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
1103098
label
Reagan, Ronald
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
1103098
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Reagan, Ronald
citationUrl
collections
A. James Reichley Files (Ford Administration)
James Reichley's Subject Files
subjects
Presidential campaign, 1976
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
1103098
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1976-06-30
month
6
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
mediaId
72b5aa29e86d2dec
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box 5, folder "Reagan, Ronald" of the A. James
Reichley Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Copyright Notice
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of
photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald R. Ford donated to the United
States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.
Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public
domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to
remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid
copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Some items in this folder were not digitized because it contains copyrighted
materials. Please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library for access to
these materials.
Election: News
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
C-21
CANDIDATES ON THE ISSUES: REAGAN
Reazan
By Godfrey Sperling Jr.
The interview follows:
Staff correspondent of
Are you disturbed by the moral climate in the United
The Christian Science Monitor
States?
Oklahoma City
Oh yes, I think almost everyone is. I think what we have
seen is an era of permissiveness. But I also think we have
Ronald Reagan, asserting that "this country is hungry for
seen a kind of humanist philosophy that has been impressed
a spiritual revival," says that as president he would "take
particularly upon our children, a questioning of all moral
advantage of every opportunity to stress moral values."
values. all the traditional values.
However, asked about the possibility that Democrat
Would you or could you do anything to improve this cli-
Jimmy Carter might be making prayer an issue, Mr. Rea-
mate?
gan said, "I myself don't think we ought to make God an
The office of the presidency does have a moral suasion. I
endorser in this campaign." He himself placed "great re-
believe that by setting a tone at that position, by doing
liance" on prayer, he said.
whatever you can to counter this humanist philosophy and
Mr. Reagan gave these views during a lengthy interview
to reawaken an interest in traditional values upon which
with the Monitor aboard his plane recently, en route from
this country was founded - yes, I think a president can do
Detroit to Oklahoma City. The interview was part of a
something.
Monitor effort to probe the specific campaign '76 stands on
Do you do this by, perhaps, turning the presidency into
the issues of the three main contenders: Mr. Reagan, Pres-
what Teddy Roosevelt once called a "bully pulpit"?
ident Ford; and Mr. Carter.
I think you take advantage of every opportunity to stress
Analyses of Mr. Ford's and Mr. Carter's stands will ap-
those moral values. I think this country is hungry for a spir-
pear on these pages soon.
itual revival.
The interview came during a night flight on a small cam-
Jimmy Carter is bringing religion, certainly the subject
paign jet, after a long day which had included a luncheon
of prayer, into this election. Do you think it belongs there?
speech and several local TV interviews. Mr. Reagan spoke
Well, it has always been difficult for me to volunteer this.
freely after a quick chicken dinner, never groping for an-
I have never hesitated to answer questions about my own
swers. He was friendly, but maintained a degree of re-
faith, my own belief, my own reliance on prayer.
serve. Except for the deep lines on his face, he has the look
Is there a possibility that the candidates could be running
of a much younger man.
against each other on which is more prayerful?
Among Mr. Reagan's points:
I don't think there should be such a contest
I myself
He opposes national health insurance and calls "gov-
don't think that we ought to make God an endorser in this
ernment medicine spending more expensive" and "less ef-
campaign.
It would be difficult for me to simply volun-
ficient" than private medical practice.
teer what my faith is. I have never hesitated to answer
He would add 5 to 15 years to the sentence of anyone
when asked, and, frankly, I place a great reliance on
with a gun in his possession while committing a crime, and
prayer.
make the sentence mandatory, without probation.
Where do you stand on national health insurance?
He would "turn the industry loose" to produce the
I think any comparison of our pluralistic system in Amer-
energy the country needs, and strike a balance between
ica compared to those countries such as England, Sweden,
man and his environment which would recognize that
that have put in national health insurance reveals that gov-
"people are ecology, too."
ernment medicine is more expensive, government medicine.
On foreign policy, he would oppose concessions to Mos-
is less efficient, and we have, I believe, the finest health
cow without proper concessions in return, keep up U.S. ties
care to be found any place in the world and we should think
with Taiwan while using China as a "deterrent" against the
twice before we throw that system away.
Soviet Union, seek to replace Soviet with American in-
How would you handle inflation? Unemployment?
fluence in- Arab states, refuse to deal with Cuba's Fidel
Inflation and jobs go hand in hand. I believe that our
Castro, and refuse to "negotiate away" the Panama Canal.
problem has been [that] for too many years we treated the
Christian Science Monitor, 6/3/76 (Cont.)
"It was then that we insurated the reforms and it was
Reagan Challenged
in the next three years that we saved the taxpayers $2
billion, that we increased the grants and that we reduced
the rolls by more than 300,000 people."
California
Over Governorship
In answer to a similar question in Sacramento Wednes-
day, Reagan said the welfare rolls had been mounting by
Supplement
40,000 a month in the first years of his administration.
Presidential Drive Facing Questions
The Way statement continued that the California Em-
ployment Development Department, in a recent report,
Regarding Claims Made Elsewhere
said that Reagan's Community Work Experience Program
had "failed to achieve any of its objectives."
Way pointed out that Reagan had declared-in nation-
BY KENNETH REICH
ally and regionaily televised speeches-that the work ex-
Times Political Writer
perience program "is an answer to much of the welfare.
SACRAMENTO-As Ronald Reagan's campaign party
problem in the nation" and said the program had "put
arrived in Fresno this week, reporters were handed a
able-bodied welfare recipients to work at useful communi-
F-
press release from the President Ford Committee in
ty projects in return for the welfare grants."
which state Sen. Howard Way (R-Exeter) assailed Rea-
But, he noted, the employment department found that
gan for allegedly misrepresenting his record as governor
during 1974, the program's peak year, only 2.6% of the
on welfare reform.
182.735 available welfare recipients were provided with
Rearah
FORD LIBRARY is 074839
L.A. Times
6/3/76.
2233pED 06-02
a724
F-Rezqan
B a eevbyluiv
BC-Reagan Roundtable, Adv 06 - 5 Takes, 490-2,330
$ADV 06
BERALD FORD LIBRART
For Release Sun. June 6
By WALTER R. MEARS
and
DOUG WILLIS
Associated Press Writers
LOS ANGELES AP - Ronald Reagan contends that U.S. defenses have
slipped to a point at which the Soviet Union can be 'more truculent
and aggressive" with conventional arms and might survive American
retaliation in a nuclear war.
In an interview with The Associated Press, the Republican
presidential challenger said the U.S. defense budget should be
whatever it takes to maintain national security, but said be could not
set a figure.
Reagan said he had confidence in the budget favored by former
Secretary of Defense James R. Schlesinger who advocated about $104
billion in defense spending this year. That 1s about $3 billion over
President Ford's budget.
Reagan also said be still wants to shift programs that represent
about a quarter of the $396-billion federal budget to state and local
governments, along with tax sources to finance them. But be said be
had no estimate of how much the net tax saving would be.
He said there is concern in Congress that the administration "might
by some kind of executive order" make U.S. concessions in Panama
without congressional approval.
Reagan has said that as President. be would not permit negotiations
with Panama predicated on a yielding of U.S. sovereignty over the
canal and its zone. He has avoided saying that he would simply break
off negotiations.
Insisting that the United States should not give up control of the
Canal Zone, Reagan said only in 'the era of science fiction» can be
envision a time when the Panama Canal will not be vital to U.S.
interests.
Here is a partial transcript of the interview. conducted aboard
Reagan's chartered jet as he campaigned for Tuesday's California
presidential primary:
Q. Gov. Reagan. you say the United States has slipped to second
place in military strength. Does this mean in your view that the
Soviet Union could now defeat the U.S. in a full scale war?
A: I don't believe that the Soviet Union would have the margin
of superiority to attack. But I think the great danger is that the
Soviet Union is in the position of being more truculent and aggressive
with the use of conventional arms knowing that there is virtually no
way we can prevent this, such as in Angola. All we could do was talk.
Q: You mean that you think this creates a new danger of brush-fire
type wars?
A: That's right up to and including. I think. what the commander of
NATO warned about, Alexander Haig, that the imbalance there was so
great that we were on the edge of disaster. Now suppose the move
should come by the Soviet Union in western Europe and the NATO
alliance can't stop them The only recourse left to us would be
the one thing that none of us wants at all the nuclear button. The
day we push the nuclear button we know that we do not have the nuclear
superiority we once had, we don't even have parity.
MORE
2242pED 06-02
a725
S a eevbylwyf
BC-Reagan Roundtable, Adv 06 - 1st add, 470
$ADV 06
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
For Release Sun June 6
LOS ANGELES: that parity.
Q: But you do believe that we still have second strike capability?
A: Not really. We've ignored some very significant factors, one of
them being their civil defense plan. There are ostimates that
they could take a second strike and suffer probably fewer casualties
than they did in World War II. Russian casualties during World War II
were estimated at 20 million
Q: So what does this add up to? Does this mean that you're concerned
about being in a massive retaliation position, or about the United
States being unable to retaliate?
A: I am concerned that we must have a defensive posture so strong
that they can't be tempted into doing this. Now this does not mean,
... that I would have us have tank for tank and gun for gun and man
for man. Not at all. Our ability has lain in technology and in
qualitative superiority. We have weapons systems which have not been
developed, for example the cruise missile, probably the most promising
... a weapons system in which we're years ahead of them in
development. This would alter their whole plan if suddenly we were on
the scene with a new weapons system.
Q: The administration's defense budget this year is 14 per cent
higher than last year, about $101 billion. The projections in Ford's
budget would have it go up by about $10 billion a year over the next
four years. How much more do you think should be spent?
A: Well. in defense spending I believe that you are guided by
necessity. It isn't a matter of opinion, of choosing to have this
priority or that priority. You have to spend what is necessary to
maintain national security.
Q: Can you say what is necessary in your view?
A: No although I do believe that I would have confidence in Dr.
Schlesinger's figures when be was there. Now I've never challenged
that Mr Ford has not asked for more armaments. for more defense
spending than Congress has been willing to givé. But .. he places
his faith and confidence in his long time buddies in the Congress and
they turn him down. And I have said that leadership today. I believe,
calls for going to the American people and telling them the truth.
Q: You've made that point repeatedly Ford says that he's
been sustained in 42 vetoes that have saved $13 billion. What could
you do differently?
A: Well, let's take that picture of defense. Here is his own
secretary of defense caught between not wanting to reduce the
political chances of the President but at the same time trying to
persuade the Congress ... that we need more defense strength. And so
he can't say, he won't say we're No. 2. but he won't say we're No. 1.
Mr. Ford at the same time is saying to the American people
we're the most powerful nation on earth. You can't have it both ways
... What is wrong with the President of the United States saying to
the people of the United States here is the danger and it is your
danger, not just mine ...
More
2252pED 06-02
a726
S a eevbylvyx
BC-Reagan Roundtable, Adv 06 - 2nd add, 470
$ADV 06
For Release Sun. June 6
LOS ANGELES: just mine.
Q: Ford has called Congress irresponsible
...
and has been very
critical of the Congress for overspending
...
A: Well, he's vetoed some spending bills and I think this is
understandable. Good Lord. he's boasting about $13 billion. I vetoed
$16 billion worth at a state level. State Finance Director Roy Bell
says Reagan vetoed nearly $2.3 billion in spending bills during his
eight years as California governor.
...
Probably
the
greatest
triumph we had were the welfare reforms in California. Now the
opposition was so great there that when I asked the legislature as
governor for permission to come before a joint session and present the
proposal for reform, they refused ... So I went up and down the
state presenting them to the people. And the result was that in about
two months the leadership of the Democratic legislature came in to
see me and their expression was 'Stop those cards and letters.
Q: Is this what you would do from the White House?
A: Yes. and I think it's long overdue.
Q: You've said that any President would have to say that he'd go to
war if necessary to defend the Panama Canal What bout situations
short of loss of the canal, a situation in which we would still have
use of the canal
but Panama would control it Where do you draw
the line?
A: Well I think the safest line. here is one of the four great
waterways of the world. strategic waterways. And in a time of
emergency or war an enemy that could close those four waterways could
shut down the industry of the United States Now one of the
reasons for our having sovereignty in the canal zone is because we
realized that this great and important waterway was being built across
a tiny country which could not possibly be expected to preserve or
defend the canal The thing is that sovereignty then gives us
this power and ability there is a deterrent factor against someone
trying to take it if it belongs to the United States.
Q: Then in your view the zone and the canal are inseparable issues?
The administration position is that we negotiate on the zone and then
somewhere down the road consider the canal.
A: But you have a treaty now, what they're talking about is a treaty
which would call for a period in which you'd turn over the canal. How
do you negotiate such a treaty when you don't even know what kind of
government there will be in Panama? We're negotiating with a fellow
that took over by military force and threw out the elected government
of the country.
Q: Is there a point foreseeable at which we won't need the canal?
A: Well, now we get into the era of science fiction. No one can ever
say that something is impossible
Suppose down the road
someplace surface travel of ships literally became minute or
non-existent because of some new development
:::
out of our space
travel, something developed in rocket travel
Then, of course, a
canal wouldn't be necessary.
MORE
2301pED 06-02
LIBRARY
GERALD
is
oyos
a727
S a eevbyleev
BC-Reagan Roundtable, Adv 06 - 3rd add, 470
$ADV 06
For Release Sun, June 6
LOS ANGELES: necessary..
Q: You want a balanced federal budget, but you also want an increase
in defense spending and you've advocated several tax cuts ... How
can you balance the budget and at the same time increase defense
spending and cut taxes?
A: How did we save $2 billion on welfare and increase the welfare
grants by 43 per cent in California? And we saved the taxpayers $2
billion
Welfare grants were increased and the caseload declined under
Reagan reforms. The claim of a $2-billion saving is based on an
estimate of what welfare would have cost Californians in state
federal and local taxes without the reforms. according to a Reagan
aide. State welfare spending went from $450 million to $968 million
annually during the Reagan administration, and federal matching funds
increased about as much. Exact comparisons are impossible because of
a shift of programs for the aged, blind and disabled from federal to
state jurisdiction
Congressman Phil Crane R-III. has written a booklet on saving $56
billion in federal spending and yet adding a couple of billion
dollars for research and development for the Pentagon Now I'm
not going to say that I agree with every point ... But he also
includes, and I would too the Pentagon itself as an area of savings.
You have to assume that the same kind of bureaucratic fat exists in
the Pentagon as in any other government agency ...
Q: The transfer program. to which you still refer without the
1ll-fated $90 billion figure, how big a share of the federal budget do
you now envision transferring back to the states? You've mentioned
welfare and other programs that you want to switch:
A: Well what I had to do. the $90 billion figure. which I think got
distorted was an illustration of the size of those half-dozen
programs to the federal government
Q: Well that was about a quarter of the budget, a little less. Is
that still the range of transfer that you have in mind?
A: Yes. But I also made it plain that this would not be a net
saving because obviously if you're going to continue those programs
some of that spending is going to be there. What I pointed out was
that with that much in just that transfer alone that first you'd lose
the portion of that ... Washington administrative overhead. it
would be gone. Second, I believe from our own experience with welfare
that there is then an additional slice because they would be run more
efficiently and effectively at the state and local level than they're
being run in what is bad administration
...
Q: Can you quantify that ... How much do you think that you can
save if you are able to transfer about a quarter of the federal budget
back to the states?
A: That I couldn't quantify because I don't know at the moment, I
would not have available to me the figures on what is the
administrative overhead, what share of HEW would become unnecessary.
MORE
2310pED 06-02
LIBRARY OFOF GERALD
a315
S a zyvzvtwyf.
BC-Reagan Roundtable, Adv 06 - 4th add, 440
$ADV 06
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
Repeating for all needing
For Release Sun, June 6
LOS ANGELES: unnecessary.
Q: You've also said you think there are a number of federal programs
that should be canceled outright. Could you give me some examples?
A: Of course there's Ph11 Crane's book. but as I say; I can't go by
that completely but I think when you look at it, yes, we're in an
emergency situation with our country now going into debt at a rate of
about $100 billion a year ... You have to treat this as an
emergency situation just as a family whose breadwinner suddenly has
bad a big cut in income and the family's got to say what can we do
without. Now maybe some of the things you do without are not foolish
or useless but maybe some of them you have to say, well, they're a low
priority, they're not as important as food on the table
For example, I think you'd have to look at the arts program
...
Now this wouldn't be a big saving, 1t isn't a big program, but here's
an example.
Q: The program for the arts, I believe, 1s about $180 million
...
A: Yes.
Q: That doesn't get you very far toward dealing with a $70 billion
deficit.
A: No as I said, this is one of the smaller ones ...
Q: Are there any b1g ones?
A: Sure. I think there are. I think a lot of that big chunk would
come in this transfer back to local government Look at 74,000
regulators now. federal regulators. enforcing federal regulations. It
is estimated that the administrative expense of those alone
is
$3 billion
President Ford has proposed to Congress an easing of federal
regulations of industry and business over the next four years with
specific steps yet to be outlined. Ford said there are 80 agencies and
about 100 000 federal employes involved In regulatory programs The
current administration budget for the 24 major regulatory agencies is
$3.8 billion
Q: Who are the regulators that you would eliminate?
A. The regulation that we have to have 1s where government protects
US from each other. For example. we have anti-monopoly laws ...
Q: What about food stamps? Is that something you think we can
eliminate?
A: This is something that should be transferred. Right now it's run
at the state level or administered at the state level but totally
under the authority of the federal government.
Q: And these transfers would be with earmarking of a portion of the
federal income tax to the states and localities?
A: Whether that or whether other taxes ...
Whether
it's
a
particular tax, a whole tax, certainly I do not mean to dump 1t on the
states.
End ADV Sun June 6, Sent June 2
End Repeat
2343pED 06-02