of this problem is needed.
PRESIDENT CALLS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION
Legislatively, nothing much will happen in Congress over the next few weeks
because the wheels are just starting to turn. But meantime the President is busy
sending the Congress messages spelling out his legislative goals.
Chief among these were messages calling for sharing of Federal revenue with the
cities and states and a far-ranging program to enhance the quality of our physical
environment.
The President's program is so broad that he will be sending the Congress
14 bills to implement it.
I anticipated one of the President's recommendations with my own bill to permit
suits by citizens against polluters. The Clean Air Amendments of 1970 have already
provided such authority in connection with air pollution. But there remains a need
to give citizens the power to sue in cases involving water pollution. My bill to
provide this power already is in the hopper.
One of the environment-enhancing actions taken by the President has special
significance for Michigan.
All but a few Michigan paper manufacturers use recycled waste materials in
their products and are finding the competition tough because their costs are higher
than the users of virgin fibers.
Now the President has ordered that the Government buy paper products--where
possible--with 3 to 50 per cent of recycled materials in it.
ECONOMY REBOUNDS
The economy clearly is making a comeback from the doldrums of 1970.
Not only is auto production setting a rapid pace, but housing starts have
spurted ahead nationally.
In December, housing starts climbed to a 20-year high. On an annual basis,
December starts reached 1,987,000 units. This was a 17 per cent jump over November.
Single family starts rose to an annual rate of 1,204,000 units from 930,000
units in November-up 29 per cent. Multi-family starts rose to 679,000 units, up
5 per cent from the November rate of 647,000 units.
The issuing of building permits in December was even more spectacular. It
reached an all-time high of 1,737,000 units, topping the November rate by 17 per cent
and running 48 per cent above the rate for December 1969.
What happens to housing is the key to expansion in the economy in 1971 and 1972.
The upsurge in housing can be counted on to help reduce unemployment throughout the
nation.
MOON FLIGHTS ALREADY PAID FOR
Considerable attention has been focused on the cost of the Apollo 14 flight--
$400 million. What apparently is little known is that most of the spacecraft and
rockets necessary for the Apollo program have already been paid for.
Spending for the Apollo program has dropped by more than $1 billion since 1970.
Three Apollo flights have been cancelled. There are three more to come after
Apollo 14, but the launching dates for these missions have been stretched out. The
final flight will be in December 1972.
Space program emphasis now is on the orbital space shuttle--the idea of
developing a reusable spaceship that will blast into orbit like a rocket but return
to earth like an airplane. Because the spaceship would be reusable, there would be
substantial cost savings.
###
Your Washington Review
KENT
5
IONIA
Congressman
JERRY FORD
February 22, 1971
REVENUE SHARING WOULD HOLD DOWN TAXES
Michigan taxpayers have many good reasons for supporting President Nixon's plan
to share $5 billion and more in income tax revenue each year with the states and
cities.
One of the best reasons came to light in Governor Milliken's recent radio-
television report on Michigan's fiscal 1972 budget.
The Governor proposed a tax increase, to be delayed until Jan. 1, 1972. Then he
said the amount of the tax increase would be reduced by the state's allocation under
Federal revenue sharing.
Michigan's slice of the tax sharing pie is estimated at $229 million. of that
3um, the State would get roughly half, and the other half would go to local units of
government. That means the State tax hike would be reduced by about $115 million.
This, of course, depends on whether the Democratic-controlled Congress approves
revenue sharing.
It can be assumed that local units of government also would seek to hold back
on tax increases if Federal revenue sharing became reality.
There are other good reasons for revenue sharing. If states and local units of
government get Federal funds without strings attached, they will have the freedom to
make more of their own decisions and pick their own priorities. This is government
as our forefathers intended it-government that is closest to the people.
This is "Power to the People" in its best sense.
MORE RESEARCH ON PROBLEMS
More attention is being paid to solving society's problems health, pollution,
the need for new sources of energy, crime and transportation.
That is reflected in the new Federal Budget for fiscal 1972. The budget calls
for much stronger support of research and development work at colleges and
universities.
The budget would provide $16.7 billion for total Federal research and develop-
ment in fiscal '72, up 7.6 per cent from the $15.5 billion in fiscal '71.
The research breakdown includes:
Civilian research
$2.89 billion, up 13.8%
Defense Department research and development
$8.3 billion, up 12.3%
National Science Foundation research
$468 million, up 44.5%
National Institutes of Health R&D
$1.18 billion, up 11.8%
College and university R&D
$1.9 billion, up 14.7%
Besides the additional emphasis on social problems, these proposed outlays for
research focus on the need to increase U.S. eminence in basic research through the
National Science Foundation. The budget also points up the necessity to rely more
heavily on increased research and development to maintain our defense capability.
The research program at the National Science Foundation will give new emphasis
to work in such fields as oceanography, the social sciences and engineering. The
Foundation's national and special research programs will be more than doubled in
fiscal 1972.
FIGHT AGAINST DISEASE STEPPED UP
The fiscal 1972 Federal Budget not only provides an extra $100 million for the
fight against cancer but additional funds for research into heart disease, sickle
cell anemia and tooth decay.
Other major studies will be directed at lung diseases, the effects of environ-
mental pollutants on health, a better understanding of mental disease and drug
addiction, and prevention of the disabilities and diseases of infancy and early
childhood.
To help meet the need for more health manpower, the budget includes $95 million
for a new initiative in support of health profession schools, plus funds to shorten
the curriculum, expand medical school enrollments, train primary care physicians,
and increase the use of physician assistants and other such personnel.
MY 'RUNAWAY PAPPY' BILL
I am going to try again. Back in 1949, when I first took my seat in Congress,
I introduced a piece of legislation I called my Runaway Pappy Bill. This is a bill
which gives fathers who have abandoned their families and fled to another state a
choice of supporting their children or going to Jail. I was unsuccessful in 1949,
so I reintroduced the bill in 1950, and again in 1951. Now I am once more introducing
it.
Judges like the late Circuit Judge Dale Souter of Kent County were strongly in
support of the bill but the Judicial Conference, as such, was opposed. So was the
Council of State Governments. So I gave up. But the number of letters from
abandoned wives and mothers has increased lately, and it may be that the prospect
for such legislation has improved. I am going to give it another try.
My Runaway Pappy Bill would do two things. It would make it a crime for a man
to move out of a state to avoid obeying a State court order for the support of his
family. It also would make family support orders enforceable in federal court in
the state to which a man has fled. It would not be necessary to bring him back.
So the idea is to deter a man from skipping the state in the first place or to
force him to pay up if he has gone on the lam. As the late Judge Souter used to
say, a man who abandons his children is perpetrating a more serious crime against
society than the individual who steals an automobile.
The opposition to this bill has come from those who contend that the states are
handling the problem. Experience indicates that this is just not true. We need the
help of the Federal Government to get at husbands and fathers who refuse to support
their children and who flee to another state to escape their responsibilities. We
must throw the forces of the Federal Government into pursuit of fathers who run off
and leave their families without means of support.
Not only does a fugitive father make life miserable for his former wife and his
children, but such families usually wind up on public assistance and the taxpayer
has to carry the load. It's a good guess such welfare costs hundreds of millions a
year.
FOREIGN STUDY SCHOLARSHIP AVAILABLE
In cooperation with the American Institute for Foreign Study, I am offering a
$1,000 scholarship to a high school junior for six weeks of study and travel in
Europe this summer. I have sent complete information regarding this scholarship to
every high school principal in Kent and Ionia Counties. Any 11th grader in Kent
and Ionia who is interested may obtain further information from the school principal.
# # #
Your Washington Review
KENT
5
IONIA
Congressman
JERRY FORD
March 1, 1971
BATTLES OVER ISSUES TAKING SHAPE
The issues are coming into focus. Battle lines are being drawn in the
Congress over several key public issues.
In a Senate subcommittee, Sen. Kennedy, D-Mass., has zeroed in on the Nixon
Administration's health insurance proposals. Sen. Kennedy has introduced his own
massive health insurance bill.
The Nation's governors met in Washington last week and did some lobbying for
revenue sharing on Capitol Hill.
The President asked Congress for consumer protection legislation--as he did
last year--and immediately the Democratic congressional leadership speeded up plans
to move its own bill.
DIFFERENCES POINTED UP
There are sharp differences between the Administration's health insurance
plan and Kennedy's.
The Administration would build on the present health insurance system by
requiring all employers to pay most of the cost of premiums for their workers.
There would be payments as high as $50,000 for catastrophic illness. The program
also includes a Government-supported family health insurance plan for low income
families with children, not covered by the employer plan. There would be prepaid
employer-employe contributions for Medicare to provide one-half the cost, with
general revenue providing the other half. The Medicaid program for the aged,
blind and disabled would continue.
The Kennedy plan would substitute a massive Federal program for all of the
private health insurance plans now in existence. It would cost $70-$77 billion a
year.
The Nixon proposal would draw primarily on the private economy for financing.
The Kennedy proposal would draw on the Federal Treasury for 50 per cent of its
financing. The rest would come from a 3.5 per cent payroll tax on employers, plus
a 1 per cent tax on employees earning up to $15,000 a year and 2.5 per cent on
those earning more.
The health insurance industry would be regulated under the Nixon plan.
BUYER'S BILL OF RIGHTS VS. NEW AGENCY
President Nixon has set up a new Office of Consumer Affairs in the Executive
Office of the President and has asked Congress to enact a Buyer's Bill of Rights.
This legislation would ban hazardous consumer products, regulate warranties, and
quickly stop allegedly deceptive advertising and sales practices.
The Democrats have proposed creation of an independent consumer protection
agency. They plan fast congressional action on their measure, sponsored by
Rep. Benjamin Rosenthal, D-N.Y.
President Nixon is opposed to setting up a separate Federal agency on consumer
protection. He believes advocacy is needed, however, on such matters as fraud and
utility rates. He will send Congress a specific proposal after April 20.
REVENUE SHARING VS. WELFARE TAKEOVER
Some opponents of Federal revenue sharing are talking about a complete Federal
takeover of welfare costs instead.
I personally do not believe that a Federal takeover of welfare would be good
for the country, nor is it politically feasible.
First of all, if the Federal Government took over all welfare costs, just
three states--New York, California and Massachusetts--would get 51 per cent of the
dollar benefit. This would come from your federal taxes.
Second, a Federal takeover of welfare would not serve to bail out local
governments now in financial distress and it would move the center of political
power even more forcibly to Washington.
We need both welfare reform and revenue sharing. But we do not need--and we
must not have--complete Federalization of the welfare system.
KENT, IONIA REVENUE SHARES ANNOUNCED
The Administration has broken down the estimated first-year $229 million
Michigan allocation under proposed revenue sharing into State and local shares. I
sponsored the legislation and will do all possible for its enactment but we have
some rough legislative hurdles ahead, including the opposition of the House
Democratic leadership.
Of the $229 million, the State would get $128,883,405 and Michigan's local
units of government $100,265,427.
The cities would receive $66,193,735; the counties, $29,707,252; and the
townships, $4,365,050.
Kent County's share would be $1,363,217, and Ionia County's would be $90,308.
Cities in Kent County would receive funds as follows: Grand Rapids,
$2,215,551; East Grand Rapids, $101,494; Grandville, $44,977; Lowell, 16,366;
Sparta Village, $15,777; Wyoming, $381,602; and Walker, $29,436.
Cities in Ionia County would get the following amounts: Belding, $36,265;
Ionia, $144,587; and Portland Village, $15,895.
Townships in Kent County would share as follows: Ada, $4,121; Alpine,
$2,590; Byron, $10,597; Caledonia, $1,531; Cannon, $235; Cascade, $5,887; Gaines,
$2,002; Grand Rapids, $4,003; Paris, $53,219; Plainfield, $9,773; Sparta, $3,061.
Townships in Ionia County would benefit as follows: Berlin, $235; Easton,
$4,121; Lyons, $706; Odessa, $1,060; and Portland, $2,826.
BILLS I HAVE SPONSORED
I have introduced a bill to make Pine Rest Christian Hospital eligible for
Federal staffing grants. I have also co-sponsored a bipartisan package of four
campaign financing reform bills and a bill to create a national cemetery at Fort
Custer, Mich.
Pine Rest now is ineligible for Federal staffing money because it takes into
consideration a person's religion in deciding whether such a person may practice
in its facilities or be employed on its staff. This is considered a bona fide
occupational qualification in this instance.
The bipartisan campaign financing reform bills are intended to place a
meaningful ceiling on campaign expenditures. This package would overhaul a
46-year-old law which is completely unrealistic. In 1966 and again in 1967, I
sponsored comprehensive legislation to replace this out-of-date federal campaign
financing law.
###
Your Washington Review
KENT
5
IONIA
Congressman
JERRY FORD
March 8, 1971
HOUSE PASSES FIRST LEGISLATION
The House last week passed its first legislation of this session--two veterans
bills and a debt limit increase bill.
I joined other members in a unanimous voice vote for the two veterans bills.
One measure extends from six months to nine the length of time community
nursing home care may be provided a veteran at Federal Government expense.
The other provides home mortgage insurance, up to $30,000, for service-connected
paraplegic and quadriplegic veterans. The eligible veteran will pay 10% of the
premiums.
The Administrator of Veterans Affairs raised questions in both instances. The
Administrator now has the discretionary power to extend the nursing home care period
beyond six months, and he wanted it left that way. He felt that the mortgage
insurance bill discriminates against those disabled veterans who are not eligible
for specially adapted housing grants from the Government and therefore are not
eligible for mortgage insurance under the new bill.
HOUSE ACTS ON DEBT
The House approved a bill which increases the permanent national debt limit by
$20 billion and the temporary debt limit by $15 billion. The bill puts the debt
limit temporarily at $430 billion but provides that it drop down to $400 billion
after June 30, 1972.
The House Ways and Means Committee declared that the debt limit had to be
increased so the U.S. Treasury could pay all the government's bills during the time
when demands on the Treasury are the heaviest. Since the Federal Government is
operating at a deficit, borrowing is necessary to pay some of the bills. The amount
of borrowing is circumscribed by the debt limit.
The last Congress overspent the President's budget by $6.6 billion--due to
action and inaction. When the President sought to hold down congressional spending,
the Democratic-controlled Congress overrode his vetoes.
The vote on raising the debt limit was 227 to 112. I voted for it as an action
that had to be taken.
The real fight of the day came on an Administration proposal to waive the
4.25 per cent interest rate ceiling on longterm U.S. Treasury bonds so that up to
$10 billion worth of such bonds can be sold.
The powerful Ways and Means chairman, Rep. Wilbur Mills, D-Ark., backed the
Administration's position because sticking with the 4.25 per cent interest limitation
makes management of the Federal debt costly and inefficient. This artificial
limitation drives up the rate on the Government's short-term securities.
I joined Mills in supporting the proposal. Six former secretaries of the
Treasury, Democrats and Republicans, have favored this proposal as a means of saving
tax dollars. They recognized that it is the marketplace which determines interest
rates, not the Congress.
House members favoring a temporary lifting of the 4.25 per cent bond interest
rate prevailed, 212 to 179.
(more)
CENTER WORKS ON ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS
As a person who is intensely interested in restoring our environment, I was
encouraged recently by a visit from Peter Wege of Grand Rapids.
Pete is president of the Center for Environmental Study in Grand Rapids, a
non-profit organization devoted to a study of environmental problems of the Grand
Rapids area. Pete stopped by my Washington office to bring me up to date on the
Center's activities.
The Center was formed after a six-month study by the Wege Foundation. It now
is getting financial support from the Kellogg Foundation for a three-year study of
environmental needs in the Grand Rapids Area.
The Center has task forces working on various environmental problems. These
task forces will develop information and propose constructive programs for community
action.
You may have seen the Center's report on Kent County's solid waste problem. It
is an excellent report which spells out possible courses of action. Local officials
should find it useful.
The Center's aim is to coordinate the efforts of industry, government and
private citizens to improve the environmental quality of Kent County. I most
heartily endorse this project and will do everything I can to help.
Pete Wege brought to my attention the Center's moves to adapt the systems
approach to environmental quality management.
I was so impressed by the work the Center has done that I sent the Center's
reports to Russell Train, chairman of the President's Council on Environmental
Quality. The work being done by the Center in Grand Rapids may prove useful as a
model for other communities throughout the nation.
I INSPECT CAPITOL BOMBING SITE
The day of the bombing on the first floor of the U.S. Capitol Building, Senate
Republican Leader Hugh Scott and I toured the area damaged by the explosion.
My office is on the second floor of the Capitol at the reor of the building,
otherwise known as the West Front. The scene of the bombing was an area just off the
small rotunda, which is directly below the large second-floor rotunda immediately
beneath the Capitol dome.
The Capitol bombing was an outrage--the act of a sick mind. Whatever the
motivation, an act of this kind is senseless.
Although security at the Capitol must be tightened, the building must be kept
fully open to the public. To shut out the public would be to take an action which
would be applauded by today's revolutionaries. They would like to see the American
people alienated from their government.
VISITS TO THE DISTRICT
I have been in the Fifth District (Kent and Ionia Counties) 10 days since the
beginning of the year while the new Congress has been organizing.
My visits took place on Jan. 11, 12, 18, and 19, and on Feb. 5, 6, 18, 19, 20
and 27. I met with various groups in the District and held office hours for
individuals with personal problems.
In addition, I will be in Ionia March 11 for a Lincoln Day Dinner and in Grand
Rapids March 26 for an Advertising Club luncheon and a meeting with a Senior
Citizens group at the XYZ Center.
###
WASHINGTON REMEN
Report
Serving
From Your Congressman
Kent and Ionia Counties
JERRY FORD
March 15, 1971
SST DECISION FACES HOUSE
The House shortly will vote on whether to provide an additional $134 million to finance
development of the U.S. supersonic transport (SST) from March 30 through June 30.
The overall program calls for the Government to spend $1.342 billion to build two
prototypes (test models) of the SST and pay for prior research and development.
To date, $864 million has been spent on developing the plane.
If the Federal Government cancelled the SST, it would have to pay contract penalties of
$119 million.
So the basic decision now facing the House is whether to write off nearly $1 billion and
wind up with nothing or to spend an extra $300 million and produce two prototypes of the
world's finest commercial airplane.
WHY A FEDERAL INVESTMENT IN THE SST?
The Government is initially putting up most of the money for the SST prototypes because
no single company or joint private enterprise can afford the project. Besides, the Government
funds are a loan.
The full cost of the prototypes, including prior research and development, is $1.7 billion.
The Government is providing $1.3 billion plus. This must be repaid in royalties from sale of
the plane. Private industry is supplying the rest of the funds. The aircraft manufacturer
has invested $228 million; the engine manufacturer, $94 million; and others, including
commercial airlines, $81 million.
Every plane sold will return a royalty to the Government. The Government will recover its
investment of $1.3 billion when the 300th plane is delivered. Already 122 are on order, with
down payments totaling $81 million. Boeing, the manufacturer of the SST airframe, estimates
SST sales at more than 500. If 500 are sold, the Government will net a $1 billion profit.
The SST program is unique. It will make money for the Government, not take money from
the Government.
There are those who claim the SST is a bad priority. But the opposite is true. SST jobs
and profits will generate tax revenues that can be used for social purposes. And if the SST
returns the Government a $1 billion profit, that money could build 100 large hospitals, 400
schools, and 100,000 units of housing.
THE SST WILL BOOST THE ECONOMY
The SST will help the economy in a number of ways. It will:
*Generate 150,000 direct and indirect jobs
"Produce tax revenues of between $6 and $10 billion
*Generate between $22 and $50 billion in balance of trade between 1978 and 1990
ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONS ANSWERED
I am as much concerned about the environment as anyone else. But there is no valid
evidence that SST operations would be environmentally harmful.
(more)
Page 2
There is no sonic boom problem.
The SST will fly at subsonic speeds over land, and then accelerate to 1,800 miles an
hour when it is well out over the ocean.
There is no noise problem.
The SST will make half as much noise for airport neighbors as present jumbo jets because
it will be over the community a much shorter time due to steep angle takeoffs and landing
approaches. Also, General Electric has redesigned the engine so that airport noise--
noise on the ground--will be less than the strict standard set by the Federal Aviation
Administration.
There is no oil problem.
One of the myths promoted by opponents of the SST is that it will use huge quantities of
the world's oil and spur oil production, thus contributing to pollution. The truth is
that in 1990, all commercial aviation together will account for some 2 per cent of the
world's oil consumption. The world's SST's will be using only a fraction of this 2 per
cent or about 1/300th. This figure is based on an estimate that SST's will be carrying
some 80 million passengers a year by 1990.
The ozone question presents no problem.
There are theories that the SST may disrupt the stratospheric ozone layer which shields
us from harmful ultraviolet rays. However, the weight of scientific opinion refutes such
theories. This opinion is based on 20 years of experience with supersonic military
flight. Most people do not realize that the U.S. has flown thousands of military super-
sonic flights with no identifiable impact on the world's atmosphere. Reputable
scientists have just testified before Congress that tests can provide the authoritative
answer in about two months. The Department of Transportation currently is researching
the ozone question. Dr. William W. Kellogg, who headed up a 70-man M.I.T. study of the
SST, stated that "nowhere have we indicated (in our report) that we believe SST develop-
ment should be held up pending the results" of studies such as that now under way.
THE SST'S ARE FLYING
The Russians, the French and the British are already flying their SST's. The Russians
were first. They plan to inaugurate commercial flights between Moscow and Calcutta with their
TU-144 SST in October 1971 and they are already promoting the TU-144 for sale to the airlines.
The British and French are test-flying their supersonic transport, the Concorde. Reports
are that it is meeting or exceeding most of the performance specifications.
However, the U.S. SST is a better plane than both the TU-144 and the Concorde--and the
world will buy our version if we build it. If the Congress grounds the SST, it means the
Russians or the French and British supersonic commercial aircraft will take over the skies of
the world.
MY POSITION
It's not just intercontinental airline travelers who need the SST. Actually, we all need
it--because it will help our economy tremendously. This is why George Meany, president of the
AFL-CIO, has strongly endorsed the program.
But despite the boost to our economy I would be opposed to the SST if I seriously believed
it would be environmentally offensive.
I think we should build the prototypes, then decide whether to proceed with production.
USA
WASHINGTON REMEN
Report
Serving
From Your Congressman
Kent and Ionia Counties
JERRY FORD
INCT PRINTED AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE)
March 22, 1971
HIGHER SOCIAL SECURITY CHECKS UPCOMING
More than 26 million Americans who rely on Social Security benefits will be getting a
10 per cent across-the-board increase in payments, retroactive to last Jan. 1. The House
approved the increase Tuesday, 358 to 3. The Senate had acted earlier, and the President has
signed the bill into law.
The increase first will show up in the June checks. There also will be a separate check
in June, covering the amount retroactive to Jan. 1.
I strongly favored the Social Security increase. Those on fixed incomes suffer the most
from inflation. They need help. They are struggling to maintain a decent standard of living.
Now we must prepare to enact other improvements in the Social Security Act--a provision
which automatically raises benefits whenever the cost of living rises substantially, and a
provision increasing the outside earnings limitation.
FULL ENFRANCHISEMENT NEEDED FOR 18-YEAR-OLDS
The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of allowing 18-year-olds to vote
in national elections. Now it is only logical and right that we make 18-year-olds eligible
to vote in state and local elections.
The House is expected to vote Tuesday on a constitutional amendment which will fully
enfranchise 18-year-olds. I cosponsored that amendment. The Senate has already approved
such an amendment on a unanimous vote.
I favored the 18-year-old voting amendment last year when the Congress sought to give
18-year-olds the vote in all elections by statute instead of by amending the constitution.
Now that the Supreme Court has upheld that statute only as it applies to national elections,
the result is chaos. We must remedy the situation.
I feel certain the House will overwhelmingly approve the 18-year-old voting amendment.
I
hope three-fourths of the states (38 are needed) then will ratify it in time for the 1972
elections. And I hope Michigan is the very first state to do SO.
The proposed constitutional amendment offers today's young people a great opportunity to
make their voices heard at all levels of government. They deserve that opportunity.
Today's young people are better educated and better informed than I was at their age. I
believe the vast majority of them are looking for 8. chance to work through the system to improve
the quality of life in America.
It is not enough to allow our young people to vote in national elections. They must be
fully enfranchised.
HOUSE KILLS THE SST
The House Thursday made what I consider to be a grievous error. By a vote of 215 to 204
the House adopted an amendment withholding funds for continued development of the United States
supersonic transport plane.
I voted against the amendment. I favored continued funding aimed at building two SST test
models (prototypes).
(more)
-2-
In voting to kill the SST program, the House literally threw away nearly $1 billion. The
Federal Government has already invested $864 million in development of the SST prototypes, and
it will cost the Government at least an additional $119 million in contract penalties to drop
the project. Total, $983 million.
The issue Thursday was whether to provide an additional $134 million to keep the SST
project going through June 30.
Total cost of developing the two SST prototypes was $1.7 billion, with the Federal
Government investing $1.3 billion and private industry $400 million. I favored building the
two test models and then deciding whether private interests should proceed with production.
Under the financing arrangements, the Government would have received a royalty on each plane
sold. The Government would have recovered its investment with delivery of the 300th plane,
and would have made a profit of $1 billion if 500 planes were sold.
I was shocked and dismayed by the vote killing the SST. It means that the United States
will be second best in many lines of scientific endeavor and will fall behind the Russians,
the British and the French in commercial aviation. We will be buying from foreign nations,
not building and selling, the commercial airplane of the future.
The House has taken a tragic action, a catastrophic action. I hope the Senate will show
better judgment. If the Senate votes to reverse this action, it will be sustaining the
position of three Presidents--John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson and Richard M. Nixon.
If the House decision stands, the Congress will be giving layoff slips to 13,000 aircraft
workers--many in Michigan--who have been employed in building the SST prototypes. It will also
mean the loss of 150,000 jobs that would have been created in the United States for a 10-year
period if the SST had gone into the production stage.
I favored building the SST prototypes for good and sound reasons. Objections to the SST
on environmental grounds were being met. SST production would have given the economy a lift,
creating up to 150,000 jobs, generating $6 to $10 billion in tax revenue, and generating
between $22 and $50 billion in favorable balance of trade between 1978 and 1990.
Grounding of the SST will hurt the economy and result in an estimated $17 billion balance
of trade deficit.
I INTRODUCE KENTWOOD HOUSING BILL
I am introducing a bill which would make possible a 150-unit housing project in Kentwood,
which Michigan Consolidated Gas Company planned to build until barred from doing so by the
Securities and Exchange Commission.
Under present law, the SEC ruled last June 22, a public utility holding company like
Michigan Consolidated Gas cannot engage in housing activity. My bill would permit such compa-
nies to participate in government-assisted low and moderate income housing programs.
If my bill is enacted, Michigan Consolidated Gas will be able to go ahead with a 175-unit
project in Muskegon and a 213-unit project in Romulus as well as the Kentwood project. It also
is expected that the Kentwood project ultimately would be expanded to 302 homes.
We need the Kentwood project, both to help meet low income housing needs in our area and
to provide additional employment.
I COSPONSOR ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY BILLS
I have cosponsored, with Rep. Guy Vanderjagt of Cadillac, 8. bill aimed at getting junked
automobiles off our streets and out of our countryside. Besides removing eyesores, the bill
would recycle otherwise wasted steel and other metals.
The measure would earmark $19 million of Federal auto excise tax receipts to aid the
states in financing collection programs. The bill also would offer rapid tax writeoffs to
scrap producers who install modern equipment to reduce old cars to reusable scrap.
I have also cosponsored four Administration water pollution control bills. One would
provide grants to states to develop improved water pollution control programs. Another revises
the Federal aid formula for sewage plant construction to better meet local needs. A third
empowers the Environmental Protection Agency to set national water and effluent standards and
to enforce them. And the fourth would set up an Environmental Financing Authority to make sure
that no local community is unable to finance its cost-share of a sewage disposal plant.