Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
12237624
label
Ford Broadcasts, 1951-1956
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
12237624
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Ford Broadcasts, 1951-1956
citationUrl
collections
Gerald R. Ford Congressional Papers
Broadcasts Files
subjects
Truman, Harry S., 1884-1972
Eisenhower, Dwight D. (Dwight David), 1890-1969
Appropriations and expenditures
Communism
Federal budget
International relations
National security
Veterans
Taxation
Public works
Flags
Bill of Rights
iiifBase
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
12237624
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1950-11-30
month
11
year
1950
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1949-01-01
month
1
year
1949
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
url
mediaId
9b3073b7861e9535
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box D37, folder "Ford Broadcasts, 1951-1956" 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States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.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.
SPEECH BY JERRY FORD ON MUTUAL NEWSREEL OF THE AIR
MARCH 29, 1951
Durny The current emergency period The
greatest personal sacnfici to being male by
World War II veterans who have been
envoluntanly recalled to contat duty leaving behande
dependent families.
there is a morning tile of resentment against
The involuntory extension of enlcotments beyond
the period of the organist contract between
the Dept 8 Deparse + the separament.
It was necessary to eftend endertments
last year but Engrees should not give the
Dept. 8 Defere a blank check in This setreation
in the future.
nept week when debate on The draft of training
bue begins 2 internal to New an amendment
Digitized from Box D36 of The Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech File at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
stipulating that no return of W.W.II
can have his enlistment contract formal envolumentaly
extended lead realise Congras by production
declares war.
Orderim of such an amendment in The
melitary mangower Impotation will prevent
the efecutive bound the government from
taking advantage of veterans who have already
had long t, honorable send in the defense
your nation
GERALD FORD
SPEECH OVER RADIO STATION WJR, DETROIT, BY GERALD R. FORD, JR.
FRIDAY NIGHT, AUGUST 10, 1951, 10:30 - 10:45 P.M. CST
"YOUR CONGRESS" SERIES
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN - there is now, more than ever before, the
justifiable and perennial hue and cry that the high costs of the federal
government will ruin the nation. We in the Congress who serve on the several
Appropriation committees hear more about and see more of this real danger than
most of our colleagues. It can also be said that those of us in the Congress
who do the initial pruning see what a gigantic task lies ahead if the Presi-
dent's tremendous budget is to be cut to a realistic level.
At the outset let me make this one point perfectly clear. I agree whole-
heartedly with those who favor greatly reduced expenditures by the federal
government. Big government, and ours is tremendously big, becomes wasteful,
extravagant, and very costly. In ordinary times it is necessary to watch con-
tinuously the expenditures of the government to be sure that the federal budget
is kept within bounds. In times of national emergency, greater vigilance than
ever should have top priority.
Our nation is in a period of international crisis right now and probably
will be for many months ahead. The government and our citizens are alert to
the multitude of world problems and are attempting to cope with them even though
there are many discouraging factors and progress seems slow, yes, almost snail-
like. To do this means certain adjustments must take place in our public and
private lives. A government operating under such conditions is of necessity
an expensive government. In the rush to meet new problems by emergency appropria-
tions, many of the normal functions of government are obscured but unfortunately
not eliminated or even greatly curtailed. The result is simply this - the cost
GERALD LIBRARY FORD
-2-
of emergency activities is simply piled on top of the normal and before you
know it Congress is faced with exceptionally high budget requests all along
the line. That is what may happen this year if Congress is not alert and
hardboiled. Many of the ordinary functions of the federal government logically
should be curtailed during this current crisis, with expenditures concentrated
on emergency activities. Unfortunately the President's budget which he sub-
mitted to the Congress last January did not carry out this policy. The
President did recommend a big budget for national defense, and rightly so, but
he made little effort to cut the normal expenditures and functions of the
federal government.
It is easy to say, let's cut down on the normal functions of government.
However, let's examine how this task might and should be accomplished.
The simple method would be an across-the-board cut. For example, make a
flat percentage cut of perhaps 25 per cent in all normal functions. Such a
procedure would achieve a very helpful dollar cut in proposed appropriations.
This approach to the problem is commonly referred to as the meat axe method.
The cleaver does its job - money is saved - but very likely with harmful
results on certain essential nonmilitary agencies that have a definite part
in the war effort. I repeat, because the meat axe method is not selective,
it is quite likely that irreparable damage might well be done to some highly
important government activities. For example, we would probably agree that
under present conditions the work of the F.B.I. is very important - would it
make sense to cut the budget of this agency by 25 per cent? The meat axe
approach does its work, but I think there is a better method; the selective
method shall we call it.
-3-
What is meant by the "selective" method? I mean simply this - make
cuts in appropriations but do the job agency by agency and function by
function. It is the hard way, of course, but it is also the safest. It
means no essential, and I emphasize essential, government services will
be destroyed yet reductions in expenditures will result in those areas where
savings can legically and safely be achieved.
In my judgment the House of Representatives this year has made a
reasonably good record on economy in reference to the normal functions or
expendi tures of the federal government. When the President submitted his
budget for the current fiscal year Mr. Truman dared the Congress to make
any reductions in his 90 billion dollar spending program. The House gladly
accepted this challenge. For your information, here are some figures in
black and white which prove that the President's budget could be cut. So
far the House of Representatives has considered nine (9) appropriation
bills for fiscal year 1952. These 9 bills cover all of the normal functions
of the federal government. The President proposed that Congress in these
specific measures appropriate $16,015,748,225. The House said no, that
figure is altogether too high and consequently slashed $1,339,835,516 from
the White House budget proposals. The reductions approved by the House in
normal federal expenditures total slightly above 8 per cent. These cuts
which add up to more than a billion three hundred million are the best
evidence the Congress believes the regular agencies and departments can and
must pull in their belts and make sacrifices along with all our citizens
during the rearmament and mobilization effort.
A natural question at this point would be - What has the Senate done
on these appropriation bills? As of August 6th the Senate has taken
GERAMO action R. FORD LIBRARY
4
on 6 of the 9 1952 appropriation bills and it has increased the total amounts
in 5 of the 6 measures. The Senate's action in increasing appropriations is
nothing new or different. Last year a study was made which revealed that in
10 of the 11 years from 1940 to 1950 inclusive the Senate boosted total appropria-
tions well above the House-approved figures. In this 11 year period the Senate
voted over 18 billions more than the House in the aggregate.
While discussing the free-spending attitude of the Senate as a whole I
would be unfair if I failed to mention the excellent economy record of Michi-
gan's Senator Homer Ferguson. Senator Ferguson this year, and this is only
typical of his sound approach to federal fiscal matters, on 30 our of 31 roll
call votes favored reductions in government spending. In addition, he has an
outstanding record of being on the job in Washington fighting for economy day
after day. The only way for a Member of Congress to save hard earned tax
dollars for the American people is to be in the Capital and on the job. Senator
Ferguson has rightfully earned the reputation as a two fisted fighter for
economy in the federal government.
Let's turn to the emergency or defense portion of the federal budget.
The Department of Defense requested that Congress appropriate this year 59
billion 1 hundred million dollars for the Army, Navy and Air Force. The top
budget officials of all three branches of the Armed Forces testified before
the House Committee on Appropriations for 11 weeks in an effort to justify the
many individual items in this multibillion dollar bill. These long and detailed
hearings convinced the 50 members of the House Appropriations Committee the
Department of Defense budget could stand some reductions and as a result the
Committee recommended a cut of 1 billion 500 million dollars. These reductions
-5-
amount to approximately a 3 per cent reduction in the funds for the Army,
Navy and Air Force.
Actually the Committee was very cautious in slashing the budget re-
quests for the Department of Defense. It is the conviction of the Congress
that in this crisis, as far as the military is concerned, it would be better
to gamble on the side of generosity where the military security of the nation
is at stake. I emphasize this attitude prevails only in reference to military
funds.
The Committee on Appropriations in its report on this bill did, however,
strongly condemn the Defense Department for extravagance in civilian employ-
ment and specifically ordered the Pentagon brass to make sharp reductions in
their publicity and information staffs. In the opinion of the Committee the
57.6 billion dollars will assure a defense sufficient to avert a disaster at
home and provide the Armed Forces with sufficient men and equipment to
retaliate successfully in the event of attack by the Enemy.
The cost of the current mobilization effort does not fall entirely on
the Department of Defense. Setting up and maintaining price and wage con-
trols is terribly expensive. For example, President Truman recently sub-
mitted a budget of 238 million dollars for administrative expenses for the
numerous defense production activities. For the past two weeks nine members
of the Committee on Appropriations have listened five and six hours per day
to Mr. Charles Wilson, Eric Johnston, Mike DiSalle and others who have tried
to justify this tremendous request for funds.
Here are some highlights on what the President proposes for the opera-
tion of O.P.S. and other related agencies. Seventy per cent of the 238 million
GERAL FORD LIBRARY
-6-
would be used to pay the salaries of approximately 34,000 new federal
employees whose average pay would be about $5,000 annually. Nearly 15
million dollars would be spent on travel alone. For just printing forms
Mr. Truman has requested 81/2 million dollars. Other supplies, materials and
equipment would come to about 71/2 million dollars. In other words, the cost
of administering a price control law is a real burden on the United States
Treasury. This year's federal taxes, yours and mine, will be used in part
to pay for the 34 thousand proposed new federal employees who have the job
of setting price ceilings and allocating critical materials. At the moment
I cannot predict what action the Congress will take on this budget request
but there are a number of Members of Congress who definitely feel the 238
million dollars for the operation of O.P.S. and related agencies is altogether
too high a figure. A 10 per cent cut by Congress can be easily justified.
This past week the federal Civil Defense officials presented their
case to the House Committee on Appropriations in favor of the President's
535 million dollar budget for this program. Much of the testimony is of a
confidential nature but here is a breakdown of the proposed Civil Defense
budget: Administrative cost - 19 million dollars; federal contributions to
states and local governments - 45 million dollars; procurement fund - 20 million
dollars; emergency supplies and equipment - 200,000,000 dollars; and protective
facilities, such as bomb shelters - 250 million dollars.
Original decisions on this expensive program by the legislative branch
of the federal government will be made shortly. No one denies that an adequate
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
-7-
Civil Defense organization must be in operation, particularly in potential
target areas like Michigan, but does the cost have to come so high. There
is a prevalent feeling in the Congress that the present Civil Defense Agency
is too expensive an operation.
In closing, let me emphasize one point. Every citizen should make
a real effort to know exactly how his Senators and Representatives vote on
economy issues in the Congress. Remember this - the millions and billions
appropriated from the federal Treasury come from all the taxpayers, big and
small. Members of Congress by their votes in effect spend your money. Conse-
quently it behooves every taxpayer to know quite specifically whether a
Senator or Representative votes for extravagance or for economy in the handling
of your tax dollars.
Thank you.
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
RADIO SPEECH BY REPRESENTATIVE GERALD R. FORD, JR. AS GUEST
ON WEEKLY RADIO REPORT BY SENATOR HOMER FERGUSON. 8/28/51
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, It is a real pleasure and a distinct
privilege for me to appear as a guest on Senator Ferguson's weekly radio
program. In my judgment it is most important for our Michigan citizens
to have up to date and factual information from the Nation's capital and
I hope my remarks will be of some help along this line.
In the present rush of life most of us pay relatively little
attention to the affairs of government and base what few opinions we have
on newspaper stories and the remarks of radio commentators. We know that
we pay taxes but just how much we know only once a year - that is - when we
file our final tax return. The rest of the time we know that our take-home
pay is considerably smaller than our income as listed by our employer. We
are also prone to accept the notion that our tax dollars are probably
frittered away. This opinion is reinforced occasionally by stories coming
out of Washington to the effect that each stenographer has two typewriters
or that there are too many employees and they earn too much. Subconsciously,
perhaps we are aware that there must be some useful government services,
but what they may be is not at all clear to us. It is to the problem of
government services that I would like to turn our attention for a few minutes.
It is a fair question to ask, what do we get for our money? Rather
than answer this question in broad terms, I would like to investigate a single
segment of government activity to demonstrate that, at least, in some areas
direct, tangible benefits accrue as a result of government expenditures.
The area I would like to discuss deals with public works. First as
a member of the House Public Works Committee, and now as a member of the
FORD is LIBRARY
Committee on Appropriations, I have come in close contact with the problem
of public works. The area covered is concerned with the development of
our greatest of all natural resources - water. We are, therefore, interested
in irrigation, flood control, navigation of both our rivers and harbors,
power, and recreation and conservation. There are many agencies of govern-
ment involved in one way or another, but the greatest activity is carried
on by the Bureau of Reclamation of the Interior Department and the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers. There is some overlapping of interests among the
various agencies and, therefore, the need for constant vigilance by Con-
gressional committees.
Fundamentally, the Reclamation Bureau is concerned with the
problem of conservation and effective use of water resources in the western
states. Its primary interest is irrigation but in actual practice it gets
into the problem of power development and stream control. The Grand Coulee
Dam was a Reclamation project because of its irrigation phases; even though
the principal public benefit is electric power. The Corps of Engineers
on the other hand is primarily interested in river and harbor development
for navigation purposes and the control of rivers for flood protection.
However, in the process of controlling our rivers, dams are built and, thus,
a power potential may be involved. So here develops a source of conflict
and duplication - both agencies get involved in the development of hydro-
electric power.
Since I am intimately acquainted with the operations of the
Corps of Engineers, I think a brief description of its operations is the
best way to illustrate my topic - namely, that our tax dollars frequently
yield direct and tangible benefits. Periodically, the Army Engineers submit
Page Three
to the Public Works Committee a list of projects for approval. On the
basis of Hearings the committee determines the soundness of these proposals.
The most important criteria, of course, is the prospective benefit to be
received. The Corps must establish that the annual return from the pro-
ject will exceed the costs involved as amortized over a period of years.
The costs to be amortized must include the original cash outlays and the
annual operating expenses. The benefit-cost ratio must therefore be at
least 1 to 1. The calculation of the proposed benefits is, I fear, subject
to a good deal of judgment and even, perhaps, wishful thinking, and as a
result some of the public works projects of the past have not been a good
investment for Uncle Sam's tax dollars.
It is fairly easy to compute the ratio for a project that
is almost exclusively electric power. The costs of construction can be
figured reasonably accurately and since the power potential is known then
it isn't too difficult to determine the rate necessary to cover the costs.
If the available market is such that the power can't be sold at the required
rate, then it is perfectly clear that the project is not economically sound.
The problem of benefit computation as we move away from power to flood
control, navigation or recreation becomes increasingly difficult and less
accurate. Nonetheless, I think an homest and sincere effort is made to
establish the potential future value of each project.
The Army Engineers annually submit a proposed program to the
Committee on Appropriations. This includes the amount for each project
as recommended in the President's budget. For each project, and there
were over 100 of them this year, a complete and comprehensive stat
ement GEHAL FORD LIBRARY
Page Four
was submitted in justification of the requested appropriations. Admittedly,
this statement isn't an engineering report; it is instead a statement of
total estimated cost, the funds thus far allotted and money requested for
current construction. Further detail includes a breakdown of costs by
major categories such as land acquisition, relocations, power plant
equipment if involved, dam construction and so forth. In addition, there
is a statement describing the project and the benefits to be derived.
The justification sheet with all this data constitutes the basis for
questioning by the Congressmen during the committee hearings. The testi-
mony thus developed gives a basis for determining the validity of the request.
Final committee action may be much different from the requested funds. For
example, the House of Representatives this year cut 126 million dollars from
the budget after the committee did some pruning.
It should be brought out that each project has gone through the
mill at the Bureau of the Budget before ever getting to the Committee on
Appropriations. How much money is allowed for each project depends upon
broad government policy as well as the soundness of the case. This year
in Congress the drive for economy has been so strong many projects will get
far less than would be the case in normal times.
In order to be specific I have selected several projects to
illustrate the problem of benefits to be received and some of the other
complications involved. The Buggs Island Reservoir in the Virginia-North
Carolina area is an interesting project of the multi-purpose type which
consists of a dam across the Roanoke River close to the Virginia-North
Carolina line. The total cost is estimated to be $88,840,000. When
completed GERALE FORD LIBRARY
the project will provide flood control, hydro-electric power, pollution
abatement, commercial fishing, navigation and stream control for power
plants down the river. The principal benefit is power-84 per cent. The
income from this source will be about $5,000,000. In other words, its
204,000 KW capacity will produce this much revenue. From flood control the
benefit is estimated at about $1,000,000 annually. This is computed by
determining what the potential losses would be from an average flood and
this is calculated from flood records over a period of years. Present day
economic development is, of course, considered. It is estimated, for example,
that a recurrence of the record flood of August, 1940 without the reservoir
in operation would cause damage in the lower Roanoke River of over $6,000,000.
With the reservoir in operation the damage would be a negligible amount.
Previously I have listed many other benefits to be derived from
this project, namely, pollution abatement, commercial fishing and naviga-
tion, but no dollar and cent estimate is made of their value. This is
frequently done because of the difficulty of computation. This illustrates
pretty well my point, however, as to the complexity of the problem.
Now, let me outline for you the situation with respect to a
river and harbor project. An interesting one is called Calcasieu River
and Pass, in the State of Louisiana. This is a project with a present
cost of about $8,000,000 and may ultimately run up to $12,600,000 if it
is found necessary to build a series of jetties. The work at present con-
sists in the dredging of a 35-foot channel between Lake Charles and the
Gulf of Mexico. It is a navigation project pure and simple. There will be
no income in the form of tolls, instead the benefit will accrue to coastal
shippers. When completed it is estimated that over 13,000,000 tons of cargo
LIBRARY
Page Six
mostly oil and petroleum products, will go through the channel instead
of the longer route now used. The oil companies think the resulting
savings will range between six and seven and a half cents per barrel be-
tween Gulf and North Atlantic ports, with greater savings for overseas
traffic. Stated differently, this will mean a savings in transportation
costs of over $4,000,000 each year.
These two typical cases, I believe, illustrate a few of the problems
involved and describe the nature of the benefits to be received. The point
is, however, that these projects when completed will be of over-all benefit
to the nation. As I've said before, none of many projects proposed are
built unless justified on a benefit to cost ratio.
As you can imagine, there are many river and harbor and flood
control projects throughout this great Nation that can be justified on a
sound business basis. In fact there are so many there must be a careful
evaluation made so that only the best come first. During this critical
period when the federal government must of necessity stop all nonessential
nondefense spending, a number of public works projects have to be deferred.
My subcommittee on Appropriations had this difficult problem.
We had three long months of hearings with interested witnesses from all
over the country. Everyone of the witnesses tried to make a case for
their individual home town project. When all the testimony was in our
subcommittee proposed that the federal government spend over 500 million
this year on such public works projects. We did, however, cut 126 million
dollars from the President's budget on these items. The entire House of
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
Page Seven
Representatives concurred in this 20 per cent cut in President Truman's
budget but when the bill got to the Senate practically all of the reductions
were washed out. In fact, the Senate put back 124 million dollars despite
the economy efforts of Senator Ferguson of Michigan and Senator Douglas of
Illinois. If Senators Ferguson and Douglas had not fought for the American
taxpayers, I'm afraid the increases would have been even more.
Naturally you will ask - Will the Senate get away with the in-
crease in expenditures? Frankly, I don't think so. The House and Senate
conferees must get together in conference to work out a compromise and as
one of the 10 or more conferees it is my prediction that the final figure
will be closer to the House total. It certainly should be if there is ever
to be any relief for the American taxpayer.
It has been a privilege to appear on this program as Senator
Ferguson's guest. In closing, thanks for listening to this report from
the Nation's Capital.
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
MUTUAL BROADCASTING PROGRAM SATURDAY, JANUARY 5, 1952
The fundamental problem and over-riding issue facing this session of the
Congress is the proper and effective handling of the President's budget for the
coming fiscal year. At this late hour it should be crystal clear that unless
the reckless and wasteful spending of hard-earned tax dollars is curtailed imme-
diately the United States is doomed to financial bankruptcy which will be followed
by the inevitable disintigration and chaos from which there is no return.
In the last 20 years and particularly for the last six years the record
indicates Congress has been the only safeguard against even bigger appropriations
and unlimited spending. Admittedly President Truman's budget requests of the
past should have been cut even deeper, but until now, with the federal tax burden
at unbearable and record heights, there has been mighty little appreciation of the
necessity for "down-the-line economy." Today the federal government by both
direct and indirect taxes is a sizeable sharecropper on the wages of every working
man in America. Until there is a substantial reduction in federal spending there
can be no lifting of the tax burden from the shoulders of our citizens. Unless
there is a curtailment of useless non-defense expenditures and more economical
utilization of the funds appropriated for the military, federal tax collectors
under President Truman will be digging deeper and deeper into the pocketbooks
Lb R. FORD of LIBRARY
-2-
every wage earner.
Is there any hope for a balanced budget in the next fiscal year? Probably
not as long as the President continues to request expenditures approximating 100
billfontdollars annually. In the last session of the Congress the House and
Senate Republicans and a few economy minded Democrats shaved about 5 per cent from
the President's budget but despite this effort the Truman Administration undoubtedly
will end up with a 5 to 7 billion dollar deficit in the current fiscal year. In
the coming session the Republicans in Congress again will lead the attack for economy,
but if the job is to be done, as it must be, all members of Congress must practice
as well as preach economy. Our citizens can rest assured that if there is any
cooperation from the White House and from the Democratic Party leaders in the
Congress the budget can and will be balanced.
Within the next few weeks President Truman in his budget message will submit
the blueprint either for continued financial irresponsibility or for a return
to solvency and stability. The President could and should set the pattern for
economy and reduced appropriations but, if not, then the Congress must assume
the burden of balancing expenditures against receipts.
Sound government financing is a basic moral issue. Continued deficit RD
GERALD LIBRARY
-3-
financing is a crime, in fact as reprehensible as the dishonest administration of
our laws. To keep our government strong, to maintain and enlarge the freedom and
opportunities for our people, federal expenditures must be reduced and the tax
burdens lifted. Every citizen, but more specifically the President and each member
of Congress must face the issue of economy in government in a forthright manner.
The second session of the 82nd Congress will be the final testing ground.
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
MUTUAL BROADCASTING PROGRAM SATURDAY, JANUARY 5, 1952
The fundamental problem and over-riding issue facing t is session of the
Congress is the proper and effective handling of the President's budget for the
coming fiscal year. At this late hour it should be crystal clear that unless
the reckless and wasteful spending of hard-earned tax dollars is curtailed imme-
diately the United States is doomed to financial bankruptcy which will be followed
by the inevitable disintigration and chaos from which there is no return.
In the last 20 years and particularly for the last six years the record
indicates Congress has been the only safeguard against even bigger appropriations
and unlimited spending. Admittedly President Truman's budget requests of the
past should have been cut even deeper, but until now, with the federal tax burden
at unbearable and record heights, there has been mighty little appreciation of the
necessity for "down-the-line economy." Today the federal government by both
direct and indirect taxes is a sizeable sharecropper on the wages of every working
man in America. Until there is a substantial reduction in federal spending there
can be no lifting of the tax burden from the shoulders of our citizens. Unless
there is a curtailment of useless non-defense expenditures and more economical
utilization of the funds appropriated for the military, federal tax collectors
under President Truman will be digging deeper and deeper into the pocketbooks
GER FORD of LIBRARY
-2-
every wage earner.
Is there any hope for a balanced budget in the next fiscal year? Probably
not as long as the President continues to requ t expenditures approximating 100
billiontdollars annually. In the last session of the Congress the House and
Senate Republicans and a few economy minded Democrats shaved about 5 per cent from
the President's budget but despite this effort the Truman Administration undoubtedly
will end up with a 5 to 7 billion dollar deficit in the current fiscal year. In
the coming session the Republicans in Congress again will lead the attack for economy,
but if the job is to be done, as it must be, all members of Congress must practice
as well as preach economy. Our citizens can rest assured that if there is any
cooperation from the White House and from the Democratic Party leaders in the
Congress the budget can and will be bàlanced.
Within the next few weeks President Truman in his budget message will submit
the blueprint either for continued financial irresponsibility or for a return
to solvency and stability. The President could and should set the pattern for
economy and reduced appropriations but, if not, then the Congress must assume
the burden of balancing expenditures against receipts.
Sound government financing is a basic moral issue. Continued deficit
FORD i LIBRARY GERALD
-3-
financing is a crime, in fact as reprehensible as the dishonest administration of
our laws. To keep our government strong, to maintain and enlarge the freedom and
opportunities for our people, federal expenditures must be reduced and the tax
burdens lifted. Every citizen, but more specifically the President and each member
of Congress must face the issue of economy in government in a forthright manner.
The second session of the 82nd Congress will be the final testing ground.
EORD LIBRAR. 077830 y
920rd MUTUAL NEWS REEL Irisc, speechen
3/7/52
Fortunately for the American taxpayers the Congress is becoming more and
more economy minded despite the obvious lack of cooperation from the executive
branch of the federal government. There is excellent evidence for this obser-
Recently
vation in today's action by the House Committee on Appropriations. President
Truman in a supplemental appropriation bill for the current year demanded that
ongress appropriate approximately 1 billion 70 million dollars for a number
of federal agencies. The House Committee after ascrutinizing investigation of
the operations and practices of the various agencies reduced the requested
funds about 100 million dollars or a 10 per cent slash.
Bear in mind this billion-dollar appropriation request by the President
was principally for the purpose of tiding over the agencies until June 30th.
In other words these departments and bureaus in most instances refused to
live within the funds previously appropriated, and simply wanted the Congress
to make up the deficiencies. This situation is typical of the bad planning and
poor management that exists in most branches of the executive department.
The American people are rightfully alarmed over continued deficits, high
taxes and irresponsible fiscal policies. Congress is likewise concerned and
FORD i LIBRARY GERALD
-2-
as a result there will be increasingly greater cuts in the federal budget, but
until the House and Senate get some cooperation from the White House there can
be no satisfactory and permanent solution to high taxes and wasteful spending.
FORD i LIBRARY GERALD
YOUR CONGRESS
RADIO STATION WJR
DETROIT, MICHIGAN
APRIL 3, 1953
SPEECH OF REPRESENTATIVE GERALD R. FORD, JR
FIFTH DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
Ladies and gentlemen.
At present there is nationwide public interest in the question of Federal
taxes. With March 15th and all its headaches just behind us, this is not unusual.
Even though we are only too familiar with what taxes we pay individually, it's not
too easy to comprehend the magnitude of the revenue collected annually by Uncle Sam.
In this fiscal year which ends June 30th, the Federal treasury anticipates collec-
tions from all sources to total about 68 billion dollars. This was the best esti-
mate several months ago. More precise figures can be expected with a few weeks when
Treasury officials will have had an opportunity to check and total funds received
up to March 15th.
We readily agree that any nation which extracts from 65 to 70 billion in
taxes from its citizens annually is imposing a mighty heavy burden unless every dol-
lar is spent wisely and economically. As servants of the people, your government
officials have aduty to account for their stewardship in expending your tax dollars.
Living in these critical times when the free nations of the world are harras-
sed by the aetheistic dictators behind the Iron Curtain, I believe it wise and es-
sential to allot adequate funds for national defense.
A well prepared Army, Navy and Air Force costs many billions but that does
not mean we should condone the waste and extravagance of the past three years by
the Department of Defense. A strong and technically advanced domestic economy
costs money, but again that gives no license to alibi about inefficiency and wast e--
ful practices. Let me assure you, the new administration expects to get a better
job done for less dollars. At the same time it can see no reason why it will not be
able to strengthen our domestic economy by unshackling American labor and industry
from the unproductive regimentation of the past.
Obviously, the position of an economizer is not an enviable one in this age
in which tyrants threaten from without and new military technologies force upon us
what often seems like a geometrical progression of ever-increasing military expen-
ditures each year. Even if we assume the military budget cannot be cut too deeply,
and I doubt the validity of this assumption there is nothing untouchable about the
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
page two
appropriations for dher Federal agencies. We should remember this fact the cit-
izens in Michigan would be saved about 500 million dollars a cool half billion
if the Federal budget for the next fiscal year is slashed 10 billion dollars.
Some citizens rightfully wonder what has been accomplished along these
lines by the new Eisenhower administration. The evidence is overwhelming that Pres-
ident Eisenhower in the 70 days he has held the reins of government has moved
swiftly and effectively to cut expenses and streamline government operations. With-
in a few days after the Inauguration a freeze order was clamped on all Federal em-
ployment. In other words, no Federal agency could hire new employees. This ban on
new employees has materially helped to cut down the Federal payroll and the cumula-
tive effect will be an even more substantial improvement.
At the same time stop orders were issued on all new Federal construction
projects which were less than 20 percent completed. These new projects are being
carefully reviewed and many will undoubtedly be abandoned at considerable savings to
the taxpayer.
Several weeks ago the new Secretary of Defense, Mr. Charles Wilson, orde
a slash in the number of civilian employees for the Army, Navy and Air Force. An
immediate cut of 40,000 employees in this one branch of the Federal government will
save millions without reducing our military preparedness.
Postmaster General Summerfield, working hard to bring efficiency to his
Department, announced March 22 the inauguration of a plan to improve rural postal
service which is expected to save millions for the taxpayers. Summerfields ef-
ficiency move calls for the establishment of new R.F.D. routes and revision of
R.F.D. and contract routes to conform with population shifts and highway improvements.
To be inaugurated April 1 in Wilkes County, North Carolina, the reorgan-
ization will expand R.F.D. service there to take in 700 additional families and to
cut costs by $20,000 in the first year of operation. Summerfield said this will be
done by replacing 19 outmoded rural postoffices with mobile postal facilities, giv-
ing home mail service and by consolidating mail contract routes.
As you know, former President Truman, on January 9, 1953 proposed a bud-
get for the next twelve months totalling 78 billion, 600 million dollars. The new
President and his advisors are confident that the Truman budget can be whittled down
without damaging our military forces or destroying our domestic economy.
Here is one example: I" the Truman budget for the fiscal year starting
July 1, 1953 the Department of Commerce was allocated 1 billion, 131 million, 195
page three
thousand dollars. Secretary of Commerce Weeks, an Eisenhower appointee, has cut
this by 15 per cent or over 169 million.
Another tax saving suggestion by the new Secretary of Commerce merits
comment at this time. He recommends that Uncle Sam sell his Federal barge lines
which have been in direct competition with privately owned barge companies. This
would be a wise move for several good reasons. The Federally owned barges which
have operated on the lower Mississippi have been a serious drain on the Federal
treasury. In contrast, the privately owned barge lines have provided good service
and paid substantial taxes to Uncle Sam. By selling the Federal barge line, lock,
stock and barrel, the Treasury will get back its investment in equipment, terminate
the annual operating losses and bring in new revenue. The new Secretary of Commerce
is to be congratulated for this sound and sensible proposal.
Still another plan to help put income and expenditures back on speaking
terms is in the first stages of organization. It has been proposed that the Recon-
struction finance Corporation be abolished. The R.F.C., originally set up by for-
mer president Hoover to meet a real crisis, in recent years has become a source of
easy money for those who had the "right" political influence. The memory of mink
coats and deep freezes lingers with uncomfortable vividness. The small business
benefits of R.F.C. will be transferred to the Treasury Department, but the rest of
R.F.C. will be liquidated as a major step in getting Uncle Sam out of those fields
where private business can handle the job at no cost to the taxpayers generally.
The proposed reductions in the Federal budget will result in termination
of certain programs and projects. Some citizens who are intensely interested in a
particular program or project will object to any economy effort by the President and
Congress if the cut in expenditures eliminates their "pet" projects. It's the old
story, "I'm for economy in government; I want my taxes reduced but don't cut the
Federal bodget where it will eliminate our airport, our flood control project or our
hospital building plans."
If the President, the Congress and all our people are to benefit from less
Federal spending and less taxes, here are a few concrete suggestions which originated
with a Congressman from Wisconsin which ought to be followed. According to Repre-
sentative Glenn Davis there are 10 things the public can do to reduce taxes:
1) As a farmer, don't ask for conservation payments or other benefits as
a substitute for economic production and marketing.
2) As a veteran, don't ask for across-the-board benefits for veterans,
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
page four
for additional nonservice-connected benefits, or for millions for new veterans'
hospitals while thousands of existing beds are idle for lack of adequate staffs.
3) As an employer, don't permit wasteful production practices just be-
cause "Uncle Sam is paying for most of it anyway".
4) As a payroller for Uncle Sam, don't ask for a pay boost.
5) As a taxpayer, don't ask for income tax Belief until the talk of re-
duced budget becomes a reality.
6) As a Chamber of C ommerce official, don't ask for ne W Federal pro-
jects for your community.
7) As a Federal job seeker, don't ask for the continuation of an unnec-
essary government job.
8) As a state or local administrator, don't ask for more, or even as much,
Federal assistance.
9) As a Federal administrator, don't ask for more employees or more funds
than you actually need.
10) As a constituent and voter don't ask your congressman to vote bigge
appropriations unless you want to pay more taxes.
This may seem to be harsh advice. It may even appear to be politically
unwise. But the time has come when political expediency must be abandoned. The
public generally expects the Federal budget to be reduced and it can be reduced
if every segment of our population, including government employees, veterans, far-
mers, and our military leaders cooperate to the maximum in saving every possible
dollar that is paid into the Federal treasury. If such an attitude prevails across
the board with no exceptions, that long-awaited reduction in Federal taxes will
be a reality.
In closing I wish to express my thanks and congratulations to WJR for con-
tinuing this fine public service information feature.
1 hank you and good night.
****
GERALD FORD
YOUR CONGRESS
RADIO STATION WJR
DETROIT, MICHIGAN
APRIL 3, 1953
SPEECH OF REPRESENTATIVE GERALD R. FORD, JR
FIFTH DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
Ladies and gentlemen.
At present there is nationwide public interest in the question of Federal
taxes. With March 15th and all its headaches just behind us, this is not unusual.
Even though we are only too familiar with what taxes we pay individually, it's not
too easy to comprehend the magnitude of the revenue collected annually by Uncle Sam.
In this fiscal year which ends June 30th, the Federal treasury anticipates collec-
tions from all sources to total about 68 billion dollars. This was the best estim
mate several months ago. More precise figures can be expected with a few weeks when
Treasury officials will have had an opportunity to check and total funds received
up to March 15th.
We readily agree that any nation which extracts from 65 to 70 billion in
taxes from its citizens annually is imposing a mighty heavy burden unless every dol-
lar is spent wisely and economically. As servants of the people, your government
officials have aduty to account for their stewardship in expending your tax dollars.
Living in these critical times when the free nations of the world are harras-
sed by the aetheistic dictators behind the Iron Curtain, I believe it wise and es-
sential to allot adequate funds for national defense.
A well prepared Army, Navy and Air Force costs many billions but that does
not mean we should condone the waste and extravagance of the past three years by
the Department of Defense. A strong and technically advanced domestic economy
costs money. but again that gives no license to alibi about inefficiency and wast e---
ful practices. Let me assure you, the new administration expects to get a better
job done for less dollars. At the same time it can see no reason why it will not be
able to strengthen our domestic economy by unshackling American labor and industry
from the unproductive regimentation of the past.
Obviously, the position of an economizer is not an enviable one in this age
in which tyrants threaten from without and new military technologies force upon us
what often seems like a geometrical progression of ever-increasing military expen-
ditures each year. Even if we assume the military budget cannot be cut too deeply,
and I doubt the validity of this assumption there is nothing untouchable about the
page two
appropriations for ther Federal agencies. We should remember this fact the cit-
izens in Michigan would be saved about 500 million dollars a cool half billion
if the Federal budget for the next fiscal year is slashed 10 billion dollars.
Some citizens rightfully wonder what has been accomplished along these
lines by the new Eisenhower administration. The evidence is overwhelming that Pres-
ident Eisenhower in the 70 days he has held the reins of government has moved
swiftly and effectively to cut expenses and streamline government operations. With-
in a few days after the Inauguration a freeze order was clamped on all Federal ema
ployment. In other words, no Federal agency could hire new employees. This ban on
new employees has materially helped to cut down the Federal payroll and the cumula-
tive effect will be an even more substantial improvement.
At the same time stop orders were issued on all new Federal construction
projects which were less than 20 percent completed. These new projects are being
carefully reviewed and many will undoubtedly be abandoned at considerable savings tc
the taxpayer.
Several weeks ago the new Secretary of Defense, Mr. Charles Wilson, orde
a slash in the number of civilian employees for the Army, Navy and Air Force. An
immediate cut of 40,000 employees in this one branch of the Federal government will
save millions without reducing our military preparedness.
Postmaster General Summerfield, working hard to bring efficiency to his
Department, announced March 22 the inauguration of a plan to improve rural postal
service which is expected to save millions for the taxpayers. Summerfields ef-
ficiency move calls for the establishment of new R.F.D. routes and revision of
R.F.D. and contract routes to conform with population shifts and highway improvements.
To be inaugurated April 1 in Wilkes County, North Carolina, the reorgan-
ization will expand R.F.D. service there to take in 700 additional families and to
cut costs by $20,000 in the first year of operation. Summerfield said this will be
done by replacing 19 outmoded rural postoffices with mobile postal facilities, giv-
ing home mail service and by consolidating mail contract routes.
As you know, former President Truman, on January 9, 1953 proposed a bud-
get for the next twelve months totalling 78 billion, 600 million dollars. The new
President and his advisors are confident that the Truman budget can be whittled down
without damaging our military forces or destroying our domestic economy.
Here is one example: I" the Truman budget for the fiscal year starting
July 1, 1953 the Department of Commerce was allocated 1 billion, 131 million, 195
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
thousand dollars. Secretary of Commerce Weeks, an Eisenhower appointee, has cut
this by 15 per cent or over 169 million.
Another tax saving suggestion by the new Secretary of Commerce merits
comment at this time. He recommends that Uncle Sam sell his Federal barge lines
which have been in direct competition with privately owned barge companies. This
would be a wise move for several good reasons. The Federally owned barges which
have operated on the lower Mississippi have been a serious drain on the Federal
treasury. In contrast, the privately owned barge lines have provided good service
and paid substantial taxes to Uncle Sam. By selling the Federal barge line, lock,
stock and barrel, the Treasury will get back its investment in equipment, terminate
the annual operating losses and bring in new revenue. The new Secretary of Commerce
is to be congratulated for this sound and sensible proposal.
Still another plan to help put income and expenditures back on speaking
terms is in the first stages of organization. It has been proposed that the Recon-
struction finance Corporation be abolished. The R.F.C., originally set up by for-
mer president Hoover to meet a real crisis, in recent years has become a source of
easy money for those who had the "right" political influence. The memory of mink
coats and deep freezes lingers with uncomfortable vividness. The small business
benefits of R.F.C. will be transferred to the Treasury Department, but the rest of
R.F.C. will be liquidated as a major step in getting Uncle Sam out of those fields
where private business can handle the job at no cost to the taxpayers generally.
The proposed reductions in the Federal budget will result in termination
of certain programs and projects. Some citizens who are intensely interested in a
particular program or project will object to any economy effort by the President and
Congress if the cut in expenditures eliminates their "pet" projects. It's the old
story, "I'm for economy in government; I want my taxes reduced but don't cut the
Federal bodget where it will eliminate our airport, our flood control project or our
hospital building plans."
If the President, the Congress and all our people are to benefit from less
Federal spending and less taxes, here are a few concrete suggestions which originated
with a Congressman from Wisconsin which ought to be followed. According to Repre-
entative Glenn Davis there are 10 things the public can do to reduce taxes:
1) As a farmer, don't ask for conservation payments or other benefits as
a substitute for economic production and marketing.
2) As a veteran, don't ask for across-the-board benefits for veterans,
page four
for additional nonservice-connected benefits, or for millions for new veterans'
hospitals while thousands of existing beds are idle for lack of adequate staffs.
3) As an employer, don't permit wasteful production practices just be-
cause "Uncle Sam is paying for most of it anyway".
4) As a payroller for Uncle Sam, don't ask for a pay boost.
5) As a taxpayer, don't ask for income tax Belief until the talk of re-
duced budget becomes a reality.
6) As a Chamber of C ommerce official, don't ask for ne W Federal pro--
jects for your community.
7) As a Federal job seeker, don't ask for the continuation of an unnec-
essary government job.
8) As a state or local administrator, don't ask for more, or even as much,
Federal assistance.
9) As a Federal administrator, don't ask for more employees or more funds
than you actually need.
10) As a constituent and voter don't ask your congressman to vote bigge
appropriations unless you want to pay more taxes.
This may seem to be harsh advice. It may even appear to be politically
unwise. But the time has come when political expediency must be abandoned. The
public generally expects the Federal budget to be reduced and it can be reduced
if every segment of our population, including government employees, veterans, far-
mers, and our military leaders cooperate to the maximum in saving every possible
dollar that is paid into the Federal treasury. If such an attitude prevails across
the board with no exceptions, that long-awaited reduction in Federal taxes will
be a reality.
In closing I wish to express my thanks and congratulations to WJR for con-
tinuing this fine public service information feature.
1 hank you and good night.
****
GEBALO R.FORD
Speech for Recorded W JR
- 1 -
stract
april
6,
1954
13:35
In recent weeks the so-called n new look" in our foreign
policy and military strategy has aroused as much interest and discussion
But But done
as the change in ladies fashions of a few years ago which first gave
rise to the phrase. This, of course, is as it should be, for it is
through such discussion that we become fully informed and are able to
make the judgements necessary to the discharge of our responsibilities
as citizens in a great democracy.
Unfortunately, however, not all of the discussions has
been of a sort which leads to a full and clear understanding of these
policies and their impact upon the lives of all of us. All too frequently
columnists and commentators have focussed their attention upon those
aspects which interest them most or which seem to have the most sensational
appeal. Others have not always been impartial in their attitudes and
in some quarters the discussion has been marked by a high degree of
partisanship. As a consequence, certain aspects of the policies have
been over-emphasized to the detriment of others and there has been some
tendency to concentrate on the trees and ignore the forest.
Talk it would be helpful therefore, to bry, in the
short time available, to take an over-all view of these policies and to
relate the parts to the whole.
One of the important features of our present foreign
policy and defense program, and one which is most frequently overlooked,
is that they constitute a long range, over-all approach to the Communist
threat to our security.
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
- 2 -
It is no exaggeration to say that in the years between
1945 and 1953 we had no foreign pobicy worthy of the name. Unaware of,
or unwilling to recognize, the ambitions of the Communist rulers to
dominate the world, the men in charge of our government were unprepared
for each new aggression or threat of aggression and countered each new
foray with a hastily devised response designed to meet the particular
situation. Sometimes these were successful, more often they were not,
but each was marked by a costliness which broader planning might have
avoided.
The consequences of this policy, or rather lack of policy,
were all too apparent. Our expenditures for military preparation and
foreign aid took an ever increasing share of our national output, our
national budget became increasingly more unbalanced, and the spiral of
inflation became ever more pronounced. We moved from crisis to crisis
through recurrent periods of hope and fear which sapped our confidence
and gave rise to much unrest and insecurity and threatened our unity.
This has now been changed. President Eisenhower and his
advisors have recognized the Communist menace for what it is, andall=
embracing effort to engulf the free world in a monstrous tyranny moving
forward on many fronts. They have also recognized that the men in the
Kremlin plan not only for the immediate future, but for what has been called
"an entire historical era." The policies which they have developed and
the programs which they are fellowing are designed to counter this threat
in all its manifestations and over the "long pull." We are no longer
meeting emergency after emergency on the basis of the exigencies of the
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
- 3 -
moment, but are preparing and acting according to a broad plan oF our own.
There are two principal elements in this plan. First,
there is the principle of collective security, based upon the recog-
nition that there are other sovereign, free nations who are threatened
as we are by Communism, and who are united with us in opposition to it.
We cannot, without giving up the freedom which we cherish and which we
are striving to protect, meet the Communist menace alone. Our air force
would lose much of its effectiveness without the bases which our allies
have made available to us and without their manpower and other potentials
we would not have the flexibility and mobility to meet the various forms
of aggression which our enemy is capable of employing.
Through the Inter-American alliance, the North Atlantic
Treaty, the security treaties with our allies in the Western Pacific,
and in the United Nations Organization itself we have developed and are
fostering a system of mutual defense to which each free nation contributes
according to its resources and which is capable of matching the uneasy
strength which Soviet Russia has sought to mobilize by conquest. Because
this system is based upon co-operation and because each nation bears a
fair share of the burden according to its ability, it will develop a
stability and spiritual strength which our enemy will be unable to match
and which will insure our ultimate victory.
The second important element in our policy is to make it
clear to our enemy that any aggression on his part will be far more
costly to him than anything he can hope to gain. As Admiral Radford
50 cogently stated: The free nations # can ill afford to let a single
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
- 4 -
additional area fall behind the Iron Curtain. Though it often seems
unclear, and is sometimes deliberately obscured, it is simple as A-B-C.
Aside from the tragedy to the people conquered, Soviet domination means
that these people and their resources will be harnessed to the Soviet
war machine, and may be turned against us." We must not, as the previous
administration did with respect to Korea, encourage aggression in any
area by announcing that we have netinterest in it and then attempt to
meet the attack by a hasty and sometimes frantic, but extremely costly,
opposition.
We must be prepared, and we must convince the rulers of
the Communist world that we are prepared, to meet any attack on their part,
wherever it may occur, with a force so great that they cannot hope to
triumph and that our rewponse will be such that their loss will be far
greater than the stakes they seek to win. There are those who have
argued that the threat of retaliation in the past has never deterred an
aggressor, but they lose sight of the fact that never before has the
power of retaliation been so great and so sured
It is the impact of these policies upon our military
planning that has aroused the greatest controversy. Many commentators and
politicians professed to find in Mr. Dulles statement of our decision to
N ... depend primarily upon a great capacity to retaliate, instantly, by
means and at places of our choosing," a program involving sole dependence
upon atomic and thermonuclear weapons and the means of delivering them
to target. In shocked horror they proclaimed that the United States had
now committed itself to a policy of relying entirely upon the new weapons
of mass destruction and that consequently it would be unprepared to counter
any local aggression except by precipitating World War III.
FORD is LIBRARY GERALD
- 5 -
Nothing could be farther from the truth. Mr. Dulles
did no more than to express, in succinct terms, what appears to be
almost self-evident: That is, that in the atomic age, faced with an
unscrupulous enemy fully equipped with all of the modern weapons,
we must also be prepared with those weapons and we must be willing
and able to use them if, when, and where it is to our advantage and
our security demands that we do SO. To draw from his words the corollary
that we will neglect the more traditional weapons and are committed to
a policy of mass destruction is to indulge in fancy of the wildest sort.
Unless we would blindly deceive ourselfes we must
recognize that Soviet Russia today possesses the atomic and hydrogen
bombs, that it has the aircraft to carry them to our cities, and that
unless deterred it will do so in order to achieve its objective of a
communized world ruled from the Krembin. How else, in the world as it
is today, can such a possibility be better avoided than by being ready
to bring to the enemy surely and swiftly even greater destruction than
that which he would wreak upon us?
But to stress the weapons and equipment needed to over-
come the ultimate threat facing us does not mean that we propose to
ignore the possibility, one might almost say probability, of the more
limited and localized aggressions of our enemy and its satellites.
No
are all too aware of our recent experiences in Korea and the struggle now
going on in Indo-China not to realize that he has attempted and is likely
to attempt again to weaken us through limited engagements in areas where
the powerful new weapons are of little use. Again in the words of
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
- 6 -
Admiral Radford
Our planning does not subscribe to the thinking that the
ability to deliver massive atomic retaliation is, by
itself, adequate to meet all our security needs. It is
not correct to say we are relying exclusively on one
weapon, or one Service, or that we are anticipating one
kind or war. I believe that this Nation could be a
prisoner of its own military posture if it had no cap-
ability, other than one to deliver a massive atomic
attack.
It should be evident from the forces we intend to maintain
that we are not relying solely upon air power. We shall
continue to have over a million men in our Army, and we
shall continue to have a Navy that is second to none.
We have never before attempted to keep forces of this
size over an indefinite period of time.
I think it is quite clear that the new look" policies of
the Administration do not commit us inevitably to an all-out atomic war,
but instead afford us the best chance of avoiding such a holocaust. Based
firmly upon the principles of collective security and the deterrence of
aggression, these policies comprise a program designed to make the best use
of our assets and those of our allies and to provide the means to counter the
aggressions of our enemy with a wide variety of responses.
In evaluating our foreign and military policies we cannot
avoid consideration of the effect which they have upon our domestic economy.
While we Americans are prepared to make any sacrifice required for the preser-
- 7 -
vation of our freedom and our national safety, we must take care lest
we expend our energies needlessly and in the name of defense spend
ourselves into bankruptcy. Such a course would give the Communists
their victory at a minimum cost.
One of the consequences of the "new look" policies will be
the avoidance of this danger. Wereas our budgets in the fiscal years
1953 and 1954 called for national security expenditures of 50 billion
dollars and 49 billion dollars, respectively, this has been reduced
to 45 billion dollars in the budget submitted to Congress by President
Eisenhower for the fiscal year 1955. As we move further along in the
oh
implementation of these ploicies and achieve the level of preparedness
desired, it will be possible to reduce our military expenditures Oven
further and to achieve the balanced budget needed to alleviate the
pressures of inflation.
Furthermore, it has become practicable, as a result of
these policies, to reduce our economic aid to our allies. Because our
military programs are no longer marked by costly preparations based on
emergencies created at the will of our enemy, our allies are better able
to adjust their own economies to carrying their fair share of the burden
and to achieve a stability which reduces their dependence upon direct aid
from us. This is desirable in itself, for it ameliorates the strain upon
our own economy and promotes the mutual respect which is the foundation of
sound relationships between free nations.
We cannot, of course, be content to live in a world made
tense by the threat of aggression and burdened by vast expenditures for
- 8 -
the tools of war. The new policies do not provide a magic formula
for removing thèse tensions and burdens, but they do embody a program
which makes time an asset for us and which will enable us to demonstrate
to the peoples ruled by Soviet despotism that only under freedom can
wealth
they achieve the spiritual and material welath coveted by all men. I
firmly believe that these policies will enable us to avert a general
war which could result only in the destruction of all that man has
achieved.
2005 & LIBRARY 07VH3D
2. This that WJR. mlu speech.
Keepin file on Jackson Speech
[1955?]
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen -
I deeply appreciate the opportunity to discuss with you
matter
on this program a very vital program concerning our national
security. I refer to the President's recommendations for the
development and maintenance of a strong Army, Navy and Air Force.
Let me assure each of you that the Congress is most interested
in providing all necessary funds for a sound national defense
program, plus any essential implementing le gislation to insure
that the Armed Forces of the United States continue to be adequate
for all foreseeable contingencies.
Before indicating what "power and military might" the
United States has, both offensive and defensive, let's analyze a
few basic problems. First, how much should Uncle Sam spend each
year, and second, what kind of a war should our strategists prepare
for.
Unfortunately there is no clear cut, precisely accurate
answer. There are some theorists who say the United States should
spend twice as much as we are spending now in order to build,
in effect, a steel ring around America and literally fill the skies
with aircraft. This Maginot Line type of thinking was disastepus
to France at the outset of World War II. It would be equally
FORD i LIBRARY GERALD
Page 2
ineffective for our country today under current circumstances.
Such a policy would not meet the world-wide challenge of the
Kremlin and its satellites, and in the process Uncle Sam would
doubtlessly "go broke."
At the same time our government cannot afford to strip
our Armed Forces to the bone and rely on any alleged good intentions
of the enemy. To skeletonize our Army, Navy and Airforce at this
crucial period in world history would be an open invitation to
the Kremlin to launch a full scale assault on the free nations
of the world.
The answer seems to be President Eisenhower's program of
a "balanced force" for the "long pull." This policy will avoid
the disasters of pre-World War II and before Korea when the Army,
Navy and Air Force were without sufficient manpower, equipment
and dollars to do the job.
In June of 1950, just before Korea, the Army had been
6
squeezed down to less than 800,000; the Navy was reduced to a
mothball fleet, and the Air Force was cut to 48 wings or less.
It was a sad and serious situation. This Nation paid heavily in
manpower, equipment and dollars for this error in judgment when
our forces were ordered into battle in Korea. The new national
defense policy submitted to the Congress by President Eisenhower
FORD is LIBRARY GERALD
Page 3
will avoid and prevent the disasters of the past. At the same
time this program is one the Nation can afford over the long
pull. Let me give you some of the details which make it sound
and sufficient.
At the end of December the Army had an active duty strength
of about 1,300,000 men, and was supporting major combat elements
consisting of 19 divisions, 12 regiments and 117 antiaircraft
battalions. Under the budget program for fiscal 1956 approved
by the President, the Army will reduce its active duty strength
to approximately 1,027,000 men by June 30, 1956, and will be
supporting 15 combat divisions - 2 of which are more or less
permanently deployed -- 11 regiments, and 136 antiaircraft
battalions. In addition, the Army will have 3 training divisions
which will be organized to enable the Army to carry out its
divisional rotation program announced by the Army early last year.
At this point it might be well to contrast the planned Army
strength for next year with the Army's picture in June, 1950,
just prior to the order by President Truman sending our G.I.S
into Korea. At that time the Army had 593,000 compared to
President Eisenhower's recommendation of over a million men in the
Army. In 1950, the United States had 10 Army divisions, and few
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
Page 4
of those were up to strength, and combat ready. Under Ike's proposed
program the U.S. . will have 15 combat ready Army division. In other
1
words mext year the Army will be more than twice as strong, in manpower
and equipment, as it was prior to Korea.
The Army 1s actively studying the changes in organization
and dectrine required to gear its force structure, organization and
equipment to present and projected changes in weapons technology.
Tests have been going on for some time at Fort Benning and Fort Hood,
and more extensive tests on the divisional level will be held to
study these new formations and concepts under simulated conditions
of atomic war. The force structure beyond June, 1956. may begin
to reflect the results of these tests. While it is premature to draw
definite conclusions at this time, it would appear that in the future
the Army may be organized into a larger number of smaller, but
more mobile and self-contained units of great firepower.
It is interesting to note that in three important areas the
progress
Army has made significant technological studies in the past several
years. The Army's fire-power has increased almost 100 per cent in
the past ten years, and the top experts predict the increase in fire-
power in the next five years will be at least as great.
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
Page 5
The Army's mobility - its ability to move its personnel and
equipment - has more than doubled since the end of World War II.
The automotive industry, its workers and its management, deserve
commendation for making this improvement in our Army's effectiveness.
New equipment, tanks, trucks and personnel carriers, are now being
tested and
will som continue be to ordered be for previdement. These items will
add to the army's mobility
The improvement in Army communications has been unbelievable
and the success of an Army depends to a large extent on rapid and
effective communications between units. With new electronic
equipment now in use, and much more to follow, our Army will have
the finest communications system in the world. It will be lighter
in weight, far faster and more accurate in transmission.
The Navy program for fiscal 1956 will provide for the
operation of over 1000 active ships, including 405 warships. Active
duty military strength will be gradually reduced from 687,000 at the
end of December to approximately 664,000 by June 30, 1956. This
number is again double what we had before Korea. The number of
carrier air groups will be increased from the present 16 to 17,
and an additional attack carrier equipped with modern aircraft will
be added to the fleet. The program will continue to maintain 15 anti
submarine warfare squadrons.
FORD i LIBRARY GERALD
Page 6
The Marine Corps will reduce its active duty strength
from 221,000 at the end of December to approximately 193,000 by
June 30, 1956 will continue to maintain 3 combat-ready divisions
and 3 airwings and essential supporting elements. In June, 1950,
the Marines were under 75,000 in number or about 40 per cent of
the planned strength for next year. At the seme time certain
redeployments of Marine Corps forces now in progress will increase
their ffectiveness and readiness for emergency employment.
The Navy will continue to maintain an active aircraft
inventory of 13,000 planes, of which 10,000 will be operating aircraft in
Navy and Marine active and reserve Air units. In addition to conversion
and modernization of older types, a significant number of new ships
will be added to the fleet during the current and succeeding fiscal
year. The fiscal 1956 budget provides over $1.3 billion for the
construction of new type ships and the modernization of older types.
The Air Force will continue its buildup toward the 137 wing
goal and the 975,000 manpower target established overa year ago. The
objective for June 30, 1956, is now 131 wings - 4 more combat wings than
the Air Force planned one year ago. The active aircraft inventory of
the Air Force will increase to approximately 23,000 by June 30, 1956,
and will continue to increase in fiscal 1957. Continuing modernization
of the inventory is being accomplished simultaneously, and by June 30,
1956, the combat units of the Air Force will be almost 100 per cent jet
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
Page 7
equipped. Over $6 billion in new appropriations are requested in the
1956 budget for Air Force aircraft and guided missiles. Another substan-
tial increment of military construction funds will be requested early
this Spring to push forward the construction of air bases and other
military installations required by the expanding Air Force program.
We have provided in our military program very powerful retal-
iatory forces in the Strategic Air Command of the Air Forces. In
addition, a great retaliatory capability exists in the Carrier Striking
Forces of the Navy, and in the tactical air units of the Air Force
and the Marine Corps. Our policy calls for flexibility and versatil-
ity in the employment of existing forces. We are prepared to use our
total resources in the most effective manner appropriate to the
particular situation.
The buildup of the Strategic Air Command of the Air Force
is continuing. This part of our retaliatory force will increase in
numbers, but more importantly in quality as the remaining recipro-
cating engine bombers are replaced by modern jet aircraft. The
B-36, long the mainstay of the long-range strategic forces, will be
replaced by the B-52, the new long-range jet bomber. The long-
range strategic fighter units in the SAC forces are scheduled to
be re-equipped with supersonic fighters possessing a nuclear capability.
Page 8
These forces are being maintained in a high degree of readiness. Some
of these forces are capable of operating directly from the continental
United States, all are capable of operating from basesscattered around
the globe. Local air defense for bases in areas outside the continental
air defense system is being improved.
The carrier striking forces of the Navy will be augmented by
one additional carrier and one carrier air group this year. More
importantly, both the Carriers and the aircraft are being rapidly
modernized, the carriers both through the conversion of existing carriers
and the construction of new carriers, and the aircraft through the
replacement of old modesl with the new aircraft now in production.
I am sure you are all familiar with the new Forrestal class
carriers, the first of which was launched about a month ago. These new
carriers, as well as other carriers that are being modernized, will be
equipped with newly developed aircraft with improved nuclear capabilities,
such as the A3D and all N1D, and very high speed fighters such as F9F9,
FT4 and Γ3H. Our carrier-based airpower increases the flexibility and
dispersion of our retaliatory power.
The Army has also improved its nuclear capabilities. Atomic
artillery and HONEST JOHN unguided rockets, both capable of delivering
atomic warheads, are now included in Army units in the Continental
United States and overseas.
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
Page 9
The capability of our retaliatory force is dependent upon
its quality as well as its size. The tremendous destructive power of
nuclear weapons has put a premium on certainty of delivery. A single air-
craft may now accomplish what would have required thousands of aircraft
during World War II. Consequently, the quality of our retaliatory force is
now becoming increasingly more important than its size. We feel confident
that the retaliatory forces provided in our program are equal to the tasks
they must perform.
CONTINENTAL DEFENSE
The UnitedStates has been building a continental air defense
system for several years. Thishs a massive undertaking, involving great cost
and effort in the land areas of the far North and in the seaward extensions.
The major elements of this system are (1) the warning net, on
the land, on the sea, and in the air, employing both electronic means such
as radar and the eyes and ears of hundreds of thousands of our private citizens
in the Ground Observer Corps manning 13,000 posts throughout the country;
(2) the weapons systems, including manned interceptor aircraft, anti-aircra ft
artillery and guided missiles; and (3) the communication and control system,
the essential link between the warning net and the weapons systems.
While continental air defense is the primary responsibility
of the Air Force, the continental defense system is a joint undertaking of
all the services, including the participation of selected elements of the
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
reserve forces of the Army, Navy and Air Force. The Air Force and its reserve
In Delmt we All evidence the installation
nibi, which is a grinnd to air anti-almant weapon
Page 10
components, for example, provide the land warning net, the so-called "Texas
Towers," the close-in airbourne early warning aircraft and the manned inter-
ceptor forces. The Army, assisted by the National Guard, provides the anti-
aircraft artillery and NIKE guided missile units. The Navy furnishes the
seaborne early warning facilities, namely the picket ships, the distant air-
borne early warning aircraft, harbor defense and submarine surveillance.
In addition, each of the services in time of emergency will con-
tribute such aircraft, radar facilities, and the antiaircraft artillery forces
as may be available in its active forces and reserve components. The Air Force,
for example, would provide allavailable tactical and training aircraft in
the continental United States and the bulk of the Air Force reserve forces
would be committed to this mission for a period of time. The Army would
contribute such National Guard antiaircraft resources and such other anti-
aircraft units of the active forces as may be available in the continental
United States. The Navy and Marine Corps would contribute such aircraft, both
land and ship-based, as may be available and useful at the time of emergency.
The problem of coordinating this vast aggregate of forces is
indeed a big one. For this reason we have recently established the new Con-
tinental Air Defense Command with headquarters at Colorado Springs, which is
responsible for the control of the combat elements and coordination of the
early warning systems.
The continental air defense program is being pushed with all
practical speed. It is important to understand that the kind of equipment
Page 11
needed in this program is subject to rapid obsolescence due to the high
rate of technological advance in this field. The improvement of the
system is geared to the availability of suitable equipment and to the
capacity of our forces to use this equipment.
Considerable progress has been made in the implementation of
comprehensive plans for aircraft control and warning and submarine
detection, as well as in measures for the destruction of hostile aircraft
and submarines. The aircraft control and warning network will encompass
(1) the present continental United States permanent radar network, which
is undergoing substantial augmentation; (2) the Southern Canada Pinetree
radar network, which is virtually completed; (3) an early warning line
across middle Canada; and (4) the distant early warning line across the
most northerly practicable part of North America.
The continental United States radar network is being extended
seaward from both coasts by radar-equipped aircraft, radar picket vessels,
and large radar in the "Texas Towers" being installed on strategically
situated shoals off our coasts. The Mid Canada line will be extended
seaward by the use of airborne early warning aircraft and radar picket
ships. A limited number of aircraft and radar picket ships have already
begun operations and construction of the first "Texas Tower" will begin
soon. Equipment is being procured to convert the continental defense
net to a new semi-automatic system to improve communications, data
processing, and weapons control.
GERALD 1188484
Page 12
Our expanding active Air Force fighter interceptor squadrons are
one hundred per cent equipped with modern jet fighters. Improved
firepower in these interceptor forces is being achieved by the introduction
of high performance air-to-air rockets and FALCON and SPARROW guided
missiles will soon give our interceptors increased kill effectiveness.
Antiaircraft defenses around many of our critical targets are
being strengthened by the installation of the Army's NIKE surface-to-air
guided missile. We are encouraged by the number of NIKE batteries now
ready to engage hostile aircraft should the need arise. Improved
surface-to-air guided missiles are expected to be available in the future.
A comprehensive and vigorous research and development effort
is directed toward the future air defense system which will encompass radars
of increased range and height finding capability; high performance long-
range, medium-range, and short-range piloted and pilotless interceptors;
more versatile surface-to-air guided missiles; improved devices for sub-
marine detection; and nuclear weapons applications to continental defense.
While our air defense system is already formidable, we must
d@vote our efforts to a steadily improving air defense system phased to
cope with growing Soviet capabilities and make maximum feasible use of
new weapons and techniques as quidkly as they are developed. We must
recognize that in a very real sense all forces included in our military
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
Page 13
programs contribute in some measure to continental defense; offensive
forces by their deterring effect and overseas-based forces plus our
allies by posing both material and psychological obstacles to any potential
enemy operations.
While the two tasks I have judt discussed have high priority,
there are other important military tasks which we must be prepared to
carry out. A portion of our ground forces, amphibious forces and
tactical air forces must be deployed in line with our international
commitments and strategic needs. However, from the viewpoint of collective
defense of the free world, it is essential to hold these deployed forces
to the minimum and to concentrate, principally in the United States, the
balance of our forces in a strategic reserve available for use wherever
they may be required.
We recognize both the possible needs for timely reinforcement
of U.S. forces overseas as well as the practical considerations limiting
the rapid deployment of large military forces from the continental
United States immediately on the outbreak of war. Thus, we must achieve
a proper balance between the size of our active forces and the size of our
ready reserve forces. We must develop reserve forces adequate in size
and combat effectiveness to sustain and augment the active forces of
all services in a timely manner in the event of an all-out war. The new
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
Page 14
legislation requested by the President earlier this month will provide the
foundation for rebuilding, strengthening and improving the readiness of the
civilian components of our armed forces to meet today's requirements for
rapid mobilization.
As stated earlier, an essential task during the initial period,
in the event of global war, will be to clear and keep open the sea lanes
that tie us to our Allies. Our military programs provide the forces to
deal with potential enemy naval forces, to seize and defend advance naval
bases; tp conduct antisubmarine warfare and to carry out the minesweeping,
minelaying and harbor defense missions of the Navy.
As we all recognize, global war is not the only threat to our
national security. Our forces must also be prepared to cope with lesser
hostile actions. Within the framework of collective defense of the free
world we must place growing reliance on the forces of the other free nations
of the world. We will continue to assist in the equipping and training
of these forces. We must recognize, however, that there may be places
where local forces cannot by themselves cope with aggression directed
against them. We must be prepared, in line with our collective security
responsibilities, to come rapidly and effectively to their assistance.
yes the Pre
GERALO FORD LIBRARY
In cloing let me measonre you That
the Presidents military program 10 smil & aligite
to mut all Insurance contingoncies I below
The Congress will Emcur in his recommentations.
Thank you d Good night
FLAG DAY
A. Flag Day -- June 14
1. On June 1b, 1777, the Continental Congress, sitting in
Philadelphia adopted a resolution declaring that the
"flag of the thirteen United States shall be of thirteen
stripes of alternate red and white, with a union of
thirteen stars of white in a blue field, representing
the new constellation.
2. The report of the special committee appointed to design
the flag said "the stars of the flag represent a new
constellation rising in the West. Theiidea signifies
harmony."
3. Report continues: "The blue in the field is taken from
the edge of the Covenanters Banner of Scotland, signifi-
cant of the covenant of the United States against opres-
sion.
The red, the color which in the Roaman days was
a symbol of defiance, denotes daring, and the white purity.
B. Flag Over U. S. Capitol
1. Only building where the flag flies night and day, every
day of the year.
2. During World War I requests were received from all over
the country urging that the U. S. flag be flown contin-
uously over public buildings in Washington.
3. Since then it has been the custom to keep the flags on
the east and west fronts of the U. S. Capitol Building
flying 24 hours a day every day in the year.
4. Flags over the House and Senate chambers are flown
when the respective House is in session. Senate often
redesses over night so the flag may fly when the Benate
is not actually meeting.
5. Availability of a flag which has flown over Capitol
1) May be ordered from my office for $6.50
2) Size is 5 X 8 feet (SHOW FLAG)
30 Certificate to prove that it has flown over the
Capitol is included
C. "The Star-Spangled Banner" (SHOW REPLICA) One of most famous
flags
1. Original in Smithsonian Institute
a. Orginally 30 X 42 feet in size
b. Now 28 X 32 feet
C. 15 stripes and 15 stars
2. Fort Mc Henry at Baltimore, Maryland
a. Night of Sept. 13, 1814, during the War of 1812
b. Fort protected Baltimore
3. Francis Scott Key
a. Lawyer sent to secure the release of Dr. Beanes
who had been captured by the British in their
raid on Washington during which time they had
burned the Capitol and White House and other
public buildings.
BERALD FORD LIBRARY
b. On British Tender, "Minden" during attąck
C. Wrote poem next morning, Sept. 14
d. Only other place in addition to the Capitol where
flag flies day and night isaat his grave in
Frederick, Md.
4. "Star-Spangled Banner" adopted by Congress as official
national anthem on March 2, 1931
D. Another famous flag: ne raised by Marines on Iwo Jima on Feb.
23, 1945
1. Now at museum at the Marine base at Quantico, Va.
2. (SHOW BOOKLET) Marine Corps has published a booklet
entitled, "How to Respect and Display Our Flag" which
is abailable from my office. Free
F. Flag Day Celebration sponsored by the 40 and 8 at Marne next
Tuesday evening.
1. "I Am An American Day"
2. Respect to our flag simply indicates respect, appre-
ciation, honor, loyalty to our country, its people,
and its way of life.
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
Flay Day
TV
JK 1761
&
&
THE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
WASHINGTON 25, D.C.
H1
LEGISLATIVE REFERENCE SERVICE
FLAG DAY
"On June 14, 1777, the Continental Congress, sitting in Phila-
delphia, adopted a resolution declaring:
"That the flag of the thirteen United States shall be
of thirteen stripes of alternate red and white, with a
union of thirteen stars of white in a blue field, re-
presenting the new constellation.
"The resolution was adopted following the reception of the report
of a special committee appointed to suggest & design for the flag.
In explaining the design the committee said:
"The stars of the flag represent a new constellation rising
in the West. The idea is taken from the great constellation
Lyra, which in the hands of Orpheus, signifies harmony. The
blue in the field is taken from the edge of the Covenanters
Banner of Scotland, significant of the covenant of the United
States against oppression. The stars are disposed in a circle,
symbolizing the perpetuity of the Union, the ring signifying
eternity. The thirteen stars show the number of the united
colonies and denote subordination of the States of the Union
as well 8.8 equality among themselves. The red, the color which
in the Roman days was a symbol of defiance, denotes daring, and
the white purity.
"The resolution was not promulgated by the Secretary of the Congress
until September 3, 1777. The flag made according to this design was
first carried in the Battle of the Brandywine, on September 11, 1777.
There is a tradition that the first flag with these stars and stripes
was made by Mrs. John Ross, better known as Betsy Ross, of 329 Arch
Street, Philadelphia, at the request of General Washington. There is
also a tradition that there was some disuussion about the number of
points which the stars should have. A star with six points had been made.
According to one version General Washington did not like this and he
folded a piece of paper and out across it with the shears making a
five-pointed star. According to another version the five-pointed star
was cut by Mrs. Ross. In any event the star with five points was adopted.
FORD is LIBRARY GERALD
- 2 -
"Flags of different designs had been inuse before the adoption of
the Congressional resolution of June 14 and continued in use for some
time afterward. As the Washington coat of arms contained stars and
stripes it has been suggested that the national flag drew its inspiration
from this, but the report of the Congressional committee on the design
for the flag does not support this view. The new flag was hoisted on
the naval vessels of the United States and it was first saluted by a
foreign power when the 'Ranger,' in command of Captain Paul Jones,
arrived in a French port on February 14, 1778, with the flag flying.
"The popular observance of the anniversary of the adoption of the
flag vas of slow growth. In 1889 Professor George Bolch, principal of
a free kindergarten for the poor in New York city, decided to hold
patriotic exercises on that day. They attracted considerable attention
and the State Department of Education arranged to have the day observed
in all the public schools. Not long afterward the State Legislature
passed a law providing that:
"It shall be the duty of the State Superintendent of Public
Schools to prepare 8. program making special provision for observance
in the public schools of Lincoln's Birthday, Washington's Birthday,
Memorial Day and Flag Day.
"In obedience to this law the Superintendent ordered that the flag
should be displayed on every public school building at 9 o'clock in the
morning and that there should be patriotic exercises with a history of
the flag and the singing of songs. In 1897 the Governor of New York
issued a proclamation ordering the display of the flag over all the public
buildings in the State. This is sometimes called the first official
recognition of the anniversary outside of the schools. But four years
earlier the Mayor of Philadelphia, in response to a resolution of the
Society of Colonial Dames of Pennsylvania, ordered the display of the
flag on the public buildings in the city. The resolution was offered by
Mrs. Elizabeth Duane Gillespie, a direct descendant of Benjamin Franklin,
then president of the Colonial Dames of the State, and it proposed that
the day be known thereafter as Flag Day and that the flag be displayed
by all citizens on their residences and on all business places as well
as on the public buildings.
"President Wilson, on June 14, 1917, took advantage of the cele-
bration of Flag Day to justify the declaration of war against Germany
made on April 6. In the course of an eloquent address, the introduction
to which dealing with the flag follows, he said:
"We meet to celebrate Flag Day because this flag which we
honor and under which we serve is the emblem of our unity, our
power, our thought and purpose as a nation. It has no other character
than that which we give it from generation to generation. The
choice is ours. It floats in majestic silence above the hosts
that execute those choices whether in peace or war. And yet,
though silent, it speaks to us-speaks to us of the past, of the
FORD is LIBRARY GERALD
- 3 -
men and women who went before us and of the records they wrote
upon it. We celebrate the day of its birth, and from its birth
until now it has witnessed a great history, has floated on high
the symbol of great events, of a great plan of life worked out
by a great people. We are about to carry it into battle, to
lift it where it will draw the fire of our enemies. We are about
to bid thousands, hundreds of thousands, it may be millions,
of our men, the young, the strong, the capable men of the
Nation, to go forth and die beneath it on fields of blood far
away - for what? For some unaccustomed thing? For something
for which it has never sought the fire before? American armies
were never before sent across the seas. Why are they sent now?
For some new purpose, for which this great flag has never been
carried before, or, for some old, familiar, heroic purpose for
which it has been men, its own men, die on every battlefield
upon which Americans have borne arms since the Revolution?
"Following this introduction he explained the reasons which had
made it imperative that the United States should join the other Nations
engaged in resisting German aggression.
"Altho the anniversary is not a legal holiday in any of the States
it has come to be observed in some way or another thruout the whole
country. Special exercises are held in the public schools when the
children are asked to pledge allegiance to the flag. Patriotic songs
are sung and patriotic poems are recited. It is customary to hold a
celebration in the Bestay Ross House in Philadelphia, and the Patriotic
Order of the Sons of America are in the habit of placing a wreath on
the grave of Betsy Ross in Mount Moriah Cemetery in Philadelphia. The
Daughters of the American Revolution observe the day with exercises
of some. kind. One chapter of this order presented flags to thirty-six
newly organized Boy Scout Troops in 1934. The Sons of the American
Revolution, not to be outdone by the Daughters, also hold exercises and
in 1934 they were broadcast from New York by radio. Among the speakers
on this occasion was Rear Admiral A. J. Hepburn, who spoke of the loyalty
to the flag impressed upon every man in the navy. The increasing
observance of the day with the passing years has brought about a more
lively appreciation of the significance of the varicolored bit of
bunting as the banner of 8. free people."
Source: Douglas, George William, The American Book of Days, 1938,
pp. 325-327.
[John T. Rodgers
History and General
Research Division
June 2, 1953]
la
FORD i LIBRARY GERALD
SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION
U. S. National Museum
Department of History
"OLD GLORY"
United States flag made by Captain William Driver's mother and a
few girls of Salem, Massachusetts, and presented to Captain Driver, a
merchant ship captain, on March 17, 1824, his 21st birthday. It was on
this occasion that he named the flag "OLD GLORY", the first American
flag to be thus called. The U.S. flag at this time contained 24 stars.
In 1837, Captain Driver had the flag taken apart and the stars re-
arranged. He also cut out an anchor which he had sewn in the corner of
STATE
the field. In 1862, "OLD GLORY" was flown from the dome of the Capitol
Building at Nashville, Tennessee.
The flag, which is now about 9½ feet by 17 feet was presented to the
U.S. National Museum in Washington, D.C., in 1922 by Mrs. Mary J. D.
Roland, a daughter of Captain Driver.
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
FACTS ABOUT THE UNITED STATES FLAG
Until the Executive Order of June 24, 1912, neither the order of
the stars nor the proportions of the flag were prescribed. Consequently,
flags dating before this period sometimes show unusual arrangements of
the stars and odd proportions, these features being left to the discre-
tion of the flag maker. In general, however, straight rows of stars and
proportions similar to those later adopted officially were used. The
principal acts affecting the flag of the United States are:
Act of January 13, 1794, provided for 15 stripes and 15 stars
after May, 1795.
Act of April 4, 1818, provided for 13 stripes and one star for
each State, to be added to the flag on the 4th of July following
the admission of each new State.
Executive Order of President Taft dated June 24, 1912, established
proportions of the flag and provided for arrangement of the stars
in six horizontal rows of eight each, a single point of each star
to be upward.
Number of Stars in the U. S. Flag, 1787 to Present
13 Stars - 1787 to 1795
15 Stars - 1795 to 1818
20 Stars - 1818 to July 3, 1819
21 Stars - July 4, 1819 to July 3, 1820
23 Stars - July 4, 1820 to July 3, 1822
24 Stars - July 4, 1822 to July 3, 1836
25 Stars - July 4, 1836 to July 3, 1837
26 Stars - July 4, 1837 to July 3, 1845
27 Stars - July 4, 1845 to July 3, 1846
28 Stars - July 4, 1846 to July 3, 1847
29 Stars - July 4, 1847 to July 3, 1848
30 Stars - July 4, 1848 to July 3, 1851
31 Stars - July 4, 1851 to July 3, 1858
32 Stars - July 4, 1858 to July 3, 1859
33 Stars - July 4, 1859 to July 3, 1861
34 Stars - July 4, 1861 to July 3, 1863
35 Stars - July 4, 1863 to July 3, 1865
36 Stars - July 4, 1865 to July 3, 1867
37 Stars - July 4, 1867 to July 3, 1877
38 Stars - July 4, 1877 to July 3, 1890
43 Stars - July 4, 1890 to July 3, 1891
44 Stars - July 4, 1891 to July 3, 1896
45 Stars - July 4, 1896 to July 3, 1908
46 Stars - July 4, 1908 to July 3, 1912
48 Stars - July 4, 1912 to Present
FORD LIBRARY & GERALD
BIBLIOGRAPHY ON FLAGS
1. Preble, George Henry, Origin and History of the American Flag.
Philadelphia: Nicholas Brown, 1917. Two volumes.
2. Quaife, Milo Milton, The Flag of the United States. New York: Grosset
& Dunlap, 1942.
3. Hamilton, Schuyler, The History of the National Flag. Philadelphia:
Lippincott, Grambo & Co., 1853.
4. Horner, Harlan Hoyt, The American Flag. Albany, N. Y.: State of New
York Education Dept., 1910.
5. Moss, James A., The Flag of the United States. Washington: U. S. Flag
Association, 1933.
6. National Geographic Magazine, October 1917. Washington: National
Geographic Society.
7. Schermerhorn, Frank Earle, American and French Flags of the Revolution.
Philadelphia: Pennsylvania Society of Sons of the Revolution, 1948.
8. Cox, Mamie Wynne, The Romantic Flags of Texas. Dallas: Banks Upshaw
and Co., 1936.
9. Waldron, Col. W. H., U.S.A., "Flags of America" in United States Naval
Institute Proceedings, June, 1936.
10. Griffis, William Elliot, The American Flag of Stars and Stripes.
Ithaca, N. Y.: Andrus & Church (no date).
11. Stewart, Charles W., The Stars and Stripes. Boston: Boylston Publishing
Co., 1915.
12. Hulme, F. Edward, The Flags of the World. London: Fred. Warne & Co.
(no date).
13. Bureau of Navigation, Navy Department, Flags of Maritime Nations.
Washington, 1873.
14. United Nations Honor Flag Committee, World Flag Encyclopedia. Washington,
1948.
15. King, Elizabeth W., "Flags of the United Nations" in The National Geographic
Magazine, February 1951.
16. Quartermaster General, U.S.A., Flags of the Army of the United States
Carried During the War of the Rebellion 1861-1865. Washington, 1887.
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
FLAGS-EAST AND WEST FRONTS OF THE UNITED STATES CAPITOL
BUILDING
A number of inquiries are received each year requesting information about
the flags flown over the east and west fronts of the United States Capitol,
and the following statement relative thereto is presented:
Prior to 1894 flags were flown only over the Senate and House Chambers,
but under the Sundry Civil Appropriation Act approved August 18, 1894
(28 Stat. 393), provision was made for flags to be flown over the east and
west fronts of the Capitol, the appropriation reading as follows:
"To provide flags for the east and west fronts
of the center of the Capitol, to be hoisted
daily under the direction of the Capitol Police
board, $100, or so much thereof as may be
necessary. 11
In this connection the Annual Report of the Architect of the Capitol for
the fiscal year ended June 30, 1900, contains the following statement:
"Under this appropriation, amounting to $100
annually, all necessary flags have been
supplied and kept flying between the hours of
sunrise and sunset at the east and west porticos,
central portion of the building, as well as from
the dome, on days of national interest and holi-
days.
Formerly, no provision being made therefor, flags
were displayed only during the sessions of Congress,
and these floated only during the hours when either
House might be in session. If
During World War I requests were received from all over the country urging
that the United States flag be flown continuously over the public buildings
in Washington, D. C., and ever since that time it has been the custom to
keep the flags on the east and west fronts of the United States Capitol
Building flying 24 hours a day every day in the year.
The flags, which are 8 X 12 feet, are removed from the east and west fronts
only when they become worn and unfit for further use. and are replaced by new
flags.
The authorities in charge of the United States Capitol consider it a fitting
mark of respect that our flag be kept flying at all times over the United
States Capitol Building.
FORD i LIBRARY GERALD
FLAGS--EAST AND WEST FRONTS OF THE UNITED STATES CAPITOL
BUILDING
A number of inquiries are received each year requesting information about
the flags flown over the east and west fronts of the United States Capitol,
and the following statement relative thereto is presented:
Prior to 1894 flags were flown only over the Senate and House Chambers,
but under the Sundry Civil Appropriation Act approved August 18, 1894
(28 Stat. 393), provision was made for flags to be flown over the east and
west fronts of the Capitol, the appropriation reading as follows:
"To provide flags for the east and west fronts
of the center of the Capitol, to be hoisted
daily under the direction of the Capitol Police
board, $100, or so much thereof as may be
necessary. 11
In this connection the Annual Report of the Architect of the Capitol for
the fiscal year ended June 30, 1900, contains the following statement:
"Under this appropriation, amounting to $100
annually, all necessary flags have been
supplied and kept flying between the hours of
sunrise and sunset at the east and west porticos,
central portion of the building, as well as from
the dome, on days of national interest and holi-
days.
Formerly, no provision being made therefor, flags
were displayed only during the sessions of Congress,
and these floated only during the hours when either
House might be in session. "
During World War I requests were received from all over the country urging
that the United States flag be flown continuously over the public buildings
in Washington, D. C., and ever since that time it has been the custom to
keep the flags on the east and west fronts of the United States Capitol
Building flying 24 hours a day every day in the year.
The flags, which are 8 X 12 feet, are removed from the east and west fronts
only when they become worn and unfit for further use. and are replaced by new
flags.
The authorities in charge of the United States Capitol consider it a fitting
mark of respect that our flag be kept flying at all times over the United
States Capitol Building.
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION
U. S. National Museum
Department of History
THE STAR-SPANGLED BANNER
Garrison flag of Fort McHenry, Baltimore, Md., during the bombardment
of the fort by the British fleet, September 13, 14, 1814, when it was
gallantly and successfully defended by Col. George Armistead and the brave
men under him.
Francis Scott Key, detained with the British fleet, had eagerly watched
for this flag during the fight, and as he saw it still waving over the fort
on the morning of September 14 he was inspired to write the verses of the
Star-Spangled Banner, now our national anthem.
The flag was made at Baltimore, Md., by Mrs. Mary Pickersgill, assisted
by her daughter, Mrs. Caroline Purdy. Mrs. Pickersgill received $405.90
for the work.
It was presented to the United States National Museum, Washington, D. C.,
in 1912 by Mr. Eben Appleton, grandson of Colonel Armistead, and was repaired
in 1914 by Mrs. Amelia Fowler and a corps of expert needlewomen.
The flag originally measured 30 feet by 42 feet but is now about 28
feet by 32 feet. It is one of the few American flags still in existence
containing 15 stars and 15 stripes.
SIL-23
9-53
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
1:30
NBC MONITOR
Radio Halley
Talk by Guast R, Fast Jr.
M. Barrian
Records Feb. 3, 1956
One evening last October it was my privilege to act as a judge
for a high school essay contest. Among those who read their essays on the
amenican
now
by
topic, "What the Bill of Rights Means to Me," was a 17-year old Chinese girl.
Her essay, well written and effective, was read with such sincerity and
conviction that it impressed me immensely. It must have had the same effect
on others as she was declared a first-place winner in the all-city contest
conducted among six large city high schools. Her name was Helen K. Liu,
particularly
and I was proud of her.
As I listened to her dissertation on our "Bill of Rights, " my thoughts
who m1950 was overwhelmed with a
went back five years to a little Chinese girl of 12 in whom hT became par ticularly
muttitude problems
interested in 1950. This child had been found as an orphan of three months
in the hinterland of China by an American missionary from my Congressional
District. The child had been cared for and protected by the missionary,
and as the Communist menace approached, had been brought to this country under
a visitor's visa because the immigrant quota was full.
The missionary had adopted the girl, but on March 7, 1950 the child
United States
was put under arrest by the Immigration Officers because a technicality in
the law required her deportation. This meant deportation to a land without
a home, to a people entirely strange and to government meet cruel cruoland viscums
milamenia
So while we do live under a government of law, we also live under a
government which can humanize the law to prevent injustice and to save human
life and dignity. I am happy to say that this 12-year-old Chinese
through child 1 efforts The combrad of The
good
Charges +
other got
was released from arrest and permitted to grow up in the home of her foster
mother. The little girl's name was Helen K. Liu.
QERALD FORD LIBRARY
-2-
This was the same Helen K. Liu who five years later was to receive
top honors in an essay contest on "What the Bill of Rights Means to Me."
She spoke the voice of experience. America had been good to Helen K. Liu
and Helen K. Liu was being good to and for America.