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
1676472
label
President Ford Committee Leadership Mailings, 4/12/76 - Reagan's TV Address (1)
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
1676472
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
President Ford Committee Leadership Mailings, 4/12/76 - Reagan's TV Address (1)
citationUrl
collections
President Ford Committee Records
General Subject Files
subjects
Speeches, addresses, etc.
Presidential campaign, 1976
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
1676472
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1976-04-30
month
4
year
1976
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1976-03-01
month
3
year
1976
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
a8aa749df11b65e6
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box H50, folder "President Ford Committee
Leadership Mailings, 4/12/1976 - Reagan's TV Address (1)" of the President Ford
Committee Campaign Records 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States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.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.
300
slight mailing
50
Kaye
100
Fieldmen + internal
+WH+RNC +
T= 450
50
Chotine (Advocate
+ -sched.)
T= 500
100
extra CRQ, etc.)
600
GERALD R. FORD
April 12, 1976
MEMORANDUM FOR:
FROM:
PFC LEADERSHIP 7WA
FRED SLIGHT
Director of Research
SUBJECT:
Ronald Reagan's National
Television Address
Ronald Reagan presented, via the NBC network, a 30-minute
political speech on the evening of March 31.
It is of note that his performance was worthy of his long
career in the acting profession; however, it is discon-
certing that such factual inaccuracies and simplistic con-
clusions could have been offered by someone who is seeking
the Presidency of the United States.
In order to provide you with a more balanced understanding
of the critical national and international issues which were
discussed, I attach an analysis of Mr. Reagan's speech which
contrasts the fact and fiction of his politically motivated
remarks.
I trust that you will find this material to be of interest
and use.
Attachment
FORD is LIBRARY 01.840
(1)
BUSING
The Reagan Rhetoric
"Nothing has created more bitterness for example than
forced busing to achieve racial balance. It was born
of a hope that we could increase understanding and
reduce prejudice and antagonism. I'm sure we all
approved of that goal. But busing has failed to
achieve the goal.
Page 11, paragraph 3
The Ford Record
Candidate Reagan's statement implies that neither the President
nor his Administration is either aware of this problem or
concerned enough to do something about it. On the President's
12th day in office, he signed an education bill with the
following provisions:
- Prohibits the use of all Federal funds (except Impact
Aid) for busing activities.
Allows the courts to terminate busing orders on a
finding that the school district has and will
continue to comply with the fifth and fourteenth
amendments.
Prohibits any new order to bus past the next
nearest school.
Prohibits orders to bus except at the start of an
academic year.
Prohibits busing across district lines or altering
district lines unless, as a result of discriminatory
actions in both school districts, the lines caused
segregation.
-Provides school districts a reasonable time to
develop voluntary plans before a court order can be
executed.
The President has also directed the Secretary of Health, Education,
and Welfare, the Attorney General, and members of the White House
staff to review the ramifications of busing and to develop better
methods to achieve quality education within an integrated environ-
ment for all school children.
FORD & GERALD LIBRARY
(2)
CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT GROWTH
The Reagan Rhetoric
"When I became Governor, I inherited a state government
that was in almost the same situation as New York City.
The state payroll had been growing for a dozen years at
a rate of from 5 to 7,000 new employees each year. State
government was spending from a million to a million and
a half dollars more each day than it was taking in."
Page 7, paragraph 2
The Reagan Record
The California state budget under then Governor Reagan more than
doubled, increasing from $4.6 billion in 1967 to $10.2 billion
in 1973.
In addition, the state payroll continued to increase, from a
total of 113, 779 persons in 1967 to 127,929 persons in 1973.
As for the $4 billion bonded indebtedness of California, there is
little basis for comparison of the state with the current multitude
of problems facing the City of New York.
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
(3)
CALIFORNIA STATE TAXES
The Reagan Rhetoric
"California was faced with insolvency and on the verge
of bankruptcy. We had to increase taxes. Well, this
came very hard for me becaue I felt taxes were already
too great a burden. I told the people the increase, in
my mind, was temporary and that, as soon as we could,
we'd return their money to them."
Page 7, paragraph 3
The Reagan Record
Under Ronald Reagan, there were three huge state tax increases
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
which totaled more than $2 billion.
In 1967, there was an increase of $967 million, the largest state
tax hike in the nation's history. Of this, $280 million went for
a one-time deficit payment and state property tax relief. In 1971
the increase was $488 million, with $150 million going to property
tax relief. In 1972, there was a final increase of $682 million,
with $650 million going for property tax relief. While much of the
property tax relief was short-term, the huge tax increases were
permanent.
State personal income tax revenues went from $500 million to $2.5
billion, a 500% increase. Taxable bracket levies were increased from
7% to 11%. The range of the brackets was reduced so that taxpayers
reached the highest taxable bracket more quickly and personal
exemptions were reduced. Finally, after he adamantly denied that he
would ever do so, then Governor Reagan agreed to a system of withholding
state income taxes.
Bank and corporation taxes went up 100%. The state sales tax rose
from 4% to 6%. The tax on cigarettes increased 7 cents a pack and
the liquor tax rose 50 cents per gallon. Inheritance tax rates were
increased and collections more than doubled.
Under Governor Reagan, the average tax rate for each $100 of assessed
valuation rose from $8.84 to $11.15. Under his predecessor, Pat
Brown, the increase was much less in dollars and percentage--fr $6.96
to $8.84. And in the six years of Republican Governor Knight's admin-
istration, it was still less--from $5.94 to $6.96. One reason for the
big increase under Mr. Reagan--from $3.7 billion to $8.3 billion--is
that the state paid a steadily smaller percentage of the school costs--
one of the biggest reasons for local property taxes.
Despite periodic efforts to provide relief, there has been a substantial
increase in the burden carried by most property owners. Inflation
and high assessments have helped wipe out any savings. Only $855 million
of the record $10.2 billion budget in Reagan's final year was for tax
relief for homeowners and renters.
(4)
CALIFORNIA WELFARE REFORM
The Reagan Rhetoric
"After a few years of trying to control this runaway program
(welfare) and being frustrated by bureaucrats here in
California and in Washington, we turned again to a citizens'
task force. The result was the most comprehensive welfare
reform ever attempted.
And in less than three years we reduced the rolls by more
than 300,000 people. Saved the taxpayers $2 billion".
Page 10, paragraph 2-3
"And, increased the grants to the truly deserving needy by
an average of 43%. We also carried out a successful experi-
ment which I believe is an answer to much of the welfare
problem in the nation. We put able-bodied welfare recipients
to work at useful community projects in return for their
welfare grants.'
Page 11, paragraph 1
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
The Reagan Record
One reduction of 20,000 persons was due to a correction in ac-
counting procedures in the state's largest county, Los Angeles.
Candidate Reagan also has taken credit for a drop of 110,000 cases
which in fact, had occurred before his program had gone into effect.
Moreover, a reduction in unemployment in California from 7.4%
in April, 1971 to 5.9% in September, 1972 had as large an effect
on checking the rise of welfare cases as any other single factor.
In addition, the migratory rate of unemployed persons into California
declined from 233,000 in 1967 to 44,000 in 1971, reducing potential
welfare roll increases.
Rolls for welfare families increased in the eight years of Mr.
Reagan's governorship from 729,357 to 1,384,400, and the cost of
the program went from $32.3 million to $104.4 million.
With regard to increasing grants to the deserving and putting
"Able-bodied welfare recipients" to work, the Reagan program never
touched more than 6/10th of 1% of welfare recipients. Although
the program was designed to have 59,000 participants in its first
year in 35 counties, it managed only 1,100 participants in 10
counties, mostly rural farm areas.
(5)
ECONOMIC RECOVERY
The Reagan Rhetoric
"In this election season the White House is telling
us a solid economic recovery is taking place. It
claims a slight drop in unemployment. It says that
prices aren't going up as fast, but they are still
going up, and that the stock market has shown some
gains. But, in fact, things seem just about as they
were back in the 1972 election year. Remember, we
were also coming out of a recession then. Inflation
has been running at around 6%. Unemployment about
7. Remember, too, the upsurge and the optimism
lasted through the election year and into 1973. And
then, the roof fell in. Once again we had unemploy-
ment. Only this time not 7%, more than 10. And
inflation--wasn't 6%, it was 12%."
Page 1, paragraph 3
"Now, in this election year 1976, we're told we're
coming out of this recession. Just because inflation
and unemployment rates have fallen to what they were
at the worst of the previous recession. If history
repeats itself we will be talking recovery four years
from now merely because we've reduced inflation from
25% to 12%."
Page 2, paragraph 2
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
The Ford Record
There are now 2.6 million more people at work today than there
were just a year ago. Total employment is at its highest point
in history.
Unemployment reached its peak in May, 1975 at 8.9%--not "more than
10%". March, 1976 figures show that this rate has been reduced to
7.5%, and that it continues to decline.
Prices are not going up as fast. In 1974, inflation stood at an
annualizedrate of 12.2%. Inflation today is down to 6.3%--cut
nearly in half.
This recovery has taken place on a broad and lasting front. In
addition to a decrease in both unemployment and inflation, major
gains have been posted in retail sales, GNP, durable goods, housing
and personal income. This Administration's statements are based on
more than just the unemployment and cost-of-living statistics that
candidate Reagan implies.
(6)
EDUCATION
The Reagan Rhetoric
"Schools. In America, we created at the local level and
administered at the local level for many years the greatest
public school system in the world. Now through something
called federal aid to education, we have something called
federal interference and education has been the loser.
Quality has declined as federal intervention has increased. "
Page 11, paragraph 2
The Ford Record
The Federal government supports only 7% of the total cost of
elementary and secondary education. The bulk of this support is
distributed through the states to local governments to meet the
specific educational needs of each community.
&
President Ford has recognized that "since Abraham Lincoln signed
FORD
the Act creating the land grant colleges, Federal encouragement
and assistance to education has been an essential part of the
GERALD
American system. To abandon it now would be to ignore the past
LIBRARY
and threaten the future. "
The very first major piece of legislation the President signed
was an omnibus education bill. It improved the distribution of
Federal education funds and the administration of Federal programs.
On March 1 of this year, President Ford sent an education message
to Congress which combined 24 categorical grant programs into one
grant program of $3.3 billion so that state and local school systems
would have far greater flexibility in the use of these funds.
This action insured continuing, appropriate Federal support for
education, while minimizing the intensive rules and regulations
which are unrelated to the development of quality education.
(7)
ENERGY
The Reagan Rhetoric
"Only a short time ago we were lined up at the gas
station. We turned our thermostats down as Washington
announced 'Project Independence.' We were going to
become self-sufficient, able to provide for our own
energy needs.
At the time we were only importing a small percentage
of our oil. Yet, the Arab boycott caused half a mil-
lion Americans to lose their jobs when plants closed
down for lack of fuel. Today, it's almost three years
later and 'Project Independence' has become 'Project
Dependence. Congress has adopted an energy bill so
bad we were led to believe Mr. Ford would veto it.
Instead he signed it. And, almost instantly, drilling
rigs all over our land started shutting down. Now, for
the first time in our history, we are importing more oil
FORD & 07V839 LIBRARY
than we produce. How many Americans will be laid off
if there is another boycott? The energy bill is a
disaster that never should have been signed."
Page 6, paragraphs 1-2
The Ford Record
Candidate Reagan seems to have missed the whole point of having a
national energy policy. Two years ago (not the three that he
claims), at the time of the March, 1974 announcement of Project
Independence, the United States was importing 35% of its oil--
not the "insignificant" amount that Mr. Reagan seems to recall.
It was for this reason that President Ford called for a comprehen-
sive national energy policy to achieve, by 1985, national energy
independence. Oil rigs did not begin shutting down after the
passage of the EPCA. There were an average of 1,662 drilling rigs
operating last year, the highest number in a decade. Figures for
January 1976--just this week released--show that 1,710 rotary
rigs were in operation one full month after passage of EPCA.
And, preliminary estimates indicate that 1976 investments by the
petroleum industry in production and development activities will
exceed those of 1975.
The Energy Policy and Conservation Act passed by the Congress and
signed by President Ford in December ended a difficult, year-long
debate between the Congress and the Administration on oil pricing
policy, opening the way to an orderly phasing out of controls on
domestic oil over forty months, thereby stimulating our own oil
production.
(8)
By removing controls, this legislation should give
industry sufficient incentive over a period of time to
explore, develop and produce new fields in the outer
continental shelf, Alaska, and potential new reserves
in the lower forty-eight states. Removal of these
controls at the end of forty months should increase
domestic production by more than one million barrels
per day by 1985 and reduce imports by about three million
barrels per day.
More importantly, this bill enables the United States to
meet a substantial portion of the mid-term goals for energy
independence set forth over a year ago. Incorporated in
this are authorities for:
-- a strategic storage system
-- conversion of oil and gas-fired utility and in-
dustrial plants to coal
-- energy efficiency labeling
-- emergency authorities for use in the event of
another embargo
-- and the authority we need to fulfill our inter-
national agreements with other oil consuming nations
FORD is GERALD LIBRARY
These provisions will directly reduce the nation's
dependence on foreign oil by almost two million barrels
per day by 1985. The strategic storage system and the
stand-by authority will enable the United States to
withstand a future embargo of about four million barrels
per day.
The EPCA didn't give President Ford everything that he
wanted, but it was a step in the right direction.
Most importantly, it recognized the need and provided
the means for gradual decontrol of oil.
President Ford has already put these authorities to good use--
his Administration recently announced the decontrol of heavy fuel
oil, and will shortly follow suit with decontrol of other products
as provided under the law.
Finally, candidate Reagan seems to have conveniently forgotten that
President Ford long ago called for the decontrol of natural gas,
production from national petroleum reserves, measures to stimulate
more effective conservation, the development of new energy sources,
and the development of more and cleaner energy from our vast coal
resources.
Perhaps the question which should be asked is, "Does Mr. Reagan even
have a policy?"
(9)
FEDERAL SPENDING
The Reagan Rhetoric
"The fact is, we'll never build a lasting economic
recovery by going deeper into debt at a faster rate
than we ever have before. It took this nation 166
years--until the middle of World War II--to finally
accumulate a debt of $95 billion. It took this
administration just the last 12 months to add $95
billion to the debt. And this administration has
run up almost one-fourth of our total national
debt in just these short nineteen months."
"Inflation is the cause of recession and unemployment.
And we're not going to have real prosperity or recovery
until we stop fighting the symptoms and start fighting
the disease. There's only one cause for inflation--
government spending more than government takes in. The
cure is a balanced budget. Ah, but they tell us, 80%
of the budget is uncontrollable. It's fixed by laws
passed by Congress."
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
Page 2, paragraphs 3-4
"But laws passed by Congress can be repealed by
Congress. And, if Congress is unwilling to do this,
then isn't it time we elect a Congress that will?"
"Soon after he took office, Mr. Ford promised he would
end inflation. Indeed, he declared war on inflation.
And, we all donned those WIN buttons to "Whip Inflation
Now. " Unfortunately, the war--if it ever really started--
was soon over. Mr. Ford, without WIN button, appeared
on TV, and promised he absolutely would not allow the
Federal deficit to exceed $60 billion (which incidentally
was $5 billion more than the biggest previous deficit
we'd ever had). Later he told us it might be as much
as $70 billion. Now we learn it's $80 billion or more."
Page 3, paragraphs 1-2
The Ford Record
The national debt reached $72 billion in 1942. The estimated
deficit for FY '76 is $76.9 billion. The gross Federal debt up
through FY '76 is estimated at $634 billion. Thus, the Adminis-
tration's share of the national debt is 15.6%, not the 25%
declared by candidate Reagan.
President Ford's economic policy has been designed to:
1. Create sustained economic recovery and growth without
inflation;
2. Reach a balanced Federal budget by 1979; and,
3. Provide jobs for all who seek work.
(10)
President Ford has offered specific plans for achieving a balanced
budget; but, a large part of the cause of the current recession is
the result of past fiscal policies, especially rapid increases in
Federal expenditures. There is no quick remedy for the problems
created a decade ago.
A precipitous return to a balanced budget, as candidate Reagan
would like, would fuel inflation, halt the recovery, and mean a
sustained period of high unemployment.
Some 77.1% of the federal budget for FY '77 is in "uncontrollable"
or "open-ended" expenditures. Approximately $236.8 billion of
this is allocated to payments to individuals. In order to achieve
candidate Reagan's "balanced" budget as quickly as he suggests,
we would have to terminate all of some, or part of several, of
the following expenditures:
$108.0 billion
Social Security and Railroad Retirement
38.4 billion
Medicare and Medicaid
26.0 billion
Public Assistance Programs
22.9 billion
Federal Retirement Funds
16.3 billion
Veterans Benefits
FORD is LIBRARY 07V839
About 26 cents out of every Federal tax dollar in 1977 will go to
defense ($101.2 billion). Revenue sharing and grants to states
and localities--funds returned for use at the local level--take up
another 15 cents out of every Federal dollar spent. This too,
leaves little room for immediate, massive Federal cuts.
In March, 1975, President Ford literally "drew the line" at a deficit
of $60 billion. To meet that goal, the President vetoed some 47 bills
sent to him by the Congress--at an attempted cost savings to the
American taxpayer of $26 billion. The Congress overrode only 7 of
these vetoes, but at a cost to the taxpayer of another $13 billion
added to the Federal deficit.
Thus, the estimated deficit for FY 76 will be $76.9 billion. The
largest previous yearly deficit occurred in 1943--$54.8 billion.
Gross national debt for FY 76 is estimated to be $634 billion--of
which $76.9 billion, or 15.6% occurred during a year in which a
Ford budget was in effect.
The President's proposed budget for FY 1977 cuts the rate of growth
of Federal spending in half, down to 5.5%. The estimated deficit
for FY 77 is $43 billion or $33 billion less than the previous year
and some $26 billion less than projected expenditures had government
continued to grow at the same pace as it had during the last decade.
President Ford has set a balanced budget as his goal for 1979.
FOREIGN AFFAIRS
(11)
ANGOLA
The Reagan Rhetoric
"We gave just enough support to one side of Angola to
encourage it to fight and die but too little to give it
a chance of winning."
Page 13, paragraph 2
The Ford Record
The U.S. objective in supporting the FNLA/UNITA forces in Angola
was to assist them, and through them all of black Africa, to
defend against a minority faction supported by Soviet arms and
Cuban intervention. Despite massive Soviet aid and the presence of
Cuban troops, we were on the road to success in Angola until December
19 when Congress adopted the Tunney Amendment cutting off further
U.S. aid to the FNLA and UNITA. President Ford severely rebuked
the Congress for that action.
CHINA
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
The Reagan Rhetoric
"In Asia our new relationship with mainland China can have
practical benefits with both sides. But that doesn't mean
it should include yielding to demands by them as the
Administration has to reduce our military presence on Taiwan
where we have a long-time friend and ally, the Republic
of China."
Page 13, paragraph 3
The Ford Record
We have not reduced our forces on Taiwan as a result of Peking's
demands. Our reductions stem from our own assessment of U.S.
political and security interests. The ending of the Vietnam conflict,
and the lessening of tension in the area brought about by our new
relationship with the People's Republic of China has made this
drawdown possible.
(12)
FOREIGN AFFAIRS
ISRAEL
The Reagan Rhetoric
"Mr. Ford's new Ambassador to the United Nations attacks
our long time ally Israel."
Page 13, paragraph 3
The Ford Record
Candidate Reagan has grossly distorted the facts. William Scranton
did not attack Israel. His veto blocked an unbalanced Security
Council Resolution critical of Israel-- a resolution that every
other member of the Security Council voted for. In a March 23
speech in the United Nations Security Council, Ambassador Scranton
reiterated long-standing U.S. policy--a policy articulated by
every Administration--and every U.S. Representative to the United
Nations since 1967--on Israel's obligations as an occupying power
under international law with regard to the territories under its
occupation.
Far from attacking our long-time ally, Israel, President Ford's
Administration seized an historic opportunity to help the area
move towards a secure, just and comprehensive peace settlement.
During the Spring of 1975, the President held an extensive series
of meetings with important leaders in the area. A second, in-
terim agreement was reached shortly thereafter between Israel
and Egypt.
This agreement reaffirmed and strengthened the ceasefire, widened
the buffer zone, and committed both sides to settle the Middle
East conflict by peaceful means, refraining from use of force.
For the first time in years, the Suez Canal was opened to Israel for
non-military shipping.
VIETNAM
FORD is LIBRARY CERALD
The Reagan Rhetoric
"And, it is also revealed now that we seek to establish
friendly relations with Hanoi. To make it more palatable,
FOREIGN AFFAIRS
(13)
we are told this might help us learn the fate of the men
still listed as Missing in Action."
Page 13-14, paragraph 3
The Ford Record
Neither President Ford nor his Administration spokesman have said
we "seek to establish friendly relations with Hanoi. " Such an
assertion is totally false.
The Congress, reflecting the views of the American people and
the Ford Administration, has called for an accounting of our Mis-
sing in Action and the return of the bodies of dead servicemen
still held by Hanoi.
The Ford Administration, in keeping with this Congressional man-
date, has offered to discuss with Hanoi the significant outstand-
ing issues between us.
CUBA
The Reagan Rhetoric
"In the last few days, Mr. Ford and Dr. Kissinger have
taken us from hinting at invasion of Cuba to laughing it
off as a ridiculous idea. Except, that it was their
ridiculous idea. No one else suggested it. Once again --
what is their policy? During this last year, they carried
on a campaign to befriend Castro. They persuaded the
Organization of American States to lift its trade embargo,
lifted some U.S. trade restrictions, they engaged in culture
exchanges. And then on the eve of the Florida primary
election, Mr. Ford went to Florida, called Castro an outlaw
and said he'd never recognize him. But he hasn't asked our
Latin American neighbors to reimpose a single sanction, nor
has he taken any action himself. Meanwhile, Castro continues
to export revolution to Puerto Rico, to Angola, and who
knows where else?
Page 14, paragraph 2
FORD is LIBRARY GERALD
FOREIGN AFFAIRS
(14)
The Ford Record
Neither President Ford nor his representative stated -- or hinted--
at an "invasion of Cuba." Nor did the United States persuade
the OAS to lift the sanctions against Cuba.
At San Jose last summer, the U.S. voted in favor of an OAS resolution
which left to each country freedom of action with regard to the
sanctions. The U.S. did so because a majority of the OAS members
had already unilaterally lifted their sanctions against Cuba,
and because the resolution was supported by a majority of the
organization members. Since that resolution passed. no additional
Latin American country has established relations with Cuba.
The U.S. has not lifted its own sanctions against Cuba. It
did not enter into any agreements with Cuba. and did not trade
with Cuba. We did not engage in cultural exchanges.
The U.S. did validate a number of passports for U.S. Congressmen
and their staffs, for some scholars and for some religious leaders
to visit Cuba. And the U.S. issued a few select visas to Cubans
to visit the U.S.
These minimal steps were taken to test whether there was a mutual
interest in ending the hostile nature of our relations. This
policy was consistent with the traditional American interest in
supporting the free flow of ideas and people. Since the Cuban
adventure in Angola, the Ford Administration has concluded that the
Cubans are not interested in changing their ways. The U.S. has
resumed it's highly restrictive policies toward Cuban travel.
With regard to Cuban efforts to interfere in Puerto Rican affairs,
the U.S. has made it emphatically clear in the UN and bilaterally
to the Cubans and other nations that the U.S. will not tolerate
any interference in its internal affairs.
Mr. Reagan's criticism is particularly interesting when compared
to the following comment he made last August in a release for his
weekly editorial column.
"Recent conciliatory gestures by Castro, including
the return of $2 million ransom money he had impounded
in connection with a U.S. airliner hijacking, indicates
that he is ready to talk turkey with the United States.
Since we can accomplish both humanitarian and national
objectives in the process, it's time for the Washington
establishment to lift its Cuban dialogue above the
level of that advertising slogan, 'Since we're neighbors
let's be friends.
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
(15)
FOREIGN AFFAIRS
EASTERN EUROPE
The Reagan Rhetoric
"Now we learn that another high official of the State
Department, Helmut Sonnenfeldt, whom Dr. Kissinger refers
to as his "Kissinger", has expressed the belief that, in
effect, the captive nations should give up any claim of
national sovereignty and simply become a part of the
Soviet Union. He says, 'Their desire to break out of the
Soviet straightjacket' threatens us with World War III.
In other words, slaves should accept their fate."
Page 17, paragraph 2
The Ford Record
The Reagan statement is wholly inaccurate. It is a gross distortion
of fact, to ascribe such views to Mr. Sonnenfeldt or to the Ford
Administration. Not a single person in the Ford Administration has
ever expressed any such belief.
The U.S. does not accept a sphere of influence of any country,
anywhere, and emphatically rejects a Soviet sphere of influence
in Eastern Europe.
Two Presidents have visited in Eastern Europe; there have been
two visits to Poland and Romania and Yugoslavia, by Presidents.
Administration officials have made repeated visits to Eastern
Europe, on every trip to symbolize and to make clear to these
countries that the U.S. is interested in working with them and
that it does not accept or act upon the exclusive dominance of
any one country in that area.
At the same time, the U.S. does not want to give encouragement
to an uprising that might lead to enormous suffering. The United
States does not accept the dominance of any one country anywhere.
&
FORD
Yugoslavia was mentioned, for example. The Ford Administration
would emphatically consider it a very grave matter if outside
GERALD
LIBRARY
forces were to attempt to intervene in the domestic affairs of
Yugoslavia. The U.S. welcomes Eastern European countries
developing more in accordance with their national traditions,
and we will cooperate with them. This is the policy of the United
States, and there is no "Sonnenfeldt" doctrine.
(16)
FOREIGN AFFAIRS
THE HELSINKI PACT
The Reagan Rhetoric
"Why did the President travel halfway 'round the world to
sign the Helsinki Pact, putting our stamp of approval on
Russia's enslavement of the captive nations?
We gave away the freedom of millions of people -- freedom
that was not ours to give. "
Page 16, paragraph 2
The Ford Record
Again, candidate Reagan has distorted the facts for emotional
impact. President Ford stated clearly on July 25 that "the United
States has never recognized the Soviet incorporation of Lithuania,
Latvia and Estonia and is not doing so now. Our offical policy of
non-recognition is not affected by the results of the European
Security Conference."
President Ford went to Helsinki along with the Chiefs of State or
heads of government of all our Western allies and, among others,
a Papal Representative, to sign a document which contains Soviet
commitments to greater respect for human rights, self-determination
of peoples, and expanded exchanges and communication throughout
Europe. Basket three of the Act calls for a freer flow of people
and ideas among all the European nations.
The Helsinki Act, for the first time, specifically provides for the
possibility of peaceful change of borders when that would correspond
to the wishes of the peoples concerned.
And the Helsinki document itself states that no occupation or
acquisition of territory by force will be recognized as legal.
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
(17)
FOREIGN AFFAIRS
PANAMA CANAL
The Reagan Rhetoric
"The Canal Zone is not a colonial possession. It is not
a long-term lease. It is sovereign U.S. territory every
bit the same as Alaska and all the states that were carved
from the Louisiana Purchase. We should end those negot-
iations (on the Panama Canal) and tell the General; We
bought it, we paid for it, we built it and we intend to
keep it. "
Page 15, paragraph 3
The Ford Record
It is not certain whether the Reagan rhetoric on the Panama Canal
Zone best displays his ignorance--or his frequent distortion
of the facts for political gain. What is certain is that Mr. Reagan's
view that the Canal Zone is "sovereign U.S. territory every bit
the same as Alaska and all the states that were carved from the
Louisiana Purchase" is absolutely incorrect.
The United States did not buy the Canal Zone from Panama for $10
million in 1903. Instead, this country bought certain rights
which Panama then granted--rights to run the Canal Zone as if it
were U.S. territory, subjecting Panamanians to U.S. law and
police in a strip of land through the middle of their country.
Neither is the Canal Zone sovereign U.S. territory. The original
treaty does not give sovereignty to the U.S. but only rights
the U.S. would exercise as "if it were sovereign." The 1936
treaty refers to the Canal Zone as Panamanian territory under U.S.
jurisdiction. Legal scholars have been clear on this for three-
quarters of an century. Unlike children born in the United States,
for example, children born in the Canal Zone are not automatically
citizens of the United States.
Candidate Reagan's rhetoric aggravates an already difficult
situation. In 1964, anti-American riots in the Canal area took 26
lives. Since that time, negotiations between the United States and
Panama on the Canal have been pursued by three successive American
Presidents. The purpose of these negotiations is to protect our
FORD
national security, not diminish it.
GERALD,
(18)
FOREIGN AFFAIRS
THE U.S. ROLE
The Reagan Rhetoric
"Now we must ask if someone is giving away our own
freedóm. Dr. Kissinger is quoted as saying that he thinks
of the U.S. as Athens and the Soviet Union as Sparta.
"The day of the U.S. is past and today is the day of the
Soviet Union." And he added, " My job as Secretary of
State is to negotiate the most acceptable second-best
position available."
Page 16, paragraph 3
The Ford Record
Candidate Reagan's so-called quotes from Secretary Kissinger are
a total and irresponsible fabrication. He has never said what
Mr. Reagan attributes to him, or anything like it.
In a March 23, 1976 press conference in Dallas, Secretary Kissinger
said: "I do not believe that the United States will be defeated.
I do not believe that the United States is on the decline."
"I believe that the United States is essential to preserve the
security of the free world and for any progress in the world that
exists.
"In a period of great national difficulty, of the Viet-Nam war,
of Watergate, of endless investigations, we have tried to preserve
the role of the United States as that major actor. And I believe
that to explain to the American people that the policy is complex,
that our involvement is permanent, and that our problems are
nevertheless soluble, is a sign of optimism and of confidence in
the American people rather than the opposite."
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
(19)
GOVERNMENT GROWTH & FEDERAL TAXES
The Reagan Rhetoric
"Then came a White House proposal for a $28 billion
tax cut, to be matched by a $28 billion cut in the
proposed spending -- not in the present spending, but
in the proposed spending in the new budget. Well, my
question then and my question now is, if there was $28
billion in the new budget that could be cut, what
was it doing there in the first place?"
Page 3, paragraph 3
"They could
correct a great unfairness that now
exists in our tax system. Today, when you get a
cost-of-living pay raise-- one that just keeps you
even with purchasing power-- it often moves you up
into a higher tax bracket. This means you pay a
higher percentage in tax but you reduce your purchasing
power. Last year, because of this inequity, the
government took in $7 billion in undeserved pro-
fit in the income tax alone, and this year they 11
do even better."
Page 4, paragraph 2
The Ford Record
President Ford has submitted a budget for FY '77 which will
curb the growth in Federal expenditures -- proposing a $28
billion cut in existing programs, not a reduction in the
proposed budget as candidate Reagan would have the public
believe. The President has called for this spending cut to
be tied to a tax cut which would return to a family of
four earning $15,000 a year approximately $227 more in
take-home pay -- and which would give businesses more in-
centive to create jobs.
The President's tax proposals for individuals have several
key features:
-- an increase in the personal exemption from
$750 to $1000.
-- substitution of a single standard deduction--
$2,500 for married couples filing jointly and
$1, 800 for single taxpayers -- for the existing
low income allowance and percentage standard
deduction.
FORD i LIBRARY GERALD
-- a reduction in individual income tax rates.
(20)
President Ford's proposals to increase the inheritance tax exemption
from $60,000 to $150,000, and his proposal to stretch out the
Federal estate tax payment period for farms and small businesses,
will help to keep farms and small business in the family after years
of hard work.
And, to help businessmen create jobs, the President has proposed:
-- permanent reductions in corporate income taxes;
-- a permanent increase in the investment tax credit;
-- accelerated depreciation for construction of plants
and equipment in high unemployment areas;
-- broadened incentives to encourage stock ownership
by low and middle income working Americans.
The President's budget and tax measures have already meant more jobs
for American workers, the slashing of inflation, and the growth of
real take-home pay. His effort to curb the growth of government --
and to return control to the individual -- has already, and will con-
tinue to return dollars to the American worker.
FORD is LIBRARY GERALD
(21)
NATIONAL DEFENSE
The Reagan Rhetoric
"The Soviet Army outnumbers ours more than two-to-one
and in reserves four-to-one. They out-spend us on wea-
pons by 50%. Their Navy outnumbers ours in surface ships
and submarines two-to-one. We are outgunned in artillery
three-to-one and their tanks outnumber ours four-to-one.
Their strategic nuclear missiles are larger, more power-
ful and more numerous than ours. The evidence mounts
that we are Number Two in a world where it is dangerous,
if not fatal, to be second best."
Page 16, paragraph 1
The Ford Record
In January of this year, President Ford submitted to Congress
the largest peacetime budget for the Department of Defense in
the history of the United States--$112 billion, $700 million.
He has assured the American people that "the United States is
going to be number one, as it is, in our national security"
as long as he is President.
Candidate Reagan conveniently neglects to mention that our
strategic forces are superior to the Soviets'. The United
States holds numerous advantages over the Soviet Union, including
the following:
-Our missile warheads have tripled and we lead the
Soviets in missile warheads by more than two-to-one.
--Our missiles are twice as accurate and more survivable.
We have a three-to-one lead in the number of strategic
bombers.
- We are proceeding with the development and production of
FORD i LIBRARY GERALD
the world's most modern strategic bomber, the B-1.
We are developing the world's most modern and lethal missile
launching submarine, the Trident.
--We are developing a new large ICBM.
National defense is more than a numbers game, and candidate Reagan's
rhetoric indicates a disturbingly shallow grasp of what true balance
is all about. It is absolutely meaningless to say the Soviet Army
is twice the size of the U.S. Army when one considers that one million
of their troops are deployed on the Chinese border.
Candidate Reagan also ignores that we are at the head of a great
Alliance system in Europe, and we are firmly tied to the strongest
economic power in Asia.
(22)
President Ford is the one responsible for reversing the recent
trend of shrinking defense budgets in which a Democratic Congress
has made $37 billion in cuts during the past seven years.
Mr. Reagan's short-sighted, politically motivated statements that
proclaim that our nation is "in danger" are both factually
irresponsible and potentially damaging to this country. They
alarm our people, confuse our allies, and invite our adversaries
to seek new foreign adventures.
FORD is LIBRARY 038470
(23)
SOCIAL SECURITY
The Reagan Rhetoric
"Now, let's look at Social Security. Mr. Ford says he
wants to 'preserve the integrity of Social Security.
Well, I differ with him on one word. I would like to
restore the integrity of Social Security. Those who
depend on it see a continual reduction in their standards
of living. Inflation strips the increase in their benefits.
The maximum benefit today buys 80 fewer loaves of bread
than it did when that maximum payment was only $85 a
month. In the meantime, the Social Security payroll
tax has become the most unfair tax any worker pays.
Women are discriminated against. Particularly, working
wives. And, people who reach Social Security age and
want to continue working, should be allowed to do so and
without losing their benefits. I believe a Presidential
commission of experts should be appointed to study and
present a plan to strengthen and improve Social Security
while there's still time--so that no person who has
contributed to Social Security will ever lose a dime."
Page 4, paragraph 3
The Ford Record
FORD is LIBRARY 02RALD
The statement that the "maximum benefit today buys 80 fewer
loaves than it did when the maximum benefit was only $85 a
month" implies that the purchasing power of Social Security
payments has declined substantially. In fact, the average benefit
has almost tripled in terms of the amount it can buy from that
time in 1940 when the benefit was $85.
It was President Ford who first recognized inflation as the single
greatest threat to the quality of life for older Americans. As a
result, his budget request to Congress for fiscal year 1977 inclu-
ded a full cost-of-living increase in Social Security benefits in
order to maintain the purchasing power of 32 million older Americans.
Rather than add to government bureaucracy a "Presidential commission
of experts" to re-study the complex problem, as candidate Reagan
suggests, the President has taken immediate action by requesting
legislation to maintain the fiscal integrity of the Social Security
Trust Fund. President Ford has proposed an increase in payroll taxes
of three tenths of one per cent for both employers and employees so
that future Social Security payments will not exceed revenues.
And, beyond merely strengthening the Social Security system, and fight-
ing inflation, President Ford has proposed coverage of catastrophic
illness--with a ceiling of $750 on medical expenditures.
ERRORS IN CANDIDATE REAGAN'S
SPEECH OF MARCH 31, 1976
REAGAN STATEMENT:
page 1, paragraph 3
"In this election season the White House in telling us
a solid economic recovery is taking place. It claims
a slight drop in unemployment. It says that prices
aren't going up as fast, but they are still going up,
and that the stock market has shown some gains. But,
in fact, things seem just about as they were back in
the 1972 election year. Remember, we were also
coming out of a recession then. Inflation has been
running at around 6%. Unemployment about 7%.
Remember, too, the upsurge and the optimism lasted
through the election year and into 1973. And then,
the roof fell in. Once again we had unemployment. Only
this time not 7%, more than 10. And inflation -- wasn't
6%, it was 12%. 11
RESPONSE:
The peak of unemployment -- 8.9% -- was reached in May, 1975.
Latest unemployment figures -- March, 1976 -- show the rate was
7.5%. The employment is now at an all time high with 86.7
million at work. This exceeds the pre-recession peak of
July, 1974 and is a 2.6 million gain since March '75.
Prices are not going up as fast. Inflation in 1974 was at an annual
rate of over 12 percent. Today it is running at an annual rate of
about 6 percent.
In 1972 we were further into recovery than we are today. But
Mr. Reagan's statistical facts concerning 1973-74 are incorrect.
The peak unemployment figure was reached in May, 1975 at
8.9%. It never reached 10% as he states.
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 2, paragraph 2
"Now, in this election year 1976, we're told we're
coming out of this recession. Just because inflation
and unemployment rates have fallen to what they were
at the worst of the previous recession. If history
repeats itself will we be talking recovery four years
from now merely because we've reduced inflation from
25% to 12%. 11
RESPONSE:
All of the figures -- retail sales, GNP, durable goods, housing,
personal income, etc. clearly show we are moving out of the
recession -- the Administration's statements are not based merely
on improved unemployment and cost-of-living statistics as Mr.
Reagan implies.
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 2, paragraph 3
"The fact is, we'll never build a lasting economic
recovery by going deeper into debt at a faster rate
than we ever have before. It took this nation 166
years -- until the middle of World War II -- to
finally accumulate a debt of $95 billion. It took
this administration just the last 12 months to add
$95 billion to the debt. And this administration
has run up almost one-fourth of our total national
debt in just these short nineteen months."
RESPONSE
The national debt reached $72 billion in 1942. The current
estimated deficit for FY 1976 is $76.9 billion. Gross federal
debt for FY 1976 is estimated at $634 billion. Thus the
administration's share of the national debt is 15.6%, not 25%.
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 2, paragraph 4
"Inflation is the cause of recession and unemployment.
And we're not going to have real prosperity or recovery
until we stop fighting the symptoms and start fighting
the disease. There's only one cause for inflation --
government spending more than government takes in.
The cure is a balanced budget. Ah, but they tell us,
80% of the budget is uncontrollable. It's fixed by laws
passed by Congress."
RESPONSE:
The President has offered specific plans for a balanced budget.
But a large part of the cause of the current recession is the
result of past fiscal policies, rapid increases in federal expendi-
tures. There is no quick remedy for problems c reated a decade
ago. A rapid return to a balanced budget, as Mr. Reagan calls
for, would provide fuel for inflation, but at the same time, it
would mean a long delay in recovery and much longer period of
high unemployment.
The budget for FY 1977 estimates that 77.1% of the budget is
uncontrollable.
REAGAN STATEMENT:
page three, last two sentences of top paragraph
"But laws passed by Congress can be repealed by
Congress. And, if Congress is unwilling to do this,
then isn't it time we elect a Congress that will?"
RESPONSE:
The open-ended or uncontrollable programs call for outlays of
$383.1 billion in FY 1977. $236.8 billion is allocated to payments
for individuals. Does Mr. Reagan want to repeal the following:
Social Security and Railroad Retirement -- $108.0 billion
Federal Employees Retirement Benefits -- $22.9 billion
Veterans Benefits -- $16.3 billion
Medicare and Medicaid -- $38.4 billion
Public Assistance Programs -- $26.0 billion
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 3, paragraph 2
"Soon after he took office, Mr. Ford promised he
would end inflation. Indeed, he declared war on
inflation. And, we all donned those WIN buttons to
"Whip Inflation Now.' Unfortunately, the war --
if it ever really started -- was soon over. Mr.
Ford, without WIN button, appeared on TV, and
promised he absolutely would not allow the Federal
deficit to exceed $60 billion (which incidentally was
$5 billion more than the biggest previous deficit
we'd ever had). Later he told us it might be as
much as $70 billion. Now we learn it's $80 billion
or more. "
RESPONSE:
The President did draw a line at a deficit of $60 billion on March 29,
1975 in a televised address. The largest single yearly deficit occur-
red in 1943 -- $54.8 billion. The difference between $54.8 billion
and $60 billion is, of course, $5.2 billion. The current estimated
deficit for FY 76 is not $80 billion or more, it is $76.9 billion.
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 3, paragraph 3
"Then came a White House proposal for a $28 billion
tax cut, to be matched by a $28 billion cut in the
proposed spending -- not in the present spending, but
in the proposed spending in the new budget. Well, my
question then and my question now is, if there was.
$28 billion in the new budget that could be cut, what
was it doing there in the first place?"
RESPONSE
The proposed $28 billion cut is a cut in the anticipated $56
billion year-to-year increase in Federal spending that would
take place unless strong measures are taken. The President
has proposed the reform measures needed to accomplish this
objective; cutting in half the growth rate of federal spending
and making it possible to give the American people further tax
cuts.
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 4, paragraph 1
"It would have been nice if they'd thought of some
arrangement like that for the rest of us. They could,
for example, correct a great unfairness that now
exists in our tax system. Today, when you get a
cost-of-living pay raise -- one that just keeps you
even with purchasing power -- it often moves you
up into a higher tax bracket. This means you pay
a higher percentage in tax but you reduce your pur-
chasing power. Last year, because of this inequity,
the government took in $7 billion in undeserved pro-
fit in the income tax alone, and this year they'll
do even better. Now isn't it time that Congress
looked after your welfare as well as its own?"
RESPONSE:
Inflation does indeed increase taxes. The President has recognized
this and has been successful in reducing the inflation rate by 50%.
He has also proposed curbing the rise in expenditures and matched
this with a comparable tax cut.
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 5, paragraph 3
"Ending inflation is the only long range and lasting
answer to the problem of unemployment. The Wash-
ington Establishment is not the answer. It's the
problem. Its tax policies, its harassing regulations,
its confiscation of investment capital to pay for its
deficits keeps business and industry from expanding
to meet your needs and to provide the jobs we all
need. "
RESPONSE:
The President's economic policies are anti-inflationary. He has
vetoed 46 bills and saved the taxpayers $13 billion. (Source: OMB)
Monetary expansion is now far more restrained than in 1972. Over
the last six months, the broadly defined money supply has grown
at an 8.6% annual rate. In the comparable September 1971-
March 1972 period, it grew at a 14.6% rate. It should be noted
that a 14.6% rate is well above the 10.5% upper limit of the
Federal Reserve's present target range.
Wholesale prices increased 12.5% from March 1974-March 1975,
while the price index went up only 5.5% between March 1975 and
March 1976.
Employment reached an all-time high of 86.5 million in February.
New orders for manufactured goods were up 2.4 percent in
February.
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 6, paragraph 2
"At the time we were only importing a small percentage
of our oil. Yet, the Arab boycott caused half a million
Americans to lose their jobs when plants closed down for
lack of fuel. Today, it's almost three years later and
"Project Independence" has become "Project Dependence. 11
Congress has adopted an energy bill so bad we were led
to believe Mr. Ford would veto it. Instead he signed it.
And, almost instantly, drilling rigs all over our land
started shutting down. Now, for the first time in our
history, we are importing more oil than we produce. How
many Americans will be laid off if there is another
boycott? The energy bill is a disaster that never should
have been signed. "
RESPONSE:
Candidate Reagan stated we were only importing a small percentage
of our oil when the Arab oil embargo occurred in 1974. In fact,
we were already importing 35% of our petroleum needs. The
amount of oil that we imported during 1975 was 6.0 mb/d, and
we produced 8. 4mb/d.
The Energy Policy and Conservation Act passed by the Congress
in December ended a year-long debate between the Congress
and the Administration on oil pricing policy and opened the way to
an orderly phasing out of controls on domestic oil over forty
months, thereby stimulating our own oil production. By removing
controls, this bill should give industry sufficient incentive over
a period of time to explore, develop and produce new fields in
the outer continental shelf, Alaska, and potential new reserves
in the lower forty-eight states. Removal of these controls at
the end of forty months should increase domestic production by
more than one million barrels per day by 1985 and reduce imports
by about three million barrels per day.
The average number of active rotary drilling rigs in March 1976
was approximately 270 less than in December 1975 which was the
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
highest level since 1962. Except for the two years after the
embargo, this First Quarter downturn reflects a normal seasonal
trend. Further, preliminary estimates indicate that 1976 invest-
ments by the petroleum industry in production and development
activities will exceed those of 1975.
REAGAN STATEMENT: (continued)
Page 6, paragraph 2
RESPONSE: (continued)
More importantly, this bill enables the United States to meet
a substantial portion of the mid-term goals for energy independence
set forth over a year ago. Incorporated in this are authorities
for a strategic storage system, conversion of oil and gas-fired
utility and industrial plants to coal, energy efficiency labeling,
emergency authorities for use in the event of another embargo,
and the authority we need to fulfill our international agreements
with other oil consuming nations. These provisions will directly
reduce the nation's dependency on foreign oil by almost two
million barrels per day by 1985. In addition, the strategic
storage system and the stand-by authorities will enable the United
States to withstand a future embargo of about four million barrels
per day.
Oil rigs didn't begin shutting down. There were 1660 drilling
rigs operating in 1975, the highest number in a decade. Through
mid-March 1976, there were as many rigs operating as were
operating in the comparable period during '75.
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 7, paragraph 2
"When I became Governor, I inherited a state govern-
ment that was in almost the same situation as New
York City. The state payroll had been growing for
a dozen years at a rate of from 5 to 7,000 new
employees each year. State government was spend-
ing from a million to a million and a half dollars
more each day than it was taking in. The State's
great water project was unfinished and underfunded
by a half a billion dollars. My predecessor had
spent the entire year's budget for Medicaid in the
first six months of the fiscal year. And, we learned
that the teachers' retirement fund was unfunded. A
four billion dollar liability hanging over every prop-
erty owner in the state. I didn't know whether I'd
been elected Governor or appointed receiver. "
RESPONSE:
The bonded indebtedness of California at $4 billion does not compare
to New York City's current problem.
The State payroll increased from 113, 779 in 1967 to 127, 929 in 1973.
The state budget more than doubled under Ronald Reagan. From
$4.6 billion in 1967 to $10.2 billion in 1973.
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 7, paragraph 3
Page 9, paragraph 2
"California was faced with insolvency and on the verge
of bankruptcy. We had to increase taxes. Well,
this came very hard for me because I felt taxes
were already too great a burden. I told the people
the increase, in my mind, was temporary and that,
as soon as we could, we'd return their money to
them,
"This was government-by-the-people proving that it
works when the people work at it. When we ended
our eight years, we turned over to the incoming
administration a balanced budget. A $500 million
surplus. And, virtually the same number of employees
we'd started with eight years before. Even though the
increase in population had given some departments a
two-thirds increase in work load."
RESPONSE:
The number of state employees increased from 113, 779 in 1967
to 127, 929 in 1975. Under Reagan, there were three huge tax
increases totalling more than $2 billion.
In 1967, there was an increase of $967 million, the largest state
tax hike in the nation's history. Of this, $280 million went for
one-time deficit payment and state property tax relief. In 1971,
the increase was $488 million with $150 million for property tax
relief. In 1972, an increase of $682 million with $650 million for
property tax relief. Much of this property tax relief was short
term, but the overall tax increases were permanent.
State personal income tax revenues went from $500 million to
$2.5 billion, a 500% increase. Taxable bracket levies were in-
creased from 7% to 11%. The size of the brackets was reduced
so that taxpayers reached the highest bracket morequickly and
Page 7, paragraph 3 and Page 9, paragraph 2 (continued)
personal exemptions were reduced. Finally, after he adamantly
denied that he would ever do so, the Governor agreed to a system
of withholding state income taxes.
Bank and corporation taxes went up 100%. The state sales tax
rose from 4% to 6%. The tax on cigarettes went up 7 cents a
pack and the liquor tax rose 50 cents per gallon. Inheritance
tax rates were increased and collections more than doubled.
Under Reagan, the average tax rate for each $100 of assessed
valuation rose from $8.84 to $11.15. Under predecessor Pat
Brown, the increase was much less in dollars and percentage --
from $6.96 to $8.84, and in the six years of Republican Knight's
administration, it was still less -- from $5.94 to $6.96. One
reason for the big increase under Reagan -- from $3.7 billion to
$8.3 billion -- is that the state paid a steadily smaller per-
centage of the school costs -- one of the biggest reasons for
local property taxes.
Despite periodic efforts to provide relief, there has been a sub-
stantial increase in the burden carried by most property owners.
Inflation and high assessments have helped wipe out any savings.
Only $855 million of the record $10.2 billion budget in Reagan's
final year was for tax relief for homeowners and renters.
FORD & LIBRARY 03RALD
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 10, paragraph 4
"And in less than three years we reduced the rolls by
more than 300,000 people. Saved the taxpayers $2
billion.'
11
RESPONSE:
Substitute for 300,000 and $2 billion the following:
1. Drop by 20,000 persons in rolls due to correction in
accounting procedures in largest county, Los Angeles.
2. Migratory rate of unemployed into California declined
from 233,000 in 1967 to 44,000 in 1971.
3. 110,000 decline in rolls attributed to Reagan even
though his welfare program had not gone into effect
when decline occurred.
4. Rolls for welfare families increased in 8 years of
Reagan's Governorship from 729,357 to 1,384,400
and their state expenditures went from $408 million
to $995 million.
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 11, top sentence
"And, increased the grants to the truly deserving needy
by an average of 43%. We also carried out a successful
experiment which I believe is an answer to much of the
welfare problem in the nation. We put able-bodied welfare
recipients to work at useful community projects in return
for their welfare grants."
RESPONSE:
The average payment of the AFDC in 1970 was $193.00 per family;
in 1974, it was $239.00. The average payment for Old Age
Assistance in 1970 was $117.00 per person; in 1974, the average
payment was $129.00 per person.
The program never touched more than 6/10th of 1% of welfare
recipients. Also, the program was designed to have 59,000
participants in the first year in 35 counties, but it managed
only 1, 100 participants in 10 counties in mostly rural farm
areas.
In May 1974 the California Auditor General found that 262
participants found regular work as a result of the program at a
cost of $1.5 million. This amounts to $6,000 in overhead costs
plus regular welfare costs for each person placed in regular
employment.
In 1974, because the program was a complete failure, it was
repealed by the Legislature.
REAGAN STATEMENT:
page 12, paragraph 4
"Independent business people, shopkeepers and farmers file
billions of reports every year required of them by Washington.
It amounts to some 10 billion pieces of paper each year and
it adds $50 billion a year to the cost of doing business.
Washington has been loud in its promise to do something
about this blizzard of paperwork. And they made good.
Last year they increased it by 20%. "
RESPONSE:
The figures 10 billion and 50 billion are guestimates. No one has
counted the number of pages in all of these reports. Moreoever,
if it is liberally estimated that it costs $100 an hour to work on these
forms, the total cost to business would be $4.3 billion.
Between December, 1974 and December, 1975, the number of reports
from the Executive branch agencies excluding IRS, banking and
regulatory agencies declined by 5%. However, the number of hours
of burden associated with filling out the reports required by the
Congress, i.e., the Real Estate Settlements Act which requires
information to be filed when a house is sold added 4 million manhours
of reporting burden last year. In the absence of that report the
reporting burden would have declined. There are other reports
mandated by Congress which have added to this burden.
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 13, paragraph 2
"We gave just enough support to one side in Angola to
encourage it to fight and die but too little to give it a
chance of winning."
RESPONSE:
The U.S. objective in supporting the FNLA/UNITA forces in
Angola was to assist them, and through them all of black Africa,
to defend against a minority faction supported by Soviet arms and
Cuban intervention. Despite massive Soviet aid and the presence
of Cuban troops there was a good chance for a satisfactory outcome
in Angola until December 19 when Congress adopted the Tunney
Amendment cutting off further U.S. aid to the FNLA and UNITA.
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 13, paragraph 3
"In Asia our new relationship with mainland China can
have practical benefits with both sides. But that doesn't
mean it should include yielding to demands by them as
the Administration has, to reduce our military presence
on Taiwan where we have a long-time friend and ally,
the Republic of China. "
RESPONSE:
We have not reduced our forces on Taiwan as a result of
Peking's demands. Instead, our reductions stem from our own
assessment of U.S. political and security interests. We have
drawn our forces down because the Vietnam conflict has ended
and because the lessening of tension in the area brought about
by our new relationship with the People's Republic of China
has made it possible.
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 13, paragraph 3
"Mr. Ford's new Ambassador to the United Nations
attacks our long time ally Israel. 11
RESPONSE:
Governor Scranton not only did not attack Israel, his veto blocked
an unbalanced Security Council Resolution critical of Israel - - a
resolution that every other member of the Security Council voted
for. In his March 23 speech in the United Nations Security Council
Governor Scranton was simply reiterating long-standing U.S.
policy -- a policy articulated by every Administration since 1967 --
on Israel's obligations as an occupying power under international
law with regard to the territories under its occupation.
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 13-14, paragraph 3
"And it is also revealed now that we seek to establish
friendly relations with Hanoi. To make it more palatable,
we are told this might help us learn the fate of the men
still listed as Missing in Action. "
RESPONSE:
The Congress, reflecting the desire of the American people and
the Administration for an accounting of our Missing in Action and
the return of the bodies of dead servicemen stil held by Hanoi
has urged the Administration to make a positive gesture toward
Hanoi in an effort to obtain such information. The Administration,
in keeping with this Congressional mandate, has offered to discuss
with Hanoi the significant outstanding issues between us. We have
not said we 'seek to establish friendly relations with Hanoi. I Such
an assertion is totally false.
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 14, paragraph 2
"In the last few days, Mr. Ford and Dr. Kissinger have
taken us from hinting at invasion of Cuba to laughing it
off as a ridiculous idea. Except, that it was their
ridiculous idea. No one else suggested it. Once again --
what is their policy? During this last year, they carried
on a campaign to befriend Castro. They persuaded the
Organization of American States to lift its trade embargo,
lifted some U.S. trade restrictions, they engaged in
culture exchanges. And then on the eve of the Florida
primary election, Mr. Ford went to Florida, called
Castro an outlaw and said he'd never recognize him.
But he hasn't asked our Latin American neighbors to reimpose
a single sanction, nor has he taken any action himself.
Meanwhile, Castro continues to export revolution to
Puerto Rico, to Angola, and who knows where else?
RESPONSE:
We did not persuade the OAS to lift the sanctions against Cuba.
At Quito in the fall of 1974 we did not support a motion in the
OAS to do so. At San Jose last summer the U.S. voted in favor
of an OAS resolution which left to each country freedom of action
with regard to the sanctions. We did so because a majority of
the OAS members had already unilaterally lifted their sanctions
against Cuba, and because the resolution was supported by a
majority of the organization members. Since that resolution
passed, no additional Latin American country has established
relations with Cuba.
The U.S. did not lift its own sanctions against Cuba, did not
enter into any agreements with Cuba, and did not trade with Cuba.
We did not engage in cultural exchanges. We validated some
passports for U.S. Congressmen and their staffs, for some
scholars and for some religious leaders to visit Cuba. We issued
a few select visas to Cubans to visit the U.S.. These minimal
steps were taken to test whether there was a mutual interest in
ending the hostile nature of our relations. This policy was
consistent with the traditional American interest in supporting
the free flow of ideas and people. We have, since the Cuban
adventure in Angola, concluded that the Cubans are not interested
in changing their ways. We have resumed our highly restrictive
policies toward Cuban travel. With regard to Cuban efforts to
interfere in Puerto Rican affairs, we have made it emphatically clear
REAGAN STATEMENT: (continued)
Page 14, paragraph 2
RESPONSE: (continued)
in the UN and bilaterally to the Cubans and other nations that
the U.S. will not tolerate any interference in its internal affairs.
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 15, paragraph 3
"The Canal Zone is not a colonial possession. It is not
a long-term lease. It is sovereign U.S. territory every
bit the same as Alaska and all the states that were carved
from the Louisiana Purchase. We should end those
negotiations (on the Panama Canal) and tell the General:
We bought it, we paid for it, we built it and we intend
to keep it."
RESPONSE:
Negotiations between the United States and Panama on the Canal
have been pursued by three successive American Presidents.
The purpose of these negotiations is to protect our national
security, not diminish it.
Finally, Governor Reagan's view that the Canal Zone is "sovereign
U. S. territory every bit the same as Alaska and all the states
that were carved from the Louisiana Purchase" is incorrect.
Legal Scholars have been clear on this for three-quarters of a
century. Unlike children born in the United States, for example,
children born in the Canal Zone are not automatically citizens
of the United States.
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 16, paragraph 1
"The Soviet Army outnumbers ours more than two-to-one
and in reserves four-to-one. They out-spend us on
weapons by 50%. Their Navy outnumbers ours in surface
ships and submarines two-to-one. We are outgunned in
artillery three-to-one and their tanks outnumber ours
four-to-one. Their strategic nuclear missiles are larger,
more powerful and more numerous than ours. The
evidence mounts that we are Number Two in a world
where it is dangerous, if not fatal, to be second best. "
RESPONSE:
Our nation is not "in danger, " but it is damaging to the interests
of this country when a politician declare to our adversaries and
our friends abroad -- falsely -- that we are in second place.
Such statements are both irresponsible and dangerous in that
they alarm our people and confuse our allies.
It is meaningless to say the Soviet Army may now be twice the
size of the U.S. Army when about half of the Soviet Army is
deployed on the Chinese border. More meaningful is the Soviet
Army strength in Europe. Such rhetoric based on simplistic
factural comparisons indicate a disturbingly shallow grasp of what
true balance is all about.
Mr. Reagan conveniently neglects to point out that our strategic
forces are superior to Soviet forces. Our missiles are far
more accurate and survivable. We have over twice as many
missile warheads and, after all, it is the warheads which actually
reach the target. Our lead in this area has been increasing over
the past several years. Mr. Reagan likewise ignores our vast
superiority in strategic bombers.
Addressing the implication that the President has tolerated a weak
defense policy, President Ford is the one who reversed the trend
of shrinking defense budgets. His last two defense budgets are
the highest peacetime budgets in the nation's history. Mr. Reagan
might better speak to the Democratic Congress about its $32
billion cuts in defense over the past six years.
Examining in more detail the question of America's strength first,
we must dispose of the numbers game. If national defense were a
REAGAN STATEMENT: (continued)
Page 16, paragraph 1
RESPONSE: (continued)
matter of bookkeeping we could point out that:
- -Our missile warheads have tripled;
- --We lead the Soviet Union by more than two-to-one;
- We have over a three-to-one lead in strategic
bombers;
- - Our missiles are twice as accurate as the Soviet
Union's.
But it is a disservice to the American people to confuse them
with any such numbers comparison. Two important facts are
ignored by Governor Reagan.
First, the United States stands at the head of a great Alliance
system in Europe, and we are firmly tied to the strongest
economic power in Asia. We have friendly relations with most
of the nations of the world. These relations are the product
of our longtime bipartisan foreign policy and the valuable
accomplishments of all of our previous Administrations since
President Truman.
Second, we cannot ignore that whatever might be the balance
of power today, it is not fixed. In our military programs and
our defense budgets, we are indeed looking to the future to
guarantee that this nation will never be in danger.
In our defense programs many new programs insure our position
of strength:
- We are proceeding with the development and production
of the world's most modern strategic bomber, the B-1.
- We are proceeding with the development and production
of the world's most modern and lethal missle launching
submarine, the Trident.
- We are developing a new large ICBM.
REAGAN STATEMENT: (continued)
Page 16, paragraph 1
RESPONSE: (continued)
-- We are producing three new fighters.
-- We are planning the production of 15 new fighting ships.
It is true a figure that can be cited to show that the Soviets have
more ships, but it is a distortion to equate Soviet destroyers with
our modern nuclear powered aircraft carriers.
The money we have put into defense over the past several years
has been inadequate. However, the responsibility for slashing
$32 billion dollars must rest with the Congress, not the
Administration.
Fortunately, under the prodding of President Ford, the Congress
has begun to awaken to the risks of constantly reducing our
defense spending. If the budget he proposed this year passes,
the trend will have been reversed.
In fact we are number one. Unless we falter our give way to
panic we will remain number one.
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 16, paragraph 2
"Why did the President travel halfway 'round the world
to sign the Helsinki Pact, putting our stamp of approval
on Russia's enslavement of the captive nations?
We gave away the freedom of millions of people--
freedom that was not ours to give."
RESPONSE:
The President did not go to Helsinki to put the stamp of approval
on Soviet domination of Eastern Europe. On the contrary, he
went to Helsinki along with the Chiefs of State or heads of
government of all our Western allies and, among others, a Papal
Representative, to sign a documents which contains Soviet commitments -
to greater respect for human rights, self-determination of peoples,
and expanded exchanges and communication throughout Europe.
"Basket three" of the Act calls for a freer flow of people and
ideas among all the European nations.
The Helsinki Act, for the first time, specifically provides for the
possibility of peaceful change of borders when that would correspond
to the wishes of the peoples concerned. With regard to the particular
case of the Baltic States, President Ford stated clearly on July 25
that "the United States has never recognized the Soviet incorporation
of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia and is not doing so now. Our
official policy of non-recognition is not affected by the results of
the European Security Conference." In fact, the Helsinki document
itself states that no occupation or acquisition of territory by force
will be recognized as legal.
REAGAN STATEMENT
Page 16, paragraph 3
"Now we must ask if someone is giving away our own
freedom. Dr. Kissinger is quoted as saying that he
thinks of the U.S. as Athens and the Soviet Union as
Sparta. 1 The day of the U.S. is past and today is the
day of the Soviet Union. 1 And he added, My job as
Secretary of State is to negotiate the most acceptable
second-best position available. 1 11
RESPONSE
Governor Reagan's so-called quotes from Secretary Kissinger are
a total and irresponsible fabrication. He has never said what the
Governor attributes to him or anything like it. In fact, at a
March 23, 1976 press conference in Dallas, Secretary Kissinger
said: "I do not believe that the United States will be defeated.
I do not believe that the United States is on the decline. I do
not believe that the United States must get the best deal it can.
"I believe that the United States is essential to preserve the
security of the free world and for any progress in the world that
exists.
"In a period of great national difficulty, of the Viet-Nam war,
of Watergate, of endless investigations, we have tried to preserve
the role of the United States as that major actor. And I believe
that to explain to the American people that the policy is complex,
that our involvement is permanent, and that our problems are
nevertheless soluble, is a sign of optimism and of confidence in
the American people rather than the opposite."
REAGAN STATEMENT
Page 17, paragraph 2
"Now we learn that another high official of the State
Department, Helmut Sonnenfeldt, whom Dr. Kissinger
refers to as his "Kissinger", has expressed the belief
that, in effect, the captive nations should give us any
claim of national sovereignty and simply become a part
of the Soviet Union. He says, 'Their desire to break out
of the Soviet straightjacket' threatens us with World War III.
In other words, slaves should accept their fate."
RESPONSE:
The statement is wholly inaccurate, and a gross distortion of fact,
to ascribe such views to Mr. Sonnenfeldt or to this Admistration.
Neither he nor anyone else in the Administration has expressed any
such belief. The Administration view on this issue was expressed
by Secretary Kissinger before the House International Relations
Committee on March 29 as follows:
"As far as the U.S. in concerned, we do not accept a
sphere of influence of any country, anywhere, and
emphatically we reject a Soviet sphere of influence in
Eastern Europe.
"Two Presidents have visited in Eastern Europe; there
have been two visits to Poland and Romania and Yugoslavia,
by Presidents. I have made repeated visits to Eastern Europe,
on every trip to symbolize and to make clear to these countries
that we are interested in working with them and that we do
not accept or act upon the exclusive dominance of any one
country in that area.
"At the same time, we do not want to give encouragement
to an uprising that might lead to enormous suffering. But in
terms of the basic position of the United States, we do not
accept the dominance of any one country anywhere.
"Yugoslavia was mentioned, for example. We would emphatically
consider it a very grave matter if outside forces were to attempt
to intervene in the domestic affairs of Yugoslavia. We welcome
Eastern European countries developing more in accordance with
their national traditions, and we will cooperate with them. This
is the policy of the United States, and there is no Sonnenfeldt
doctrine. 11
ERRORS IN CANDIDATE REAGAN'S
SPEECH OF MARCH 31, 1976
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 1, paragraph 3
"In this election season the White House is telling
us a solid economic recovery is taking place. It
claims a slight drop in unemployment. It says that
prices aren't going up as fast, but they are still
going up, and that the stock market has shown some
gains. But, in fact, things seem just about as they
were back in the 1972 election year. Remember, we
were also coming out of a recession then. Inflation
has been running at around 6%. Unemployment about
7. Remember, too, the upsurge and the optimism
lasted through the election year and into 1973. And
then, the roof fell in. Once again we had unemploy-
ment. Only this time not 7%, more than 10. And
inflation -- wasn't 6%, it was 12%."
RESPONSE:
The peak of unemployment -- $8.9% -- was reached in May, 1975.
Latest unemployment figures -- March, 1976 -- show the rate was
7.5%. The employment is now at an all time high with 86.7 million
at work. This exceeds the pre-recession peak of July, 1974 and
is a 2.6 million gain since March '75.
Prices are not going up as fast. Inflation in 1974 was at an annual
rate of 12.2%. Today it is at 6.3%.
In 1972 we were further into recovery than we are today. But
Mr. Reagan's statistical facts concerning 1973-74 are incorrect.
The peak unemployment figure was reached in May 1975 at 8.9%.
It never reached 10% as he states.
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
2
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 2, paragraph 2
"Now, in this election year 1976, we're told we're
coming out of this recession. Just because inflation
and unemployment rates have fallen to what they were
at the worst of the previous recession. If history
repeats itself will we be talking recovery four years
from now merely because we've reduced inflation from
25% to 12%. "
RESPONSE:
All of the figures -- retail sales, GNP, durable goods, housing,
personal income, etc. clearly show we are moving out of the
recession - - the Administration's statements are not based merely
on improved unemployment and cost-of-living statistics as Mr.
Reagan implies.
3
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 2, paragraph 3
"The fact is, we'll never build a lasting economic
recovery by going deeper into debt at a faster rate
than we ever have before. It took this nation 166
years -- until the middle of World War II -- to
finally accumulate a debt of $95 billion. It took
this administration just the last 12 months to add
$95 billion to the debt. And this administration
has run up almost one-fourth of our total national
debt in just these short nineteen months."
RESPONSE:
The national debt reached $72 billion in 1942. The current estimated
deficit for FY 1976 is $76. 19 billion. Gross federal debt for FY
1976 is estimated at $634 billion. Thus the administration's share
of the national debt is 15.6%, not 25%.
% debt was 1942 compared to Fl 176
GNP
in
4
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 2, paragraph 4
"Inflation is the cause of recession and unemployment.
And we're not going to have real prosperity or recovery
until we stop fighting the symptoms and start fighting
the disease. There's only one cause for inflation
government spending more than government takes in.
The cure is a balanced budget. Ah, but they tell us,
80% of the budget is uncontrollable. It's fixed by laws
passed by Congress. 11
RESPONSE:
The President has offered specific plans for a balanced budget.
But a large part of the cause of the current recession is the
result of past fiscal policies, rapid increases in federal expendi-
tures. There is no quick remedy for problems created a decade
ago. A rapid return to a balanced budget, as Mr. Reagan calls
for, would provide fuel for inflation, but at the same time, it
would mean a long delay in recovery and much longer period of
high unemployment.
The budget for FY 1977 estimates that 77.1% of the
uncontrollable.
budget and is Pres. has to join prob. challenged Kim
1.
this
5
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 3, last two sentences of top paragraph
"But laws passed by Congress can be repealed by
Congress. And, if Congress is unwilling to do this,
then isn't it time we elect a Congress that will?"
RESPONSE:
The open-ended or uncontrollable programs call for outlays of
$383. 1 billion in FY 1977 (plus the third quarter). $236.8 billion
is allocated to payments for individuals. Does Mr. Reagan want
to repeal the following:
Social Security and Railroad Retirement -- $108.0 billion
Federal Employees Retirement Benefits - - $22.9 billion
Veterans Benefits - - $16.3 billion
Medicare and Medicaid -- $38.4 billion
Public Assistance Programs -- $26.0 billion
6
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 3, paragraph 2
"Soon after he took office, Mr. Ford promised he
would end inflation. Indeed, he declared war on
inflation. And, we all donned those WIN buttons to
"Whip Inflation Now. " Unfortunately, the war --
if it ever really started -- was soon over. Mr.
Ford, without WIN button, appeared on TV, and
promised he absolutely would not allow the Federal
deficit to exceed $60 billion (which incidentally was
$5 billion more than the biggest previous deficit
we'd ever had). Later he told us it might be as
much as $70 billion. Now we learn it's $80 billion
or more. "
RESPONSE:
2xth
The President did draw a line at a deficit of $60 billion on March 29,
1975 in a televised address. The largest single yearly deficit occur-
red in 1943 -- $54.8 billion. The difference between $54.8 billion
and $60 billion is, of course, $5.2 billion. The current estimated
deficit for FY 76 is not $80 billion or more, it is $76.9 billion.
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 3, paragraph 3
"Then came a White House proposal for a $28 billion
tax cut, to be matched by a $28 billion cut in the pro-
posed spending -- not in the present spending, but in
the proposed spending in the new budget. Well, my
question then and my question now is, If there was
$28 billion in the new budget that could be cut, what
was it doing there in the first place?"
RESPONSE:
The proposed $28 billion cut was not a cut in the budget as sug-
gested in the next to last line, it was a $28 billion cut in Federal
expenditures in programs already existing. The President's pro-
posal was an effort to prevent further increases in spending.
8
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 4, paragraph 1
"It would have been nice if they'd thought of some
arrangement like that for the rest of us. They could,
for example, correct a great unfairness that now
exists in our tax system. Today, when you get a
cost-of-living pay raise -- one that just keeps you
even with purchasing power -- it often moves you
up into a higher tax bracket. This means you pay
a higher percentage in tax but you reduce your pur-
chasing power. Last year, because of this inequity,
the government took in $7 billion in undeserved pro-
fit in the income tax alone, and this year they'll
do even better. Now isn't it time that Congress
looked after your welfare as well as its own?"
RESPONSE:
Inflation does indeed increase taxes. The President has recognized
this and has been successful in reducing the inflation rate by 50%.
He has also proposed curbing the rise in expenditures and matched
this with a comparable tax cut.
-Whetalmit 2 taxents?
9
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 5, paragraph 3
"Ending inflation is the only long range and lasting
answer to the problem of unemployment. The Wash-
ington Establishment is not the answer. It's the
problem. Its tax policies, its harassing regulations,
its confiscation of investment capital to pay for its
deficits keeps business and industry from expanding
to meet your needs and to provide the jobs we all
need. "
RESPONSE:
The President's economic policies are anti-inflationary. He has
vetoed 46 bills and saved the taxpayers $13 billion.
Monetary expansion is now far more restrained than in 1972. Over
the last six months, the broadly defined money supply has grown
at an 8.6% annual rate. In the comparable September 1971-
March 1972 period, it grew at a 14.6% rate. It should be noted
that a 14.6% rate is well above the 10.5% upper limit of the
Federal Reserve's present target range.
Wholesale prices increased 12.5% from March 1974-March 1975,
while the price index went up only 5.5% between March 1975 and
March
figure
March 1976.
Employment reached an all-time high of 86.5 million in February.
New orders for manufactured goods were up 2.4 percent in
February
March figure arie?
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 6, paragraph 2
"At the time we were only importing a small percentage of our
oil. Yet, the Arab boycott caused half a million Americans to
lose their jobs when plants closed down for lack of fuel. Today,
it's almost three years later and "Project Independence" has
become "Project Dependence. 11 Congress has adopted an energy
bill so bad we were led to believe Mr. Ford would veto it.
Instead he signed it. And, almost instantly, drilling rigs all
over our land started shutting down. Now, for the first time in
our history, we are importing more oil than we produce. How
many Americans will be laid off if there is another boycott?
The energy bill is a disaster that never should have been signed. "
RESPONSE:
Candidate Reagan stated we were only importing a small percentage of
our oil actually 35%. When he stated it's almost three years in
fact it is only two years March, 1974 to the present. The amount of
oil that we imported during 1975 was 6.0 mb/d, and we produced 8.4 mb/d.
The Energy Policy and Conservation Act passed by the Congress in
December ended a year-long debate between the Congress and the
Administration on oil pricing policy and opened the way to an orderly
phasing out of controls on domestic oil over forty months, thereby
stimulating our own oil production. By removing controls, this legis-
lation should give industry sufficient incentive over a period of time to
explore, develop and produce new fields in the outer continental shelf,
Alaska, and potential new reserves in the lower forty-eight states.
Removal of these controls at the end of forty months should increase
domestic production by more than one million barrels per day by 1985
and reduce imports by about three million barrels per day.
More importantly, this bill enables the United States to meet a substantial
portion of the mid-term goals for energy independence set forth over a
year ago. Incorporated in this are authorities for a strategic storage
system, conversion of oil and gas-fired utility and industrial plants to
coal, energy efficiency labeling, emergency authorities for use in the
event of another embargo, and the authority we need to fulfill our inter-
national agreements with other oil consuming nations. These provisions
will directly reduce the nation's dependency on foreign oil by almost two
million barrels per day by 1985. The strategic storage system and the
stand-by authority will enable the United States to withstand a future
embargo of about four million barrels per day.
=
Oil rigs didn't begin shutting down. There were 1660 drilling rigs
operating in 1975, the highest number in a decade. Through mid-March
1976, there were as many rigs operating as were operating in the com-
parable period during '75.
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 7, paragraph 2
"When I became Governor, I inherited a state govern-
ment that was in almost the same situation as New
York City. The state payroll had been growing for
a dozen years at a rate of from 5 to 7,000 new
employees each year. State government was spend-
ing from a million to a million and a half dollars
more each day than it was taking in. The State's
great water project was unfinished and underfunded
by a half a billion dollars. My predecessor had
spent the entire year's budget for Medicaid in the
first six months of the fiscal year. And, we learned
that the teachers' retirement fund was unfunded. A
four billion dollar liability hanging over every prop-
erty owner in the state. I didn't know whether I'd
been elected Governor or appointed receiver."
RESPONSE:
The bonded indebtedness of California at $4 billion does not compare
to New York City's current problem.
The State payroll increased from 113,779 in 1967 to 127, 929 in 1973.
The state budget more than doubled under Ronald Reagan. From
$4.6 billion in 1967 to $10.2 billion in 1973.
3
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 7, paragraph 3
Page 9, paragraph 2
"California was faced with insolvency and on the verge
of bankruptcy. We had to increase taxes. Well,
this came very hard for me because I felt taxes
were already too great a burden. I told the people
the increase, in my mind, was temporary and that,
as soon as we could, we'd return their money to
them.
"This was government-by-the-people proving that it
works when the people work at it. When we ended
our eight years, we turned over to the incoming
administration a balanced budget. A $500 million
surplus. And, virtually the same number of employees
we'd started with eight years before. Even though the
increase in population had given some departments a
two-thirds increase in work load."
RESPONSE:
PK
The number of state employees increased from 113, 779 in 1967
to 127, 929 in 1975. Under Reagan, there were three huge tax
increases totalling more than $2 billion.
In 1967, there was an increase of $967 million, the largest state
tax hike in the nation's history. Of this, $280 million went for
one-time deficit payment and state property tax relief. In 1971,
the increase was $488 million with $150 million for property tax
relief. In 1972, an increase of $682 million with $650 million for
property tax relief. Much of this property tax relief was short
term, but the overall tax increases were permanent.
State personal income tax revenues went from $500 million to
$2.5 billion, a 500% increase. Taxable bracket levies were in-
creased from 7% to 11%. The size of the brackets was reduced
so that taxpayers reached the highest bracket morequickly and
Page 7, paragraph 3 and Page 9, paragraph 2 (continued)
Reagon
personal exemptions were reduced. Finally, after he adamantly
denied that he would ever do so, the Governor agreed to a system
of withholding state income taxes.
Bank and corporation taxes went up 100%. The state sales tax
rose from 4% to 6%. The tax on cigarettes went up 7 cents a
pack and the liquor tax rose 50 cents per gallon. Inheritance
tax rates were increased and collections more than doubled.
Under Reagan, the average tax rate for each $100 of assessed
valuation rose from $8.84 to $11.15. Under predecessor Pat
Brown, the increase was much less in dollars and percentage --
from $6.96 to $8.84, and in the six years of Republican Knight's
administration, it was still less -- from $5.94 to $6.96. One
reason for the big increase under Reagan -- from $3.7 billion to
$8.3 billion -- is that the state paid a steadily smaller per-
centage of the school costs -- one of the biggest reasons for
local property taxes.
Despite periodic efforts to provide relief, there has been a sub-
stantial increase in the burden carried by most property owners.
Inflation and high assessments have helped wipe out any savings.
Only $855 million of the record $10.2 billion budget in Reagan's
final year was for tax relief for homeowners and renters.
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 10, paragraph 4
"And in less than three years we reduced the rolls by more
than 300, 000 people. Saved the taxpayer S $2 billion. "
RESPONSE:
Substitute for 300, 000 and $2 billion the following:
recepients
OK
PK 1. Drop by 20,000 persons in rolls due to correction in
accounting procedures in largest county, Los Angeles.
persons
OK pk 2. Migratory rate of unemployed into California declined
from 233, 000 in 1967 to 44, 000 in 1971.
The
person
claimed by candidate
pk 3. 110, 000 decline in rolls attr ibuted to Reagan even though
of
his welfare program had not gone into effect when decline actually
occurred.
PK
4. Rolls for welfare families increased in 8 years of
or
Reagan's Governorship from 729, 357 to 1, 384, 400
and the cost went from $32. 3 million to $104. 4 million.
FORD & LIBRAR GERALD
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 11, top sentence
"And, increased the grants to the truly deserving needy by an
average of 43%. We also carried out a successful experiment
which I believe is an answer to much of the welfare problem in
the nation. We put able-bodied welfare recipients to work at
useful community projects in return for their welfare grants."
RESPONSE:
The program never touched more than 6/10th of 1% of welfare recipients.
PK
Also, the program was designed to have 59,000 participants in 1st year
in 35 counties, but it managed only 1, 100 participants in 10 counties in
mostly rural farm areas.
17
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 12, paragraph 4
"Independent business people, shopkeepers and farmers file
billions of reports every year required of them by Washington.
It amounts to some 10 billion pieces of paper each year and
it adds $50 billion a year to the cost of doing business.
Washington has been loud in its promise to do something
about this blizzard of paperwork. And they made good. Last
year they increased it by 20%. 11
RESPONSE:
The figures 10 billion and 50 billion are guestimates. No one has
counted the number of pages in all of these reports. Moreover, if it
is liberally estimated that it costs $100 an hour to work on these forms,
the total cost to business would be $4. 3 billion.
Between December, 1974 and December, 1975, the number of reports
from the Executive branch agencies excluding IRS, banking and
regulatory agencies declined by 5%. However, the number of hours
of burden associated with filling out the reports increased by 8%. One
reason for that increase is reports required by the Congress ( i. e.,
the Real Estate Settlements Act which requires information to be filed
when house was sold added 4 million manhours of reporting burden last
year. In the absence of that report, the reporting burden would have
declined. There are other reports mandated by Congress which have
added to this burden.
Dr. Duncan can see no reason for the increase of 20% that candidate
Reagan was talking about. It is also virtually impossible to estimate
cost to business in completing the forms.
12
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 13, paragraph 2
"We gave just enough support to one side in Angola to
encourage it to fight and die but too little to give it a
chance of winning. 11
RESPONSE:
The U.S. objective in supporting the FNLA/UNITA forces in
Angola was to assist them, and through them all of black Africa,
to defend against Soviet and Cuban intervention. Despite massive
Soviet aid and the presence of Cuban troops, we were on the road
to success in Angola until December 19, when Congress adopted
the Tunney Amendment cutting off further U.S. aid to the FNLA
and UNITA.
B)
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 13, paragraph 3
"In Asia our new relationship with mainland China can
have practical benefits with both sides. But that doesn't
mean it should include yielding to demands by them as
the Administration has, to reduce our military presence
on Taiwan where we have a long-time friend and ally,
the Republic of China."
RESPONSE:
We have not reduced our forces on Taiwan as a result of
Peking's demands. Instead, our reductions stem from our own
assessment of U.S. political and security interests. We have
drawn our forces down because the Vietnam conflict has ended
and because the lessening of tension in the area brought about
by our new relationship with the People's Republic of China
has made it possible.
20
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 13, paragraph 3
"Mr. Ford's new Ambassador to the United Nations
attacks our long time ally Israel. 11
RESPONSE:
U.N. Ambassadrer William
Governor Scranton not only did not attack Israel, his veto blocked
an unbalanced Security Council Resolution critical of Israel -- a
resolution that every other member of the Security Council voted
for. In his March 23 speech in the United Nations Security Council,
Ambassador
Governor Scranton was simply reiterating long-standing U.S.
policy -- a policy articulated by every Administration since 1967 - -
on Israel's obligations as an occupying power under international
law with regard to the territories under its occupation.
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 13-14, paragraph 3
"And, it is also revealed now that we seek to establish
friendly relations with Hanoi. To make it more palatable,
we are told this might help us learn the fate of the men
still listed as Missing in Action. 11
RESPONSE:
The Congress, reflecting the views of the American people and
the Administration, has called for an accounting of our Missing in
Action and the return of the bodies of dead servicemen still
held by Hanoi. The Administration, in keeping with this Congress-
ional mandate, has offered to discuss with Hanoi the significant
outstanding issues between us. We have not said we "seek to
establish friendly relations with Hanoi. 11 Such an assertion is
totally false.
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 14, paragraph 2
"In the last few days, Mr. Ford and Dr. Kissinger have
taken us from hinting at invasion of Cuba to laughing it
off as a ridiculous idea. Except, that it was their
ridiculous idea. No one else suggested it. Once again --
what is their policy? During this last year, they carried
on a campaign to befriend Castro. They persuaded the
Organization of American States to lift its trade embargo,
lifted some U.S. trade restrictions, they engaged in
culture exchanges. And then on the eve of the Florida
primary election, Mr. Ford went to Florida, called
Castro an outlaw and said he'd never recognize him.
But he hasn't asked our Latin American neighbors to reimpose
a single sanction, nor has he taken any action himself.
Meanwhile, Castro continues to export revolution to
Puerto Rico, to Angola, and who knows where else?
RESPONSE:
We did not persuade the OAS to lift the sanctions against Cuba.
At Quito in the fall of 1974, we did not support a motion in the
OAS to do SO. At San Jose last summer, the U.S. voted in favor
of an OAS resolution which left to each country freedom of action
with regard to the sanctions. We did SO because a majority of
the OAS members had already unilaterally lifted their sanctions
against Cuba, and because the resolution was supported by a
majority of the Organization members. Since that resolution
passed, no additional Latin American country has established
relations with Cuba.
The U.S. did not lift its own sanctions against Cuba, did not
enter into any agreements with Cuba, and did not trade with Cuba.
We did not engage in cultural exchanges. We validated some
passports for U.S. Congressmen and their staffs, for some
scholars and for some religious leaders to visit Cuba. We issued
a few select visas to Cubans to visit the U.S.. These minimal
steps were taken to test whether there was a mutual interest in
ending the hostile nature of our relations. This policy was
consistent with the traditional American interest in supporting
the free flow of ideas and people. We have, since the Cuban
adventure in Angola, concluded that the Cubans are not interested
in changing their ways. We have resumed our highly restrictive
policies toward Cuban travel. With regard to Cuban efforts to
interfere in Puerto Rican affairs, we have made it emphatically clear
REAGAN STATEMENT: (continued)
Page 14, paragraph 2
RESPONSE: (continued)
in the U.N., and bilaterally to the Cubans and other nations, that
the U.S. will not tolerate any interference in its internal affairs.
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 15, paragraph 3
"The Canal Zone is not a colonial possession. It is not
a long-term lease. It is sovereign U.S. territory every
bit the same as Alaska and all the states that were carved
from the Louisiana Purchase. We should end those
negotiations (on the Panama Canal) and tell the General:
We bought it, we paid for it, we built it and we intend
to keep it. 11
RESPONSE:
Negotiations between the United States and Panama on the Canal
have been pursued by three successive American Presidents.
The purpose of these negotiations is to protect our national
security, not diminish it.
candidate
Finally, Governor Reagan's view that the Canal Zone is "sovereign
U. S. territory every bit the same as Alaska and all the states
that were carved from the Louisiana Purchase" is incorrect.
Legal Scholars have been clear on this for three-quarters of a
century. Unlike children born in the United States, for example,
children born in the Canal Zone are not automatically citizens
of the United States.
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page lo, paragraph 1
"The Soviet Army outnumbers ours more than two-to-one
and in reserves four-to-one. They out-spend us on
weapons by 50%. Their Navy outnumbers ours in surface
ships and submarines two-to-one. We are outgunned in
artillery three-to-one and their tanks outnumber ours
four-to-one. Their strategic nuclear missiles are larger,
more powerful and more numerous than ours. The
evidence mounts that we are Number Two in a world
where it is dangerous, if not fatal, to be second best.'
RESPONSE:
Our nation is not "in danger, 11 but it is damaging to the interests
of this country when a politician declares to our adversaries and
our friends abroad -- falsely -- that we are in second place.
Such statements are both irresponsible and dangerous in that
they alarm our people and confuse our allies.
It is meaningless to say the Soviet Army may now be twice the
size of the U.S. Army when about half of the Soviet Army is
deployed on the Chinese border. More meaningful is the Soviet
Army strength in Europe. Such rhetoric based on simplistic
factural comparisons indicate a disturbingly shallow grasp of what
true balance is all about.
Candidate
Mr. Reagan conveniently neglects to point out that our strategic
forces are superior to Soviet forces. Our missiles are far.
more accurate and survivable. We have over twice as many
missile warheads and, after all, it is the warheads which actually
reach the target. Our lead in this area has been increasing over
the past several years. Mr. Reagan likewise ignores our vast
superiority in strategic bombers.
Addressing the implication that the President has tolerated a weak
defense policy, President Ford is the one who reversed the trend
of shrinking defense budgets. His last two defense budgets are
the highest peacetime budgets in the nation's history. Mr. Reagan
might better speak to the Democratic Congress about its $32
billion cuts in defense over the past six years.
Examining in more detail the question of America's strength first,
we must dispose of the numbers game. If national defense were a
REAGAN STATEMENT: (continued)
Page 16, paragraph 1
RESPONSE: (continued)
matter of bookkeeping we could point out that:
Minile
- Our missile warheads have tripled;
- - We lead the Soviet Union by more than two-to-one;
- - We have over a three-to-one lead in strategic
bombers;
- - Our missiles are twice as accurate as the Soviet
Union's.
But it is a disservice to the American people to confuse them
with any such numbers comparison. Two important facts are
ignored by Governor canvidate Reagan.
First, the United States stands at the head of a great Alliance
system in Europe, and we are firmly tied to the strongest
economic power in Asia. We have friendly relations with most
of the nations of the world. These relations are the product
of our longtime bipartisan foreign policy and the valuable
accomplishments of all of our previous Administrations since
President Truman.
Second, we cannot ignore that whatever might be the balance
of power today, it is not fixed. In our military programs and
our defense budgets, we are indeed looking to the future to
guarantee that this nation will never be in danger.
In our defense programs, many new programs insure our position
of strength:
- We are proceeding with the development and production
of the world's most modern strategic bomber, the B-1.
We are proceeding with the development and production
of the world's most modern and lethal missle launching
submarine, the Trident.
- - We are developing a new large ICBM.
27
REAGAN STATEMENT: (continued)
Page 16, paragraph 1
RESPONSE: (continued)
- - We are producing three new fighters aircraft.
- - We are planning the production of 15 new fighting
ships, including two carriers.
It is true a figure that can be cited to show that the Soviets have
more ships, but it is a distortion to equate Soviet destroyers with
our modern nuclear powered aircraft carriers.
quoted
The money we have put into defense over the past several years
has been inadequate. However, the responsibility for slashing
$40 billion dollars must rest with the Congress, not the
the
Administration.
Fortunately, under the prodding of President Ford the Congress
has begun to awaken to the risks of constantly reducing our
defense spending. When the budget he proposed this year passes,
the trend will have been reversed.
In fact, we are number one. Unless we falter or give way to
panic, we will remain number one.
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 16, paragraph 2
"Why did the President travel halfway 'round the world
to sign the Helsinki Pact, putting our stamp of approval
on Russia's enslavement of the captive nations?
We gave away the freedom of millions of people --
freedom that was not ours to give. "
RESPONSE:
The President did not go to Helsinki to put the stamp of approval
on Soviet domination of Eastern Europe. On the contrary, he
went to Helsinki along with the Chiefs of State or heads of
government of all our Western allies and, among others, a Papal
Representative, to sign a document which contains Soviet commit-
ments to greater respect for human rights, self-determination of
peoples, and expanded exchanges and communication throughout
?
Europe. Basket three of the Act calls for a freer flow of people
and ideas among all the European nations.
The Helsinki Act, for the first time, specifically provides for
the possibility of peaceful change of borders when that would
correspond to the wishes of the peoples concerned. With regard
to the particular case of the Baltic States, President Ford stated
clearly on July 25 that "the United States has never recognized
the Soviet incorporation of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia and is
not doing so now. Our official policy of non-recognition is not
affected by the results of the European Security Conference. "
In fact, the Helsinki document itself states that no occupation or
acquisition of territory by force will be recognized as legal.
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 16, paragraph 3
"Now we must ask if someone is giving away our own
freedom. Dr. Kissinger is quoted as saying that he thinks
of the U.S. as Athens and the Soviet Union as Sparta.
"The day of the U.S. is past and today is the day of the
Soviet Union. 11 And he added, 11 My job as Secretary
of State is to negotiate the most acceptable second-best
position available."
RESPONSE:
Governor Candidate Reagan's so-called "quotes" from Secretary Kissinger are
a total and irresponsible fabrication. The He Secretary has never said what
the Governor attributes to him, or anything like it. In fact, at
a March 23, 1976 press conference in Dallas, Secretary Kissinger
said: "I do not believe that the United States will be defeated.
I do not believe that the United States is on the decline. I do
not believe that the United States must get the best deal it can.
"I believe that the United States is essential to preserve the
security of the free world and for any progress in the world
that exists.
"In a period of great national difficulty, of the Viet-Nam war, of
Watergate, of endless investigations, we have tried to preserve
the fole of the United States as that major actor. And I believe
that to explain to the American people that the policy is complex,
that our involvement is permanent, and that our problems are
nevertheless soluble, is a sign of optimism and of confidence in
the American people rather than the opposite. "
30
REAGAN STATEMENT:
Page 17, paragraph 2
"Now we learn that another high official of the State
Department, Helmut Sonnenfeldt, whom Dr. Kissinger
refers to as his "Kissinger", has expressed the belief
that, in effect, the captive nations should give up any
claim of national sovereignty and simply become a part
of the Soviet Union. He says, 'Their desire to break out
of the Soviet straightjacket' threatens us with World
War III. In other words, slaves should accept their
fate. 11
RESPONSE:
The statement is wholly inaccurate, and a gross distortion of
fact, to ascribe such views to Mr. Sonnenfeldt or to this
Administration. Neither he nor anyone else in the Administration
has ever expressed any such belief. The Administration view
on this issue was expressed by Secretary Kissinger before the
House International Relations Committee on March 29 as follows:
"As far as the U.S. is concerned, we do not accept a
sphere of influence of any country, anywhere, and
emphatically we reject a Soviet sphere of influence in
Eastern Europe.
"Two Presidents have visited in Eastern Europe; there
have been two visits to Poland and Romania and Yugoslavia,
by Presidents. I have made repeated visits to Eastern
Europe, on every trip to symbolize and to make clear
to these countries that we are interested in working with
them and that we do not accept or act upon the exclusive
dominance of any one country in that area.
"At the same time, we do not want to give encourage-
ment to an uprising that might lead to enormous suffering.
But in terms of the basic position of the United States,
we do not accept the dominance of any one country anywhere.
"Yugoslavia was mentioned, for example. We would
emphatically consider it a very grave matter if outside
forces were to attempt to intervene in the domestic affairs
of Yugoslavia. We welcome Eastern European countries
developing more in accordance with their national traditions,
and we will cooperate with them. This is the policy of the
United States, and there is no Sonnenfeldt doctrine. 11