Ask the Scholar

Document scope · 1 page
doc
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 material relating to Health Maintenance Organizations (HMO).

Scholar Source Context

Document identity
localId
12222092
label
Fifth District Weekly Radio Reports, June-October 1973
core
doc
dtoType
document
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
12222092
contentType
document
title
Fifth District Weekly Radio Reports, June-October 1973
description
This file contains material relating to Health Maintenance Organizations (HMO).
collections
Gerald R. Ford Congressional Papers
Weekly Radio Reports
subjects
Soviet Union
Department of Defense. 9/18/1947-
Agriculture
Arms control
Commerce
Economic stabilization
Energy policy
Federal budget
Food
Health
Impoundment of funds
Inflation (Finance)
Legislation
Meat
National security
Obscenity (Law)
Pension trusts
Petroleum
Political reform
Prayer in the public schools
Presidential powers
Private schools
Summit meetings
Taxation
United States-Soviet relations
Voting
Wars
Wastes
Watergate Affair, 1972-1974
Peace negotiations
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
12222092
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1973-10-31
month
10
year
1973
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1973-06-01
month
6
year
1973
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
8ea447cc722bb8a2
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box D36, folder "Fifth District Weekly Radio Reports, June-October 1973" of the Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech File 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. The Council donated to the United States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.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 D37 of The Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech File at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library SCRIPT FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS THE WEEKEND OF JUNE 2-3, 1973. This is your congre ssmem, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capital. About 30 million Americans now look to private pensions for economic security in their older years. There are 34,000 private pension plans operating in the United States, controlling assets of $140 billion--the largest amount of virtually unregulated capital in the country. But despite these impressive statistics, private pensions have not lived up to their promiser In all too many cases, the pension promise shrinks to this: If you remain in good health, and if you stay with the same company until you are 65 years old, and if the company is still in business, and if your department has not been abolished, and if you haven't been laid off for too long a period, and if there is enough money in the fund, and if that money has been prudently managed, then you will get a pension, which may or may not be adequate for your needs. Pension reform will be one of my major legislative efforts during the 93rd Congress. Visting to protect ones persion, portability ensurance vitally important the Congre SS works on pension plans, a Labor Department regulation which requires the disclosure of full information on what existing pension plans do is scheduled to go into effect on July 31. The administrators of the pension plans must make this information available by the July date. Every worker can get this information in notices which are supposed to be posted on company bulletin boards and in company newsletters. In addition, the individual worker can receive this information on reque st. The "description form" that must be made available is supposed to tell each employee in simple language what he has to do to be eligible for pension benefits. It is also supposed to tell him the amount of money being put into the fund by employee and ALD employer, how benefits and contributions are computed, how long an employee must -2- work for basic and full rights, what the disability benefits are, what happens to benefits in case of a mergetor the sale of the company, and how claims can be filed. If an employee writes the pension plan headquarters for a copy of the form, the employer must notify the employee that a copy will be delivered within 30 days. As the Congress works to improve private pension plan systems, this full-dis- closure regula tion should go a long way toward clear ing up the mystery that surrounds some plans. mission. Now let me turn to an entirely different subject--the current Skylab With our astronauts actually living in a laboratory out in space, the United States has entered into a new era of space exploration. What you may not know is that Michigan will play a major part in the success of the Skylab mission. The Skylab project includes as one of its major functions the use of $37 million worth of scientific cameras and sensors designed to study earth resources from our orbiting laboratory in space. The Environmental Research Institute of Michigan atamarbor will play a major role in analyzing and interpreting the data gathered with Skylab&s scientific instruments. Skylab is the size of a 10-story high building. It provides spacious accommodations in which the astronauts are conducting their experiments. For the first time in manned space flight, astronauts have adequate facilities to conduct inti ensive scientific tests. Their experiments should provide solid evidence of the usefulness--or lack of usefulne ss--of space flight, in solving the scientific problems of the earth. The Environmental Research Institute of Michigan will be conducting seven earth resource projects with Skylab data These involve detectors of oil pollution in the oceans, the mapping of mineral deposits, and the aerosol content of the atmosphere. This is your congre ssman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capit a. VIBRANT I'll be back next week--same time, same SCRIPT FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS THE WEEKEND OF JUNE 9-10, 1973. This is your congre ssman, Jerry Ford, talking to you from the nation's capital. The 200th birthday of our nation is less than four years away. Unless we acti to clean up our environ ment, it will be celebrated in a growing clutter of litter. We will be unable to put our best foot forward in 1976 if the path is strewn with debris. The need for a cleanup is great, since no part of nature is exempted from the pervæsive influence of pollution. The byproducts of industry, wastes from our homes, industrial chemicals, noxious gases and burned crankcase oil from auto- mobiles help to comprise this dangerous momolith. The solutions to many of these problems are very complex and expensive. The individual citizen often feels incapable of doing anything to help alleviate these problems. There is, however, one form of pollution which is a direct result of actions by individuals and, therefore, can be eliminated by individuals. I refer to land pollution caused by careless littering. Litter is a national disgrace. It dots our landscape and spreads over it like an uncontrollable form of cancer. Litter is caused by careless people, and it can be cleaned up by people who care. It is heartening to note that people from all across the nation are rallying to a nationwide cleanup project called Johnny Horizon 176, - a project of the U.S. Interior Department. In the words of Interior Secretary Rogers Morton, "Johnny Horizon '76 stands for action. He represents and speaks for each and every concerned citizen who wants to do something about making America a better place in which to live. " The Johnny Horizon Program was established by an act of Congre SS in September GERAL FORD LIBRARY of 1970 and signed into law by President Nixon. The slogan is: "Let's Clean Up -2- America for our 200th Birthday." The task before us is staggering. Last year, Americans bought 60 million tons of packaging and threw away 54 million tons. This amount is going up by six pert cent each year, so it is predicted that by 1976 each person in America will use 660 pounds of packaging in one year. All too often, proper di sposal is not utilized and the costs waste is thrown on the g round or into a river. Cleanup of this litter an astounding $500 million a year, and the cost is rising. Thus we are buying packaging and then we are paying to clean it up. In aerosol cans, for instance, 16 per cent of the product cost is for the container. In baby food, 36 per cent of the cost is for the jar. Returnable bottles made an average of 31 trips between user and manufacturers 20 years ago, and now the average is down to 19. Much of what we regard as garbage can and should be recycled instead of thrown into the environment. The Johnny Horizon Program is an effort to explain the problems of pollution and what each of us can do to help in the fight against pollution. More than 1,500 organizations across the country have taken it upon themselves to join in this worthwhile project. They include chambers of commerce, schools, churches, youth groups, conservation, civic and commercial organizations. In addition, the American Revolution Bicentennial Commission has of ficial ly recognized this program as part of its activities leading up to 1976. Johnny Horizon 176 is a program in which both young and old can participate. For the young, brochures, posters, litter bags and recorded instructions are available in a way which appeals to children. For adults, different types of anti-pollution campaign packets have been prepared with emphasis on how to conduct cleanup campaigns in every community. Information can be obtained by writing the Johnny Horizon Program Coordinator, U.S. Department of Interior, Washington, D.C. 20240. This is your congre ssman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capital. I'll be back with you next week--same time, same station. SCRIPT FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS THE WEEKEND OF JUNE 16-17, 1973. This is your congre ssman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capital. This week I would like to touch on a variety of topics in this radio report. First off, let me tell you how pleased I am that the sident has announced a 60-day freeze on wholesale and retail prices, with the freeze to be followed by an effective system of price controls. There is no question that the Administration made a bad mistake in going to loose voluntary controls last January--the so-called Phase III system. Phase III, very plainly, was a flopdn many anas Now we are back to a freeze, which gives us a good chance to get a real handle on the inflation problem again. You may be sure I will do everything I can to help in the fight against inflation. Another topic I would like to focus on today is tax reform. As you may know, the House Ways and Means Committee has conducted a number of hearings on tax reform and the Administration has submitted its tax reform proposals to the committee. Something I have discovered, through my mail, is that notax all of my constituents realize I have sponsored a tax reform proposal which would give a tax credit to parents for part of the tuition paid to gend their children toy nonpublic nonprofit elementary and secondary schools. My bill has the support of Ways and Means Chairman Wilbur Mills--and Mr. Mills recently said that "undoubtedly" my tax credits proposal will be included in the big tax reform bill to be prepared by his committee. Speaking of the tax credit for nonpublic school education bill, Chairman Mills said: "I'm definitely committed to it; the President's committed to it; and I think many of us in the Congress are." There are many other tax reform proposals under consideration as well, of BERALE course, FORD JARARY -2- One of these, which I support most strongly, would provide - taxpayers 65 and older with a Federal tax credit for local property tax payments in excess of 5 per cent of their income--up to a maximum of $500. In addition, one of the major features of the Administration's bill is aimed at preventing the wealthy from avoiding the payment of Federals income taxes. This proposal would wipe out tax shelters and produce about $800 million in extra revenues during its first year of operation. It would affect about 130,000 taxpayers. The outlook for enacting these and other reform measures still remains uncertain. As with every piece of major legislation, there are differing points of view which must be re solved before any significant action is taken. I, for one, am going to continue to pre SS for these tax reform measure and will urge my colleagues to do the same. I would like now to voice some thoughts about the meetings about to take place between President Nixon and Soviet leader Brezhnev. I am most hopeful that these meetings will provide a sound foundation for improved relations between the United States and the Soviet Unions for years to come. It is possible that the Nixon-Brezhnev meetings will pave the way for a second SALT Agreement reducing the danger of nuclear warfare, a new trade relationship which will be beneficial to both the U.S. and the U.S.S.R., a European Security Treaty which will result in a mutual reduction of forces, the elimination of mutual irritants, an easing of tensions, and a new era of space cooperation. If these meetings are as successful as they might be, we could emerge with real prospects for agents a generation of peace. This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's vapital. I'll be talking with you again next week-same time, same station. GERALD'S LIDRARY SCRIPT FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS THE WEEKEND OF JUNE 30-JULY 1, 1973. This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capital. I would like to comment today on two topics-the Nixon-Brezhnev summit and talks tax credits for parents sending their children to nonprofit nonpublic elementary and secondary school As I look back upon the Nixon-Brezhnev summit meetings, I feel a great satisfaction. These meetings at the summit produced a number of significant steps toward world peace. The fruits of the Nixon-Brezhnev conference constitute historic advances toward peace for all mankind. Let us consider what was achieved at the summit. The United Sta tes and the Soviet Union formally agreed to consult each other whenever there is a risk of nuclear war and to refrain from any threat or use of force that would Deopardize world peace. Fürthermore, in this "Agreement on the Prevention of Nuclear War," the two nations joined in an alliance against nuclear confrontation, pledging that they would work together to maintain world peace and to avoid serious international confrontations. President Nixon and Soviet leader Brezhnev also signed a Declaration of the Seven Principles, which promises to pave the way for a second Strategic Arms Limitation Agreement. These guidelines are similar to the joint U.S.-Soviet pronouncement in May 1971 which broke the impasse in the stalled SALT I negotiations. The Seven Principles Agreement commits the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. to conclude a treaty limiting offensive nuclear weapons by 1974; pledges both nations to a permanent limitation on strategic nuclear weapons; and broadens SALT II talks to include "qualitative improvements" in offensive nuclear weapons. It commits both sides not only to the limiting of such weapons but to an actual reduction of strategic weapons. Mr. Nixon and Mr. Brezhnev also signed an agreement calling for increased 13 FORD LIBRARY -2- cooperation in developing peaceful uses of atomic energy-the first such practical agreement between the U.S. and the Soviet Union on a working level. Both sides are seeking a breakthrough that might result in the development of a nuclear reactor producing pollution-free electrical energy. As the summit meetings concluded, Mr. Brezhnev invited Mr. Nixon to visit Moscow next year and Mr. Nixon accepted. That 1974 summit might well be the occasion for the signing of a broad treaty limiting offensive nuclear weapons, just as the 1972 summit in Moscow saw the signing of the treaty limiting defensive nuclear weapons. There is no question but that the summit meetings recently concluded have strengthened peaceful relations between Washington and Moscow and have been most fruitful and productive. As we continue to build on this foundation, we can look forward to peace not only for this generation but beyond. Turning now to another topic, we find that the Supreme Court last week struck down the use of tax credits in New York and Pennsylvania to assist parents who send their children to nonpirofit nonpublic elementary and secondary schools. It would seem to rule out Federal income tax credits for such purposes. I consider this decision most unfortunater and ungair. A In my view, parents whose children attend nonpublic schools deserve a tax break because they carry a double burden. They pay public school taxes as well as the tuition necessary to keep nonpublic schools operating. I also believe it is healthy for the country to keep our nonpublic schools in operation as competition for the public school system. But the facts are that many of our nonpublic schools are being forced to shut down for financial re asons. So I believe the Supreme Court decision on tax credits for parents on of nonpublic school pupils to be most regrettable. This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capital. LIBRA I'll be back with you again next week-same time, same station. ##### SCRIPT FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS THE WEEKEND OF JULY 7-8, 1973. This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capital. I am deeply concerned about the possibility of food shortages due to the current price freeze. The stories about the killing of baby chicks because it is unprofitable are for poultry producers to raise chickens absolutely shocking. The sooner we move from the freeze into Phase IV price controls the better. I don t know how must 2 hope stirll be sech the Administration will be ready to get into Phase IV a strong & realistic program within OF two The poultry producers, the livestock raisers, the fruit and vegetable farmers, the canners and the grocers have all told the Cost of Living Council the same story. The freeze has put them in a squeeze between rising costs and the prices they are able to charge. As a result, they can't afford to produce certain items or stock them on their grocery shelves. Consequently, they say, shortages will soon develop if relief from the freeze in the form of a cost pass-through is not granted. The Administration unfortunately also is caught in a squeeze. Any abrupt easing of the freeze will cause a new bulge in consumer food prices. Next week the U.S. House of Repre sentatives is going to be considering a farm Itisa production incentive approved bill which is aimed at assuring plentiful food for consumers. It would put a floor under farm prices and would be effective for the next five crop years. The bill the House Agriculture Committee is sending to the House floor is similar to a bill already passed by the Senate. Known as the Agriculture and Consumer Protection Act, the farm bill has a target price concept. It would set a floor on prices for each crop. If the farmer can get that price, or a higher one, in the open market, the government will pay him nothing. If the farmer can't obtain a price equal to the target price, he can still sell his crop in the open market but the government then will pay him GERALD the FORD LIBRARI -2- difference between what he received and the target price. Under the current farm program, the government pays producers of basic crops whether the free market prices are high or low. Farmers want to earn their money in the marketplace whenever they can. Since food supplies are vital and because farmers have le SS control over what they receive for their products and what they must pay for their supplies than almost any The encentive provisions other business, they de serve a floor against disaster. And this will also assure adequate food supplies for consumers. There is a difference between the House and Senate bills as to what the target farm prices should be. And the Administration feels that the target prices in both so some masmable amendments will be proposal the House and Senate bills are too high, So there will have to be & empromise. Whatever the final target prices are, they will have to be tied to farm production costs. If the costs of operating a farm go up or down, the target prices should be increased br decreased. This is only fair. Another change in the new farm bill is that payments to a producer cannot exceed $20,000. At present, there is a limit of $55,000 per commodity which is too high The current wheat certificate program will be ended--as will the proce ssor's tax, sometimes referred to as "the bread tax." This should help consumers & baker. The milk program would be supported at 80 per cent of parity. The sale of grain abroad under the Public Law 480 program--the Food for Peace Program--would be continued. This new farm program is important to all Americans. Everyone is a consumer of good. Beyond that, about one-fourth of all jobs in private employment are related to agriculture. About 41 million people are employed in agriculture, almost as many as in the transportation, steel and automobide industries combined. GERALD FORD CIBRARY This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation capital. I'll be badk next week--same time, same station. ######## SCRIPT FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS THE WEEKEND OF JULY 14-15, 1973. This is your congre ssman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capital. It is a measure of how far America and the rest of the world have travelled toward peace that the public is more concerned today about tearing down tax shelters than it is about building fallout shelters. We have been using the slogan, "A generation of peace." Before we fall into the habit of accepting it just as a slogan, let's look at some of the things that have happened in this world in the last two years. Not only has America entered into productive talks with Russia and the People's Republic of China, but the pursuit of peace has taken hold throughout the world. North Korea is talking with South Korea. China is talking to Japan. Pakistan is talking to India. East Germany is talking to West Germany. North Vietnam and South Vietnam, despite some problems remaining to be resolved, are talking to weach other. The war in Vietnam has been ended and our American combat forces have come home. Home, too, are out American POWs. Their heads are held high, and they are on their feet-not on their knees. For the first time in a generation, no young Americans are being drafted to serve in the armed forces of four country. Because of the agreements beached between the United States and the Soviet Union, our two nations are engaged in the far more productive pursuit of rattling plowshares instead of rockets. Our talks with Russia are easing tensions, and the direct talks between our two nations are centering on trade. We may well be headed toward a mutual reduction of force: although let me say at this point that it would be a terrible mistake for the United States to reduce its forces in Europe unilaterally. If we did that, what would there be to negotiate? A new spirit of conciliation has replaced the old enmities which provented depente. This is why I am hopeful about a mutual reduction of forces. R.FORD LIBRARY -2- Never before have the chances been so good for our children and grandchildren to live in a peaceful world. The symbolic Doomsday Clock which had been ticking forward is being with each straining of world tensions now turned back. Fourteen years ago a Soviet leader talking about "burying" the United States. It is good that now we are talking about burying our differences. There are of course many other problems facing the United States at this juncture in our history. We have the horror of Watergate, which is being exposed in the Watergate the Senate Erving Committee hearings. I am appalled by incident andy all of its ramifications. But with the Senate Committee operating, and a special prosecutor functioning, and a grand jury functioning, I feel sure the entire truth will come out and that all of the guilty will be brought to justice. We must also at this point be very concerned about our economy. As I view it, the economy currently is slowing down and will continue to slow down but without a back rece ssion. This is a healthy development. It will tend to hold prices with or without Phase IV. At the same time, unemployment is going down. But we must move to Phase IV of price controls as quickly as possible because the present price freeze is producing difficulties throughout the food industry. The freeze is nothing to cheer about when it causes Crown Packing Company, Michigan's second largest meat packer, to shut down and brings a warning from Frederick & Herrud, the largest meat packer in the state, that they might have to do y the same. You cannot expect the meat packers e or anyone else connected with the food industry to supply the public with food at prices that mean a loss instead of a profit. This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capital. I'll be talking with you again next week-same time, same station. ERALD FORD LIBRARY ####### SERIPT FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS THE WEEKEND OF JULY 21-22, 1973. This is your congre ssman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capital. During the last month, Treasury Secretary Shultz, the chairman of the Cost of Living Council, other members of the Council and senior staff officials of the Cost of Living Council have been consulting with consumers, busine ssmen, farmers, Congressional leaders, and government of ficials in lp parts of the country. On the basis of all those sconsultations, the Cost of Living Council has put together the Phase IV price control program announced last Wednesday. In my view, the Phase IV program is the best that could be devised to meet the present situation as regards inflation and the economy. Although the freeze was keeping prices stable at retail levels, it was causing busine SS shutdowns and unemployment and creating shortages in the food industry. Among the problems created by the freeze were situations where the cost of processing or distributing food products was above the freeze price. It is exactly this which forced Crown Packing Co., the second largest meat packer in Michigan, to shut down on July 4 and mearly closed down Frederick & Herrud, which operatesp plants in Grand Rapids, Detroit and Wilmington, N.C. The freeze also caused fresh fruit and vegetable farmers to incur losses because low market prices had prevailed during the base period or the freeze prices were based on last year's crop. So now price ceilings have been lifted on all agricultural products except beef in order to permit a pass-through of raw agricultural product cost increases incurred since June 8 by processors, distributors and retailers on a dollar-for-dollar basis. Ceilings on beef prices will continue until September 12. on Sept. 12, the price ceiding will end and there will be a pass-through of other cost increases on a ddllar-for-dollar basis. This second stage of the food controls program will place the food sector under control rules similar to the rules for the industrial service, retail LIBRAT -2- and wholesale sectors of the economy. Except for foods, the freeze on prices will remain in effect until August 12. However, modifications of the freeze rules will be made to relieve its most serious inequities. The fundamental pricing rule of Phase IV is that prices are permitted to rise as much as costs rise, in dollars per unit of output, without any profit margin on the additional costs. Large firms--those with annual sales in excess of $100 million--will be required to notify the Cost of Living Council of intended price increases and may not put them into effect for 30 days. During that period, the Council may deny or suspend the proposed increase. These are tough rules--in some respects tougher than during Phase II. But the inflationary situation today is in www.ways more difficult than during Phase II. Nowhere have the difficulties created by price controls been made more apparent than in the case of food. Since the ceilings were placed on meat prices on March 29, and especially since the freeze was imposed on June 13, food has given the clearest evidence of the harm that controls do to supplies. We have read of baby chicks being drowned and pregnant SOWS and cows, bearing next year's food, being slaughterek and packing plants closed down. Special attention is being given in the post-freeze period to stabilizing the cost of food. But the real key to curbing food prices lies in increasing supplies, not in price controls. There is# no way, with or without controls, to prevent a substantial rise in food prices. However, by 1974 we should be able to achieve a much more moderate rate of inflation. By that time, the good feed crops ALD LIBRA in prospect for this year should have produced a much larger supply of food, This is your congre ssman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capital I'll be back with you again next week-same time, same station.,###### SCRIPT FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS THE WEEKEND OF JULY 21-22, 1973. # This is your congre ssman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capital. The "Battle of the Budget" between the President and the Democratic-controlled Congre SS continues. The spending merchants in Congre SS still seem to have the upper hand, although Presidential vetoes have been upheld on the big spending bills. The battle of the budget is being waged in the congressional committees and on the floor of the House and Senate. This year it is being waged with a special kind of grimnesska because the Administration and its supporters realize it'sxe a case of "now or never" if W3 are to get a handle on Federal spending. One of the most fiscally irresponsible pieces of legislation passed by the House this session is the Health, Education and Welfare Department appropriation bill. It would increase funding for HEW XI and the Labor Department by $1.9 billion over læt year. I opposed this measure. I voted against it after a move by House Republicans to cut $632 million from the bill failed. I cannot understand how anyone EXM in the Congre SS can vote for sharp increases in Federal X spending at the same time that prices are rising and the dollar is being devalued. Until we taxand learn to live within a budget, we are going to continue to increase our national debt, and the problems of inflation and devaluation will continue. Debt statistics are not interesting. they do, however, tx tell a story. As recently asi9k0 1940, our national debt was $43 billion. Now, xt a little over three decades later, it tops $455 billion, a tenfold increase. The per capita share of that debt has risen from $367 to ** $2,046--or $8,184 for the average family of four. There have been three wars in the meantime, which balboosted the debt considerably. But that isn't the whole story. And regardless of how we spent it the fact remains that we did spend # nearly half a trillion dollars more than we took in over this period from 1940 to the present. GERALD, FORD LIBRARY -2- It has always been popular to advocate spending on social welfare programs. If a politician tries to buy votes with private money, he's a crook. But if he tries to buy them with the people's own money, he's a great liberal. Since public money doesn't appear to belong to anyone, there's always the temptation to bestow it on someone in the name of the public good. This is why social welfare spending has gone from $24 billion in1965 to $71.8 billion in 1972 and to $83.6 billion in 1973. For fiscal 1974, the President is proposing $93.8 billion, a 12 per cent increase over last fisdal year. But even an increase of 390 per cent in just nine years isn't enough for the spending merchants of the 93rd Congre They They want still more of your tax dollars spent. And if they spend more tax dollars than the Government collects under present tax rates, then we either add to the Federal debt or a tax increase is in order. I personally am strongly opposed to any kind of a Federal tax increase--gasoline tax or any other kind. I am K supporting Pre sident Nixon in his efforts to collar spending. to get mutour outlays in line with what we take in. We can't afford to makrxembark on massive fiscal fantasies. broad-scale programs with small-scale planning. Gpvernment is our single biggest bu siness. In 1971, the last fully year for which total figures are available, Federal, State and local government generated $137 billion in income for wage-earners. In the same year, private services totalled $110.5 billion; durable goods manufacturing, $132.8 billion; non-durable goods, $90.2 billion; wholesale and retail trade, $130.7 billion. Income from Government provides nearly one dollar out of every five in our national earnings. Government spending has adixa a direct effect on our economy. Government over-spending hase created today's inflationary binge. I would like to see Americans tell their congre somen and senators how their tax dollars should be spent. If they support fiscal responsibility they should say SO. It's their money their future their country! This is your congre ssman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation capital, I'll be back next week. same time, same station. ### # smith 2 St's the best 3 veze- retain poss prog 12. on beef devised to nt Re that could be pres, signation DP lsa tuf prog. Betritgines relief hypronding for a posstin markups rustant an indu will Riss way fn Su stude Throsetappu isthtest yours Soly main each like ones. SCRIPT FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT STATIONS THE WEENEND OF AUGUST 4-5, 1973. This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capital. Recently Congress has been focusing on recapturing powers which supposedly have been usurped by the Executive Branch. To this end, the Congress has passed legislation limiting the power of the President to refuse to spend funds appropriated by the Congress and a bill sharply curbing the President's power to wage undeclared war. To limit the President's power to hold back on spending the House passed a so-called anti-impoundment bill. This bill would require the President to inform the House within 10 days of a decision to impound certain funds. The President would be forced to spend this money if either the House or the Senate disapproved his impoundment decision within 60 days. As passed by the House, this bill also set a spending ceiling of $267.1 billion for fiscal 1974 which Republicans unsuccessfully tried to reduce to $263.3 billion. If the Congress exceeds the budget ceiling, the President then would have to make a flat percentage cut across the board in all but certain sacrosanct programs to bring the total outlays down to the ceiling. I voted against this bill because the Congress should be getting hold of Federal spending in a responsible way -- by adopting budgetary control procedures unanimously recommended by a House-Senate Study Committee three months ago. Instead of bringing this budget control bill to the House floor, the Democrats have allowed it to languish in the House Rules Committee. In a move marked by extreme partisanship, they passed over the budget control bill and brought up the anti-impoundment legislation which the Preisdent is almost certain to veto. The Senate has also passed an anti-impoundment bill. The Senate bill would order an end to impoundment unless both Houses of Congress approved the President's action within 60 days. I would like to turn now to the war powers legislation. (more) Page 2 If we learned anything at all from our frustrating experience in Vietnam, it was that we must prevent congressionally UNauthorized U. S. participation in future Vietnams. That was the mood when the House wrestled with the controversial War Powers Bill. That measure restricted the power of the President to involve the United States in future armed conflicts. As passed by the House, the bill requires the President to stop any commitment of U. S. armed forces to combat outside the United States at the end of 120 days unless Congress has approved his action. The problem with this approach to undeclared wars is that it is negative rather than positive. Under terms of the War Powers Bill, Congress by remaining inactive, by doing nothing would have veto power over a Presidential decision. Before the bill was finally passed, the House voted on a pair of positive amendments -- amendments which I supported. One amendment would have required Congress to act one way or the other by approving or disapproving, within 120 days, the President's commitment of U. S. troops to combat. The other amendment would have required affirmative action by the Congress to terminate a military action undertaken by the President in emergency situations. I supported both amendments, but unfortunately both failed. Congress, I believe, should be willing to stand up and be counted not lie back in the weeds and make major policy decisions by default. This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the Nation's capital. I'll be back with you next week -- same time, same station. ### SCRIPT PREPEREFOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT STATIONS THE WEEKEND OF I AUGUST 4-5, 1973. This is your congressman, Jerry Fords, reporting to you from the nation's capital. Recently Congress has been focusing on recapturing powers which supposedly have been usurped by the Executive Branch. To this end, the Congress has passed legislation limiting the power of the President to refuse to spend funds appropriated by the Congress and a bill sharply curbing the President's power to wage undeclared war. To limit the President's power to holdy back on spending the House passed a so-called anti-impoundment bill. This bill would require the President to inform the House within 10 days of a decision to impound certain funds. The President would be forced to spend this money if either the House or the Senate disapproved his impoundment decision within 60 days. As passed by the House, this bill also set a spending cealing of $267.1 billion for fiscal 1974 which Republicans unsucce ssfully tried to reduce to $263.3 billion. If the Congress exceeds the budget ceiling, the President then would have to make a flat percentage cut across the board in all but certain sacrosanct programs to bring the total outlays down to the ceiling. I voted against this bill because the Congress should be getting hold of Federal spending in a responsible way-by adopting budgetary control procedures unanimously recommended by a House-Senate Study Committee three months ago. Instead of bringing this budget control bill to the House floor, the Democrats have allowed it to languish in the House Rules Committee. In a move marked by extreme partisanship, they passed over the budget control bill and brought up the anti- impoundment legislation, which the President ist almost certain to veto. FORD The Senate has also passed an anti-impoundment bill. the Senate bill would BERRA order LIBRARY an end to impoundment unless both Houses of Congress approved the President action -2- within 60 days. I would like to turn now to the war powers legislation. If we learned anything at all from our frustrating experience in Vietnam, it was that we must prevent congre ssionally UNauthorized U.S. participation in future Vietnams. That was the mood when the House wrestled with the controversial War Powers Bill. That measure restricted the power of the President to involve the United States in future armed conflicts. As passed by the House, the bill requires the President to stop any commitment of U.S. armed forces to combat outside the United States at the end of 120 days unless Congress has approved his action. The problem with this approach to undeclared wars is that it is negative rather than positive. Under terms of the War Powers Bill, Congress by remaining inactive, byr doing nothing. would have veto power over a Presidential decision. Before the bill was finally passed, the House voted on a pair of positive amendments amendments which I supported. One amendment would have required Congress to ac one way or the other by approving or disapproving, within 120 days, the President's commitment of U.S. troops to combat. The other amendment would have required affirmative action by the Congress to terminate a military action undertaken by the President in emergency situations. I supported both amendments, but unfortunately both failed. Congress, I believe, should be willing to stand up and be counted. not lie back in the weeds and make major policy decisions by default. FORD i LIBRARI 0768 This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the Nation's capital. I'll be back with you next week--same time, same station. GERALD R. FORD MICHIGAN OFFICE: FIFTH DISTRICT. MICHIGAN 425 CHERRY STREET SE. GRAND RAPIDS 49502 Congress of the United States Office of the Minority Leader house of Representatives Washington, D.C. 20515 PLEASE NOTE BECAUSE OF THE AUGUST RECESS OF CONGRESS, THE NEXT RADIO TAPE WILL BE SENT TO YOU FOR USE THE WEEKEND OF SEPTEMBER 8. FORD JAKARY SCRIPT FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS THE WEEKEND OF AUG. 11-12, 1973. This is your congressman, Jerry Ford. Congress is in recess this month and I am touring the Fifth District in my mobile office. This is also a good time to take stock of what Congress has done during the first seven months of this year. Most of the major legislation is still in the congressional pipeline. There is very little important legislation that has gone through the entire legislative process. We approved an increase in Social Security benefits. We passed a minimum wage bill. We approved an omnibus farm bill. And we hammered out a compromise which calls for an end to the bombing of Communist forces in Cambodia on August 15. But, mostly, Democrats in the Congress have been engaged in forcing the President to spend more tax dollars, to increase the federal deficit. You may recall that the President was determined to hold total Federal outlays for fiscal 1973 to $250 billion, and so he impounded billions of dollars that had been appropriated by the Democratic-controlled Congress. He refused to spend the money on the basis that certain programs could not be justified. The liberal Democrats did their darndest to try to force the President to spend these additional billions. They passed legislation mandating the spending, and the President followed suit with several vetoes. Then the liberal Democrats tried to pass the mandated spending bills over the President's veto but fortunately there were enough fiscally responsible members of Congress to prevent this. And so the veto override attempts failed. The President had anticipated a Federal deficit of $25 billion even with total Federal outlays held to $250 billion. Fortunately, Federal revenues exceeded estimates. And this, coupled with the President's success in holding back spending, meant that we ended up fiscal 1973 with a deficit of $14.4 billion instead of the expected $25 billion deficit. The liberal Democrats underscored their confrontation mood by passing so-called anti-impoundment legislation. These bills, approved by both Page 2 the House and Senate, would force the President to spend funds which he had chosen to impound. The bills also set a fiscal 1974 spending ceiling and provided that if Congress exceeds this ceiling the President shall make proportional cuts across the board except for certain exempted programs. In the House, Republicans tried to cut the spending ceiling by about $4 billion but were defeated. A much better approach to economy in the federal government is the Budgetary Control Act, which would establish a Budget Committee in the Senate and the House to make sure that Congress does not exceed the budget, or provides the necessary revenue if it does. This is the approach to fiscal responsibility I favor-not the confrontation approach of an anti-impoundment bill. The President should have some flexibility when it comes to spending--or not spending--appropriated funds. There are, of course, many other bills which should be approved before the Congress calls it quits this year. We should pass trade reforms, pension reforms, tax reforms, health insurance legislation, health maintenance organization legislation, a bill to keep the Northeastern Railroads operating, an anti-hijacking bill, and a bill establishing a new Natural Resources Department. Time is running out for major bills still in the congressional pipeline. The House Ways and Means Committee was supposed to be well along with the trade bill by August Recess time, but now that committee will be lucky to report a trade bill out by October. Waiting in the wings is tax reform. Hopefully, we will get action on both trade reform and tax reform this year. This is your congressman, Jerry Ford. I'll be talking with you again after Congress resumes its deliberations in September. # # # LIBRARY SCRIPT FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS THE WEEKEND OF AUGUST 11-12, 1973. This is your congre ssman, Jerry Fords and I am touring the Fifth District in my mobile office. This is also Congre SS is in recess this month a good time to take stock of what Congress has done during the first seven months of this year. Most of the major le gislation is still in the congressional pipeline. There is very little important legislation that has gone through the entire legislative process. We approved an increase in Social Security benefits. We passed a minimum wage bill. We approved an omnibus farm bill. And we hammered out a compromise which calls for an end to the bombing of Communist forces in Cambodia on August 15. But mostly Democrats in the Congre SS have been engaged in forcing the President I Spend more tax dollars, to increase The federal deficit in trying to make the You may recall that the President was determined to hold total Federal outlays for fiscal 1973 to $250 billion, and so he impounded billions of dollars that had been appropriated by the Democratic-controlled Congress. He refused to spend the money on the basis that certain programs could not be justified liberal The Democrats did their darnedgest to try to force the President to spend these additional billions. They passed legislation mandating the spending, and the President withoutd votoes! Liberal followed suit Then the Democrats tried to pass the mandated spending bills over the President's veto but fortunately there were enough fiscally responsible members of Congress to prevent this. And so the veto override attempts failed. The President had anticipated a Federal deficit of $25 billion even with total Federal outlays held to $250 billion. Fortunately, Federal revenues exceeded estimates. And this, coupled with the President's success in holding back spending, meant that we ended up fiscal 1973 with a deficit of $14.4 instead of the expected $25 billion deficit. VERARY GERALD -2- The liberal Democrats underscored their confrontation mood by passing so-called anti-impoundment legislation. These bills, approved by both the House and Senate, would force the President to spend funds which he had chosen to impound. The bills also set a fiscal 1974 spending ceiling and provided that if Congre SS exceeds this ceiling the President shall make proportional cuts acros the board except for certain exempted programs. In The Honor Republicans tried to cut the spending cuting by about $4 Gillion but were defented which Congress I snact before. a much better approach to economy in the got is the Budgetary Control Act, which would establish a Budget Committee in the Senate and the House to make sure that Congress does not exceed the budget or provides the necessary revenue if it does. This is the approach to fiscal responsibility I favor-not the confrontation approach of an anti-impoundment not spending bill. The President should have some flexibility when it comes to spending appropriated funds. There are, of course, many other bills which should be approved before the Congress calls it quits this year. We should pass trade reforms, pension reforms, tax reforms, health insurance legislation, health maintenance organization legislation, and a bill to keep the Northeastern Railrodds operating, an anti-hijacking bill, a bill establishing a new Natural Resources Department and Time is running out for major bills still in the congressional pipeline. The House Ways and Means Committee was supposed to be well along with the trade bill by August Recess time, but now that committee will be lucky to report a trade bill out by October. Waiting in the wings is tax reform. Hopefully, we will get action on both trade reform and tax reform this year. FOR This is your congre ssman, Jerry Ford. I'll be talking with you again after Congress resumes its deliberations in September. ####### SCRIPT FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS THE WEEKEND OF AUGUST 11-12, 1973. This is your congre ssman, Jerry Ford, and I am touring the Fifth District in my mobile office. This is also Congress is in recess this month a good time to take stock of what Congress has done during the first seven months of this year. Most of the major legisiation is still in the congressional pipeline. There is very little important legislation that has gone through the entire legislative process. We approved an increase in Social Security benefits. We passed a minimum wage bill. We approved an omnibus farm bill. And we hammered out a compromise which calls for an end to the bombing of Communist forces in Cambodia on August 15. But mostly Democrats in the Congress have been engaged in fighting with the President over spending and in trying to make the President look bad. You may recall that the President was determined to hold total Federal outlays for fiscal 1973 to $250 billion, and so he impounded billions of dollars that had been appropriated by the Democratic-controlled Congress. He simply refused to spend the money. liberal The Democrats did their dernechest to try to force the President to spend these additional billions. They passed legislation mandating the spending, and the President liberal followed suit by vetoing it. then the Democrats tried to pass the mandated spending bills over the President's veto but fortunately there were enough fiscally responsible members of Congress to prevent this. And SO the veto override attempts failed. The President had anticipated a Federal deficit of $25 billion even with total Federal outlays held to $250 billion. Fortunately, Federal revenues exceeded estimates. And this, coupled with the President's success in holding back spending, meant that we ended up fiscal 1973 with a deficit of $14.4 billion instead of the expected $25 billion deficit. GERALD LIBRAR GERALD R. FORD -2- The liberal Democrats underscored their confrontation mood by passing so-called enti-impoundment legislation. These bills, approved by both the House and Senate, would force the President to spend funds which he had chosen to impound. The bills also set a fiscal1974 spending ceiling and provided that if Congress exceeds this ceiling the President shall make proportional cuts acro $ the board except for certain exempted programs. There are many pieces of major legislation which Congress should enact before adjourning for the year. One of these is the Budgetary Control Act, which would extablish a Budget Committee in the Senate and the House to make sure that Congres does not exceed the budget or provides the necessary revenue if it does. This is the approach to fiscal responsibility I favor--not the confrontation approach of an anti-impoundment or bill. The President should have some flexibility when it comes to spending appropriated funds. There are, of course, many other bills which should be approved before the Congress calls it quits this year. We should pass trade reforms, pension reforms, tax reforms, health insurance legislation, health maintenance organization legislation, a bill to keep the Northeastern Railroads operating, an anti-hijacking bill, a bill establishing a new Natural Resources Department, and a fuels and energy bill. Time is running out for major bills still in the congressional pipeline. The House Ways and Means Committee was supposed to be well along with the trade bill by August Recess time but now that committee will be lucky to report a trade bill out by October. Waiting in the wings is tax reform. Hopefully, we will get action on both trade reform and tax reform this year. R.FORD This is your congre saman, Jerry Ford, I'll be talking wi you again after Congress resumes its deliberations in September. ###### SCRIPT FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS THE WEEKEND OF SEPT. 8-9, 1973. This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the Nation's capital. It is not only legislative developments which have an impact on the lives of Americans. Two fairly recent events which are important to us all are the Supreme Court decisions dealing with pornography and governmental aid to nonpublic schools. The Supreme Court ruled against aid to nonpublic schools in New York and Pennsylvania cases involving tax credits. This is the approach contained in a bill I introduced at the outset of the first session, 93rd Congress, in the hope of providing tax relief for parents sending their children to nonprofit nonpublic elementary and secondary schools. My bill would have provided parents of nonpublic school children a Federal income tax credit of up to $200 per year per student. But the Supreme Court decision indicates that this approach would be declared unconstitutional. I hope some alternative can be worked out. Because of the potential flood of students into public schools if our nonpublic school system should collapse, every taxpayer could feel the effects of the Supreme Court decisions in the New York and Pennsylvania cases. Besides that, I have always felt it is unfair to make the parents of nonpublic school children carry a double load simply because they were exercising their right to send their youngsters to schools of their choice. The Supreme Court's decision on pornography gives citizens the right to say what kind of literature and movies they want in their communities. The ruling, if properly enforced, will help to rid us of the plague of smut while not compromising freedom of speech. President Nixon's four appointees to the Supreme Court, joined by Associate Justice White, performed corrective surgery on prior rulings by the liberal Warren Court. The Burger Court held that a challenged work must show "serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value" which may be judged by "contemporary standards. Moreover, the Court said that a national standard of pornography is unworkable. It ruled that states and communities, working within the Court's Page 2 broad guidelines, may now use local standards in determining the merits of a work. The turnabout is of monumental importance to the United States. The smut industry, which had wrapped itself in the cloak of freedom of speech under the Warren Court rulings, had emerged from the underground and spread its wares across the country like a disease. Pornography became big business. The rise of pornography was encouraged by the inability of the Warren Court to decide on a viable definition of pornography. Justice Brennan said he was "reluctantly forced to conclude that none of the available formulas are acceptable." The decision of the Burger Court is not perfect. The Court agreed on a working definition of pornography, but further clarification may be needed. In addition, many state legislatures may have to rewrite statutes dealing with pornography before the new guidelines can be fully implemented. Despite the shortcomings, however, the Supreme Court has taken a step toward reaffirming the basic morality of the American people. Hard-core pornography is a plague that demeans the First Amendment freedoms and eats away at the American spirit. To allow it to flourish would say something about our society that we are not willing to say or have said. There is no inconsistency in upholding freedom of speech while pro- hibiting the rampaging of pornography in our communities. As Chief Justice Burger said, obscenity has never been protected by the First Amendment. The Supreme Court, after 15 years of permissiveness, has reaffirmed that the moral foundation upon which this nation was built is still intact. This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capital. I'll be talking with you again next week-same time, same station. # # # SCRIPT FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS THE WEEKEND OF SEPT. 8-9, 1973. This is your congre ssman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the Nation's capital. It is not only legislative developments which have an impact on the lives of Americans. Two fairly recent events which are important to us all are the Supreme governmental Court decisions dealing with pornography and aid to nonpublic schools. The Supreme Court ruled against aid to nonpublic schools in New York and Pennsylvania cases involving tax credits. This is the approach contained in a bill I introduced at the outset of the first session, 93rd Congress, in the hope of Revent molile office providing tax relief for parents sending their children top nonprofit nonpublic elementary and secondary schools. My bill would have provided parents of a $200 nonpublic school children Federal income tax credit of up to per year peru student. But the Supr teme Court decision indicate that this approach would be declared unconstitutional, I hope some alternative can be worked out. Because of the potential flood of students into public schools if our nonpublic school system should collapise, every taxpayer could feel the effects of the Supreme Court decisions in the New York and Pennsylvania cases. Besides that, I have always felt it is unfair to make the load parents or nonpublic school children carry a double simply because they were exercising their right to send their youngsters to schools of their choice. The Supreme Court's decision on pornography gives citizens the right to say what kind of literature and movies they want in their communities. The ruling, if properly enforced, will help to rid us of the plague of smut while not compromising freedom of speech. President Nixon's four appointees to the Supreme Court, joined by Associate Justice White, performed corrective surgery on prior rulings by the liberal Warren Court. The Burger Court held that a challenged work must show "serious 1 Cterary, LIBRARY -2- artistic, political or scientific value If which may be judged by "contemporary standards." Moreover, the Court said that a national standard of pornography is unworkable. It ruled that states and communities, working within the Court's broad guidelines, may nown use local standards in determining the merits of a work. The turnabout is of monumental importance to the United States. The smut industry, which had wrapped itself in the cloak of freedom of speech under the Warren Court rulings, had emerged from the underground and spread its wares across the country like a disease. Pornography became big busine SS. The rise of pornography was encouraged by the inability of the Warren Court to decide on a viable definition of pornography. Justice Breman said he was #reluctantly forced to conclude that none of the available formulas are acceptable." The decision of the Burger Court is not perfect. The Court agreed on a working definition of pornography, but further clarification may be needed. In addition, many state legislatures may have to rewrite statutes dealing with pornography before the new guidelines can be fully implemented. Despite the shortcomings, however, the Supreme Court has taken a step toward reaffirming the basic morality of the American people. Hard-core pornography is a plague that demeans the First Amendment freedoms and eats away at the American spirit. To allow it to flourish would say something about our society that we are not willing to say or have said. There is no inconsistency in upholding freedom of speech while pro- hibiting the rampaging of pornography in our communities. As Chief Justice Burger said, obscenity has never been protected by the First Amendment. The Supreme Court, after 15 years of permissiveness, has reaffirmed that the moral foundation upon which this nation was built is still intact. This is your congre ssman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capital. I'll be talking with you again next week--same time, same station SCRIPT FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS THE WEEKEND OF SEPT. 15-16, 1973. This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capital. The President last Monday sent the Congress a second State of the Union Message, pointing up the legislation he would like to see the Congress pass this year. The President stressed, particularly, the need to balance the fiscal 1974 budget and to deal with the energy crisis. I share those concerns. There are no higher priorities than to balance the Federal budget as a means of fighting inflation and to act now to meet this Nation's future energy needs. I hope and trust that the Congress will work with the Executive Branch to hold down Federal spending SO the Congress does not break the Federal budget and thus raise the prices of every family in America. The Federal budget is one of the fronts on which we must constantly fight inflation. We have also adopted a stiff new set of price controls. The Federal Reserve Board is tightening up on the money supply. And the Administration and the Congress have acted to encourage greatly increased production of food supplies with the hope of not only halting the rise in food prices but eventually lowering them. To meet the energy needs of this Nation we must have congressional action right now. We must complete action on legislation permitting construction of the trans-Alaska oil pipeline; we must step up research and development in the use of our vast coal resources; and we must consider the deregulation of natural gas. For the near term, we apparently must accept some combination of four very unattractive choices--increased reliance on foreign oil; increased disturbance of our ecology; an increase in the number of instances when we fail to meet energy demands; and an increase in prices for energy in all forms. One way to ease this situation is to speed up the use of nuclear power in this country. The President is determined to do this by shortening the length of time presently involved in licensing nuclear plants. Page 2 As of Jan. 1, 1973, there were 29 nuclear plants in operation in the United States. At the same time, 55 were being built, and 76 were on order. Nuclear power has its own set of ecological problems, of course. But these problems are less severe than the ecological problems associated with the use of fossil fuels like coal and oil. If nuclear power plants come on line at the rate indicated, we could gradually reduce our dependence on oil import and minimize energy shortages. Meantime, our most abundant source of energy is coal. We must manage to make more use of coal in such a way that we do not damage the land we inhabit or the air we breathe. Surface mining is both the most economical and the most environmentally destructive method of extracting coal. But the damage caused by surface mining can be repaired and the land restored. Strip mining does not have to be a blight on the land. It is not a lasting environmental cost if reclamation processes are used to restore the environment. The President has proposed legislation to establish reclamation standards which would regulate all surface and underground mining in this country. These standards would be enforced by the States. This legislation should be enacted. It would enable us to increase the supply of a highly economical fuel while avoiding the severe environmental penalties we have often paid in the past. The energy bills proposed by the Administration can and should be passed this year. Along with the fight against inflation, this is one of our top priorities. This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capital. I'll be back with you next week-same time, same station. ### SCRIPT FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS THE WEEKEND OF SEPT. 15-16, 1973. This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's vapital. The President last Monday sent the Congress a second State of the Union Message, pointing up the legislation he would like to see the Congress pass this year. The President stressed, particularly, the need to balance the fiscal 1974 budget and to deal with the energy crisis. I share those concerns. There are no higher priorities than to balance the Federal budget as a means of fighting inflation and to act now to meet this Nation's future energy needs. I hope and trust that the Congress will work with the Executive Branch to hold down Federal spending so the Congress does not break the Federal budget and thus raise the prices every family in America. paidby The Federal budget is one of the fronts on which we must constantly fight inflation. We have also adopted a stiff new set of price controls. The Federal Reserve Board is tightening up on the money supply. And the Administration and the Congre SS have acted to encourage the production greatly increased of food supplies products with hope of not only halting the rise in food prices but eventually lowering them. To meet the energy needs of this Nation we must have congre ssional action. We must complete action on legislation permitting construction of the trans-Alaska oil and pipeline; we must step up research and development in the use of coal; we must consider the deregulation of natural gas. For the near term, we apparently must accept some combination of four very unattractive choices--incre ased reliance on foreign oil; increased disturbance of our ecology; an increase in the number of instances when we fail to meet energy demands; and an increase in prices for energy in all forms. The one way to ease this situation is to speed up the use of nuclear GE power ENALD LIBRA FORD -2- this country. The President is determined to do this by shorteming the length of time presently involved in licensing muclear plants. As of Jam. 1, 1973, there were 29 nuclear plants in operation in the United States. At the same time, 55 were being built, and 76 were on order. Nuclear power has its own set of ecological problems, of course. But these problems are less severe than the ecological problems associated with the use of fossil fuels like coal and oil. If nuclear power plants come on line at the rate indicated, we could gradui ally reduce our dependence on oil imports and minimize energy shortages. Meantime, our most abundant source of energy is coal. We must manage to make coal more use of in such a way that we do not damage the land we inhabi or the air we breathe. Surface mining is both the most economical and the most environmentally destructive method of extracting coal. But the damage caused by surface mining can be repaired and the land restored. Strip mining does not have to be a blight on the land. It is not a lasting environmental cost if reclamation processes are used to restore the environment. The President has proposed legislation to establish reclamation standards which would regulate all surface and undergrounde mining in this country. These standards would be enforced by the States. This legislation should be enacted. It would enable us to increase the supply of a highly economical fuel while avoiding the severe environmental penalties we have often paid in the past. The energy bills proposed by the Administration can and should be passed t this year. Along with the fight against inflation, this is one of our top priorities. RALD FORD LIBRAR This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's rapital. I'll be back with you next week--same time, same station SCRIPT FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS THE WEEKEND OF SEPT. 15-16, 1973. This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capital. The President last Monday sent the Congress a second State of the Union Message, pointing up the legislation he would like to see the Congress pass this year. The President stressed, particularly, the need to balance the fiscal 1974 budget and to deal with the energy crisis. I share those concerns. There are no higher priorities than to balance the Federal budget as a means of fighting inflation and to act now to meet this Nation's future energy needs. I hope and trust that the Congress will work with the Executive Branch to hold down Federal spending SO the Congress does not break the Federal budget and thus raise the prices of every family in America. The Federal budget is one of the fronts on which we must constantly fight inflation. We have also adopted a stiff new set of price controls. The Federal Recerve Board is tightening up on the money supply. And the Administration and the Congre SS have acted to encourage greatly production increased of of with the hope of not only halting the rise in food prices but eventually lowering them. RIGHT NOW To meet the energy needs of this Nation we must have congre ssional action. We must complete action on legislation permitting construction of the trans-Alaska oil our out and pipeline; we must step up research and development in the use of n coal we must consider the deregulation of natural gas. For the near term, we apparently must accept some combination of four very unattractive choices--incre ased reliance on foreign oil; increased disturbance of our ecology; an increase in the number of instances when we fail to meet energy demands; and an increase in prices for energy in all forms. the way to ease this situation is to speed up the use of nuclear 13 power ALD FORD it LIBRAR -2- this country. The President is determined to do this by shorten ing the length of time presently involved in licensing nuclear plants. As of Jan. 1, 1973, there were 29 nuclear plants in operation in the United States. At the same time, 55 were being built, and 76 were on order. Nuclear power has its own set of ecological problems, of course. But these problems are le 88 severe than the ecological problems associated with the use of fossil mains fuels like coal and oil. If nuclear power plants come on line at the rate indicated, we could gradui ally reduce our dependence on oil imports and minimize energy shortages. Meantime, our most abundant source of energy is coal. We must manage to make more use of in such a way that we do not damage the land we inhabit or the air we breathe. Surface mining is both the most economical and the most environmentally destructive method of extracting coal. But the damage caused by surface mining can be repaired and the land restored. Strip mining does not have to be a blight on the land. It is not a lasting environmental cost if reclamation processes are used to restore the environment. The President has proposed legislation to establish reclamation standards which would regulate all surface and underground mining in this country. These standards would be enforced by the States. This legislation should be enacted. It would enable us to increase the supply of a highly economical fuel while avoiding the severe environmental penalties we have often paid in the past. The energy bills proposed by the Administration can and should be passed this year. Along with the fight against inflation, this is one of our top priorities. FORD This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's vapital. GERAL IBRARY I'll be back with you next week--same time, same station SCRIPT FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS THE WEEKEND OF SEPT. 22-23, 1973. This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capital. Although I favor a sound health insurance program, particularly for catastrophic illness, prospects are not favorable for any congressional action this year. However, both the House and Senate have passed different versions of important health care legislation which sould lead to lower medical care bills for countless Americans. This legislation would encourage the establishment of health maintenance organizations--also known as HMO' throughout the country. HMO's are a relatively new concept in the health field. Basically, they are private organizations that bring together a comprehensive range of medical services in a single organization so that a patient is assured of convenient access to all services. Medical care is provided on a prepaid group plan basis for a fixed premium. The emphasis is on preventive medicine--regular checkups that are aimed at keeping a person healthy. The premium covers the cost of the checkups as well as any treatment necessary if a person does fall ill. The success of nearly 60 HMO's established to date has convinced many government officials and members of Congress that with Federal help HMO's could provide a major step toward solving our country's growing health problems. I personally am strongly in favor of limited Federal aid for HMO's in an attempt to alleviate the crushing burden of high medical and hospital costs and the inequities in the access to good medical care-- especially for the poor and the rural areas. The House-approved legislation would authorize $240 million over a three-year period to set up approximately 100 HMO's. The Senate has passed a much costlier bill, calling for $805 million for 200 HMO's. Now the House and Senate must seek to compromise their differences and advance the goal of improving health care throughout the country. As Congress begins to get into high gear following the August recess, the House Administration Committee has begun hearings on campaign reform. I have repeatedly said that some good may come out of the Watergate scandal- namely, campaign reform. Page 2 Of the some 60 bills now before the House Administration Committee, many are duplicates but at least a dozen major points contained in these bills will be given careful consideration. The House Republican Task Force on Election Reform has made a diligent study of ways to improve campaign financing and has offered a number of recommendations in this area. The major recommendation is that an independent Federal Elections Commission be established to supervise the Federal Election Campaign Act. This commission would have all the powers of the existing supervisory authorities and, in addition, would have the power to subpoena. Prosecuting powers would be left to the Justice Department. The Republican Task Force wants to see our campaign laws amended to achieve a number of goals: To build public confidence in the electoral process by making the process visible, understandable and credible. To ensure maximum individual participation in election campaigns and reduce the excessive influence of vested interests, strengthen political parties and make them responsible for their candidates. To increase penalties for election law violations and to ensure vigorous and complete enforcement of the election laws. Obviously, the election law enacted by the last Congress, although an improvement, is not adequate to do the job. This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capital. I'll be back with you next week-same time, same station. # # # SCRIPT FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS THE WEEKEND OF SEPT. 22-23, 1974. This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capital. Prospects are nil that there will be any congressional action on national health insurance this year. But both the House and Senate have passed different versions of important health care legislation which may lead to lower medical care bills for countless Americans. This legislation would encourage the establishment of health maintenance organizations--also known as HMO' throughout the country. HMO's are a relatively new concept in the health field. Basically, they are private organizations that bring together a comprehehsive range of medical services in a single organization 0 that 2. patient is assured of convenient access to all services. Medical care is provided on a prepaid group plan basis for a fixed premium. The emphasis is on preventive medicine--regular checkups that are aimed at keeping a person healthy. The premium covers the cost of the checkups as well as any treatment necessary if a person does fall ill. The success of nearly 60 HMO's established to date has convinced many government officials and members of Congress that with Federal help HMO's could provide a major step toward solving our country's growing health problems. I personally am strongly in favor of limited Federal aid for HMO's in an attempt to alleviate the crushing burden of high medical and hospital costs and the inequities ind the access to good medical care-especially for the poor the rural areas. overa 3-year period The House-approved legislation would authorize $240 million to set up approximately 100 HMO's. The Senate has passed a much costlier bill, calling for $805 million for 200 HMO's. Now the House and Senate must seek to compromise their differencest and advance the goal of improving health care throughout the country. As Congress begins to get into high gear following the August recess, GERALD LIBRARY GERALD R. -2- the House Administration Committee has begun hearings on campaign reform. I have repeatedly said that some good may come out of the Watergate scandal namely, campaign reform. Of the some 60 bills now before the House Administration Committee, many are duplicates but at least a dozen major points contained in these bills will be given careful consideration. The House Republican Task Force on Election Reform has made a diligent study of ways to improve campaign financing and has offered a number of recommendations in this area. The major recommendation is that an independent Federal Elections Commission be established to supervise the Federal Election Campaign Act. This commi ssion would have all the powers of the existing supervisory authorities and, in addition, would have the power to subpoena. Prosecuting powers would be left to the Justice Department. The Republican Task Force wants to see our campaign laws amended to achieve â number of goals: To build public confidence in the electoral process by making the proce & visible, understandable and credible. To ensure maximum individual participation in election campaigns and reduce the exce ssive influence of vested interests, strengthen political parties and make them responsible for their candidates. To increase penalties for election law violations and to ensure vigorous and complete enforcement of the election laws. Obr viously, the election law enacted by the last Congre SS is not adequate to do the job. If necessary, we may even have to strike this law and start all over again. This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's BRAR capital. I'll be back with you next week-same time, same station ###### GERAL SCRIPT FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS THE WEEKEND OF SEPT. 29-30, 1973. This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capital. The movement to permit voluntary prayer in our public schools is not only very much alive but is gaining in strength. Currently, hearings are being conducted before a Senate subcommittee on a proposed constitutional amendment which would declare "the right of persons lawfully assembled in any public building to participate in voluntary prayer.' The amendment was introduced by Senator Richard Schweiker, Republican of Pennsylvania, and has 48 cosponsors. The American Legion last Monday urged the Senate subcommittee to approve the proposed Amendment. The Conference of Catholic Bishops also has endorsed the idea of permitting voluntary prayer in public schools. Last June 17 marked the tenth anniversary of the Supreme Court decision barring prayer in public schools. Regrettably, it also marked the tenth year that Congress has failed to do anything about that decision. Hopefully the hearings now being conducted in the Senate are an indication that Congress finally is ready to respond to the will of the great majority of the American people. Ten years ago, the Court found that Bible reading and prayer constitute religious and not secular exercises. Thus, such practices were held to be in violation of the First Amendment to the Constitution. When the decision was handed down, I said--and I still believe this today-that voluntary school prayer does not violate First Amendment rights. The First Amendment requires that Congress make "no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Many renowned constitutionalists have contended that the "no establishment" clause, while it prohibits Congress from giving preference to any one religion, was not intended to withdraw religion in general from Constitutional protections. In fact, this thought was the basis of Justice Potter Stewart's dissenting opinion in the school prayer decision--and I agree with Justice Stewart. Stewart said he could not understand how an "official religion" is established by "letting those who want to say a Page 2 prayer, say it." He said: "To deny the wish of school children to join in reciting prayer is to deny them the opportunity of sharing in the spiritual heritage of our nation." This is the heart of the issue. To say that children cannot voluntarily participate in giving thanks to their Creator in a public school is, in effect, a ban on one facet of religious freedom. There is obvious inconsistency in the Supreme Court's decision. Our land is a land of religious heritage. Indeed, the freedom to worship was one of the primary reasons this nation was founded. Evidence of this heritage can be seen every day. Both houses of Congress, for example, begin each day's proceedings with a prayer by their chaplains. The phrase, "In God We Trust," has been America's official motto since 1956. It had been inscribed on our currency for many years before that. The examples are endless. Thomas Jefferson, who coined the phrase, "wall of separation of church and state," paid appropriate tribute to our religious heritage when he said, "God who gave us life, gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secured when we have removed the conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?" The act of amending our constitution is not to be taken lightly. But I believe the Court has misinterpreted the Constitution, and a Constitutional Amendment to reinstate prayer in the public schools appears to be the only viable alternative. This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capital. I'll be back with you next week-same time, same station. ### SCRIPT FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS THE WEEKEND OF SEPT. 29-30, 1973. This is your congre ssman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capital. The movement to permit voluntary prayer in our public schools is not only very much alive but is gaining in strength. before a Senate subcommittee on Currently, hearings are being conducted a proposed constitutional amendment which would declare "the right of persons lawfully assembled in any public building to participate in voluntary prayer." The amendment was introduced by Senator Richard Schweiker, Republican of Pennsylvania, and has 48 cosponsors. The American Legion last Monday urged the Senate subcommittee to approve the proposed Amendment. The Conference of Catholic Bishops also has endorsed the idea of permitting voluntary prayer in public schools. Last June 17 marked the tenth anniversary of the Supreme Court decision barring prayer in public schools. Regrettably, it also marked the tenth year that Congress has failed to do anything about that decision. Hopefully the hearings now being conducted in the Senate are an indication that Congre SS find ly is ready to respond to the will of the great majority of the American people. Ten years ago, the Court found that Bible reading and prayer constitute religious and not secular exercises. Thus, such practices were held to be in violation of the First Amendment to the Constitution. When the decision was handed down I said--and I still believe this today-that voluntary school prayer does not violate First Amendment rights. The First Amendment requires that Congre So make "no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Many and renowned constitutionalists have contended that the FORD & LIBRARY establishment" clause, while it prohibits Congress from giving preference to any one -2- religion, was nott intended to withdraw religion in general from Constitutional protections. In fact, this thought was the asis of Justice Potter Stewart's dissenting opinion in the school prayer decision--and I agree with Justice Stewart. Stewart said he could not underetand how an "official religion" is established by "letting those who want to say a prayer, say it." He said: "To deny the wish of school children to join in reciting prayer is to deny them the opportunity of sharing in the spiritual heritage of our nation." This is the heart of the issue. To say that children cannot voluntarily participate in giving thanks to their Creator in a public school is, in effect, a ban on one facet of religious freedom. There is obvious inconsistency in the Supreme Court's decision. Our land is a land of religious heritage. Indeed, the freedom to worship was one of the primary reasons this nation was founded. Evidence of this heritage can be seen every day. Both houses of Congress, forexample, begin each dey's proceedings with a prayer by their chaplaims. The phrase, "In God We Trust, If has been America's of ficial motto since 1956. It had been inscribed on our currency for many years before that. The examples are endless. Thomas Jefferson, who coined the phrase, "wall of separation of church and state, 11 paid appropriate tribute to our religious heritage when he said, "God who gave us life, gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secured when We have removed the conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?" But The act of amending our constitution is not to be taken lightly. I believe and the Court has misinterpreted the Constitution a Constitutional Amendment to reinstate prayer in the public schools appears to be the only Viable alternative. D.R.FORD This is your congre ssman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capital. I'll be back with you next week--same time, same station, SCRIPT FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS THE WEEKEND OF OCT. 6-7, 1973. This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capital. The President's announcement of mandatory allocations of fuel oil and propane is good news. A system of mandatory allocations should be helpful in alleviating any heating oil shortages we may encounter this winter. Our energy problems are assuming ever growing importance. There is, of course, no way of telling how severe these problems will be during the winter of 1973-74. This will depend on such variables as the harshness of the winter weather and fluctuations in the international oil market. However, now is the time to prepare for emergencies that may lie ahead. The system of mandatory allocations does not ensure adequate supplies of heating oil and propane for every customer. It simply means we will have a more equitable distribution of heating oil and propane so that no one area of the country will suffer undue hardship. This is especially important for the Upper Midwest and the Northeast, for these are the regions most likely to be hard hit by shortages. As John Love, director of the Federal Energy Policy Office expressed it, "To the fullest extent possible, we want to ensure that no home or hospital goes without adequate heat and no farm is without adequate propane.' Love said he believes any shortages this winter will be manageable. And he urged all Americans using fuel oil and propane to employ all possible measures of conservation. I have a couple of ideas that might help avert major fuel oil shortages this winter. One is to establish a national reserve of fuel oil. This would ensure fuel for essential needs in critical times as they arise. The other idea is to set up a Federal "hot line" to provide immediate relief for those who cannot find fuel from any source for essential needs. Inasmuch as most of the major fuel oil suppliers have interstate operations, a national hot line should be effective. Prior to the Administration's action, the Senate approved legislation establishing mandatory allocations of petroleum products and the House Page 2 was scheduled to act the week of Oct. 8. We certainly must explore every means possible of attacking our energy problems--the opening up of new sources of supply, the use of controls where absolutely necessary, and conservation wherever possible. I would like to comment now on the President's trade bill, particularly since I consider trade expansion to bevital to Michigan's trade-dependent economy. Although an expansionist trade policy benefits the entire country, few areas will benefit as directly as our state. Aggressive international marketing builds a stronger agricultural base here and builds jobs in our technically-oriented local economy. The President's trade bill, designed to give our trade negotiators broader powers, will give America greater flexibility in developing agreements with our trading partners. The bill will give us both the carrot and the stick. We will have more to offer those who treat us well, and we can get tough with those who don't. Domestic conditions here are right for rapid expansion of our trade-oriented economy. We should reach compromises which make that expansion possible. This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capital. I'll be back next week--same time, same station. # # # S6RIBT FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS THE WEEKEND OF OCT. 6-7, 1973. This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you rom the nation's capital. The President's announcement of mandatory allocations of fuel oil and propane is good news. A system of mandatory allocations should be helpful in alleviating any heating oil shortages we may encounter this winter. Our energy problems are assuming ever growing importance. There is, of course, these no way of telling how severe LOIS problems will be during the winter of 1973-74. This will depend on such variables as the harshness of the winter weather and fluctuations in the international oil market. However, now is the time to prepare for any emergencies that may lie ahead. The system of mandatory allocation does not ensure adequate supplies of heating bil and propane for every customer. It simply means we will have a more equitable distribution of heating oil and propane SO that no one area of the country will suffer undue hardship. This is espectially important for the Upper Midwest and the Northeast, for these are the regions most likely to be hard hit by shortages. As John Love, director of the Federal Energy Policy Office expre ssed it, "To the fullest extent possible, we want to ensure that no home or hospital goes without adequate heat and no farm is without adequate propane." Love said he believes any shortages this winter will be manageable. And he urged all Americ ans using fuel oil and propane to employ all possible measures of conservation. I have a couple of ideas that might help avert major fuel oil shor tages this winter. One is to establish a national reserve of fuel oil. This would ensure fuel for essential needs in critical times as they arise. The other idea is to set up a Federal "hot line" to provide immediate relief for those who cannot find fuel from any source for e ssential needs. Inasmuch as most of the major fuel oil suppliers have LIBRAR -2- interstate operations, a national hot line should be effective. Prior to the Administration's action, the Senate approved legislation establishing mandatory allocations of petroleum products and the House was scheduled to act the week of Oct. 8. We certainly must explore every means possible of attacking our energy problems- -the opening up of ne W sources of supply, the use of controls where absolutely necessary, and conservation wherever possible. I would like to comment now on the President's trade bill, ,particularly since I consider tradem expansion to be vital to Michigan's trade-dependent econ omy. areas Although an expansionist free-trade policy benefits the entire country, few will benefit as directly as our state and Aggressive international marketing builds a stronger agricultural base here and builds jobs in our technically-oriented local economy. The President's trade bill, designed to give our trade negotiators broader powers, will give America greater flexibility in developing agreements with our trading partners. The bill will give us both the carrot and the stick. We will have more to offer tho SB who treat us well, and We can get tough with those who don't. I am disappointed, however, that the House Ways and Means Committee is making it difficult if not impossible for the Administration to grant the Soviet Union "Most Favored Nation trading status. I do not think we should interfere directly with the Soviet Union's internal affairs anymore than I would expect any other nation to interfere with ours. I am concerned about civil liberties in the Soviet Union and about the Soviets' emigration policies, but I don't think we should try to use the withholding of Most Favored Nation trading status in an attempt to force change upon the Soviets. Domestic conditions here are right for rapid expansion of our trade-oriented SERALD LIBRARY economy. We should reach compromises which make that expansion possible. I'll be back next week-same time, same station This is your congre ssman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capital. SCRIPT FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS THE WEEKEND OF OCT. 13-14, 1973. This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capital. The price of everything has become the number one topic of conversa- tion these days. The Administration has tried various phases and freezes in an effort to reduce the rate of inflation and to stabilize prices. For awhile, the price control program was relatively successful. The international economy underwent fundamental changes which were to have far-reaching effects on the economies of several countries most notably the United States. We devalued the dollar in order to become more competitive in international markets. The dollar devaluation was necessary because of our comparatively low productivity growth and a high balance of payments deficit. The tight controls of Phases I and II lessened the immediate effect of the change on our domestic economy but these Phases in turn created their own problems which came home to roost in Phase III. American goods became cheaper to foreign buyers as a result of the international currency realignment. Worldwide demand for American commodities increased substantially. Price controls at home made the same goods equally attractive to the American consumer. When controls were lifted in Phase III, the increased demand drove prices up further. At the same time, farm product scarcities developed in various parts of the world due to crop failures and this produced highly unusual demands for American agricultural commodities. Since June, the country has suffered through a general price freeze, a beef price freeze, and now, in Phase IV, limited price controls. This latest plan for economic controls finds us with a continuing high foreign demand for American goods. Where has the Congress been during the months of economic anguish for the American consumer? Both the House and Senate have given top priority to legislation designed to deal with inflation and the country's economic problems. Extensive authority to control the level of prices and wages was delegated to the President at his request. Page 2 Much of the inflation problem is due, of course, to the unprecedented worldwide demand for goods of all kinds, including key U.S. products and commodities. Ninety per cent of the world's soybeans are grown in America. Soybeans are an important feed grain and are a key source of protein for many people throughout the world. It is not fair to blame either the Congress or the Administration for the unprecedented foreign purchases of our foodstuffs. Neither the Administration nor the Congress is to blame for unfavorable crop weather in Australia and in North and South Africa, the wheat crop failure in the Soviet Union, monsoons in India, a poor rice crop throughout most of Asia, and the collapse of the Peruvian anchovy industry which is normally a major source of protein for livestock feed. That various other crop failures followed upon our wheat sale to Russia is most unfortunate--but none of this could have been foreseen. Now the reports are that relief from high food prices is on the way at last. The answer is, of course, greatly expanded production. We are getting expanded supplies from the record autumn harvest and a backlog of livestock. Grain and meat prices have definitely slipped well below the peaks reached earlier this year. Gasoline and heating oil prices also are a problem. Many people ask why the increases? The main reason is that the United States imports 30 per cent of its crude oil, and the delivered price of much of this oil has doubled in the past three years. We have to pay the price of the exporting nations; it's their oil, not ours. And that means higher prices for gasoline and fuel oil. What all of this points to is that we must make every possible effort to develop other energy sources so we will not be so dependent on oil imports. This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capital. I'll be back with you next week-same time, same station. ### SCRIPT FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS THE WEEKEND OF OCT. 13-14, 1973. This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capital. The price of everything has become the number one tppic of conversation these days. The Administration has tried various phases and freezes in an effort to reduce the rate of inflation and to stabilize prices. For awhide, the price control program was relatively successful. The international economy underwent fundamental changes which were to have far-reaching effects on the economies of several countries... most notably the United States. We devalued the dollar in order to become more competitive in international markets. The dollar devaluation was necessary because of our comparatively low productivity growth and a high balance of payments deficit. The tight controls of Phases I and II le ssened the immediate effect of the change on our domestic economy but these Phases in turn created their own problems which came home to roost in Phase III. American goods became cheaper to foreign buyers as a result of the international meriand currency realignment. Worldwide demand for American commodities soared. Price controls at home made the same goods equally attractive to the American consumer. When controls were lifted in Phase III, the increased demand drove prices up further. At the same time, farm product scarcities developed in various parts of the world due agricultural to crop failures and this produced highly unusual demands for American commodities. Since June, the country has suffered through a general price freeze, a beef price freeze, and now, in Phase IV, limited price controls. This latest plan for economic controls finds us with a continuing high foreign demand for American goods. Where has the Gongre SS been during the momths of economic anguish for GRAAD FORD LIBRARY -2- American consumer? Both the House and Senate have given top priority to legislation designed to deal with inflation and the country's economic problems. Extensive authority to control the level of prices and wages was delegated to the President at his request. Much of the inflation problem is due, of course, to the unprededented worldwide demand for goods of all kinds, including key U.S. products and commodities. Ninety per cent of the world's soybeans are grown inf America. Soybeans are an important feed grain and are a key source of protein for many people throughout the world. It is not fair to blame either the Congress or the Administration for the unprecedented foreign purchases of our foodstuffs. Neither the Administration unfassable weather nor the Congress is to blame for in Australia and in North and South Africa, the wheat crop failure in the Soviet Union, monsoons in India, a poor rice crop throughout most of Asia, and the collapse of the Peruvian anchovy industry which is normally a major source of protein for livestock feed. That various other crop failures followed upon our wheat sale to Russia is most unfortunate--but none of this could have been foreseen. Now the reports are that relief from high food prices is on the way at last. The answer is, of course, greatly expanded production. We are getting expanded supplies from the record authmn harvest and a backlog of livestock. Grain and meat prices have definitely slipped well below the peaks reached earlier this year. Meantime, we should keep our inflation problem in proper perspective as far as food is concerned. It's true that between 1962 and 1972, food prices in the U.S. rose by 34 per cent. But at the same time the price of movier tickets went up 98 per cent; physician's fees, 65 per cent: dontist's fees, 56 per cent; a semi@private hospital FORD room rate, 166 për cent; and the price of ne wspapers, 68 per cent. But keep in mind, too, that during the same 10 year period, wages and salaries went up 112 per cente This is your congre ssman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capital. I'll be back next week-same time, same station.,AHIII (MORE) 3 Gasoline and heating oil prices also are a problem. Many people ask why the increases? The main reason is that the United States imports 30 per cent of its crude oil, and the delivered price of much of this oil has doubled in the pæt three years. So We have to pay the price of the exporting nations; it's their oil, not ours. And that means higher prices for g asoline and fuel oil. What all of this points to is that we must make every possible effort to develop other energy sources so we will not be so dependent on oil imports. This is your congre ssman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from the nation's capital. I'll be back with you next week--same time, same station. ##### GERALD FORD LIBRARY