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
1428836
label
Right to Work
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
1428836
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Right to Work
citationUrl
collections
David H. Lissy Files
David Lissy's Labor Files
subjects
Right to labor
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
1428836
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1976-08-31
month
8
year
1976
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1974-11-01
month
11
year
1974
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
ab73a2b2163f6da6
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box 28, folder "Right to Work" of the David H.
Lissy 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 R. 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States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.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.
Some items in this folder were not digitized because it contains copyrighted
materials. Please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library for access to
these materials.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20530
Address Reply to the
Division Indicated
and Refer to Initials and Number
HEP:TJM:CCD:ph
72-63-0
NOV 2 5 1974
Mr. James Scott, II
President, Pennsylvanians
for Right to Work
1801 North Front Street
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17102
Dear Mr. Scott:
Your telegram of October 15, 1974, directed to President Ford urging
investigation and prosecution by this Department of cash and in-kind
contributions to candidates for Federal office which originate from the
treasuries of labor organizations, has been received.
As you are probably aware, Section 610 of Title 18, United States
Code, as amended by Section 205 of the 1971 Federal Election Campaign
Act, forbids labor organizations and their officers from alienating monies
required as a condition for membership in such labor organizations for
the purpose of influencing the public-at-large to vote for particular
candidates standing for election to Federal offices. Violations of this
criminal statute subject the violating organization to fines of up to
$5,000 and each officer who willfully consents to such an unlawful use of
his union's funds to two years imprisonment and/or a fine of up to $10,000.
You can be assured that this Division places a high degree of
importance on the enforcement of this statute, and that in doing so we
have, and will continue to endeavor to enforce it vigorously whenever
specific information indicating the presence of a violation is brought to
our attention and is confirmed by appropriate Federal investigation. In
this regard, should you or anyone in your organization be in the possession
of specific information indicating that any labor organization has contributed
either directly or "in-kind" to a candidate for Federal office out of its
FORD LIBRARY & GERALD
REVOLUTION
1778-1976
-2-
general treasury, we would appreciate your making that information
available to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, whose number is
located in the front of your telephone directory.
Sincerely,
HENRY E. PETERSEN
Assistant Attorney General
Criminal Division
By:
THOMAS J. McTIERNAN
Chief, Fraud Section
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
FYI
fite - "Lebriproblems"
RIGHT TO WORK
RIGHT
NEWS
From the NATIONAL RIGHT TO WORK COMMITTEE
1990 M Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036
TELEPHONE: 296-0720-AREA CODE 202
FOR RELEASE: WEDNESDAY
NOVEMBER 13, 1974
CONTACT: HUGH C. NEWTON
RS-1
Election Analysis
FORD is LIBRARY 076839
14 MILLION PUBLIC EMPLOYEES FIRST TARGET OF BIG LABOR
WASHINGTON, DC, November 13, 1974 -- A serious drive in Congress for the
vast expansion of monopoly compulsory unionism -- with the nation's 14 million
public employees as the prime target -- is in the works, according to a leading
public interest group.
Reed Larson, Executive Vice President of the National Right to Work Committee,
in a message to the group's more than 40,000 members analyzing the results of the
November 5 elections said that a year-and-a-half long effort by Right to Work
supporters prevented big spending union bosses from gaining the absolute "veto-
proof" Congress they were seeking.
But, Larson said, "the bad news is that union organizers have purchased
enough new seats in the House and Senate to mount a serious drive in Congress
for vast expansion of monopoly compulsory unionism. Thus Right to Work forces
defending the public interest will face their gravest challenge since 1965." "
Larson warned the Committee's supporters that their biggest battle will
likely be in the public sector. "The union hierarchy can be expected to pull
all stops in its on-going campaign to strap the public sector with legislation
similar to, or worse than, the compulsory unionism-promoting National Labor
Relations Act."
(MORE)
TOP PRIORITY
Just two days after the elections Democratic National Committee chairman
Robert Strauss named "public service employment" as one of the four top-priority
legislative items facing the new Congress.
Discussing the union hierarchy's public sector campaign, The New York
Times (November 10) warned that as a result of such legislation "the public
gets kicked around whenever a well-entrenched union in control of an essential
public service doesn't get what it wants from the city or state." The New York
Daily News, also recognizing the threat, said (November 11) that "strikes
against the public should be taboo -- period. And that goes for compulsory
union membership. We simply cannot afford these callous, indefensible threats
to the health, safety and economy of the nation. Nor should civil service workers
be compelled to pay tribute to unions to hold jobs won on merit."
The National Right to Work Committee is a national citizens' coalition
dedicated to the belief that union membership whould be voluntary, not compulsory.
The National Committee believes every citizen shouldhave the right to join a
union, but that no one should be compelled to do so in order to get or keep a job.
A recent public opinion study by Opinion Research Corporation, Princeton,
N.J., showed more than two thirds of the American people opposed to compulsory
unionism.
The National Committee led the successful fight in 1965-1966 to preserve
Section 14(b) of the Taft-Hartley Act and has been largely responsible for de-
feating efforts in recent years to impose compulsory unionism on farm workers,
public employees and postal workers.
Section 14(b) is the provision of the Taft-Hartley Act which authorizes state
Right to Work Laws outlawing compulsory unionism. Nineteen states currently
have such laws.
According to Larson, some 48 members of the new Senate have promised to
oppose efforts by union lobbyists to repeal 14(b).
(MORE)
THREAT TO 14(b)
Larson said, "While the threat to 14(b) in the new Congress still is
real and immediate, a 14(b) repeal drive might also be used as a smokescreen,
while union organizers capture an even more tempting prize -- public sector
compulsory union legislation.
"The machinery is there for total domination of the legislative processes
by union lobbyists unless Right to Work supporters rally to prevent it. Union
officials are fanatically devoted to the destruction of the Taft-Hartley Act's
single remaining check on their monopoly power, Section 14(b). They're not
crazy, however; they know it won't come easy."
Larson said, "We cannot take the threat to 14(b) lightly. By the same token
we cannot lose sight of the fact that the public sector legislation poses a more
realistic threat."
Key ingredients of such legislation would be:
FORD ERALD LIBRARY 07W8
1) Monopoly bargaining privileges -- Individual public employees would
be compelled to accept unwanted union officials as their "exclusive representa-
tives" in dealing with their own government; and
2) Compulsory union affiliation -- By invoking the long-ago discredited
"free rider" argument, union officials will insist that since they are the
"exclusive agents" of all public employees, including those who don't want
their alleged services, all employees should have to join or pay money to
their unions -- or lose their jobs.
"These compulsory unionism privileges would pave the way for city-crippling
strikes. Whether or not strikes against the government are illegal would be
academic; legal or not, public sector strikes will spread like wild fire,"
Larson said.
Larson warned, "We face a very real threat. We are going to need the
cooperation and support of all Americans who feel compulsory unionism is
wrong. With this support we will thwart the union bosses who have bought
what they set out to buy, a 'veto-proof' Congress with which they intend to
run roughshod over the desires and wishes of the people."
#86 MO2, MO3, MO7, MI3, MI4, KO1, K02, K04, CO2, МОб, WNS
An Editorial
An Editorial
THE NEW YORK TIMES
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
November 11, 1974
November 10, 1974
WITHIN 24 HOURS
The Fattest Cat
-after last week's election, big labor moved to cash some
political IOUs of congressmen and governors whom it
When it comes to political spending, trade unions have
helped elect. The AFL-CIO chartered a new Public Em-
developed into the fattest of fat cats in this post-Water-
ployes Department with
gate period. The upward of $5 million contributed by
a monthly budget allot-
unions to their 1974 Congressional favorites-90 per cent
ment of $40,000.
of them Democrats-is only the visible part of their
investment. No less important is the large-scale man-
Top priority: a drive
power and other untabulated services they muster in
1
the
(OVER)
financing of all political campaigns a public responsi-
bility. Only recently he declared again that labor would
like to "get out of the business of collecting money and
making contributions to candidates." The country will
be better off if the 94th Congress gives Mr. Meany his
wish and substitutes public financing for all giving by
corporations, unions, professional societies and other
special interests.
THE WASHINGTON POST
November 8, 1974
Asning Controls
would
ing for labol
From A1
ucts.
The
council
said it flow back into the U.S. market
dates. Reformers allege
wanted controls over the size
as imports."
Strauss' desire to improve rel-
emedy the recession. The
of loans to the Soviet Union
The executive council also
ations with Barkan was a con-
White House program has
and other Communist coun-
urged the Senate to reject the
tributing factor to the blow-up
"almost" been one of inaction,
tries.
pending trade bill, which
in Kansas City.
he charged.
The AFL-CIO has long con-
would extend new trade con-
The labor reformers who
tended that the ultimate effect
cessions to the Soviet Union
met with Meany include Jerry
The AFL-CIO executive
of many of the bank's loans,
and others the council said it
Wurf, president of the Ameri-
board's official statement said
which finance a one-shot ex-
"will result in further job
can Federation of State,
the President's economic mes-
port of equipment, has been
losses and further impact on
County and Municipal
sage last month "offered no
the export of technology,
the domestic U.S. economy
Employees: Floyd (Red) Smith,
"which is used abroad to man-
struggling to absorb ever-ris-
president of the International
measures to halt the recession
ufacture produtes which then
ing imports."
Association of Machinists and
and only promises to curb in-
Aerospace Workers; Paul Jen-
flation."
nings, president of the Inter-
Meany said the housing in-
national Union of Electrical,
dustry must be the first to re-
Democrats in Congress
Radio and Machine Workers;
ceive massive aid, and among
Glenn E. Watts, president of
the first places to start would
the Communications Workers
be to "crack down" on Federal
Reserve Board Chairman
Said Ready to Act Fast
of America; Al Grospiron,
president of the Oil Chemical
Burns and the Fed's policy of
and Atomic Workers: Ken
high interest rates.
Brown, president of the
United Press International
Lower rates would not only
Graphic Arts International
stimulate housing by reducing
Congressional
Democrats,
public service employment.
Union.
the "absolutely colossal cost of
bolstered by Tuesday's elec-
"I've been talking to the
According to labor sources,
financing" a home, but would
also beln all other industries
tion victories, will act quickly
Democratic leadership. and
Watts and Bill Lucey, secre-
thev're ready" the Demo-
tarv-treasurer
of
AFSCME
NATIONAL RIGHT TO WORK COMMITTEE
1990 M STREET, N. W.
WASHINGTON
U.S.POSTAGE
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20036
NOV12'74
10
D.C
WHITE HOUSE MAIL
RECEPTION & SECURITY
NOV 14 1974
Processed by:
HONORABLE GERALD R. FORD
K04-001867
HOUSE OFFICE BLOG.
WASH.. DC 20515
"Americans Must Have the Right But Not Be Compelled to Join Labor Unions"
February 24, 1976
MEMORANDUM FOR:
JIM CANNON
FROM:
DAVID LISSY
SUBJECT:
Right to Work (14B)
This is to alert you to the fact that I am told
Bill Usery is annoyed that the White House would
announce the President's position on Right to
Work without someone having first cleared it with
him --- or at least advised him of what the position
would be. Usery may raise this matter himself and
I wanted you to be aware of his views.
Ron Nessen announced the President's position on
February 16 and Usery did not know about it until
I told his office of it yesterday. (2/23). A copy
of the Nessen briefing is attached.
FORD i LIBRARY GERALD
Attachment
CC: Jim Cavanaugh
Art Quern
- 13 -
#439-2/16
Q
What is his position?
MR. NESSEN: I thought you would never ask, Helen.
He is opposed to the repeal of (b) of the Taft-Hartley
Act. He believes that the right to work is a State issue
and the President's position is that he clearly believes
that the States should keep that right. If you repealed
14 (b) it would take that right away from the States to
determine right to work issues.
14(b) authorizes the States to have the right
to determine their own right to work laws and so he is
opposed to repealing that.
You know marijuana, all too well. (Laughter)
You know abortion.
I guess that probably does it for the moment.
Q
Ron, since he seems to be adopting most of
Wallace's policies, do you think he is picking Wallace on
the ticket?
MR. NESSEN: As I said the other day in relation
to abortion, Howard, the fact that these things have come
out and candidates have been asked for their opinions of
these issues in the context of a campaign does not mean
that he formed these opinions because it is a campaign year.
I mean, I think the people who have known him over the
years know his opinion on abortion, busing, death penalty,
right to work, and so forth.
Q
How about legalized prostitution? (Laughter)
MR. NESSEN: I didn't ask him that question.
Q Ask it. (Laughter)
Q
Ron, did the President ask Mr. Richardson
to leave the Commerce Department so early after his taking
over to go to New Hampshire to campaign?
MR. NESSEN: Well, he asked him to campaign, yes.
Q
Does this mean anything like that he is
going to be favored for Vice President or something?
MR. NESSEN: Well, Pete McCloskey has been up
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
there and Frank Zarb and ---
Q
Elliott Richardson.
MR. NESSEN: There have been a number of people
up there and it does not mean that they are necessarily
his choice for Vice President.
MORE
#439
Right to work
2/16/76
- 13 -
#439-2/16
Q
What is his position?
MR. NESSEN: I thought you would never ask, Helen.
He is opposed to the repeal of 14(b) of the Taft-Hartley
Act. He believes that the right to work is a State issue
and the President's position is that he clearly believes
that the States should keep that right. If you repealed
14 (b) it would take that right away from the States to
determine right to work issues.
14(b) authorizes the States to have the right
to determine their own right to work laws and so he is
opposed to repealing that.
You know marijuana, all too well. (Laughter)
You know abortion.
I guess that probably does it for the moment.
Q
Ron, since he seems to be adopting most of
Wallace's policies, do you think he is picking Wallace on
the ticket?
MR. NESSEN: As I said the other day in relation
to abortion, Howard, the fact that these things have come
out and candidates have been asked for their opinions of
these issues in the context of a campaign does not mean
that he formed these opinions because it is a campaign year.
I mean, I think the people who have known him over the
years know his opinion on abortion, busing, death penalty,
right to work, and so forth.
Q How about legalized prostitution? (Laughter)
MR. NESSEN: I didn't ask him that question.
Q Ask it. (Laughter)
Q
Ron, did the President ask Mr. Richardson
to leave the Commerce Department so early after his taking
over to go to New Hampshire to campaign?
MR. NESSEN: Well, he asked him to campaign, yes.
Q
Does this mean anything like that he is
going to be favored for Vice President or something?
MR. NESSEN: Well, Pete McCloskey has been up
there and Frank Zarb and --
Q
Elliott Richardson.
MR. NESSEN: There have been a number of people
up there and it does not mean that they are necessarily
his choice for Vice President.
MORE
#439
Reght to work
2/16/76
- 13 -
#439-2/16
Q
What is his position?
MR. NESSEN: I thought you would never ask, Helen.
He is opposed to the repeal of 14(b) of the Taft-Hartley
Act. He believes that the right to work is a State issue
and the President's position is that he clearly believes
that the States should keep that right. If you repealed
14 (b) it would take that right away from the States to
determine right to work issues.
14(b) authorizes the States to have the right
to determine their own right to work laws and so he is
opposed to repealing that.
You know marijuana, all too well. (Laughter)
You know abortion.
I guess that probably does it for the moment.
Q Ron, since he seems to be adopting most of
Wallace's policies, do you think he is picking Wallace on
the ticket?
MR. NESSEN: As I said the other day in relation
to abortion, Howard, the fact that these things have come
out and candidates have been asked for their opinions of
these issues in the context of a campaign does not mean
that he formed these opinions because it is a campaign year.
I mean, I think the people who have known him over the
years know his opinion on abortion, busing, death penalty,
right to work, and so forth.
Q How about legalized prostitution? (Laughter)
MR. NESSEN: I didn't ask him that question.
Q Ask it. (Laughter)
Q Ron, did the President ask Mr. Richardson
to leave the Commerce Department so early after his taking
over to go to New Hampshire to campaign?
MR. NESSEN: Well, he asked him to campaign, yes.
Q Does this mean anything like that he is
going to be favored for Vice President or something?
MR. NESSEN: Well, Pete McCloskey has been up
there and Frank Zarb and --
Q.
Elliott Richardson.
MR. NESSEN: There have been a number of people
up there and it does not mean that they are necessarily
his choice for Vice President.
MORE
#439
INFORMATION
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Kathy
February 24, 1976
Myan
MEMORANDUM FOR:
JIM CANNON
FROM:
DAVID LISSY My
Import
SUBJECT:
Right to Work (14B)
This
be
This is to alert you to the fact that I am told
Bill Usery is annoyed that the White House would
Ucorded
announce the President's position on Right to
Work without someone having first cleared it with
him -- or at least advised him of what the position un
would be. Usery may raise this matter himself and
I wanted you to be aware of his views.
Issue
Ron Nessen announced the President's position on
February 16 and Usery did not know about it until
I told his office of it yesterday (2/23). A copy
Booh
of the Nessen briefing is attached.
Idean is learn of A. until over the
Attachment
FORD is GERALD LIBRARY
CC: Jim Cavanaugh
Art Quern
- 13 -
#439-2/16
Q
What is his position?
MR. NESSEN: I thought you would never ask, Helen.
He is opposed to the repeal of 14(b) of the Taft-Hartley
Act. He believes that the right to work is a State issue
and the President's position is that he clearly believes
that the States should keep that right. If you repealed
14 (b) it would take that right away from the States to
determine right to work issues.
14(b) authorizes the States to have the right
to determine their own right to work laws and so he is
opposed to repealing that.
You know marijuana, all too well. (Laughter)
You know abortion.
I guess that probably does it for the moment.
Q Ron, since he seems to be adopting most of
Wallace's policies, do you think he is picking Wallace on
the ticket?
MR. NESSEN: As I said the other day in relation
to abortion, Howard, the fact that these things have come
out and candidates have been asked for their opinions of
these issues in the context of a campaign does not mean
that he formed these opinions because it is a campaign year.
I mean, I think the people who have known him over the
years know his opinion on abortion, busing, death penalty,
right to work, and so forth.
Q How about legalized prostitution? (Laughter)
MR. NESSEN: I didn't ask him that question.
Q Ask it. (Laughter)
Q Ron, did the President ask Mr. Richardson
to leave the Commerce Department so early after his taking
over to go to New Hampshire to campaign?
MR. NESSEN: Well, he asked him to campaign, yes.
Q
Does this mean anything like that he is
going to be favored for Vice President or something?
MR. NESSEN: Well, Pete McCloskey has been up
there and Frank Zarb and ---
Q Elliott Richardson.
MR. NESSEN: There have been a number of people
up there and it does not mean that they are necessarily
his choice for Vice President.
MORE
#439
4.3.76
Green hope
Page 7
I just use that as an example: to tackle the
hardest area in the world to achieve success and to
accomplish peace. He has done it with the direction and
the implementation and the support that I have given him.
I think you don't throw away a winning player, you keep
him and that is what he is.
QUESTION: Mr. President, I am the vice president
of the Wisconsin State Employees Union. On behalf of
our 27,000 members, I would like to welcome you to
Wisconsin.
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you.
QUESTION: As a vice president whose constituency
is composed entirely of State, county and municipal
employees, my question will be in that direction.
Your opponent in next Tuesday's election, Ronald
Reagan, has stated that if any State, county or municipal
employee participates in a strike or a similar job action
in his opinion he has quite his job. What is your
feeling toward a right to strike or a limited right to
strike for State, county, municipal employees?
BERALD FORD LIBRARY
I also would like to know what you feel or what
would your reaction be to a bill that on a nationwide basis
would give State, county and municipal employees a right
to collective bargaining?
I also would like to know what your reaction is
Roth
to the repeal of 14(b), the right to work legislation?
THE PRESIDENT: I am vigorously opposed to the
repeal of section 14(b) of the Taft-Hartley Act. As a
matter of fact, in 1950 or thereabouts I participated in
the debate and voted on that issue in the House of
Representatives. I think if a State wishes to have the
right to work, as 19 States do, under our Constitution
that is a right that they ought to be able to exercise
and I would not recommend the deletion of section 14(b)
of the Taft-Hartley Act.
Number two, I don't believe that the Federal
Ruling Bergang
Government either has the authority on the one hand or
should exercise it on the other to pass comprehensive
legislation involving the labor-management relations of
State employees and their government or county employees
and their government or city employees and their government.
Those are decisions that ought to be made at the local
or State level and the Federal Government should not get
involved in them.
MORE
Page 8
Now, the first question that you asked. We have
50 States and we have 39,000 Governmental units below the
level of statehood, I don't think that somebody in
Washington ought to tell 39,000 Governmental units or 50
States how they should handle their labor-management relations.
That is the prerogative of those units of Government.
If a government in Green Bay wants to handle it
with the right to strike -- and I just use that as an
example - and Waukesha wants to have a different policy
or the State of Wisconsin wants to have a different policy,
that is the responsibility and obligation of those units
of Government.
If a city council or a State legislature or Governor
passed some legislation one way and the people don't like
it, they know who to get rid of, and I think that is the
way it ought to be handled: Washington should keep its
fingers out of the situation. The responsibility and the
obligation rests here, right in your State and your local
units of government.
QUESTION: Thank you.
QUESTION: Mr. President, I was wondering what can
you do to help us teenagers get more jobs so we can go on
to school and make money so we can afford our education?
THE PRESIDENT: Would you ask that again? I
missed the first part.
QUESTION: What can you do to help us get more
jobs so we can have enough money to go on to college and that?
THE PRESIDENT: You are talking about high school
graduates?
QUESTION: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, about two million young
people enter the labor market every year as they go from
BERALD FORD LIBRARY
either high school into the labor market or from college
into the labor market. As I said a moment ago, we have
picked up 2,600,000 jobs since last year but that is not
enough. Our unemployment is still too high and it is still
too high particularly among our young people, and especially
among our young people in the minority categories.
Now what we have to do is to stimulate our economy
primarily in the private sector where five out of every six
jobs in this country exist today. And how do we do that?
He do that by providing an incentive to business to expand,
to modernize, to improve so that they will be more competitive
and more jobs will be available in the private sector.
MORE
DATE: 4/7/1976]
TO:
Jim Connon -
Can anyone lend
guidance on this
FORD LIBRARY 076839
Thank you
cm
Caron McConnon
RIGHT TO WORK LAW
Q. Where do you stand on the right to work law?
A. I am opposed to the repeal of section 14 (b) of the
Taft-Hartley Act. I think if a State wishes to have
a Right to Work Law, as many do, under our Constitution
that is a right that they ought to be able to exercise.
GERALD & FORD LIBRARY
DHL/4/8/76
THE WHITE HOUSE
washington
Date [circa 4/9/76]
TO:
FROM: DAVID LISSY
FYI
For Appropriate Action
COMMENTS 065M PMI
70
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
please retunto
moe
4.9.76
Right hork
Dallar, Tex
Page 15
QUESTION: Mr. President, the subject that I am
going to touch on in this question is rather delicate and
possibly controversial in an election year, so please do not answer
it if you feel the answer might hurt your chances of being
re-elected. (Laughter)
THE PRESIDENT: If I won't answer it, I will get
Betty down here to answer it. You can count on her to announce
it. (Laughter)
QUESTION: It probably is going to destroy any chance
of my ever holding a public office. (Laughter)
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, go ahead.
QUESTION: The question is, in view of what is
happening in Great Britain and in several of the other nations,
could you please consider the inequities that might be
involved in the monopolistic trends that we see in collective
bargaining?
THE PRESIDENT: You mean between labor and management?
QUESTION: In terms of collective bargaining on the
labor side. We have monopolistic controls on the management
side, but I was wondering if there were any inequities involved
in giving them laissez-faire in their group going together?
THE PRESIDENT: If I understand the question, I
strongly believe in the Taft-Hartley Act. And I would vigorously
oppose and not approve the deletion of Section 14(b) of the
Taft-Hartley Act.
I voted for, and strongly support, what we call
the Landrum-Griffin Act which tried to put more responsibility
and control over certain practices in labor organizations.
It seems to me that with the current court decisions
and the existing law, we are getting away from monopolistic
practices and undesirable practices in many of the areas where
they were bad in the '30s and the '40s and the '50s.
Now, it's not Utopia, don't get me wrong, but I
honestly think we are making some headway.
QUESTION: The issue that I was really concerned about,
we are far from it here in our country, but looking at Great
Britain, it could conceivably get to a point where the unions
could paralyze the nations operation.
MORE
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
Page 16
THE PRESIDENT: I don't think our situation is
comparable to that of Great Britain, and I have been impressed
with the restraint under the kind of facts of life that they
were faced with, with the attitude in the last few months of the
major labor organizations in Great Britain.
Of course, it was obvious if they didn't do it, the
country itself would have had serious economic repercussions.
But in this country, certainly we are not in that situation.
I don't think we will ever get there.
QUESTION: Mr. President, first of all, I wanted
to thank you for coming to Dallas and spending some time
here with each of us. And as a final question, I would like
to ask, what specific steps has your Administration taken to
reduce Federal intervention or whatever have you in the life of
the average American businessman? What steps have you taken
or will you take?
THE PRESIDENT: Let me give you one or more specifics.
Number one, about a year ago, a little less than that, I asked
the Office of Management and Budget how many forms go to American
businessmen in every department of the Federal Government.
They totaled them up and they were roughly 5,200.
Now, all of them don't go to all of you, although you
may think SO. (Laughter) But that is the total that go to
American business from all departments.
We had a conference, and after that conference I said,
by July 1 of this year, you have got to cut 10 percent off, and
we have now reduced that by about 5 percent, and by July 1, orders
are to achieve a total of a 10 percent reduction, which is 520
of them. They are making some headway
Now, we are trying under the law -- and I know that
this may be a sensitive subject -- we have already started
the process under Frank Zarb to get rid of the various price
controls under the energy legislation that was passed last
December.
Mr. Zarb has filed the necessary documents in the
Federal Register to get rid of residual oil controls. He is
next going to do it for distillates and for gasoline and shortly
we will start under the law as quickly as possible to undertake
a 40-month period of decontrol with 10 percent as the first step.
That is something that is on the way.
And if I can say parenthetically, I know that my
signing that bill was somewhat controversial last December, but
I want you to remember this, in January of last year, a year
ago, I proposed the total deregulation of oil as well as natural
gas.
MORE
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
4.19.76
aught to hork
Editors or Harks Hanks
Interview with
Page 13
newspapers
So that Committee recommendation incorporates some
of those things that I have proposed and it has not called
for the registration of the gun or the gun owner and I am
opposed to that kind of registration.
QUESTION: Is there anything in the bill that you
are opposed to?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, to be honest with you, it
is so early in the legislative process, until it gets further
down the road we really don't have the time to tkae a look
at this because it is at least two or three months away
from any final consideration by the Congress, if ever, in
this session.
QUESTION: Mr. President, Governor Carter has
indicated that he supports repeal of the right to work laws.
We have the right to work in Texas and it is a very important
issue down there. How do you feel about it?
THE PRESIDENT: I have consistenly and vigorously
opposed the elimination of Section (B) in the Taft-Hartley
Act. The Section (B) of the Taft-Hartley Act says that
if a State wants a right to work law it has the right to do
so and that no Federal law will preempt that right.
When I was in the Congress I was consistently
opposed to the repeal of the Section (B) and I still am
and always will be. There are 19 States, including Texas,
that have the right to work laws or Constitutional amendments
and if any one of the 50 States want that, that is the
prerogative under our system and I would, under no circumstances,
take that right away from any State by either law or by
Constitutional amendment.
QUESTION: Thank you.
FORD is LIBRARY DERALD
#30-76
Dallas, Tex.
Rightto hork
hork
Page 8
QUESTION: Mr. President, I am Vice President
and General Counsel of Texas Instruments. My question
this morning is in the event Congress were to enact legis-
lation repealing Section 14(b) of the Taft-Hartley Act
which, as you know, would eliminate the Texas right to
work law, would you invoke your power of veto on such
legislation?
THE PRESIDENT: I certainly would. Ever since I
was sworn into the Congress on January 3, 1949, I have
consistently taken the position that Section 14(b) must
be a part of our labor-management legislation. That is not
so easy in a State like Michigan. (Laughter)
QUESTION: That is right.
THE PRESIDENT: It is a lot more difficult than
to say it down here in Texas.
QUESTION: I used to live there.
THE PRESIDENT: In the Congressional district I
represented, there were 35,000 UAW-CIO-AFL families, and I
took that issue to them every time for 13 elections, and I
would not then and I will not now approve of the removal
of Section 14(b) from the Taft-Hartley or labor-management
acts.
QUESTION: Thank you.
QUESTION: Mr. President, the New York City
financial situation, that concerns us all, and we would:
like to have your views on the appropriate role and respon-
sibility of the Federal Government in meeting potential
situations such as New York City and other cities.
THE PRESIDENT: Let me say that the Congress has
passed two pieces of legislation that I think will handle
present and future problems where cities through bad manage-
ment get into serious financial difficulties.
Number one, I recommended to the Congress that
we amend the Bankruptcy Act so that if a city mishandles
its financial affairs, it can go into bankruptcy just like
a poorly managed company or a poorly managed individual
in the handling of his or her or that company's financial
GERAL FORD LIBRARY
affairs.
Believe me, that is a deterrent as far as cities
are concerned because they don't like to go into bank-
ruptcy and I think it is sort of a roadblock to them.
MORE
Right wat to
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
August 2, 1976
MEMORANDUM FOR:
JIM SHUMAN
FROM:
DAVID LISS not
The attached answer on the repeal of Section 14 (b)
is fine as is.
ef we and allowed to expand, & would
add one sentence:
" " l believe this is a matter which
each State should be able to
e think this the who isinl. do
decide for tself."
Attachment not may fully
CC: Jim Cavanaugh
FORD & LIBRARY 8740
and I have sought to use it responsibly.
veices
I have vetood up to now 53 bills, and 42, have been sustained.
The net result is that we have saved about $13 billion in unnecessary
expenditures.
Lissy
Q: Organized labor would like to strike down Section 14(b) of
which allows
that
the Taft-Hartley Act clientra states to pass right-to-work laws which
say people cannot be forced to join a union to hold a job. What is
your position on that?
Ford: I am completely against the repeal of Section 14(b). I
am today, always have been and always will be.
were is
Q: If the OPEC nations sussid institute another oil embargo,
as they did in 1973, what should the United States do?
GERALD LIBRARY
Ford: I don't anticipate that there will be another embargo.
Also FOR
Since 1973, this Administration has taken very major steps to de-
velop trust between the United States and the various nations in the
GENE
Middle East, including all of the Arab states as well as Israel.
We have been successful as a result of this trust in helping to get
the negotiations that resulted in the Sinai II agreement. The pros-
pects for continued progress in the Middle East are such that I just
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
August 2, 1976
MEMORANDUM FOR:
SARAH MASSENGALE
SPENCER JOHNSON
DICK PARSONS
DAVID LISSY
PAUL LEACH
FROM:
JIM CAVANAUGH
SUBJECT:
Reader's Digest Q&A's
Please review the attached answers from the
edited version of the President's interview with
Reader's Digest, and return to Jim Shuman by 11 a.m.
tomorrow, Tuesday, August 3. I'd appreciate a copy.
Many thanks.
Attachment
FORD & LIBRAR 038470