Extracted text

OCR Page 1 of 36
THE PRESIDENT HAS SEEN DIGEST OF RECENT COMMENT December 5, 1973 ENERGY Beneath lead head "Energy Czar: Calm Words Amid a Flurry of Grim News, 11 Monitor's Ellis leads: "Economic gloom deepens across US as Simon prepares to grasp nottle of the crisis. 11 The economic cloud has at least a thin silver lining now w/ 1 offical terming FEA "the potential mechanism for integrating energy policy¹ at the highest level. Love on Today said he left Admin because situation changed and new agency, which he agrees w/, was formed under Simon's basic responsibility. Tho asked to remain, Love said, he would ve been in "vague" advisory position which wouldn't have been "impt" and he didn't love DC enough to stay. Asked if he weren't "vague adviser" all along, Love conceded "whole tag of 'energy czar¹¹ created image that didn't exist. Stating it's "no surprise" that RN's be- leaguered and involved w/other matters, Lov e added he felt RN didn't see energy crisis as seriously as Love did, and in sentence he didn't complete, Love noted RN's saying at 1 point Arabs couldn't so anything else w/their oil. But, he added, he's beginning to think RN does see crisis as serious. It's a "fine line to walk, 11 tho: people must under- stand seriousness of shortage w/out pushing panic button, Love noted, but added he thinks US needs to know seriousness, it can't be insulated from bad effect it's going to have on economy. Admitting it was hard to see RN, Love said he doesn't know if RN was unhappy w/him, but "someone was. 11 He had no real reason to be in DC except to serve, and he tried to make it clear if WH was unhappy, it should tell him. In conclusion, Love said he was "probably not 'used, 111 but he's concerned that his going was "clumsily" handled. Star thinks there "probably" is "some truth" in varying accounts re: Love's problems and he and DiBona "probably were right to resign when it became clear they could remain only as window-dressing. " The "energetic" Simon "has drive and intellectual capacity" to deal w/energy crisis, and Star 's glad he "doesn't flatly rule out rationing." Allowing prices to rise or imposing tax would limit consumption and involve minimum of controls, "but it'd be clearly inequitable to low-incomes and to those who must travel. 11 Yet,Star notes, "full-scale" rationing would "involve creation of vast burocracy, invasion of privacy and