Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Source Description
This file contains memoranda, correspondence, meeting notes, copies of presidential speeches, and clippings. Much of the file concerns the Ohio primary and the involvement of Governor James Rhodes in the campaign.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
18514943
label
Presidential Campaign (11)
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
18514943
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Presidential Campaign (11)
description
This file contains memoranda, correspondence, meeting notes, copies of presidential speeches, and clippings. Much of the file concerns the Ohio primary and the involvement of Governor James Rhodes in the campaign.
citationUrl
collections
James M. Cannon Files (Ford Administration)
James Cannon's Political Files
subjects
Ohio
Presidential campaign, 1976
iiifBase
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
18514943
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1976-11-30
month
11
year
1976
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1976-06-01
month
6
year
1976
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
url
mediaId
312d9a43bc1e5e6d
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box 42, folder "Presidential Campaign (11)" of the
James M. Cannon Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Copyright Notice
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of
photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald Ford donated to the United
States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.
Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public
domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to
remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid
copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Digitized from Box 42 of the James M. Cannon Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
file
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
September 8, 1976
MEMORANDUM FOR: JIM BAKER
FROM:
JIM CANNON ImC,cd
You might be interested in this report from the Southern
Governors.
attachment
FORD LIBRARY & GERALD
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
September 2, 1976
MEMORANDUM FOR:
JIM CANNON
som
FROM:
STEVE McCONAHEY
SUBJECT:
Campaign Organization
in Southern States
As I indicated to you on the telephone, there was a clear
message that came from the Southern Governors' Conference
in regard to the President's prospects in the South.
1.
It was clear that even amongst Democratic Governors
there was a feeling that the President has pulled to
within a very close position with Carter, and that
particularly within the border states the President
has great potential.
2.
Clear, visible and near term actions must be taken
to overcome the initial impression left in any people's
minds that the President has "written off" the South.
Perhaps the initial statement attributed to Rog Morton
was incorrect; however, that impression is in the minds
of many people and it is important that we take steps
very soon to allay fears on this neglect.
3.
That the best approach to the south will be to force
people to understand what the Democratic platform
says, and then force Carter to defend it. Without
the initiative of the Republican Campaign, many people
will support Carter strictly because of his southern
heritage. It will be our initiative that will be
necessary to force people's consideration of the
Democratic platform and of Carter's position on
specific issues.
4.
Concern was expressed to me both by Governor Edwards
of South Carolina and Governor Holshouser of North
Carolina that indications to date show that the
campaign and advance people are still not doing a
GERALD FORD
"professional" job in organizing campaign activi-
ties and ensuring that they are coordinated with the
existing Republican Party structure.
-2-
I have no way to verify these complaints other than to
pass them along to you.
I think these are interesting observations you should be
aware of and perhaps relay to Rog Morton and Jim Baker.
ATTENDEES AT SOUTHERN GOVERNORS' CONFERENCE
REPUBLICAN GOVERNORS
Governor Holshouser of North Carolina
Governor Edwards of South Carolina
Governor Bond of Missouri
Governor Godwin of Virginia
Governor Moore of West Virginia
GOVERNORS
Governor Pryor of Arkansas
Governor Carroll of Kentucky
Governor Blanton of Tennessee
Governor Askew of Florida
Governor Busbee of Georgia
Governor Finch of Mississippi
Governor Tribbitt of Delaware
Governor Mandel of Maryland
Governor Boren of Oklahoma
Governor Briscoe of Texas
Governor King of Virgin Islands
live file
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Josen
September 22, 1976
1976 4 48
ADMINISTRATIVELY CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR:
JAMES M. CANNON
FROM:
JAMES E. CONNOR JEE
SUBJECT:
Paper Entitled "Thoughts on
Substantive Strategy in President
Ford's Campaign"
The attached was received in the President's outbox with the
following notation:
"Copy of V.P. S suggestions. I have the O. [original]."
Please follow-up with the appropriate action.
cc: Dick Cheney
FORD is LIBRARY CERALD
THOUGHTS ON SUBSTANTIVE STRATEGY
IN PRESIDENT FORD'S CAMPAIGN
I. Basic concept
If everyone accepts the idea that
A. President Ford for the past two years
has been acting in a sense as a
caretaker President dealing with the
most unbelievably difficult problems of
Loss of confidence in government
at home
Inflation
Recession and unemployment at
home and abroad
World crises
and, that he brought this country through
all of these problems with flying colors,
restored confidence and respect at home
and abroad, and a revitalized economy; and
B.
Now the President has been nominated by
his party for a four-year term and that
he now seeks a mandate from the American
people to deal, no longer with the past,
but rather with his vision as to the
great opportunities that lie ahead, and
his plans for dealing with both the
problems and the opportunities of the
crucial four years ahead;
C. Then he must unfold both the broad outlines
of the vision for the future and some
examples of the kind of measures he plans
to implement in order to overcome the
problems and to realize the opportunities,
leading to a better quality of life for all.
GREATO FORD
- 2 -
II. Mr. Teeter has outlined very ably the concerns and
aspirations of the people.
Below are suggested initiatives related to
Mr. Teeter's specific issues to dramatize the
President's leadership abilities which qualify him,
in fact make him essential, to the American people
and the world as our leader during the next four
years.
A. Foreign Affairs and Defense
1. Republican versus Democratic records
over the past few decades.
B. Quality of Life - Suggested initiatives
to illustrate the President's sound
and creative approach to problems.
1. Crime
a. Establishment of his programs
and danger of Democratic
Congressional inaction and lack
of effective leadership.
2. Housing
a. Maximizing Private Home
TAB A
Ownership through Stimulating
Private Investment in Housing
Construction.
3. Education
a. Increasing Access To Education TAB B
for All American Families
4. Urban Problems
a. Federal Assistance of Urban
TAB C
Development and Employment
in Major Urban Areas
FORD
- 3 -
5. Conservation
a. Parks program - already done
6. Health Cost
a. A Three-Phased Federal Program TAB D
to Control Health Care Costs.
7. Jobs
a. Providing Job Scholarships
TAB E
for Low-Income Youth
b. Developing a School Work
TAB F
Program
C.
Encouragement of the American
Enterprise System to Provide
Stabel Employment Opportunities
FORD
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
SUBJECT:
Maximizing Private Home Ownership
Through Stimulating Private Investment
in Housing Construction
Background
The lagging housing market and high unemployment in the
construction industries are widely recognized problems. The
release of Section 235 funds has demonstrated concern for the
problem, but the Administration remains vulnerable on the
housing issue. A major part of the problem is the high cost
of mortgage credit.
Any meaningful Federal program to address the shorter-term
housing problem is very costly (such as more tandem-plan money,
increasing and directing Section 8 funds into new construction,
or expanding Section 235). A potentially useful initiative may
be put together at low Federal cost in which private pension plan
reserves (now some $200 billion) may be directed toward mortgages.
At the end of 1974, only $3.5 billion or so of the private pension
fund reserves were invested in mortgages (about one-half of the
amount invested in mortgages in 1969) ; in 1975, significant new
pension fund investments were made in mortgages (perhaps an
additional $3-4 billion). Another $3-4 billion is invested in
real estate. The assets of public pension funds are now about
$190 billion, some $90 billion of which is U.S. Government pensions
invested in Treasury securities and some $100 billion of which
is assets of state and local pension funds invested primarily in
corporate securities.
Proposal
Pension fund investors (private, state and local) would be
encouraged to invest at least 15% of their funds in mortgages or
mortgage-backed securities.
This would be accomplished in two ways:
a) Investments, through the tax structure, would be
developed to encourage up to 15% of their pension
fund investment in mortgage and mortgage-backed
securities.
b) G.N.M.A. would be instructed to expand the development
and use of mortgage-backed securities, including bonds.
GERALD FORD
- 2 -
c) A new Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation
would administer this requirement, reporting
any tax obligations to the Internal Revenue
Service.
$20 billion of new mortgage investment could be created
by this proposal, although the actual investment would probably
be less than this.
There would be some minimal administrative costs, but no
significant Federal costs.
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
SUBJECT:
Increasing Access to Education for All
American Families
Background
One of the most valuable resources of America is its well-
educated and highly trained population. Access to education is
also a necessary factor in the American approach to equal
opportunity.
However, the high cost of tuition in our education
institutions is placing access to education beyond the reach
of many American families. The cost of tuition, which in some
institutions exceeds $5,000 per year, means many middle and low-
income families in this country are being denied acess to
preferred institutions.
While there are a number of scholarship programs available,
these are generally limited in size and, for the most part, are
focused only on low-income families. Middle-income families are
increasingly being priced out of the market.
Rising costs are also leading to the demise of many high
quality private institutions which can no longer compete with
publicly-subsidized institutions.
We need to assure that quality education is available to
all American families without undue financial hardship, and that
America's strong private education system is maintained.
Proposal
In order to reduce the financial burden on families, it is
proposed that a full tax deduction for all education tuition, books,
and fees at the elementary, secondary, and post-secondary levels
be allowed.
Such a tax deduction is analogous to tax incentives provided
for business investment, since education costs are investments in
America's "human capital" and thus similar in nature to business
investment.
The proposal would significantly reduce the burden on
families of educating their children and would greatly assist
the private university system in attracting students and
continuing to be financially viable.
C
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
SUBJECT:
Federal Assistance For Industrial Development
and Employment in Major Urban Areas
Background
Many of the older major cities, such as New York, Boston,
Philadelphia, Detroit, Cleveland and Newark, suffer from deterior-
ation of their assessed valuation, outward migration of industry,
high unemployment and large welfare costs.
Any long-term solution that will save these cities will
require that a sizeable portion of industry and jobs must be
attracted back to the cities.
Previous Federal policy, such as the Federal Housing Programs,
the Federal Highway program, Federal electrification programs, etc.,
has encouraged urban decentralization. If the cities are to be
reinvigorated, Federal policy must encourage it. Cities today are
faced with a multitude of internal problems. Therefore, the actual
progression of an industrial redevelopment program will require
Federal involvement.
These cities have vast areas of slums which are producing
little revenue and constitute not only "eyesores", but are areas
of degradation, crime and delinquency. The properties in some of
these areas have already been acquired by municipalities through
tax delinquencies.
A Federal program to assist in the acquisition of certain
of these areas for large scale industrial parks would provide a
necessary stimulus to the economy of the cities. Many of these
areas could be made available for industrial usage if the land
costs are written down, if they are cleared, and if the basics
of utilities and transportation are provided.
Proposal
A program of Federal incentives to stimulate jobs through
the development of large scale industrial parks in major urban areas.
Federal assistance could be made available in the following
forms:
1. Federal funds to assist state and local governments in
acquiring necessary additional land, clearing sites,
and in writing down land values. Municipalities would
be allowed to use land they now own to match Federal
funds.
- 2 -
2. Modification of the "Ribicoff Amendment" that currently
limits the amount of tax-exempt revenue bond financing
for industrial development. This modification should be
designed to permit larger amounts of tax-exempt industrial
revenue financing for urban areas that have had consistently
high unemployment.
3. Consideration should be given for industrial development
in communities with consistently high unemployment rates
above certain levels to:
a) the additional stimulus of a 'modification of the
corporate income tax, and
b) a five-year tax write-off for capital outlays.
The matching financial assistance and the liberalized
"Ribicoff", and the possible modification of the corporate tax
incentives, would be limited to:
1. Urban areas where there has been a rate of unemployment
of more than 9% for at least 2 years.
2. Urban areas that have lost manufacturing, assemplying,
packaging or warehousing jobs aggregating more than
27% of their employment in such fields.
3. Urban areas where states have established public benefit
corporations for industrial development that:
a) Have power to issue revenue bonds, acquire and
develop properties.
b) Have a continuing life and consistency of
management.
c) Have power to lease and sell by mortgage such
industrial properties.
4. Urban areas would be required to provide a form of real
property tax protections for the developments.
Singapore's experience as a prototype:
In 1964, Singapore's population of 3 million Chinese had
a per capita GNP of $300. The leaders of the sovereign city
decided to make Singapore a haven for international corporations.
They believed that the only way to prevent Communist takeover was
to advance economic and social programs for the people of Singapore.
- 3 -
To carry out this objective, Singapore built a 880-acre
indústrial park in which over 620 corporations employing nearly
70,000 workers have located in the short space of 12 years. The
per capita GNP has gone up from $300 in 1964 to $2,000 today ----
the third highest in Asia. They are now expanding to 14,000 acres
and expect to attract over 1,000 factories.
This development demonstrates what can be accomplished
by imaginative governmental policy to attract industry. The
basic concept is adaptable to major city redevelopment here in the
United States.
FORD
CRAED
D
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
SUBJECT:
A Three-Phased Federal Program to Control Health
Care Costs, to Assure Availability of Quality
Health Care to All Americans Within a Viable
Fiscal Policy
Background
Health care costs have risen more rapidly than the cost of
other goods and services in the economy. During the 1950's,
medical care amounted to 4% of the Gross National Product, while
today it consumes 8%. The cost of health care has become a major
expense for the average family and health insurance premiums have
become a major cost for business.
The financial burden on families has been a continuous
problem. It is being recognized by the health insurance companies
for 75% of all new insurance policies now cover catastrophic
expenses in excess of $100,000. However, the unemployed and
certain low income persons are without catastrophic coverage.
It is estimated that 19 million Americans are without any
basic health insurance coverage. There is evidence that compre-
hensive maternity care and preventive care for children is the
form of preventive medicine that has the highest pay-off.
Proposal
Establish a time-phased approach to improved health insurance
coverage for all Americans beginning with major cost containment.
Implementation of a comprehensive program would be contingent upon
a sound economic situation.
1. It would require cost-control measures and budgetary savings
as a condition of movement toward a more extensive system of
health finance.
2. It would save approximately $700 million in FY 1978 and provide
an opportunity to learn from experience as we proceed toward
broader health insurance coverage.
3. It would move carefully to fill in gaps in coverage and to
control costs without totally replacing the health care system
with a new, Federally controlled system.
4. It would continue the President's effort to decentralize full
Medicaid program authority and responsibility to the state
level.
FORD
- 2 -
The program would be implemented in three stages.
A. Stage I -- cost containment effective January 1977.
1. Limit increases in per diem costs for all hospitals of
8% in FY 1978. Exceptions for higher rates of increase
for new capital formation or negative cash flow, could
be requested.
2. States would be required to institute a prospective
reimbursement system by FY 1979. Cost controls have
been demonstrated to be effective over short periods of
time, but for long-term solutions they must be replaced
by more systematic mechanisms to limit inflation.
3. Federal Medicaid regulations would be modified to provide
the states with maximum program authority and responsibility.
Federal financial aid would be provided to states to assist
them in locating fraud and abuse.
4. Improve the competitive position of Health Maintenance
Organizations through amendments to current law and
through tax incentives to attract increased private
investment capital into this area.
-
5. Expand PSRO review to include outpatient care.
6. Provide support for Health Planning Agencies and PSROs
through Federal Financial Assistance, personnel training
and by providing technical assistance.
B. Stage II --- further cost containment and expanded coverage
effective January 1979.
1. Medicare modifications:
a) Combine Medicare parts A and B into a single
benefit package and administrative structure.
b) Establish a $150 deductible on all covered services.
c) Provide full payment of covered services after
$750 of our-of-pocket expense.
d) Require 10% cost sharing on in-patient hospital
services.
FORD
2. Broaden Medicaid coverage:
a) Provide, through state-administered Medicaid,
coverage for maternity care and children through
age 6.
- 3 -
b) Provide Medicaid catastrophic coverage to persons
not insured due to poverty or loss of benefits
through unemployment. This provision would be
activated after a family had incurred $750 in
expenses. The family would also be subject to the
Medicaid cost sharing provisions outlined below.
3. Establish minimum benefit standards for private insurance
policies which would include coverage against catastrophic
illness. They should also include comprehensive coverage
for maternity care and children through the age of 6.
4. Cost sharing provisions:
a) For private insurance plans, require a $150
deductible and 25% co-payments for maternity
and childrens benefits.
b) For Medicaid eligibles, deductibles for families
would be scaled from 0 aq $4000 income to a
$5000 deductible at $14,000 income. Maximum
liability would rise with income from 6% of income
at $4000 to $7500 when income reached $14,000.
Co-payments would rise from 10% of medical costs
at $4000 to 25% at $14,000 and above.
c) Comprehensive coverage for maternity benefits
and children through age 6 would be provided for
Medicaid recipients. Those with incomes over
$4000 would pay a $150 annual deductible and a
co-payment of 25%. The maximum out-of-pocket
liability would be $750.
5. Through increased cost control and cost sharing, the
expanded coverage should be a budgetary "wash".
C. Stage III --- expanded benefits for the unemployed and the non-
Medicaid covered low income population.
Stage III would expand full Medicaid coverage to all
unemployed and low income persons who cannot otherwise obtain
comprehensive health coverage. The benefits would be subject
to the cost sharing provisions outlined above.
Advantages of the Proposal
The Democratic platform and Carter have embraced the Kennedy-
Corman bill which would totally Federalize the health care system
and would transfer approximately $70-80 billion of current private
expenditures to the Federal budget. If Carter wishes to balance
the budget at the same time as instituting this proposal, it would
require an annual tax increase of approximately $500 per capita.
- 4 -
The three-phased proposal provides a well-organized plan
for cost containment and expansion of coverage with as little
disruption as possible to private health insurance and to the
private health care system.
It provides a balanced strategy which:
Controls health care costs and restructures the
delivery system to emphasize quality health care
and disease prevention.
When costs are controlled and the system is properly
restructured, it moves to expand coverage, first by
covering catastrophic illnesses and then gradually
moving to provide broad basic benefits for all
Americans through private and public programs.
As a fiscally responsible approach to reform, it is
also "realistic" and has a reasonable chance of
enactment. In effect, it "buys" its cost-control
provisions with the promise of improved coverage.
Approaches which attempt to "cap" current programs
or withdraw from Federal responsibilities without
improving coverage would have virtually no chance of
enactment and would be politically unrealistic.
GREAT FORD
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
SUBJECT:
Providing "Job Scholarships" for
Low Income Youth
Background
Youth unemployment statistics remain very high. The
August 1976 figures indicate that among youth 16 through 19
years of age, the unemployment rate is 19.7% or 1.8 million
persons. Among minority youth the rate is 40.2% or 393,000
persons.
One problem is that many jobs open to untrained youth are
unsatisfactory to the youth. They do not present a long-term
career path to youth seeking full-time employment. As a consequence,
youth tend to quit their jobs at a high rate, thus leaving large
numbers to be counted unemployed and continuously seeking new job
opportunities.
Employers are reluctant to employ youth in jobs in which
they have to pay the costs of training plus the minimum wage.
Consequently, employers tend to offer youthful job seekers low-
skilled work which requires little or no training. Jobs leading
to skilled work are reserved for those applicants who are more
likely to stay long enough to provide a return on the training
investment.
An issue is whether more should be done to provide dis-
advantaged and minority group youth seeking full-time work more
opportunities to acquire skilled jobs and receive useful training.
Among the proposals that have been considered has been the
lowering of the minimum wage for youth. This is not considered
realistic because of the strong union pressure to raise the
minimum wage.
An alternative which may be more politically viable is to
provide a financial incentive to employers to take youth into
skilled jobs and to train them. The "Job Scholarship" proposal
represents this type of an approach.
Proposal
A "Job Scholarship" is a voucher which the youth would
exchange with employers for a skilled job and training for a
specified period of time.
- 2 -
The concept of the "Job Scholarship" is similar to the
Basic Opportunity Grant Scholarship with which disadvantaged
youth can obtain a college education.
The Scholarship is envisioned as a fixed grant of $1,000
for one year of training or employment which would be renewable
for an additional year if the recipient successfully completed
the first year's program.
The Scholarship would be limited to those with incomes
below 150% of the poverty level. It could only be used to purchase
employment in full-time skilled jobs, determined by the Department
of Labor to provide a clear long-term career path and significant
potential for increasing wages and responsibility.
The program would be coordinated by a newly created Youth
Job Service which would be responsible for seeking out and
certifying job opportunities which would be eligible for partici-
pation in the "Job Scholarship" program. It would also determine
recipient income eligibility.
The "Job Scholarship" concept should be phased in at a
point when the economy approximates full employment, projected
to be near the third quarter of FY 1978.
A program which would provide approximately 450,000
scholarships will require funding at about $.5 billion per year.
This is estimated as the amount necessary to cover unemployed
disadvantaged youth.
Advantages of the "Job Scholarship" Approach
The "Job Scholarship" is a visible response to the youth
unemployment rate.
The "Job Scholarship" program, as opposed to the more general
CETA programs, is focused directly on youth and their employment
needs. Only about 27% of those in CETA "On The Job Training"
programs are youth.
The use of a voucher allows the youth flexibility in the labor
market and provides him with the independence to select the
type of employment which he feels would be most interesting
and satisfying.
The "Job Scholarship" provides a direct incentive for employers
to hire and train youth for more skilled jobs than they would
otherwise be able to obtain.
From an equity point of view, the "Job Scholarship" provides
career opportunities for disadvantaged youth entering the labor
market in the same way that the Basic Opportunity Grant program
opportunity for youth going to college.
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
SUBJECT:
Developing a "School Work" Program
Background
The Administration has developed programs which supply
summer jobs for over 1.5 million youth, including $528.4 million
for 888,100 jobs through the summer youth program.
There is a need to provide to youth attending school
jobs which can be continued during the school year, as well as
in the summer months.
Proposal
A "School Work" project could be established to provide
part-time and summer jobs for youth within the neighborhood
school setting. Projects would be designed to restore the
damage caused by vandalism to the school facility.
The program could be financed partially with funds from
existing programs and directed to part-time and summer jobs for
youth in their own schools.
The students would engage in full-time jobs at the minimum
wage during the summer, and quarter-time work during the school
year. The youth would be trained to perform such jobs as cleaning
and painting the schools, repairing broken windows, restoring
furniture, building new facilities, etc.
The proposal is based upon the concept that the school is
more than a learning facility. It is also a community institution
that can serve as a recreational facility and a community center.
The jobs are provided at the school site to increase pride in the
school and provide a strong sense of community identification for
the youth.
The projects would be directed by the coaches, the school
principals, or other respected faculty members. A coach is
generally recognized and respected as an authority figure within
the school an- can successfully instill both a sense of discipline
and a sense of self-confidence. Federal funds could be channelled
through the State Employment Service or local CETA prime sponsors
directly to school districts that establish programs in accordance
with specified criteria.
Rile
THE WHITE HOUSE
Campaign
WASHINGTON
September 8, 1976
MEMORANDUM FOR:
JIM CANNON
FROM:
ART QUERN Bill
SUBJECT:
Doug Smith Request Re: California Letter
The key substantive points in this letter which fall into
our assignment areas are:
1. Crime
-- no problem with text of letter.
2.
Common Situs Picketing
-- I would delete since it raises a number of
problems.
3. New York City "Bail Out"
-- hope no one in New York catches sight of
this letter.
4.
Section 14 B
-- no problem with text.
The letter also refers to issues which need clearances
from other staff entities:
1.
Defense Spending
-- OMB
2. Humphrey/Hawkins
-- EPB
3.
Wage and Price Controls
-- EPB
Overall, the letter is rather weak.
FORD i LIBRARI 07/870
9/8
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Doug Smith -
In sawal,
this letter
stuhes me
as less
than
Residential
June
BERALD FORD LIBRARY
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
September 4, 1976
MEMORANDUM TO: JACK MARSH
BRENT SCOWCROFT
JIM CANNON
JIM LYNN
FROM:
DOUG SMITH AS
We have an urgent request to approve
this letter for use in California. It
has been cleared by General Counsel,
but we want to be certain as to factual
accuracy.
Could you please give your comments as
to accuracy and policy to us as soon
as possible.
Thank you!
copy !
Quem for seopme
FORD is LIBRAR 07V830
090408
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
From: Robert T. Hartmann
To:
Date:
Time: 9-3-31
a.m.
p.m.
I will r not approve
this sloppy draft
for signature by
the President and
J do not have
time to completely
reds it. Have
PFC resubmet a
decent,accurate and
FORD i GERALD LIBRARY
Previdential draft
RTA
FORD i LIBRARY 938839
THE WHITE HOUSE
Mr. John Doe
6151 West Century Boulevard
Los Angeles, California 90045
Dear Mr. Doe:
Did you ever stop to think that you and I are two of the
most fortunate people on earth? We enjoy the freedom and opportunities
of citizens of the United States of America. Ninety-three percent of the
world's population is less fortunate.
But this, like all fortunes, must be carefully guarded. Your
help is needed. America is clearly at a crossroad, and must choose a
direction. Democrats in Congress offer an alternative that I believe to be
unacceptable.
In a world where the principal guarantee of peace and freedom
is the strength of the U.S. armed forces, Congressional Democrats propose
that we cut our defense by up to seven billion dollars. The Republican
members oppose these cuts as unwise and unsafe.
V
Crime is a serious and persistent problem. I have proposed man-
datory sentencing for certain violent crimes. However, crime will remain
a problem until we hold the criminal -- not society -- responsible for criminal
acts. Evidently, Democratic Congressmen do not agree.
The Democratic Party platform supports the Humphrey/Hawkins bill
which would cost us 40 billion dollars and add millions of employees to the
Lynn figure
- - MORE - -
from not grul is $10B.
FORD is LIBRARY OTRALD
- 2 -
public payroll. It endorses big labor's notorious Common Situs
Picketing Bill and calls for the repeal of historic protection against
mandatory unionization nationwide. (Section 14 B of the Taft Hartley Act).
Democratic Congressmen are openly calling for a bail-out
of
New York City, while asking for few or new concessions with respect
to its spending rate. And, they are advocating a return to the use of
discredited wage and price controls "at the discretion of the President. 11
These are specific issues on which Republicans and Democrats
in Congress disagree. I have challenged Mr. Carter to debate these
issues, but I cannot debate with the entire Congress as well. I can
only call attention to the voting record of eachjindividual Congressman
and let the American people decide. When you consider how close the
vote was on many of my vetoes, you begin to see how important this is.
FORD is LIBRARY GERALD
- (a)
Congressionally, California may be the most important state in
the Union. There are at least eight key races for Congress in
California that will be decided by a handful of votes. A switch
of eight votes on the floor of the House of Representatives would
provide a margin of sixteen votes, and by itself could completely
change the complexion of Congress.
For that reason, we have created a special Republican
Federal Election Fund in California. Money raised for this fund
will be targeted into Congressional elections in California where
it can mean a difference between victory and defeat. A properly
funded effort in California could mean a switch of sixteen votes
in the House of Representatives, and the replacement of John
Tunney with Dr. S.I. Hayakawa in the Senate.
This is an excellent cause. I know there are many causes
competing for your attention, but since this one is for your home
state of California, and since it will have such a strong impact
upon the direction of Congress and the future course of our nation,
I hope you will give it priority.
Most Americans will donate two, three or four dollars for
each of the eight key races (sixteen, twenty-four or thirty-two
dollars). Your contribution of any amount is very much appreciated.
FORD & LIBRAR
- 3 -
America is at a crossroads with this election. To affect
the choice of directions, you must pick up your checkbook now,
and write a check to the Republican Federal Election Fund. If
not, you leave the choice to others.
I appreciate your help and support. Best wishes from
Betty and me.
Sincerely,
Gerald R. Ford
FORD & LIBRARY
Some items in this folder were not digitized because it contains copyrighted
materials. Please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library for access to
these materials.
file
GEORGE F. BERLINGER
595 MADISON AVENUE
NEW YORK, N. Y. 10022
976 SEP 14 PM 2
Campaign
Sept. 13, ₽976
Mr. James Cannon
The White House
Washington, D.C.
Dear James:
I am enclosing herewith a copy of a letter I
wrote to the Editors of the NEW YORK TIMES,
which they published on Sept. 11th, in which
there is reference to Sugarman that you may
find useful.
Will you please be sure to return to me all
the things that I have sent you as soon as
are through with them.
Sincerely,
Daz
you = ₫ are
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
09/421
THE NEW YORK TIMES, SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 1976.
Letters to the Editor
"Th Welfare Rip-Off'
To the Editor:
Unfortunately, the then Comptroller
With all due respect to the Moss
and present Mayor has taken no action
committee Medicaid report, it has no
in the alleviation of that mess.
new revelations regarding Medicaid or
Former Administrators Sugarman
the larger welfare rip-off; nor does it
and Goldberg, the creators of the
begin 0 address itself to the broad
welfare monster, which even Sugar-
areas ursued by the New York State
man's $10 million worth of manage-
Welfa: Inspector General during
ment geniuses could not control, claim
1971-7
they were locked into positions by
Revie W of OWIG's annual reports for
state and Federal regulations, and
those years will provide sufficient
sometimes the story is not enough
evidence of the city's mismanagement,
regulations. New regulations are not
along with conclusions and recom-
the answer, nor are they necessary.
mendations to enable any competent
Effective control of Medicaid and
and sing ere administration to not only
welfare is impossible when that con-
clean up the entire welfare scandal
trol runs "contra" to the politics of
but in the process save enough money
the union chiefs and their surrogates,
to obviate the need for Big Mac and
the city administration.
the Federal bail-out.
Electric
ROOM 5600
30 ROCKEFELLER PLAZA
September 24, 1976
To:
1976 OCTVi/ce President Nelson A. Rockefeller
FROM:
George L. Hinman
A1 Gordon, Sr. called
to say he has it from a reliably
informed source that Schlesinger
is helping Carter prepare for
the next debate.
Tim
The VP wanted
to see - to ann A
you Nice to talk GERALA FORD LIBRAR)
you Today
100404
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
9/30/76
TO:
FROM:
I support the a
JACK JIM idea CANNON MARSH June of such
task force. To do otherwise
would deny hope to the families
of those who are still missing.
GERALD R LIBRARY FORD
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
September 29, 1976 1976 SEP 29 PM 4 55
MEMORANDUM FOR:
PHIL IP W. BUCHEN
JAMES M. CANNON
JAMES H. CAVANAUGH
JAMES E. CONNOR
MICHAEL DUVAL
MAX L. FRIEDERSDORF
JERRY H. JONES
BRENT SCOWCROFT
FROM:
JOHN 0. MARSH, June
The Republican Platform contains a plank calling creation of
a Presidential Task Force to look into the problem of our missing in
action in Southeast Asia. Attached is the wording for the plank.
I have held one "in-house" meeting to consider the advisability of such
a Task Force and to discuss responsibility, authority, membership, chair-
manship and term, should we decide to move in that direction.
The National League of Families which is composed of many of the families
of those listed as missing in action and as prisoners of war is pressing
for the formation of the Task Force and for membership from their group
on such a panel. We have also had some congressional interest. In
addition, the opposition candidate for President has indicated that he
would form a Task Force if elected.
While our meeting was not conclusive, there was a general feeling that
we should satisfy the requirements of the plank but that in doing so we
should select individuals of stature who could do more than just meet
on occasion. We also agreed that any such body would have to spend its
initial period pouring over previous information concerning the MIA's
which exists at the Defense and State Departments and with the Select
Committee of the Congress.
Also, the Chairman of a Task Force for this purpose should be carefully
selected and be one who would be considered acceptable to the families.
There was mixed feeling about participants by a member of the League of
Families on the Force. However, there was agreement that a League
representative could be in an ex-officio position.
GERALD FORD VIBRARY
092920
-2-
It was also agreed in principle that the Task Force would be given
three phases for its actions. First, to review what has been done
up to now; second, to recommend the next steps considered necessary
toward securing an accounting; and, third, to satisfy any further
Presidential mandate on the matter. The League has been seeking an
Executive Order to halt all changes in status from missing in action
to killed in action until there is an accounting and that could be
another point for Task Force consideration.
My review of the Lawson file which contains information concerning
previous discussions about a White House Task Force indicates that
there was a recommendation for its formation. The question became
moot when the House Select Committee was formed and supported by the
National League of Families.
I am about to make a recommendation to the President on this and
would first like your comments. Can I have your opinion of this by
close of business on Friday, October 8, 1976.
Additionally, we should consider the impact on this subject of the
recent selection of James Wilson whose duties also have a MIA
orientation. Please see the attached.
Attachments
FORD i LIBRARY GERALD
We must achieve the return of all Americans who
may be held in Southeast Asia and a full accounting of those
listed as Missing In Action. We strongly urge continued
consultation between the President and the National League
of Families of American Prisoners and Missing in Southeast
Asia. This country owes at least this much to all of these
courageous people who have anguished so long over this matter.
To this end and to underscore our top priority commitment to
the families of these POW's and MIA's we recommend among other
actions the establishment of a Presidential task force headed
by a special Presidential representative.
FORD & LIBRARY GERRID
FOR IMMEDIATE ELEASE
SEPTEMBER 28, 1976
Office of the White House Press Secretary
THE WHITE HOUSE
The President today announced his intention to nominate James M. Wilson,
Jr., of Bethesda, Maryland, to be Coordinator for Human Rights and Human-
itarian Affairs. This is a new position created by Public Law 94-329 of
June 30, 1976. He will be responsible for matters pertaining to human rights
and humanitarian affairs including matters relating to refugees, prisoners of
war, and members of the United States Armed Forces missing in action in
the conduct of foreign policy. Mr. Wilson has been Coordinator for Humani-
tarian Affairs at the Department of State.
Born on July 8, 1918, in China of American parents, Mr. Wilson received
his A.B. degree in 1939 from Swarthmore College and his M.A. in 1940 from
the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy. He attended Harvard Law School
and received his LL. B. in 1948. He served in the United States Army as a
Lieutenant Colonel from 1941 to 1946, and was a Staff Officer in the United
States Air Force from 1948 to 1951.
In 1953, Mr. Wilson became a Defense Advisor in Paris and Bonn for USRO
and from 1955 to 1958, he was Director of the Office for Military Rights, Inter-
national Security Affairs in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. From
1958 to 1961, he was the Assistant Coordinator for Mutual Security at the State
Department, and during 1961, he was the Assistant Coordinator for Foreign
Assistance. From 1961 to 1964, he was Counselor of Economic Affairs, then
Deputy Director of USOM in Madrid and later Deputy Director.
Mr. Wilson became the Deputy Chief of Mission in 1964 in Bangkok, with the
rank of Minister and was the Deputy Chief of Mission in Manila with the rank
of Minister from 1966 to 1970. He was Deputy Assistant Secretary of the
Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs from 1970 to 1972. He was Special
Assistant for the Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs during 1973, prior
to becoming U.S. Deputy Representative for Micronesian status negotiations.
Mr. Wilson is married to the former Joan Rathvon and they have five children.
#
#
#
FORD is LIBRARY 07V
PRESS CONFERENCE NO. 37
of the
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
7 6
11:50 A.M. EDT
September 30, 1976
Thursday
In the Oval Office
At the White House
Washington, D.C.
QUESTION: Mr. President, you are well aware of
all the stories of allegations concerning your Grand Rapids past
and the campaign financing I know, and that the records
allegedly have been subpoenaed by a Special Prosecutor.
So, this must be very disturbing, and I suppose you want it
cleared up before the election.
I know you believe the Judiciary Committee
covered it all, but can you say categorically that there
has never been any misuse of your campaign funds when you
ran for Congress?
THE PRESIDENT: First, let me say very emphatically
that I strongly believe in the Special Prosecutor concept.
I support it; the Administration supports the continuation
of a Special Prosecutor. I was pleased when the Senate
passed a version that included such a provision. I am
disappointed that the House apparently is not going to do
it.
I should add that I have full confidence in the
integrity of Mr. Ruff in his responsibilities as the
Special Prosecutor.
Number two, I also believe in the full integrity
of the Department of Justice, and I am certain that they
will do whatever they are required to under their
responsibilities.
Let me add that nobody on my staff has any
authority whatsoever to contact either the Special
Prosecutor or the Department of Justice to in any way
hinder or impede whatever investigations are going
on.
MORE
Page 2
What I know about the Kent County situation
I have picked up in reading the newspapers or seeing on
television and radio what has been reported.
I, therefore, am not familiar with the precise
charges, whatever they may be. But, I can say with
complete confidence that I am certain that when the
investigation is completed, that I will be free of any
allegations such as I have read about.
I would add this final comment: There is a
saying that is prevalent in the law that "justice
delayed is justice denied." I am certain that the
people responsible for any investigation will live up to
the high standards required in the Canon of Ethics for the
legal profession, which does require that in any such
investigations that they be full, complete and concluded
as readily as possible.
QUESTION: Well, you don't know for certain
whether there are charges or whether you are the target,
or do you?
THE PRESIDENT: No.
QUESTION: Doesn't your curiosity--even if you
made public the fact that you were going to ask, I don't
think that would be undue pressure, would it?
THE PRESIDENT: We are trying to be so circum-
spect, so that we are not under any circumstances accused
of any improprieties, that I have told members of my
staff that under no circumstances should they make
contact with either the Special Prosecutor or the
Department of Justice.
QUESTION: Mr. President, don't you have the
right under the current law to ask if you are the target
of the Special Prosecutor's investigation and, if that
is the case, why don't you want to know that, at least?
THE PRESIDENT: I can't tell you whether under the
law I can or can't. But, even if we do have that right,
I think an inquiry by me or somebody on my staff would
undoubtedly be misconstrued, and I just don't want any
such allegations being made by anybody.
QUESTION: Mr. President, could you clear up a
matter that has been pending for some time and was
referred to in this investigation--or at least it was
referred to in a newspaper article the other day--that
when you were in the House you used to go down here to the
Seamans Institute, 22nd Street or somewhere, like a lot of
other House Members did of both parties, and read a little
speech that they gave you to read at noon luncheons and
then they would give you a nice little check, maybe
they would give you an extra $1,000 or $500 because you
were Majority Leader? I am sure this was probably done
by a lot of other Congressmen, but was that true?
MORE
Page 3
THE PRESIDENT: Any time I make a speech, Sarah,
I solicit from members of my staff- I did up in the House,
and I asked any organization that I was speaking to to
give me ideas on what they thought would be appropriate
comments in speaking to that organization.
In the case of the meetings that you speak of,
it was before the Joint Maritime Labor Organization -- that
is not the right term -- but it is a combination of all
the labor organizations that are involved in the maritime
industry.
Yes, I asked them for suggestions as to what
they thought would be appropriate for discussion before
their group and they, along with the Executive Branch of
the Government that had jurisdiction over shipbuilding or
any aspects of the maritime industry--I also got
recommendations from them, and this combination of
ideas for a speech, people on my staff put together in
a speech. But they were not the ones who wrote the speech
that you are speaking of.
They submitted what they thought would be
appropriate and we took their ideas with the suggestions
from the staff committees on the House and Senate side,
the Executive Department people, the labor organizations,
from the maritime industry overall, and that combination
of information went into whatever speeches I made. I think
that is a very appropriate way to handle it.
QUESTION: Did they give you a check for this, sir?
THE PRESIDENT: Oh, yes, and those checks were
fully reported on my income tax returns. They were reported
to any other authority that required it and all of that
matter was looked into by the House and Senate committees
at the time of my Vice Presidential hearing.
QUESTION: But if they had matters pending before
Congress, did you think it was right to take that money
when they had matters pending before the Congress?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I was deeply interested
in the new legislation that was before the House and the
Senate to expand and upgrade our maritime industry. That
was a group that likewise felt that way, and I think it
was proper.
QUESTION: Mr. President, in your golf outings
or social occasions, or other occasions with Rod Markley
of Ford Motor Company or U.S. Steel, did you discuss
Government business with them either when you were a
Member of the House, or Vice President, or President?
THE PRESIDENT: Not to my best recollection.
MORE
Page 4
QUESTION: You never discussed business?
THE PRESIDENT: No.
QUESTION: Mr. President, do you think in the
headlines that have run for about the last 10 days and
the fact that some of these potential allegations have
not been resolved, that there has been any damaging
effect on your campaign, or would there be if "justice
delayed" means there is no resolution of this before
November 2?
THE PRESIDENT: I think it is vitally important
that any aspects of either one of these matters be fully
resolved as quickly as possible. I have no way of knowing
what the impact is politically.
QUESTION: Mr. President, one of the issues raised
is whether any of this campaign money was actually ever
diverted to your personal use. Would you like to say
flatly whether that was so or not?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I don't know whether that is
an allegation that is being investigated by the Special
Prosecutor's Office, but I can say that there was never
money given to me by the Kent County Republican Committee.
The Kent County Republican Committee may have done some
advertising on behalf of my candidacy or the candidacy of
other Republican candidates running for public office.
That is their function.
They, for example, always the last week or so
would have a full-page ad with the Gubernatorial candidate,
the Senatorial candidate, the Congressional candidates,
plus some State legislative officers, and so I suppose they
spent their money on that, which is a perfectly proper
function of the Kent County Republican Finance Committee and
county organizations. No money ever went to me personally.
QUESTION: Mr. President, does the timing of the
Special Prosecutor's investigation seem strange to you,
or do you question the motivation?
THE PRESIDENT: I would not under any circumstances
question the motivation or the timing.
QUESTION: Mr. President, are you holding this
press conference because Jimmy Carter has accused you of
keeping silent on these matters?
THE PRESIDENT: Not at all.
QUESTION: Mr. President, your staff says they are
having some trouble getting records of all these various
golfing trips and what-not. Have you ever asked Mr. Whyte
if he has records?
THE PRESIDENT: It is my understanding Mr. Whyte
issued a two- or three-page statement a week or 10 days
ago which outlined the circumstances of the three trips
up to Pine Valley and the two down to Disneyland. I under-
stand he issued that.
MORE
Page 5
QUESTION: I mean records of what it cost and
who Daid and that sort of thing.
THE PRESIDENT: I have no access to their
records. They will have to answer that.
QUESTION: Mr. President, you said it is
vitally important the matter be resolved as soon as
possible. Is it your wish it be resolved before the
election? It is vitally important so the voters can see
the full story, or the true story.
THE PRESIDENT: It is more important to
me personally that it be cleared up because I am very proud
of my record of personal integrity and I think that is
more important than any impact it might have on the
election.
QUESTION: Mr. President, may I just ask you
this question: Those Marine unions, the Seafarers and
Marine Engineers, supported you down through the years.
Then you vetoed the bill that they wanted. I forget the
name of it, but I am sure you recall it. After that
they shifted over to Jimmy Carter. Do you have any feeling
that maybe somebody in the Carter camp may have made some
allegation to the Special Prosecutor and that is what
triggered this, or is there a political motivation in
there somewhere?
THE PRESIDENT: Bob, I wouldn't make any allegations
of that kind. I don't think, since I don't know -- I
don't think I ought to make any comment.
QUESTION: Obviously the Special Prosecutor
wouldn't open an investigation, I would think, on just
the basis of rumors. Somebody had to make an allegation
there.
THE PRESIDENT: What impresses me the most
is a statement by a former Special Prosecutor, Leon
Jaworski, who has said, as I understand it, publicly,
that before he left the office of Special Prosecutor
he looked into such matters and he came to the
conclusion that there was no reason for action.
Now, that in no way challenges the right or
the integrity of Mr. Ruff, but where any such charges
came from, I would have no idea.
QUESTION: Let me just make one follow-up.
If I understand it, Mr. Jaworski said he had investigated
the Seafarers Union, and I think that was in relation to
a $100,000 contribution they made to Richard Nixon. As
far as I know, he never said he looked into MEBA -- the
Marine Engineers. Do you know in fact whether or
not he did?
MORE
Page 6
THE PRESIDENT: No, I can't be that precise.
QUESTION: Mr. President, you said that you
instructed that your staff shouldn't make any contacts
to the Attorney General or to the Prosecutor. Have
there been any contacts made by any of these agencies
to you so that you have any information at all either
that this is going to be resolved quickly or any
information at all?
THE PRESIDENT: I have no information what-
soever.
QUESTION: Mr. President, do you have any
information from people back in your old home district,
the Fifth District, that may have contacted you,
presumably old friends of yours?
THE PRESIDENT: I read the Grand Rapids Press,
which is a good newspaper, and I read stories concerning
this and quotations from people who were former county
chairmen or presently county chairmen, so I know what
they said. But, they haven't talked extensively about the
investigation. I guess they felt that they had testified
or made comments to whoever was investigating it, and they
didn't really say very much.
QUESTION: But you haven't talked to any of
them personally?
THE PRESIDENT: No.
QUESTION: Mr. President, a number of Pentagon
military officers have received disciplinary reprimands
for accepting freebies, free weekends of hunting
expeditions. If you think there is nothing improper about
a Congressman accepting free golfing weekend, what dis-
tinction is there?
THE PRESIDENT: The House passed a resolution
sometime in 1968, as I understand it, which says nothing
of significance or substance should be received. I do
not feel that there was any impropriety on my part or any
violation of that regulation.
I am an avid golfer. Most of you know it. I
enjoy the company of people while I am playing golf.
Every person that has been involved in these allegations
I have reciprocated with as far as they coming either to
my golf club or coming to our home.
There has been, I would say, substantial reciprocity.
Whatever the circumstances of our getting together, it has
been in a proper way and in no way a violation, in my
judgment, of any rule or ethical standard. These are
close personal friends and have been for many years, and
I have never accepted -- or I don't believe they have
tendered -- any such things on the basis of seeking any
special privilege or anything that was improper.
MORE
Page 7
QUESTION: Mr. President, on June 15, before the
Southern Baptist Convention, you condemned very strongly
what you call "situation ethics" and I was wondering why
this golfing vacation wasn't really "situation ethics,"
when at that time you said the American people, particularly
our young people, cannot be expected to take pride or
even participate in a system of Government that is defiled
and dishonored, whether in the White House or the halls
of Congress.
My question is, do you feel that in view of what
the White House has admitted you have lived up to your own
standards here?
THE PRESIDENT: I have said that I don't consider
these infrequent weekends a violation of either the rules
of the House or any ethical standards.
I explainedthat these were longstanding personal
relationships, where there has been virtual reciprocity --
and I wouldn't have accepted if there had been any thought
in my mind that it was improper or a violation of any code
of ethics.
QUESTION: Isn't that "situation ethics" though?
THE PRESIDENT: I don't think SO.
QUESTION: Mr. President, to follow up on Fran
Lewine's question earlier, she asked you if any of the
funds had been diverted to personal use, and your answer
was, sir, you had never received any funds from Kent
County.
Are we to understand that as a "no", that you
have never used any of these funds for personal use?
THE PRESIDENT: From the Kent County Republican
Committee?
QUESTION: From any campaign?
THE PRESIDENT: I will say any campaign funds
for personal use.
QUESTION: Do you find these stories personally
painful, someone questioning your integrity?
THE PRESIDENT: It naturally has some impact
when I know that all of these things have been investigated
by some 400 FBI agents and 5 to 6 Internal Revenue agents
with my income taxes going back to 8 or 9 years, when I
know I have been given a clean bill of health, not only by
the FBI but the Internal Revenue Service, by Senate and
House committees, an overwhelming vote in the House and
Senate.
MORE
Page 8
When I look at the investigation that was made of
my personal life, the financial circumstances, probably
more than anybody else in the history of this country, I
know that there is no problem. So, I guess to some extent
one is bothered a bit, but as long as my conscience is
clear I have no real problem.
QUESTION: You brought up the matter of the income
tax. It is proper, isn't it, if in case a person receives
a gift of an airplane ticket or something of that sort,
it has to be listed on their income tax as a gift, or does
reciprocity cover that when you buy a ticket later?
THE PRESIDENT: I am not familiar with the details
of that, but the IRS went into all of these matters. They
have closed out my income tax returns for back 8 or 9
years. They had people go into these with minute detail
so I --
QUESTION: What I am asking is, actually I am
asking for your legal advice.
THE PRESIDENT: I am not here to give you any
legal advice.
QUESTION: Mr. President, is this longstanding
personal relationsnip, personal and friendship though it
may be based on -- is nevertheless valuable to United
States Steel and to the Ford Motor Company, much as the
employers of other people who are friends of yours --
for example, John Byrnes, who represents a great many
interests in this town on tax reform and -- perhaps coinci-
dentally, perhaps you believe this -- your position is
about like nis on tax reform?
I asked you earlier whether you had discussed
business during these social outings. Rod Markley said
you and he discussed the Clean Air Act. I wonder, do you
not see that it is to their benefit for you to have this
personal relationship?
THE PRESIDENT: Let me modify what I said a moment
before. In a casual way, of course we might informally
talk about certain matters, but I happen to feel that they
were not asking me and I was not asking them. The times
I have played with Rod have been at Burning Tree where we
are both members and both pay our own way. John Byrnes,
I played golf with him because he is a friend of 28-plus
years. I don't see anything improper at all.
MORE
Page 9
QUESTION: Do you feel you can separate their
business as lobbyists and their representation of their
corporations as your personal friend?
THE PRESIDENT: As a matter of fact, some of
their comments could be helpful in what the status is.
QUESTION: Mr. President, since that seems to
be the issue that Carter is raising, though, he seems to
be raising the old buddy system issue and saying, in
fact, you can't.
What can you say to counter that? How can you?
THE PRESIDENT: Maybe he can't, but I can.
QUESTION: Mr. President, may I ask you, you
now are aware that some of these expenses were actually
paid by the companies and not by your friends. But you
were paying, when you had them to your home, you were paying
yourself, the taxpayers were not taking care of this.
So, these companies in effect were financing some of this.
What is your thinking about why they wanted to
do this, why they were willing to entertain you on
these weekends?
THE PRESIDENT: I think you would have to ask
the people who offered the invitation. These are per-
sonal friends, and I don't ask in advance why you want to
pay my green fees. I think that is a matter for them
on the basis of their own integrity.
QUESTION: Mr. President, you have been through
one debate. Have you got any thoughts on the second
one as to a change in format, or anything you would like
to do differently?
THE PRESIDENT: We are very satisfied with the
format that was used in the first debate. I thought it went
very well.
QUESTION: Mr. President, you look more worried
than I have seen you in a long time.
THE PRESIDENT: Worried?
QUESTION: Yes. You haven't smiled in a long
time. You look troubled, and I have known you for
ten years. Does this bother you? Is this something that
is going to hurt you badly in the campaign?
MORE
Page 10
THE PRESIDENT: I answered a moment ago I
am more concerned about my personal reputation. But, I
am not unhappy. I am just worried about getting over
to the signing ceremony for one of these bill signings.
THE PRESS: Thank you.
END
(AT 12:13 P.M. CDT)