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
4525540
label
Ford Press Releases - Fiscal Policy, 1965-1966
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
4525540
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Ford Press Releases - Fiscal Policy, 1965-1966
citationUrl
collections
Gerald R. Ford Congressional Papers
Press Releases Subject Files
subjects
Republican National Committee (U.S.)
Economic stabilization
Economics
Federal budget
Inflation (Finance)
Legislation
Taxation
iiifBase
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
4525540
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1966-10-31
month
10
year
1966
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1965-07-01
month
7
year
1965
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
url
mediaId
7410ee907941d3ea
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box D7, folder "Ford Press Releases - Fiscal Policy,
1965-1966" of the Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech File at the
Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Copyright Notice
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of
photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. The Council donated to the United
States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.
Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public
domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to
remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid
copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Digitized from Box D7 of the Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech File at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
FOR THE SENATE:
THE JOINT SENATE-HOUSE
FOR THE HOUSE
OF REPRESENTATIVES:
Everett M. Dirksen, Leader
Thomas H. Kuchel, Whip
REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP
Gerald R. Ford,
Bourke B. Hickenlooper, Chr.
Leader
of the Policy Committee
Leslie C. Arends, Whip
Leverett Saltonstall, Chr.
Melvin R. Laird,
of the Conference
Press Release
Chr. of the Conference
Thruston B. Morton,
John J. Rhodes, Chr.
Chr. Republican
Issued following a
of the Policy Committee
Senatorial Committee
Leadership Meeting
Clarence J. Brown,
PRESIDING OFFICÈR:
July 1, 1965
Ranking Member
The Republican
Rules Committee
National Chairman
Bob Wilson,
Ray C. Bliss
Chr. Republican
STATEMENT BY SENATOR BOURKE B. HICKENLOOPER
Congressional Committee
IMMEDIATE RELEASE
The health of the economy has become a matter of concern and debate since
William McChesney Martin pointed out some similarities between present conditions
and those of 1929. The President and other Administration spokesmen, emphasizing
the bright spots in the economic picture, have suggested that anything wrong in the
economy results from fright caused by Mr. Martin's speech.
We find it hard to understand how an Administration that has been talking con-
stantly of the poverty in the United States can blame Mr. Martin's qualified warn-
ing for weakening confidence in the economic system.
A balanced appraisal of the performance of the economy should begin with a
recognition of the fact that the period since World War II has been one of steady
and sustained economic growth. Downturns have been few, short, and moderate. We
should not expect only guaranteed and sustained rises in economic activity for the
future, but the attitude that "things are so good they can't continue" is probably
too nearsighted.
Nevertheless, there are danger signals in some economic indicators. To ignore
them, to sweep them under the rug, or to denounce those who point them out is short-
sighted.
The international financial situation is one of the most ominous clouds on the
economic horizon. The Administration's program of "voluntary coercion" in the
balance of payments area is based on the same principle of political expediency as
so much of its domestic economic wheeling and dealing. In the process of institut-
ing short-run remedies, the President is following a practice of giving glib and
pat answers to serious and involved questions. In imposing more and more controls
over international trade and capital flows, the Administration is abandoning the
principle of liberalized multilateral trade embodied in the Trade Expansion Act of
1962 and supported by the United States throughout the Eisenhower years, in the face
of adversity encountered by almost all of our trading partners. If this series of
shortsighted treatments for the symptoms in our balance of payments produces serious
dislocations in major foreign economies, the United States will not remain unscathed.
We believe that an International Monetary Conference should be called to deal
with the basic structural shortcomings of our international monetary system. The
problem is one which cannot be further neglected.
Room S-124 U.S. Capitol-CApitol 4-3121 Ex 3700
STAFF CONSULTANT: Robert Humphreys
PRESS RELEASE ISSUED FOLLOWING A LEADERSHIP MEETING
STATEMENT BY REP. GERALD R. FORD
- 2 -
July 1, 1965
Certain strategic imbalances have developed in the domestic economy. Although
more than 41% of our labor force reamins unemployed, distinct inflationary pres-
sures are evident. Indeed, we are greatly concerned about eroding price increases
in view of the employment situation. In particular, nothing seems to succeed in
helping young labor force participants -- the teenager jobless rate remains close
to 15%. Yet in May 1965 the Consumer Price Index stood at 109.6 of its 1957-1959
base, which was an increase of 0.3% for the month of May. If the rate of increase
for April and May is maintained for the next 12 months, the Consumer Price Index
would rise 3.6%, which is inflation in anybody's book. Even more important, the
Wholesale Price Index rose by 2.0% from May 1964 to May 1965 and this index had
been standing still from 1957 to 1964. We note that a number of recent labor con-
tracts have provided about 4% in yearly wage increases -- substantially above the
guide lines set by the Administration. These may well lead to cost-of-living in-
creases during 1965 and future years.
We are entering the sixth fiscal year of continuous deficits. They have
averaged over 6 billion dollars a year for the past five fiscal years. The deficit
for fiscal 1965 1s somewhat below four billion dollars, and this is being hailed as
a great accomplishment. We deplore the doctrine of "permanent fiscal irresponsibil-
ity" coupled with a politically pressured easy money policy. The continuous use of
fiscal "pep pills" has serious consequences -- inflationary pressures (so hurtful
to the very poor and the elderly retired), a growing interest charge on the public
debt, and disruption of international trade as more and more nations lose their
faith in the value of our currency. Even more important, Democrats in Congress
have lit the fuse on an inflationary "time bamb" by rubber-stemping one expenditure
program after another. These extended programs give the Administration greater
and greater carry-over authority to spend and spend -- in fact, this carry-over
unspent authorization ties the hands of Congress in switching to an anti-inflation-
ary policy.
There are definite signs that the quality of much of the debt has been deterior-
ating and that its quantity may be growing too fast. The so-called temporary public
debt ceiling was just raised from $324 to $328 billion. Other debt -- of states,
local governments, corporations, and individuals -- has been growing more rapidly.
For example, consumer installment payments now stand at 15% of personal income, and
total debt of the average family is a staggering 60% of its yearly earnings. Bank
credit has been expanding more quickly than in all previous expansions, although
some recent changes are apparent here.
It is our view that the Administration may be in great danger of falling from
their tightrope. Clearly they are falling off on the side of inflation. It is our
view that a balanced economy is important to all. We therefore endorse the sug-
gestion made by Senator Javits and Congressman Curtis, i.e., that the Joint Economid
Committee call hearings "at the earliest possible time" in order to explore "the
basic issues raised by Mr. Martin" and "the outlook for the economy over the next
year."
FOR THE SENATE:
THE JOINT SENATE-HOUSE
FOR THE HOUSE
OF REPRESENTATIVES:
Everett M. Dirksen, Leader
Thomas H. Kuchel, Whip
REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP
Gerald R. Ford,
Bourke B. Hickenlooper, Chr.
Leader
of the Policy Committee
Leslie C. Arends, Whip
Leverett Saltonstall, Chr.
Melvin R. Laird,
of the Conference
Press Release
Chr. of the Conference
Thruston B. Morton,
John J. Rhodes, Chr.
Chr. Republiçan
Issued following &
of the Policy Committee
Senatorial Committee
Leadership Meeting
Clarence J. Brown,
PRESIDING OFFICER
July I, 1965
Ranking Member
The Republican
Rules Committee
National Chairman
Bob Wilson,
Ray C. Bliss
Chr. Republican
STATEMENT BY SENATOR BOURKE B. HICKENLOOPER
Congressional Committee
IMMEDIATE RELEASE
The health of the economy has become a matter of concern and debate since
William McChesney Martin pointed out some similarities between present conditions
and those of 1929. The President and other Administration spokesmen, emphasizing
the bright spots in the economic picture, have suggested that anything wrong in the
economy results from fright caused by Mr. Martin's speech.
We find it hard to understand how an Administration that has been talking con-
stantly of the poverty in the United States can blame Mr. Martin's qualified warn-
ing for weakening confidence in the economic system.
A balanced appraisal of the performance of the economy should begin with a
recognition of the fact that the period since World War II has been one of steady
and sustained economic growth. Downturns have been few, short, and moderate. We
should not expect only guaranteed and sustained rises in economic activity for the
future, but the attitude that thing are so good they can't continue" is probably
too nearsighted.
Nevertheless, there are danger signals in some economic indicators. To ignore
them, to sweep them under the rug, or to denounce those who point them out is short-
sighted.
The international financial situation 1s one of the most ominous clouds on the
economic horizon. The Administration's program of voluntary coercion" in the
balance of payments area is based on the same principle of political expediency as
so much of its domestic economic wheeling and dealing. In the process of institut-
ing short-run remedies, the President 1s following a practice of giving glib and
pat answers to serious and involved questions. In imposing more and more controls
over international trade and capital flows, the Administration is abandoning the
principle of liberalized multilateral trade embodied in the Trade Expansion Act of
1962 and supported by the United States throughout the Eisenhower years, in the face
of adversity encountered by almost all of our trading partners. If this series of
shortsighted treatments for the symptoms in our balance of payments produces serious
dislocations in major foreign economies, the United States will not remain unscathed.
We believe that an International Monetary Conference should be called to deal
with the basic structural shortcomings of our international monetary system. The
problem is one which cannot be further neglected,
Room
S-124
U.S.
Capitol+CApitol
4-3121
Ex
3700
STAFF CONSULTANT: Robert Humphreys
PRESS RELEASE ISSUED FOLLOWING A LEADERSHIP MEETING
STATEMENT BY REP. GERALD R. FORD
- 2 -
July 1, 1965
Certain strategic imbalances have developed in the domestic economy. Although
more than 42% of our labor force reamins unemployed, distinct inflationary pres-
sures are evident. Indeed, we are greatly concerned about eroding price increases
in view of the employment situation. In particular, nothing seems to succeed in
helping young labor force participants - the teenager jobless rate remains close
to 15%. Yet in May 1965 the Consumer Price Index stood at 109.6 of its 1957-1959
base, which was an increase of 0.3% for the month of May. If the rate of increase
for April and May is maintained for the next 12 months, the Consumer Price Index
would rise 3.6%, which is inflation in anybody's book. Even more important, the
Wholesale Price Index rose by 2.0% from May 1964 to May 1965 and this index had
been standing still from 1957 to 1964. We note that a number of recent labor con-
tracts have provided about 4% in yearly wage increases -- substantially above the
guide lines set by the Administration. These may well lead to cost-of-living in-
creases during 1965 and future years.
We are entering the sixth fiscal year of continuous deficits. They have
averaged over 6 billion dollars a year for the past five fiscal years. The deficit
for fiscal 1965 1s somewhat below four billion dollars, and this is being hailed as
a great accomplishment. We deplore the doctrine of "permanent fiscal irresponsibil-
ity" coupled with a politically pressured easy money policy. The continuous use of
fiscal "pep pills" has serious consequences inflationary pressures (so hurtful
to the very poor and the elderly retired), a growing interest charge on the public
debt, and disruption of international trade as more and more nations lose their
faith in the value of our currency. Even more important, Democrats in Congress
have lit the fuse on an inflationary "time bamb" by rubber-stamping one expenditure
program after another. These extended programs give the Administration greater
and greater carry-over authority to spend and spend -- in fact, this carry-over
unspent authorization ties the hands of Congress in switching to an anti-inflation-
ary policy.
There are definite signs that the quality of much of the debt has been deterior-
sting and that its quantity may be growing too fast. The so-called temporary public
debt ceiling was just raised from $324 to $328 billion. Other debt -- of states,
local governments, corporations, and individuals -- has been growing more rapidly.
For example, consumer installment payments now stand at 15% of personal income, and
total debt of the average family is a staggering 60% of its yearly earnings. Bank
credit has been expanding more quickly than in all previous expansions, although
some recent changes are apparent here.
It is our view that the Administration may be in great danger of falling from
their tightrope. Clearly they are falling off on the side of inflation. It is our
view that a balanced economy is important to all. We therefore endorse the sug-
gestion made by Senator Javits and Congressman Curtis, 1.e., that the Joint Economid
Committee call hearings "at the earliest possible time" in order to explore "the
basic issues raised by Mr. Martin" and "the outlook for the economy over the next
year."
THE SENATE:
FOR THE HOUSE
Everett M. Dirksen, Leader
THE JOINT SENATE-HOUSE
OF REPRESENTATIVES:
Thomas H. Kuchel, Whip
REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP
Gerald R. Ford, Leader
Leslie C. Arends, Whip
Bourke B. Hickenlooper, Chr.
of the Policy Committee
Melvin R. Laird,
Chr. of the Conference
Leverett Saltonstall, Chr.
of the Conference
Press Release
John J. Rhodes, Chr.
of the Policy Committee
Thruston B. Morton,
H. Allen Smith,
Chr. Republican
Ranking Member
Senatorial Committee
Rules Committee
Issued following a
Leadership meeting
Bob Wilson,
PRESIDING OFFICER:
Chr. Republican
Congressional Committee
February 24, 1966
The Republican
Charles E. Goodell,
National Chairman
Chr. Committee on
Ray C. Bliss
Planning and Research
STATEMENT BY SENATOR DIRKSEN
IMMEDIATE RELEASE
The American people are involved in a three-front war -- in Viet -
Nam, against poverty, and now against inflation. Government directly
or indirectly controls the money supply. Inflation has swept in upon
us because of policies this Administration has adopted. Every major
modern inflation has been aggravated by excessive government spending.
And that has been the deliberate policy of the Democratic Administra-
tions for the past five years.
This Administration has told us 1t is promoting inflation as a step
toward fuller employment. What they have not told the American people
is the extent and cruelty of the burden they hays placed on the very
poor through this policy OF printing money at a rate twice that of our
population growth.
The Johnson administration, now concerned with inflation, prepares
to meet it by higher taxes rather than through a prudent budget. This
year's budget is $31 billion higher than the last Eisenhower budget
and Democrats have added $32 billion to the public debt in five years.
As most American workers know payroll tax increases since January 1
have already more than wiped out those tax cuts of a year ago. And
there's more to come, more even than the 4.8 billion tax increases now
before Congress. The Administration is talking in terms of another
5 per cent income tax increase and an added 2 per cent corporate tax
later this year. These increases are over and above the cruel tax of
inflation which is already waging war on those with the lowest incomes.
Higher personal income taxes hit hardest those who can least afford
them the young people who are starting a family, building a home
and building a future, those in our Society on fixed incomes and those
who have the least.
There are alternatives. One is to trim the budget which the Presi-
dent refuses to do except in areas where he knows the cuts will be
restored. Another is tighter credit but when that was tried
Democrats wailed in anguish.
This Administration has made its choice: It plans to discipline
the American people rather than discipline itself.
Room S-124 U.S. Capitol-CApitol 4-3121 Ex 3700
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
STATEMENT BY REPRESENTATIVE FORD:
February 24, 1966
Economists talk of inflation in terms of a sharp rise in the amount
of money or credit, or both, relative to goods available for purchase.
The American housewife has a sharper definition: You pay more for less.
Bacon was $1.15 a pound at a chain store here in Washington Monday
morning. Eggs were 71 cents a dozen. An American favorite --pork chops
-were $1.35 a pound. Mothers used to be able to save their budgets
with hamburger. But that's climbed to 59 cents a pound. This can of
tomatoes was bought Monday morning for 33 cents. Five years ago you
could buy it for about 20 cents, And very, very little of this in-
crease has found its way into the farmers' pocket.
Food prices have climbed 3.7 per cent in one year. And this ac-
counts for a major part in the overall 2 per cent rise in the cost of
living in the past 12 months. Republicans on the Joint Economic Commit-
tee say it is inevitable that prices will rise by another 2 to 3 per -
cent in 1966. That's a rise of 5 per cent in two years. This amounts
to a 5 per cent sales tax on everything you buy. And you'll pay it
because of inflationary policies of the Johnson-Humphrey Administration.
The Mousewife's $10 in 1961 now buys only $9.14 at the grocery store.
Inflation steals from everybody, but hurts most those 26 million
Americans who live on pensions or other fixed incomes. It will also
certainly do much to nullify whatever benefits might otherwise accrue
from programs now pursued in the anti-poverty war.
President Johnson says this Administration has produced an "American
economic miracle." Will the American people call it a miracle after
they pay their bills and then dig deep enough to pay the big tax
increase the Johnson-Humphrey Administration wants.
The National Commission on Food Marketing reports Americans are
eating less beef and far less pork now than they did a year ago. The
Johnson-Humphrey Administration set out to change America and the
American way of life. The Administration seems to be succeeding - and
you won't like it.
FOR THE SENATE:
FOR THE HOUSE
Everett M. Dirksen, Leader
THE JOINT SENATE-HOUSE
OF REPRESENTATIVES:
Thomas H. Kuchel, Whip
REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP
Gerald R. Ford, Leader
Leslie C. Arends, Whip
Bourke B. Hickenlooper, Chr.
of the Policy Committee
Melvin R. Laird,
Chr. of the Conference
Leverett Saltonstall, Chr.
of the Conference
Press Release
John J. Rhodes, Chr.
of the Policy Committee
Thruston B. Morton,
H. Allen Smith,
Chr. Republican
Ranking Member
Senatorial Committee
Issued following a
Rules Committee
Leadership meeting
Bob Wilson,
PRESIDING OFFICER:
Chr. Republican
March 10, 1966
Congressional Committee
The Republican
Charles E. Goodell,
National Chairman
Chr. Committee on
Ray C. Bliss
Planning and Research
STATEMENT BY REPRESENTATIVE FORD:
IMMEDIATE RELEASE
The Johnson-Humphrey Administration has been less than fully can-
did with the American people and the Congress about its spending
programs. Its budget explanations have been far from concise and
clear.
For three years the budgets have been consistent in two matters --
they have contained built-in deficits and they have failed to estab-
lish priorities.
During this time the was in Viet Nam has escalated but there was
little effort through the budget to set priorities for "uture needs.
The result has been a multitude of sizeable supplemental appropria-
tions.
This year's budget is 13 billion higher than the one submi a
year ago. The President says, however, It contains a deficit of
"only" $1.8 billion. What he has failed to tell the American people
is that this small deficit is fiscal chicanery. He has cut from this
budget some $200 million in popular programs which he knows the Con-
gress will undoubtedly restore. He has grossly understated the needs
of the Defense Department for fiscal 1967. He also fails to mention
that $5.2 billion of his added revenue is a one-year proposition only.
The government will gain in this one year $1.6 billion from coin clip-
ping by removing silver from our coinage and another $3.6 billion from
the speedup in tax collections.
In presenting his budget the President said that despite fighting
in Viet Nam the war on poverty must also be escaláted. For this he
asked an increase of $300 million in antipoverty funds. And yet, on
March 8, his antipoverty director informed the Congress the poverty
war is being curtailed because of the Vietnamese fighting.
The budgets with their yearly deficits have helped breed inflation
and yet the Administration scoffs at inflation. With high taxes,
high prices, high spending, high deficits -- the Great Society has
become the High Society.
It is time for the Johnson-Humphrey Administration to present pre-
cise, more realistic figure and candid budgetary estimates to the
American people so that they may judge truly how much they are
spending to meet the Administration's vast commitments here and abroad.
Room S-124 U.S. Capitol-CApitol 4-3121 Ex 3700
STATEMENT BY SENATOR DIRKSEN
March 10, 1966
The Johnson-Humphrey Administration has failed to reassure the
American people and the Congress concerning inflation, the war in
Viet Nam, and its future tax programs.
Inflation is mounting at a rapid rate due in large part to fiscal
and budgetary policies of the Johnson-Humphrey Administration. Prices
vary from day to day but continue to move higher and higher. This
affects not only the public but the purchase of goods and services
by the government as well.
The war in Viet Nam is escalating but the Administration has not
informed the American people how big it will get nor how costly it
will become.
Excise tax cuts given by Congress a year ago are being rescinded
at the request of the Johnson-Humphrey Administration. There is
continued talk of new tax increases to come later this year.
Perhaps the most dangerous sign of a new Johnson-Humphrey power
grab has been the floating of "trial balloons" on standby or emer-
gency powers for the President to raise or lower taxes and perhaps
impose direct wage and price controls at will.
Republicans take sharp issue with this proposal. The Congress
should not further abdicate its Constitutional taxing responsibility.
Republicans are unalterably opposed to granting standby taxing powers
or standby wage and price control authority to the President.
For these reasons, the Joint Senate-House Republican Leadership
strongly endorses a resolution adopted by the Senate Republican
Policy Committee on March 8. That Resolution reads in part as
follows:
RESOLVED: In view of the clear language of article I,
section 8 of the United States Constitution we are unalterably
opposed to granting to the President of the United States
any standby, emergency or other authority to raise or lower
taxes.
FOR THE SENATE:
FOR THE HOUSE
Everett M Dirksen, Leader
THE JOINT SENATE-HOUSE
OF REPRESENTATIVES:
Thomas 11. Kuchel, Whip
REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP
Gerald R. Ford, Leader
Leslie C. Arends, Whip
Bourke B. Hickenkooper, Chr.
of the Policy Committee
Melvin R. Laird,
Chr. of the Conference
Leverett Saltonstall, Chr.
John J. Rhodes, Chr.
of the Conference
of the Policy Committee
Thruston B. Morton,
H. Allen Smith,
Chr. Republican
Ranking Member
Senatorial Committee
Issued following a
Rules Committee
Leadership meeting
Bob Wilson,
PRESIDING OFFICER:
Chr. Republican
March 10, 1966
Congressional Committee
The Republican
Charles E. Goodell,
National Chairman
Chr. Committee ON
Ray C. Bliss
Planning and Resourch
STATEMENT BY REPRESENTATIVE FORD:
IMMEDIATE RELEASE
The Johnson-Humphrey Administration has been less than fully can-
did with the American people and the Congress about its spending
programs. Its budget explanations have been far from concise and
clear.
For three years the budgets have been consistent in two matters --
they have contained built-in deficits and they have failed to estab-
lish priorities.
During this time the war in Viet Nam has escalated but there was
little effort through the budget to set priorities for future needs.
The result has been a multitude of sizeable supplemental appropria-
tions.
This year's budget is $13 billion higher than the one submitted a
year ago. The President says, however, it contains a deficit of
"only" $1.8 billion. What he has failed to tell the American people
is that this small deficit is fiscal chicanery. He has cut from this
budget some $200 million in popular programs which he knows the Con-
gress will undoubtedly restore. He has grossly understated the needs
of the Defense Department for fiscal 1967. He also fails to mention
that $5.2 billion of his added revenue is a one-year proposition only.
The government will gain in this one year $1.6 billion from coin clip-
ping by removing silver from our coinage and another $3.6 billion from
the speedup in tax collections.
In presenting his budget the President said that despite fighting
in Viet Nam the war on poverty must also be escalated. For this he
asked an increase of $300 million in antipoverty funds. And yet, on
March 8, his antipoverty director informed the Congress the poverty
war is being curtailed because of the Vietnamese fighting.
The budgets with their yearly deficits have helped breed inflation
and yet the Administration scoffs at inflation. With high taxes,
high prices, high spending, high deficits -- the Great Society has
become the High Society.
It is time for the Johnson-Humphrey Administration to present pre-
cise, more realistic figure and candid budgetary estimates to the
American people so that they may judge truly how much they are
spending to meet the Administration's vast commitments here and abroad.
Room S-124 U.S. Capital-CApitol 4-3121 Ex 3700
[OVER]
STATEMENT BY SENATOR DIRKSEN
March 10, 1966
The Johnson-Humphrey Administration has failed to reassure the
American people and the Congress concerning inflation, the war in
Viet Nam, and its future tax programs.
Inflation is mounting at a rapid rate due in large part to fiscal
and budgetary policies of the Johnson-Humphrey Administration. Prices
vary from day to day but continue to move higher and higher. This
affects not only the public but the purchase of goods and services
by the government as well.
The war in Viet Nam is escalating but the Administration has not
informed the American people how big it will get nor how costly it
will become.
Excise tax cuts given by Congress a year ago are being rescinded
at the request of the Johnson-Humphrey Administration. There is
continued talk of new tax increases to come later this year.
Perhaps the most dangerous sign of a new Johnson-Humphrey power
grab has been the floating of "trial balloons" on standby or emer-
gency powers for the President to raise or lower taxes and perhaps
impose direct wage and price controls at will.
Republicans take sharp issue with this proposal. The Congress
should not further abdicate its Constitutional taxing responsibility.
Republicans are unalterably opposed to granting standby taxing powers
or standby wage and price control authority to the President.
For these reasons, the Joint Senate-House Rspublican Leadership
strongly endorses a resolution adopted by the Senate Republican
Policy Committee on March 8. That Resolution reads in part as
follows:
RESOLVED: In view of the clear language of article I,
section 8 of the United States Constitution we are unalterably
opposed to granting to the President of the United States
any standby, emergency or other authority to raise or lower
taxes.
ANOTHER
far inflation
statement
see
"LABOR" "fice,
March18
CONGRESSMAN
NEWS
GERALD R. FORD
HOUSE REPUBLICAN LEADER
RELEASE
Monday, March 21, 1966
FOR P.M. RELEASE
STATEMENT BY HOUSE MINORITY LEADER GERALD R. FORD, R-MICH.
It's an insult to the intelligence of the American people for
Democratic leaders to contend the Republican Party and the press have
kidded the public into thinking inflation is here.
The people know that certain prices have been going up steadily and
that all the nibbles at the family paycheck have added up to a great big
bite. That's why it's ridiculous for any Democrat in Congress to remark
casually that price increases since the 1957-59 period have been gradual
and to dismiss last month's record jump for a February in the wholesale
price index.
In February the wholesale price index registered the sharpest rise
for that month since 1951. That is a real danger signal, and no Democrat
in Congress can ignore it.
President Johnson recently stated candidly that inflation is "perhaps
our most serious economic challenge in 1966." If Mr. Johnson is aware of
that--just as we Republicans are and have been for some time--I'm sur-
prised other Democratic leaders are not.
Some Democrats in Congress apparently are not as interested in polls
as is Mr. Johnson. They seem not to have seen the latest Gallup Poll
results on inflation's impact on the family. That poll showed Americans
believe a family of four needs $18 more a week just to get along this
year, as compared with a year ago. That adds up to $936 more in a 12-month
period--or nearly $1,000 more a year. I'd like to ask Democrats in Congress
how many families have an additional $1,000 net this year to meet the
climb in the cost of living.
Democratic leaders say Republicans complaining about inflation are
"looking at the stock market and its gyrations rather than the overall
economy as it is." The American housewife certainly is not looking at the
stock market when she goes to buy necessities for her family and then
cries out: "My goodness, the price has gone up again."
# # #
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
CONGRESSMAN
NEWS
GERALD R. FORD
HOUSE REPUBLICAN LEADER
RELEASE
FOR WEDNESDAY, P. M. RELEASE
MARCH 30, 1966
STATEMENT BY HOUSE MINORITY LEADER GERALD R. FORD, R-MICHIGAN
It is now revealed that President Johnson was the purveyor of
misinformation when he told news reporters last week that retail sales for
January and February showed a "slight drop" from November and December.
Mr. Johnson was eager to display to inflation-anxious Americans an
"indicator" that the economy is cooling off.
Tuesday, we learned that the "flash" figures on which Mr. Johnson
based his statement about a drop in retail sales for January and February
were cockeyed. Revised Census Bureau figures now disclose that retail
sales rose vigorously in January, and the guessing by government analysis
is that February sales ran slightly above the $25.016 billion January
figure.
It is a small wonder that the American people are doubting the
Johnson-Humphrey Administration's ability to keep the economy from running
wild when Mr. Johnson cites faulty figures.
The revised government figures showing an increase in January-February
retail sales are another indicator that Republicans are right when they
insist upon cutting government spending as an alternative to a tax increase.
Since Mr. Johnson is 80 determined to avoid a tax increase, he should
submit a revised fiscal 1967 budget to Congress and thus do a service to
all Americans who want a tax increase no more than he does.
It is ironic that instead Mr. Johnson is appealing to businessmen to
hold off on plant expansion and to governors and mayors to hold back on
their governmental spending.
It would doubtless be more effective and have a greater impact on
the economy if Mr. Johnson would take the course his cockeyed January-
February retail sales figures initally blinded him to take--reductions in
non-essential domestic spending by the federal government,
# # #
GERALD LIGHTS
FOR THE SENATE:
FOR THE HOUSE
THE JOINT SENATE-HOUSE
OF REPRESENTATIVES:
Everett M. Dirksen, Leader
Thomas H. Kuchel, Whip
REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP
Gerald R. Ford, Leader
Bourke B. Hickenlooper, Chr.
Leslie C. Arends, Whip
of the Policy Committee
Melvin R. Laird,
Leverett Saltonstall, Chr.
Press Release
Chr. of the Conference
of the Conference
John J. Rhodes, Chr.
of the Policy Committee
Thruston B. Morton,
Chr. Republican
H. Allen Smith,
Senatorial Committee
Ranking Member
Rules Committee
Bob Wilson,
PRESIDING OFFICER:
Issued following a
Chr. Republican
Leadership meeting
Congressional Committee
The Republican
National Chairman
Charles E. Goodell,
April 21, 1966
Chr. Committee on
Ray C. Bliss
Planning and Research
STATEMENT BY REPRESENTATIVE FORD
IMMEDIATE RELEASE
The following quotations are excerpts from the Dallas Morning
News -- that's the Dallas, Texas Morning News of April 15, Ladies
and Gentlemen:
"President Johnson's chief economic adviser revealed
(in Austin) Thursday that he doesn't place much stock in
the American housewife's judgment on inflation.
"Gardner Ackley, speaking at the University of Texas
said he received numerous letters from homemakers blaming
him personally for high food prices.
But housewives are notoriously poor judges of what's
happening to prices except for food,' he quipped during
a press conference.
"And Ackley claims that, even on the supermarket level,
the housewife is no expert.
"'She notices when the price of a pork chop or a head
of lettuce goes up,: he noted, 'but she's not always aware
when the price comes down.
I just can't believe that any Administration or other Government
spokesman could so misjudge or so underrate the American housewife and
homemaker!
Who knows better how rapidly inflation is eating away the family
income day by day? Who knows better, who feels more painfully, the
rising costs of living as, week by week, those costs discourage every
American family in its hopes for the future?
Mr. Ackley, from his privileged economic Banctuary, sadly and
cruelly underestimates the knowledge and the power of America's women
and I hope that he and the Johnson-Humphrey Administration and the
Congress will hear from every American home and hearth on this subject,
by letter and by telegram, in the days ahead. I urge every American
homemaker to take pen in hand and tell us now -- what you know -- how
you feel -- about these terribly harsh, constantly rising costs of
living.
(more)
Room S-124 U.S. Capitol-CApitol 4-3121 Ex 3700
Staff Consultant - John B. Fisher
DERALD FORD LIBRARY
- 2 -
Representative Ford
April 21, 1966
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, the Johnson-Humphrey Administration
hesitates, vacillates and procrastinates in taking necessary action
to stop these sky-rocketing living costs. Again, Mr. Ackley, in
reply to a question as to what will happen if we get into an infla-
tionary period: "It depends on how you define inflation. I wouldn't
say we'd had much inflation." Will America's homemakers agree? And
the President and his Secretary of the Treasury continue to wonder
when or whether to "apply the brakes"! This, despite the report of
the Department of Commerce on the Gross National Product increase,
released Monday, April 18, and stating that more than one-third of
the increase in the dollar total represented higher prices and stating
further that "the accelerated price increase in the first quarter is
largely attributable to the steep rise in food prices."
There are two major fiscal brakes available -- either a tax
increase or a drastic cut in needless spending -- yet the Johnson-
Humphrey Administration, with constantly contradictory comments, will
not tell the American people truthfully what it proposes or plans.
This, therefore, is our Question-of-the-Week:
Mr. President, what are you doing
-
about the rising costs of living?
- 3 -
STATEMENT BY SENATOR DIRKSEN
April 21, 1966
The Government of the United States is the biggest business in
the world. It is the biggest borrower, the biggest lender, the
biggest hoarder, the biggest spender, the biggest landlord, the big-
gest tenant, the biggest employer, and the biggest provider in the
history of mankind. Inevitably the biggest business in the world has
the biggest budget in the world.
No one can claim, of course, that a family budget is or should
be comparable, but no one can deny that every family budget is just
as important to the wage earner and the homemaker who control it.
If a family's income is not adequate to meet its expenses, the
family has only two alternatives: to increase that income or to
reduce those expenditures, yet there seems to be no recognition of
this whatever in the Johnson-Humphrey Administration.
In a recent appearance before Agriculture Department employees,
the President said: "We in government cannot afford the luxury of
thinking that nothing SO needs reforming as other people's habits.
As public servants we know -- at least we ought to know -- that the
habits most in need of reform are our own. How very true!
What he actually said, of course, was: don't do as I do, do as
I say, for, quite obviously, while the Johnson-Humphrey Administra-
tion's spending habits are in need of drastic reform the President
is making no evident effort whatever to reform them and he and his
colleagues continue to allude repeatedly to a possible tax increase
while urging all others, but not themselves, to reduce expenditures.
The President hasn't hesitated to ask business, to ask labor, to
ask the housewives of America to reduce their spending. Why hasn't
he asked the Congress to do the same? On the contrary, hardly a
month goes by without a request from him for more and more and more
spending of the people's money for low priority, non-defense projects
and programs.
I have said before and I say again that the role of the opposi-
tion must be one of both searching criticism and constructive proposal
of alternatives. There has now been published for release today the
full text of the Republican Coordinating Committee's report entitled
(More)
- 4 -
Senator Dirksen
April 21, 1966
"The Rising Costs of Living -- A Report on the Fiscal Policies of the
Federal Government," approved at the Committee's last meeting March
twenty-eighth. A summary of the report was released at that time,
but the text contains an extensive amount of detail in support of
the report's conclusions and recommendations. The report was based
on a study made by the Task Force on Federal Fiscal and Monetary
Policies of which former Budget Director Maurice H. Stans is Chairman.
I commend this report to your attention and study and I urge you
to invite your readers to write to the Members of Congress for copies
of it. The role of the opposition of which I speak must not be one
of "Me too", nor yet one of "Not me". Rather, it must be one of
"Here's how". On the harsh question of inflation, with which every
homemaker and wage earner is living so painfully today, "Here's how".
The alternatives, as has been said, are clear -- either higher
taxes or a reduction in spending, yet we have no equally clear idea
from this Administration as to which path we will be taking.
Therefore, our Question-of-the-Week:
Mr. President, what are you doing
about the rising costs of living?
CONGRESSMAN
NEWS
GERALD R. FORD
HOUSE REPUBLICAN LEADER
RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
APRIL 21, 1966
STATEMENT BY HOUSE MINORITY LEADER GERALD R. FORD, R-MICHIGAN.
The rise in the cost of living for March, the second consecutive monthly
jump, is in line with my prediction that consumer prices will climb 3 to 5
per cent this year as compared with a 2 per cent rise in 1965.
It also is proof that the jawbone technique the President is using to
try to halt inflation--talk, talk, talk-just isn't working. He is going to
have to make a choice within perhaps the wext six months on asking Congress
for an income tax increase or cutting back substantially on the level of
federal spending.
I urge that he resolve to reduce spending and база that word to Democratic
members of Congress. If this is done, there will be no need to impose
second tax increase on the American people this years-and no excuse to do so.
The consumer price index rose four- ienths of per cent in March. In
February, it went up five-tenths of 1 per cent. There was no change in January.
The trend is unmistakable. Inflation is here. Averaging in the no-change
month of January, we find that consumer prices rose at an annual rate of
3.6 per cent for the first quarter of this year. If there are no more no-change
months during 1966, the rise for the year may be considerably greater than that.
It's time the President stopped talking about inflation and did something
about it.
###
FORD is LIBRARY GENALD
CONGRESSMAN
NEWS
GERALD R. FORD
HOUSE REPUBLICAN LEADER
RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
APRIL 21, 1966
STATEMENT BY HOUSE MINORITY LEADER GERALD R. FORD, R-MICHIGAN.
The rise in the cost of living for March, the second consecutive monthly
jump, is in line with my prediction that consumer prices will climb 3 to 5
per cent this year as compared with a 2 per cent rise in 1965.
It also is proof that the jawbone technique the President is using to
try to halt inflation--talk, talk, talk--just isn't working. He is going to
have to make a choice within perhaps the next six months on asking Congress
for an income tax increase or cutting back substantially on the level of
federal spending.
I urge that he resolve to reduce spending and pass that word to Democratic
members of Congress. If this 18 done, there will be no need to impose a
second tax increase on the American people this year--and no excuse to do so.
The consumer price index rose four-tenths of 1 per cent in March. In
February, it went up five-tenths of 1 per cent. There was no change in January.
The trend is unmistakable. Inflation is here. Averaging in the no-change
month of January, we find that consumer prices rose at an annual rate of
3.6 per cent for the first quarter of this year. If there are no more no-change
months during 1966, the rise for the year may be considerably greater than that.
It's time the President stopped talking about inflation and did something
about it.
###
GERAZO FORD LIBRARY
House Republican Policy Committee
John J. Rhodes, Chairman
Immediate Pelease
140 Cannon House Office Bldg.
Phone: 225-6168
July 27, 1966
Republican Policy Committee Statement on the Homebuilding Industry
Homebuilding and homebuying, one of the nation's largest industries, is
faced with a major crisis. Due to the inflationary fiscal policies of the
Johnson-Humphrey Administration, this major industry could slump by as much as
one-third during the second half of 1966. It is tragically significant that the
June building permit rate, an indicator of future activity, plummeted to the
lowest point since the Census Bureau began keeping records. Private ibusing
starts in June were down 18 percent from June 1965 and ications for FHA-
insured mortgages on existing homes were down 34 percent from: year ago.
The homebuilding and homebuying crisis affects millions of Americans - the
young couple who is getting married and wants to buy a home of their own, but
cannot saddle themselves for 20 to 30 years with swoller payments the family
that wants to sell the house it now has or buy another but is prevented from
doing so by the absence of home mortgage money; the builders and workers in the
home construction industry, and all of the related industries and services that
supply materials and equipment.
Under the Johnson-Humphrey Administration, interest rates are the highest
in more than 40 years. As a result, high interest costs have added tremendously
to the cost of financing the ever-mounting Federall debt. The rising demand for
credit by the Federal government and business has drawn funds away from credit-
sensitive industries such as homebuilding. And notwithstanding the fact that
personal consumption has levelled off plant and inventory expan ion continue
at a record pace as a hedge by industry against the continuing inflationary
cost spiral,
The only remedy offered by the Johnson-Humphrey Administration has been
support for an ill-conceive effort to place a statutory interest ceiling rate
over time deposits in banks and savings and loans. We are opposed to H.R. 14026.
This finger-in the dike approach will not create new savings nor direct additional
funds to the homebuilding industry. On the contrary, it could drive personal and
corporate savings from banks and savings and loans to government bonds, Federal
agency issues, or the stock market thereby further compounding the homebuilding
crisis.
We Republicans do more than "symathize" with the plight of the homebuilders
and the homebuyers. We demand that the following 'crash program be undertaken
before Congress adjourns:
1. Slash nondefense, nonessential domestic spending. Not just in regard to
appropriations as the President has urged, but also with respect to new
program authorizations which trigger the appropriations process.
2. Reduce point discounts on FHA and VA home financing through administrative
adjustments of rates to more realistic levels. Five and six point discounts
($1,500 on $25,000 home mortgage) are stifling home financing and wiping
out personal savings.
(over)
DERALD FORD LIBRARY
2.
3.
Suspend any further issues of FNMA participation sales other than for VA
and FHA pooled housing mortgages. When the participation sales bill was
being debated, we warned that this multi-billion dollar budgetary gimmick
would place severe strains on the private credit market and push up interest
rates to record levels. Experience with the program has fully confirmed
our fears.
4.
Enact the Republican-initiated proposal to grant FNMA additional borrowing
authority in a prudent and legal manner.
5.
Remove FN.1A's $15,000 administrative limitation on purchase of mortgages
under its secondary market operations.
6.
Appoint an emergency Presidential fact-finding committee on the homebuilding
crisis to report its findings in sufficient time for Congressional consider-
ation prior to adjournment of the 89th Congress.
Granted these are stern measures. However, the ever-deepening homebuilding
crisis demands that immediate and effective steps be taken. The do not open
until after election" tag must be removed from this problem.
House Republican Policy Committee
John J. Rhodes, Chairman
Immediate Felease
140 Cannon House Office Bldg.
Phone: 225-6168
July 27, 1966
Republican Policy Committee Statement on the Homebuilding Industry
Homebuilding and homebuying, one of the nation's largest industries, is
faced with a major crisis. Due to the inflationary fiscal policies of the
Johnson--liumphrey Administration, this major industry could slump by as much as
one-third during the second half of 1966. It is tragically significant that the
June building permit rate, an indicator of future activity, plummeted to the
lowest point since the Census Bureau began keeping records. Private housing
starts in June were down 18 percent from June 1965 and applications for FHA-
insured mortgages on existing homes were down 34 percent from a year ago.
The homebuilding and homebuying crisis affects millions of Americans - the
young couple who is getting married and wants to buy a home of their own, but
cannot saddle themselves for 20 to 30 years with swollen payments: the family
that wants to sell the house it nov has or buy another but is prevented from
doing so by the absence of home mortgage money; the builders and workers in the
home construction industry, and all of the related industries and services that
supply materials and equipment.
Under the Johnson-Humphrey Administration, interest rates are the highest
in more than 40 years. As a result, high interest costs have added tremendously
to the cost of financing the ever-mounting Federal debt. The rising demand for
credit by the Federal government and business has drawn funds away from credit-
sensitive industries such as homebuilding. And, notwithstanding the fact that
personal consumption has levelled off, plant and inventory expansion continue
at a record pace as a hedge by industry against the continuing inflationary
cost spiral.
The only remedy offered by the Johnson-Humphrey Administration has been
support for an ill-conceived effort to place a statutory interest ceiling rate
over time deposits in banks and savings and loans. We are opposed to H.R. 14026.
This finger-in-the-dike approach will not create new savings nor direct additional
funds to the homebuilding industry. On the contrary, it could drive personal and
corporate savings from banks and savings and loans to government bonds, Federal
agency issues, or the stock market - thereby further compounding the homebuilding
crisis.
We Republicans do more than "sympathize" with the plight of the homebuilders
and the homebuyers. We demand that the following "crash program be undertaken
before Congress adjourns:
1.
Slash nondefense, nonessential domestic spending. Not just in regard to
appropriations as the President has urged, but also with respect to new
program authorizations which trigger the appropriations process.
2.
Reduce point discounts on FHA and VA home financing through administrative
adjustments of rates to more realistic levels. Five and six point discounts
($1,500 on $25,000 home mortgage) are stifling home financing and wiping
out personal savings.
(over)
2.
3.
Suspend any further issues of FNMA participation sales other than for VA
and FHA pooled housing mortgages. When the participation sales bill was
being debated, we warned that this multi-billion dollar budgetary gimmick
would place severe strains on the private credit market and push up interest
rates to record levels. Experience with the program has fully confirmed
our fears.
4.
Enact the Republican-initiated proposal to grant FNMA additional borrowing
authority in a prudent and legal manner.
5.
Remove FMIA's $15,000 administrative limitation on purchase of mortgages
under its secondary market operations.
6.
Appoint an emergency Presidential fact-finding committee on the homebuilding
crisis to report its findings in sufficient time for Congressional consider-
ation prior to adjournment of the 89th Congress.
Granted these are stern measures. However, the ever-deepening homebuilding
crisis demands that immediate and effective steps be taken. The do not open
until after election" tag must be removed from this problem.
FOR THE SENATE:
FOR THE HOUSE
Everett M. Dirksen
THE REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP
OF REPRESENTATIVES:
of Illinois
OF THE CONGRESS
Gerald R. Ford
Thomas H. Kuchel
of Michigan
of California
Leslie C. Arends
Bourke B. Hickenlooper
of Illinois
of Iowa
Press Release
Melvin R. Laird
Leverett Saltonstall
of Wisconsin
of Massachusetts
John J. Rhodes
Thruston B. Morton
of Arizona
of Kentucky
Issued following a
H. Allen Smith
Leadership Meeting
of California
PRESIDING:
Bob Wilson
of California
The National Chairman
July 28, 1966
Charles E. Goodell
Ray C. Bliss
of New York
STATEMENT BY REPRESE .ATIVE FORD
IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Higher prices -- higher ost. higher interest rates -- higher
wages higher higher taxes! Add them all together and they
spell inflation, no matter how ou locks them from any point in
the economy.
No thinking person -- no hard-pressed taxpayer -- can help but be
alarmed by the pace of this inflation which, for many months now, has
been taking the tax dollars from his pocket far more rapidly than he
can earn them.
Republicans in Congress and across the nation are of course
taking issue with the Johnson-Humphrey Administration in its refusal
to take the necessary action to stop these sky-rocketing costs of
living. But ours is a protest in which millions of Americans of all
political faiths and on all economic levels are now joining. The
chart on display here today illustrates the facts of inflation vividly
This chart reveals, in clear and simple terms, the rate of increase
of consumer prices from June of 1957 to this very month of July, 1966.
The increase shown is alarming. The rate of increase indicated
is frightening. The refusal of the Johnson-Humphrey Administration
to check non-essential Federal spending and to stem this inflation
is beyond all understanding.
When the Government's own Bureau of Labor Statistics records the
cold, harsh fact that the rate of increase in living costs during
the past six months was the highest in the past eight years, the
issue is clear for all to see: unless these jet-propelled living
costs are checked, the results could spell not just inflation but
disaster for every American pocketbook.
(more)
Room S-124 U.S. Capitol-(202) 225-3700
Consultant to the Leadership-John B. Fisher
GERALD LIDAÇA
REPRESENTATIVE FORD
Page 2
If this gravest of economic problems could not be solved, we
would feel hopeless and helpless indeed. But it can be -- and by a
means immediately at hand: the reduction of non-essential Federal
spending by the Johnson-Humphrey Administration and its Democrat-
dominated Congress.
This is the Administration whose leader in a speech in Des Moines,
Iowa, on June 30 said:
"When these folks start talking to you about
inflation, you tell them that is something
you only have to worry about in Democratic
administrations".
Seldom has such a public confession been heard.
This is the Johnson-Humphrey Administration whose leader urges
everyone else to economize -- the housewife to select cheaper cuts
of meat, the workingman to hold to wage "guideposts", the businessman
to review his budget, the manufacturer to restrict his spending.
Yet this same leader refuses to urge his overwhelming Democratic
majority on Capitol Hill to economize in the only way that has any
real meaning for every American family.
Republicans in Congress and throughout the nation have for many
months now not only seen clearly, but have identified accurately,
both the causes of and the cure for these costs of living that
threaten all our people. The Johnson-Humphrey Administration has,
with its head in the economic sand, been either unwilling or unable
to admit these harsh facts of domestic life in America today. We
wonder why.
Therefore, our Question-of-the-Week:
Mr. President, why do you brag about inflation?
STATEMENT BY SENATOR DIRKSEN
JULY 28, 1966
The President has been gambling with our economy and, despite
the warnings of friend and foe over many months, he has been losing
steadily. The stakes of the game have been, and are, the well-being
of the American people and the point-of-no-concern has long since
been passed.
The Republicans in Congress, together with Republicans and
millions of worried Americans across the nation, have been pointing
with alarm for more than a year to what was SO clearly happening to
their pocketbooks and to the nation's economic welfare, The time
of reckoning so long foreseen has arrived.
The late H. G. Wells, in another connection, once remarked: "I
am not prophesying now; I am simply running along beside the marching
facts and pointing at them."
We have been prophesying also, month after month after month.
We have been running along beside the marching facts and pointing at
them, with increasing concern and alarm. But we have been doing far
more than this. Republicans have offered the solution to inflation
and have consistently worked to help achieve that solution by cutting
back all non-essential Federal expenditures.
We have, first and foremost, demanded that non-essential Federal
expenditures be drastically reduced. We have urged that immediate
action be taken to reduce foreign aid. At our insistence -- and only
with our help -- the prospect of a reduction in foreign aid of over
400 million dollars in this coming year now exists.
We have urged, again and again, that any number of the non-
essential, Great Society programs that have been proposed and are
being pushed be delayed, if not curtailed, in order that the cost of
living for every American might be reduced. In this we have not yet
been given a meaningful hearing nor any cooperation by the Johnson-
Humphrey Administration.
If non-essential Federal expenditures are substantially reduced --
and the initiation of new programs slowed down or eliminated --as they
clearly can be without the slightest detriment to our peoples' well-
being -- there would be no need for the wage and price controls to
Senator Dirksen
Page 2
which the President has referred. There would be no need for the
higher taxes to which he alludes. There would be no need for the
huge inflationary, budget deficit which, as an alternative, he fore-
sees.
The way out of this inflationary jungle is clear. The need for
taking it is imperative. Because these things are so, we cannot
understand, nor can millions upon millions of our people understand,
why the Johnson-Humphrey Administration has lost sight of the common
sense forest in its obsession with the Great Society trees.
Therefore, our Question-of-the-Week:
Mr. President, why do you brag about inflation?
(and, we might add, what ARE you going to do about it?)
REPUBLICAN
REPUBLICAN RESEARCH REPORT
Prepared by the
REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE
NATIONAL NAT IONAL
Research Division
1625 Eye Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.
ROBERT L.L. McCORMICK
RAY C. BLISS
Director of Research
Chairman
REPORT No. 9
August 4, 1966
INCREASE IN FOOD COSTS DURING THE JOHNSON ADMINISTRATION
The persistent advance in retail food prices continues to alarm American
homemakers. The figures as established by the U.S. Department of Labor for
the sample "market basket" listed on the following pages shows an approximate
18 percent increase in retail food prices during the Johnson Administration.
When Mr. Johnson assumed the Presidency in November 1963, the 25 representative
items listed could be purchased, on the average, for $11.13 which, incidentally,
was seven cents less than their price in June of 1963. By June of 1966, these
same items, according to the Labor Department, sold at retail in a large
sampling in cities and towns around the Nation for $12.78.
During the 34 months of John F. Kennedy's Administration, the Labor
Department's index for retail prices for food increased by 2.3 points, from
102.8 to 105.1.
Lyndon B. Johnson has been President of the United States for 31 months,
during which time the same index has increased from 105.1 to 114.0, a total
of 8.9 points.
-2-
RETAIL PRICES OF SELECTED FOOD ITEMS
November 1963 and June 1966
Unit of
Price in cents
Price in cents
Item
Measurement
November 1963
June 1966
Percentage Increase
Cereals and bakery products:
Flour, wheat
5 pounds
56.8¢
58.5¢
3.0%
Corn flakes
12 ounces
28.4
29.9
5.3
Bread, white
1 pound
21.6
21.8
0.9
Meats, poultry, and fish:
Beef and veal:
Round steak
1 pound
106.4
110.8
4.1
Sirloin steak
1 pound
108.7
117.3
7.9
Pork:
Chops, center cut
1 pound
88.3
107.1
21.3
Loin roast
1 pound
62.0
77.0
24.2
Bacon
1 pound
67.4
93.9
39.3
Poultry:
Frying chicken
1 pound
39.7
41.9
5.5
Fish:
Tuna fish
61/2 ounce
32.6
36.3
11.3
can
Dairy products:
Milk, fresh (delivered)
1/2 gallon
52.6
54.7
4.0
Butter
1 pound
75.5
79.6
5.4
Cheese, American process
1/2 pound
36.7
41.7
13.6
Fruits and vegetables:
Fresh fruits:
Apples
1 pound
14.0
22.7
62.1
Bananas
1 pound
15.6
17.2
10.3
-3-
Unit of
Price in cents
Price in cents
Item
Measurement
November 1963
June 1966
Percentage Increase
Fresh vegetables:
Potatoes
10 pounds
63.1c
86.6¢
37.2%
Onions
1 pound
10.8
15.1
39.8
Carrots
1 pound
15.0
19.0
26.7
Celery
1 pound
13.4
17.4
29.9
Cabbage
1 pound
8.5
11.6
36.5
Tomatoes
1 pound
30.9
34.3
11.0
Canned vegetables:
Peas, green
No. 303 can
22.7
24.0
5.7
Dried vegetables:
Dried beans
1 pound
17.7
20.0
13.0
Other foods at home:
Beverages:
Coffee
1 pound
69.8
83.2
19.2
Cola drink
72 ounces
55.1
56.6
2.7
carton
TOTALS
$11.13
$12.78
AVERAGE PERCENTAGE INCREASE/ITEM
18%
These same 25 items increased by
3.1% in the one month period be-
tween May 1966 and June 1966.
Source: U. S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Explanation: November 1963, was used because it was the first month of the
Johnson Administration. June 1966, was used because it is the most recent
month for which official data is available as of August 1, 1966.
JWH
CONGRESSMAN
NEWS
GERALD R. FORD
HOUSE REPUBLICAN LEADER
RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE--AUG., 9, 1966
STATEMENT BY REP. GERALD R. FORD, R-MICHIGAN.
The Johnson Administration has failed to deal effectively with inflation. Now
Administration officials are conceding that the existing 3.2 per cent wage-price
guidelines are dead.
The cost-of-living rose 2 per cent in 1965 and is climbing at a 3 to 4 per cent
rate this year. All Americans are victims of higher prices; the poor and those on
fixed incomes are hurt the most. The frightening aspect of this situation is that
it is certain to become worse.
President Johnson has tried to talk prices into remaining stable. He has
failed. The Democrat-controlled Congress has continued to pursue heavy spending
policies which have added to inflationary pressures in the economy and have helped
to make a mockery of the Administration's wage-price guidelines.
Johnson Administration officials now say they want to make the guidelines
more flexible in the light of the steel price increase and the airline machinists'
rejection of a 4.3 per cent wage boost.
What they really are saying is that they want to loosen the guidelines to
accommodate an inflation which the Administration is unable to stop. They want to
continue the pretense that the guidelines are meaningful as a coverup for the
Democrats' failure to take timely fiscal and monetary actions to halt inflation.
I have said it before and I say it again. The guidelines are dead.
For Treasury Secretary Fowler to say that "the demise of the guidelines is
greatly exaggerated" is for a high government official to whistle in the dark over
inflation. For Mr. Fowler to add that he doesn't know "whether there should be
any particular figure" set in the guidelines he insists are still alive is to show
how really unrealistic he is about the situation.
When Commerce Secretary Connor suggests that the wage-price guideposts might
better be applied industry by industry, he is conceding that the wage-price guide-
lines as we have known them are dead.
The guidelines concept follows the theory that increases in wages and prices
are not inflationary as long as they do not exceed the average increase in
industrial productivity each year.
To shift the guidelines to an industry-by-industry approach is to discard the
present guidelines and to turn to an entirely new concept designed to deceive the
public regarding inflationary developments.
# # #
GERALD LISAAR,
CONGRESSMAN
NEWS
GERALD R. FORD
HOUSE REPUBLICAN LEADER
RELEASE
FOR RELEASE ON RECEIPT
TUESDAY, AUGUST 23, 1966
STATEMENT BY REP. GERALD R. FORD, R-MICHIGAN.
Unless the Johnson Administration acts to check the current rate of inflation,
the cost of living for all Americans will rise by more than 4 per cent this year.
The 0.4 per cent increase in the consumer price index for July resumed a
trend that prevailed from February through April, when monthly increases in the
index hit 0.4 per cent or more.
If President Johnson fails to curb the inflationary spiral during the remaining
months of 1966, simple arithmetic points to a total cost of living climb for the
year of between 4 and 5 per cent.
The blame for this sharp and continuing rise in the cost of living rests
squarely on the Johnson Administration and the big-spending Democrats in Congress
who have fueled inflationary fires by following an excessively expansionary course.
The Administration has relied on tight money to restrain the economy instead
of a judicious and timely application of both fiscal and monetary curbs. The
lopsided Democratic majorities in Congress have continued spending the taxpayer's
money as though it comes from a bottomless well.
If Americans are wondering why their real income is dropping, they need look
no farther then the White House and the Democratic majorities in the Congress.
Workers at the bottom of the wage ladder are being hurt most by inflation,
along with the pensioners and others on fixed income. I applaud the fact that
minimum wage increases now being voted by Congress will be given early effect, a
move the Administration has opposed. The Administration should not be taking
inflation out on the lowest paid workers in this country.
# # #
Re: Inflation Join Repub.
CONGRESSMAN
NEWS
GERALD R. FORD
HOUSE REPUBLICAN LEADER
RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
MONDAY, AUGUST 29, 1966
STATEMENT BY HOUSE MINORITY LEADER GERALD R. FORD, R_MICHIGAN.
Housewives, pensioners, all Americans having trouble making today's
inflated dollar stretch to cover their budget: now have gotten the word from the
Texas summit.
In a telephoned message Saturday from his ranch to the Western Democratic
Conference, President Johnson advised everyone who has "nothing better to do than
complain about inflation" to goijoin the Republican Party."
We Republicane welcome the President and his inflation gang as recruiters
for the GOP. We join with him in inviting all Americans disturbed by the fright-
eningly steady rise in the cost of living to Moin the Republican Party. If
Mr. Johnson is implying that the current increase in the cost of living--at an
annual rate of 4 per cent or better--is nothing for the American people to be
alarmed about, then I disagree completely. And I am sure the people do, too.
Would Mr. Johnson also advise that all Americans who have nothing better
to do than complain about high interest, rates go join the Republican Party?
Is that his adtice to couples who are being forced to pay 61, 7 or even
as much as 8 per cent interest in order to buy a home?
Is that his advice to patriotic Americans who buy U.S. Savings Bonds
paying 4.15 per cent interest and then are disgruntled because big investors
receive 5-and-3/4ths per cent interest or more on the Johnson Administration's
Participation Sales Certificates?
Is that his advice to former President Harry S. Truman, who has warned
that high interest rates could bring on a serious depression?
By failing to apply a combination of timely fiscal and monetary restraint s,
the Johnson Administration is taking this nation down the path to recession and
perhaps depression. The problem is that the Administration has depended exclu-
sively on the tightening of credit to contain inflation.
When Mr. Truman was in the White House, he never ducked the big decisions.
Heraever resorted to buck-passing. Mr. Johnson not only has failed to come to
grips with inflation, he has evaded the responsibility for doing so. His White
House motto apparently is not "the buck stops here" but "slip, slide and duck,"
LIBRARY
HH
Re: Inflation
FOR THE SENATE:
FOR THE HOUSE
THE REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP
OF REPRESENTATIVES:
Everett M. Dirksen
Gerald R. Ford
of Illinois
OF THE CONGRESS
of Michigan
Thomas H. Kuchel
Leslie C. Arends
of California
of Illinois
Bourke B. Hickenlooper
Press Release
Melvin R. Laird
of Iowa
of Wisconsin
Leverett Saltonstall
John J. Rhodes
of Massachusetts
of Arizona
Thruston B. Morton
H. Allen Smith
of Kentucky
of California
Bob Wilson
PRESIDING:
Issued following a
of California
The National Chairman
Leadership Meeting
Charles E. Goodell
of New York
Ray C. Bliss
September 1, 1966
STATEMENT BY REPRESENTATIVE FORD
IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Former President Truman had for several years on his desk a motto
which read: "The buck stops here!" In this Johnson Administration
that motto appears to have been changed to: "Slip, slide and duck
the buck!"
As the recent airline strike continued, the President passed the
buck to the Congress.
As
labor
increases
its
demands,
the
President
passes
the
buck
in
the
silence. consumer. As As the industry cost raises of its prices, to the skyrocket President in passes he market, the buck the to
President passes the buck to the housewife.
As interest rates reach all-time highs and home mortgage money
becomes almost impossible to obtain, the President passes the buck to
those millions of our people of modest means, both younger and older,
who have hoped for years to have a home of their own.
As too long a mistaken reliance on monetary policy alone fails
in the slightest to halt inflation, the President passes the buck to
us all. For it is the American people, each and all of us, who
continue to suffer increasingly from this buck-passing fever of the
Johnson Administration.
Inflation -- a dollar declining in value -- the cost of living
in orbit -- call it what you will, in simplest terms it means that
the American wage-earner, the American taxpayer, is being cruelly
misled and badly hurt.
This Administration appears totally helpless, and even worse,
hopeless, in its futile threshing-about for solutions. When our
people are given no help -- worse yet, when they are given no hope
Room S-124 U.S. Capitol-(202) 225-3700
Consultant to the Leadership-John B. Fisher
GERALD
LIBRARI
Rep. Ford
Page 2
it's time for a drastic change.
We repeat -- and we shall continue to repeat it until action
results -- we repeat that the solution to onrushing inflation is at
hand -- a solution instantly available to this Administration and its
top-heavy majority in this Democratic Congress. That solution: a
drastic cut in non-essential Federal spending. It is these billions
of non-essential Federal funds that are being poured into the economy
that represent the principal cause of inflation, the principal reason
for today's high living costs for every family.
The President has asked housewives to buy cheaper cuts of meat.
He has suggested that wage and price guideposts --- which he himself
has torpedoed -- be observed. He has requested Government agencies
to economize. He has supported none of these things with any vigor at
all. There has been no evidence that he means it.
On the contrary he points with peculiar pride to a wartime
economy that inevitably produces high employment.
With nearly 3,100,000 men in uniform not now employable in civil-
ian life -- in the face of the known fact that at least three men are
needed in the labor force at home to provide for each man in uniform
-- we suggest that the President's boasting has a very hollow ring.
We believe that the time has come for the President of the United
States to stop passing the buck with the responsibilities that are
his -- his responsibilities to labor, to management, to the consumer,
to the taxpayer, to all the American people. He can bring about a
drastic cut in non-essential Federal expenditures through his huge
Democratic majorities in the Congress, if he is willing to do SO --
if he has the courage to do SO.
Therefore, our Question-of-the-Week:
Mr. President, When Will You
Democrats Stop Passing the Buck?
SENATOR DIRKSEN
September 1, 1966
President Johnson tells us that what America needs is "a strong
dose of self-discipline. To which we can only reply: "Physician,
heal thyself".
To ask self-discipline of labor, to ask self-discipline of
management, to ask self-discipline of Congress, to ask self-discipline
of the consumer, is pious and pointless -- until the President asks it
of his Administration and his heavy Democratic majorities in the
Congress. We are, in short, not impressed.
We are not impressed by timid surrender to labor unions. We are
not impressed by fearful deference to management. We are not impressed
by' guideposts" for wages and prices that are anything but. We are
not impressed by his requests for those reductions in appropriations
by Congress -- such as school milk and school lunch programs -- that
the President knows cannot be made. We are not impressed by the
intriguing fiction of Mr. McNamara's new math, which claims a
doubtful savings of billions. We are not impressed by anything, in
short, but a clear and courageous demonstration on the part of the
Johnson-Humphrey Administration that it has the will and the courage
to put the brakes on inflation -- to stop the skyrocketing cost of
living -- by the powerful means it has readily at hand: the drastic,
sweeping reduction of non-essential Federal spending.
We have said before and we repeat, that Republicans in Congress
and across the country have for months urged such reductions and have
shown clearly where they could be made.
When the Congress was given the Johnson-Humphrey budget for 1967,
the Republican Leadership and the Republican membership of the House
and Senate Appropriations Committees identified, item by item, those
programs where non-essential spending could be cut by hundreds of
millions of dollars -- and this without depriving our fighting forces
of a single thing they need!
The President and his Democratic majorities in Congress have
refused to make such savings, despite repeated and valiant Republicat
efforts to achieve them. Even now, at this point in the appropria-
tions calendar, it is still possible to effect a savings -- in non-
Senator Dirksen
Page 2
essential spending -- of hundreds of millions of dollars if the
President and his Congressional majorities really want to fight
inflation.
These, let me emphasize, represent savings in things that we
can do without -- just as the housewife is asked to do without, just
as the wage-earner is asked to do without, just as the would-be
home owner is asked to do without -- just as American fighting men
are being asked to do without the privileges of peace in the frightful
jungles of Asia.
We cannot have both guns and butter. We cannot fight a war in
Asia and win the war on inflation at home unless this Government of
ours, this Administration, is equally willing to do without and to
stop its willful, reckless spending of the people's money on non-
essential things.
I am in total and enthusiastic agreement with Jerry Ford that the
only effective means available to fight inflation, to stem the high
cost of living, is to cut non-essential Federal spending drastically
and to do it now. The President and his Democratic Congressional
majorities have the power so to serve this nation. We cannot help but
wonder why they have been unwilling to do so.
Therefore, our Question-of-the-Week?
Mr. President, When Will You
Democrats Stop Passing the Buck?
CONGRESSMAN
NEWS
GERALD R. FORD
HOUSE REPUBLICAN LEADER
RELEASE
For Immediate Release
September 9, 1966
President Johnson's anti-inflation package comes to Congress wrapped up in
ribbons that read: "too little and too late."
The President has offered a five-point program, including the administrative
actions of a spending cutback and indefinite postponement of the sale of government
securities.
These administrative actions are potentially the most effective of all parts
of the package. They are Republican proposals which have been urged upon the
President for months,
Suspension of the investment tax credit and of accelerated depreciation will
have little immediate impact on the frighteningly swift rise in the cost of living.
Many major expansions are under way and will continue to move ahead. There will be
inequities for companies whose plans are left on the launch pad. Some firms will
be forced to drop modernization programs intended to make themwre competitive with
foreign producers. The real force of this anti-expansionary move will not be
perceptibly felt for perhaps six months.
The President's anti-inflation package is late in arriving. It's a case of
using a bucket brigade to try to put out a fire that has been allowed to get out of
control. Apparently the chief just didn't know what to do about it.
We slready have built-in price spirals lurking within the economy, ready to
push the cost of living ever upward. I do not believe Mr. Johnson's belated fire-
fighting efforts are going to put out the blaze of higher prices.
If the President actually does move to cut non-defense spending, I will be
gratified. He is saying, in effect, "The Republicans have been right all along."
He has been talking economy for months. Why hasn't he acted before?
I would also like to ask him why Treasury Secretary Fowler must make a survey
to decide what federal securities can be withheld from the money market. It is
completely obvious that it is sales participation certificates--the high-interest
paper Republicans tried to block--which should go into deep freeze. We have been
urging repeal of the high-interest Sales Participation Act ever since it was
steamrollered through Mr. Johnson's rubber stamp Congress.
Now the chickens are coming home to roost.
###
FOR THE SENATE:
FOR THE HOUSE
Everett M. Dirksen
THE REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP
OF REPRESENTATIVES:
of Illinois
Gerald R. Ford
OF THE CONGRESS
of Michigan
Thomas H. Kuchel
of California
Leslie C. Arends
of Illinois
Bourke B. Hickenlooper
of Iowa
Press Release
Melvin R. Laird
of Wisconsin
Leverett Saltonstall
of Massachusetts
John J. Rhodes
of Arizona
Thruston B. Morton
of Kentucky
H. Allen Smith
Issued following a
of California
Leadership Meeting
Bob Wilson
PRESIDING:
of California
The National Chairman
September 15, 1966
Charles E. Goodell
Ray C. Bliss
of New York
SENATOR DIRKSEN:
Mr. President and Democratic Members of the Congress:
The American people are troubled, confused and terribly uncertain
as to the future. Their worry and their uncertainty have their basis
in both the actions and the inaction of your Administration, to which
they look hopefully for a leadership still sadly lacking.
The most recent of the nation-wide surveys of public opinion con-
firms this fact, indicating clearly that in six vital areas of domestic
concern -- fiscal and monetary policy, civil rights, the war on poverty
the farm problem, the curbing of inflation, and labor-management rela-
tions -- less than half of our people have been able to maintain their
confidence in you over these many months.
On Thursday last you presented to the Congress and the people a
five-point program hopefully designed to cool our nation's growing
economic fever and to restore something of the promise a once healthy
economy had.
Belatedly acknowledging as "a cruel and unjust tax on all the
people" the inflation now raging throughout the country -- inflation
created in great part by your actions -- you indicated, first, an
intention to cut all Federal expenditures to the fullest extent pos-
sible. Inasmuch as this primary and fundamental brake on inflation was
recommended to you by Republicans and documented in detail by us nine
months ago, why has this announcement of good intent been SO long
delayed? Specifically how specifically where -- and specifically
when -- will you order such budget cuts? Will you demand of your
Democrat-controlled Congress that it take the action required on the
eight appropriation bills still remaining before it? Will you slow
down the multi-million dollar Great Society programs already in your
hands? Will you, in short, act now? Republicans stand ready, as
always, to help in such actions.
Room S-124 U.S. Capitol-(202) 225-3700
Consultant to the Leadership-John B. Fisher
- 2 -
Second, you recommended that the seven per cent investment tax
credit be made temporarily inoperative. Could this have any possible
effect on our inflated economy for at least another six months? Is
your proposal a breach of good faith with the industrial, small busi-
ness and farm communities?
Third, you recommended suspension of the use of accelerated depre-
ciation on structures started or transferred after September 1 of this
year. Do you believe this a factor of consequence in limiting con-
struction activity and costs? Upon what basis was this remarkable
conclusion reached? Even if valid, how soon could it have any benefi-
cial effect -- if it had any at all?
Fourth, you urged the Federal Reserve Board to lower interest
rates and so ease the tight money burden. How odd that your Adminis-
tration and your Democrats in Congress, allegedly SO devoted to low
interest rates and loose money should for so long have made high
interest rates inevitable by your reckless spending policies and
programs!
Fifth, you urged deferment of certain Federal borrowing to alle-
viate credit pressures. Here again you have at long last but much too
late endorsed a clear and firm Republican recommendation of many
months ago. As a New York Times editorial put it last Tuesday,
September 13: "Even more important, the decision is a sign that the
Administration may have finally realized that it cannot really be
fiscally responsible so long as it indulges in financial gimmickry."
Why this delay, Mr. President? Why such uncertainty? Why such fear
of the future?
This is exactly that uncertainty -- that growing fear -- that is
spreading so rapidly among all our people. They are uncertain, they
are bewildered as to the future -- the future of the economy, the
future of their jobs, the future of the nation, the future of their
children in every aspect of their lives.
Therefore, Mr. President and Democratic Members of the Congress
most sincerely and respectfully, our Question of the Week: When will
the trust and confidence of the people be restored?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD:
Mr. President and Democratic Members of the Congress:
As these problems multiply at home -- and abroad -- and as the
uncertainty among our people grows, we look to the weeks ahead with
apprehension and understandably wonder what the future may hold.
As increasing reference is made to a possible adjournment of the
Congress by mid-October, Election Day, November 8th, draws closer and
we wonder more and more what the immediate period thereafter may bring.
From time to time, for example, you and your Administration and
you Democrats in Congress have suggested a tax increase as one of the
means available for checking inflation. Mr. President, do you plan to
recommend to your Democratic Congress an increase in our already heavy
income taxes, after November 8th?
Equally often, spokesmen for this Administration, including your-
self, Mr. President, have made reference to wage-and-price controls as
an alternative inflation check. Most recently, a Democratic Senate
leader urged that authority for standby controls be given you. Do you
have in mind the imposition of wage-and-price controls, after November
8th?
In an address to the American Farm Economics Association, a promi-
nent official of your Administration by inference wrote off as uneco-
nomical and needless more than two million of America's small farms
and farmers. Is it contempleted that this farm elimination program
shall be undertaken by your Democratic Congress, Mr. President, after
November 8th?
The rumor persists with each passing day that the anti-poverty
program of your Administration, so loudly hailed and so extravagantly
administered, is under survey by the Bureau of the Budget, at your
order, as the first step toward its dismantlement. Is this, too,
something planned for action by your Democratic Congress, Mr. President,
after November 8th?
Your Secretary of the Treasury and your Secretary of Commerce, in
testifying this week before the House Ways and Means Committee on
certain of your proposals identified them as "an essential and
- 4 -
enduring part of our tax structure" Earlier in the year, they said
they were opposed to any "tinkering" with these credits for economic
purposes. Yet now, apparently under pressure, they blandly endorse
such "tinkering". Will this "tinkering" continue, after November 8th?
Our people cannot long endure such uncertainties. They cannot
live nor work effectively without trust and confidence. Therefore,
Mr. President and Democratic Members of the Congress, most respect-
fully and sincerely, our Question-of-the-Week: When will the trust
and confidence of the people be restored?
FOR THE SENATE:
FOR THE HOUSE
Everett M. Dirksen
THE REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP
OF REPRESENTATIVES:
of Illinois
Gerald R. Ford
OF THE CONGRESS
of Michigan
Thomas H. Kuchel
of California
Leslie C. Arends
of Illinois
Bourke B. Hickenlooper
of Iowa
Press Release
Melvin R. Laird
of Wisconsin
Leverett Saltonstall
of Massachusetts
John J. Rhodes
of Arizona
Thruston B. Morton
of Kentucky
H. Allen Smith
of California
Bob Wilson
PRESIDING:
of California
The National Chairman
Charles E. Goodell
Ray C. Bliss
September 28, 1966
of New York
FIVE VITAL ECONOMIC QUESTIONS
Speculation increases daily in both Government and public
circles that the Johnson-Humphrey Administration is making
definite preparations for the imposition of wage-and-price
controls in the near future.
Administration officials are reported as seeing "no way
to avoid wage-and-price controls" in the months ahead. This
Administration appears unwilling or unable to stem the high
and rising costs of living by the clear and certain means
available to it -- a drastic cut in non-essential Federal
spending. As a result, nation-wide alarm at this prospect
of wage-and-price controls is increasing daily.
These questions, therefore, appear to be fair and
proper:
1. Mr. President, are you now making preparations for
wage-and-price controls?
2. Mr. President, despite your earlier reported
hesitancy about imposing wide-spread wage-and-price controls,
are you planning to impose them piecemeal?
3. Mr. President, is it true that a special wage-policy
review board is already contemplated?
4. Mr. President, if wage-and-price controls are imposed,
will they be imposed "across the board" or will exceptions and
exemptions be specified?
5. Mr. President, do you really believe that wage-and-
price controls represent the primary brake on inflation now
available?
Room S-124 U.S. Capitol-(202) 225-3700
Consultant to the Leadership-John B. Fisher
FOR THE SENATE:
FOR THE HOUSE
Everett M. Dirksen
THE REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP
OF REPRESENTATIVES:
of Illinois
Gerald R. Ford
OF THE CONGRESS
of Michigan
Thomas H. Kuchel
of California
Leslie C. Arends
of Illinois
Bourke B. Hickenlooper
of Iowa
Press Release
Melvin R. Laird
of Wisconsin
Leverett Saltonstall
of Massachusetts
John J. Rhodes
of Arizona
Thruston B. Morton
of Kentucky
H. Allen Smith
Issued following a
of California
Leadership Meeting
Bob Wilson
PRESIDING:
of California
The National Chairman
October 13, 1966
Charles E. Goodell
Ray C. Bliss
of New York
STATEMENT BY SENATOR DIRKSEN:
The President has referred to the Republican Party
as the party of fear, and, moreover, as having no constructive programs
to fight inflation, no programs to ease racial tension. He accused
us of not knowing what to do about crime in the streets or how to end
the war in Viet Nam.
Is the President bewildered? Was he referring to his Administra-
tion? His statements actually spell out the most damning self-
indictment in modern political history!
There is only one thing wrong with these Presidential statements
about the Republican Party. Like so much else voiced by this Adminis-
tration, they simply are not true.
We do not admit to being a party of fear. An honest reading of
history will prove the contrary. But we do admit, as a people, to
being concerned about this Administration and the many unwise courses
it has chosen to take.
What lies ahead of us in Viet Nam, under this Administration's
leadership, we cannot foresee. We are concerned about high and
rising living costs, in the face of which this Administration has been
helpless. We are concerned -- indeed, we know -- that we are losing
our money and our friends abroad. We are concerned -- for it is a fact
-- that the "War on Poverty" is being lost, with the poor and the
underprivileged receiving little actual help and with millions of the
people's dollars being wasted. We are concerned -- for we can prove --
that the farmer and consumer are, calculatingly, being played ruthless-
ly against one another. We are concerned -- for the proof is undeni-
able -- that an echo-chamber Democratic Congress, with its steam-
roller majorities, will continue, without thought or question, to
Room S-124 U.S. Capitol-(202) 225-3700
Consultant to the Leadership-John B. Fisher
carry out the slightest whim and wish of this Administration. We are
concerned -- for the signs are frightening --- that we are being led
down the road to national bankruptcy. We are concerned that an all-
Asian Peace Conference -- a practical first step toward peace in
Viet Nam -- has now been summarily rejected as a peace hope. We are
concerned -- for we are convinced -- that the American people are
not being told the whole truth about their Government and this Adminis-
tration's plans for them.
Of the charge that the Republican Party has no constructive pro-
grams or policies we can only assume that this Administration has
from its very first days been blind, deaf and indifferent. To this
statement I attach a listing of the specific, positive, constructive
recommendations and programs which the Republican Leadership and
the Republican Party across the country have presented to the Congress,
the Administration and the American people month after month after
month. I would remind the leader of the Democratic Party that his
Administration has chosen, to our people's detriment, either to ignore
or to reject these recommendations, the majority of which would have
gone far to correct abuses spawned by the Administration and which
would have prevented this onset of confusion and concern.
When the President chooses to speak directly and candidly to the
American people, the Republican Leadership and the Republican party
will be attentive and responsive but when the President chooses to
do otherwise, we are indeed apprehensive and concerned. We hope --
we pray -- that in the weeks to come we will witness Administration
deeds calculated to inspire faith, not fear, belief, not doubt,
confidence, not concern, hope and not despair.
Therefore, our Question-or-the-Week:
Mr. President: At home and abroad, what now --- what next?
STATEMENT BY REPRESENTATIVE FORD:
On the front page of the New York Times on Tuesday, October 4th,
in adjoining columns, there appeared the following news reports, The
first was headed: "Soviet Announces New Pact for Aid to Hanoi's
Regime. Additional program includes assistance for economy and
military needs." The second was headed: "Air Talks Revived by U.S.
and Soviet
...
Service may be opened next spring."
In the very same week the conflict in Viet Nam became the third
largest war America has ever fought. American troop strength in
Viet Nam now totals more than 325,000 men, 23,000 more than in the
Korean War. The latest U.S. casualty figures report 967 killed and
wounded in one week, the highest in any seven-day period so far.
For many months the Russians have supplied -- in ever-increasing
volume -- the weapons and ammunition that are killing American boys
every day.
As thousands of American boys fight, bleed and die in Viet Nam --
as the Soviet Union -- Communist Russia -- announces an enormous
further increase in its economic and military aid to our enemies --
this Administration must stop -- and stop now -- its trafficking with
the Russians in ways that can only result in Communist encouragement,
growth and enrichment.
And on Friday, October 7th, the President of the United States,
in addressing the National Conference of Editorial Writers, proudly
proclaimed:
"We have just signed a new United States-Soviet cultural
agreement.
"We intend to press for legislative authority to negotiate
trade agreements which would extend most-favored-nation tariff
treatment to European Communist states.
" We have just concluded an air agreement with the Soviet
Union.
" And today I am announcing the following new steps:
" We will reduce export controls on Fast-West trade with
respect to hundreds of non-strategic items.
" I have just today signed a determination that will allow
the Export-Import Bank to guarantee commercial credits to
four additional Eastern European countries - Poland and
Hungary, Bulgaria and Czechoslovakia
The Export-
Import Bank is prepared to finance exports for the Soviet-
Italian Fiat auto plant.
" We are negotiating a Civil Air Agreement with the
Soviet Union
r
And with this announcement the President of the United States
included the comment: "This is good business and this will help us
" If dealing with the enemy -- who are dealing in nothing but
death to Americans in Viet Nam -- is good business, then truth and
honor have indeed been perverted beyond recall by this Administration
In 1952, the Eisenhower Administration ended the Korean War and
kept the peace without surrender. That Administration's policy:
insistence that Communists toe the line in deeds and performance,
refusal to accept Communist words and promises.
Until the Communist world convinces us by act, not by word, that
it not only seeks peace but will so act as to preserve peace among
men, we will not be a party to any deal, any agreement, any arrange-
ment, any treaty with Communists anywhere in the world. Until we ---
and our allies -- commit ourselves without qualification to such a
policy of strength we can expect only more Koreas, more Viet Nams and
an ever-widening spread of Communist subversion, deceit and death-
dealing around the globe.
Therefore, Our Question-of-the-Week:
Mr. President: At home and abroad, what now -- what next?
REPUBLICAN PROPOSALS AND PROGRAMS
A Chronology of Constructive Recommendations
Published:
June 1965
United States Foreign Policy in Viet Nam
August 1965
The Balance of Payments
September 1965
Equality in America: a Promise Unfulfilled
December 1965
Viet Nam Policy Statement
December 1965
Toward a Stronger Federal System
December 1965
Toward Fair Elections in America
March 7, 1966
(Economic) Opportunity Crusade Act of 1966
March 1966
The Case for Revenue Sharing
March 1966
Latin America - United States: Progress
or Failure?
March 196€
The Human Investment - Job Opportunities
March 1966
The Rising Costs of Living
June 1966
The United Nations
June 1966
Effective Water Management
June 1966
The Challenge of the Modern Metropolis
June 1966
Federal, State, and Local Responsibilities
for Problems of Education
June 1966
Transportation in Modern America
June 1966
Housing and Urban Development
June 1966
The Alleviation of Poverty
June 1966
Jobs and People - Job Opportunities
June 1966
The Needs of the Aging
(Note: each of the above was published by the Republican
Coordinating Committee with the exception of the Economic
Opportunity Crusade Act of 1966, which originated with eight
Republican members of the House Education and Labor Committee.)
NEWS
CONGRESSMAN
GERALD R. FORD
HOUSE REPUBLICAN LEADER
RELEASE
STATEMENT BY HOUSE MINORITY LEADER GERALD R. FORD, R-MICHIGAN
FOR RELEASE ON RECEIPT
OCTOBER 21, 1966
It is no comfort that the emphasis in continually rising
consumer costs shifted from food to clothing in September. The
only conclusion that can be drawn from the September cost-of-living
figures is that more inflation is in prospect.
The Johnson Administration has promised to cut federal
spending as a weapon against inflation. But promises are meaningless
unless translated into action. I have yet to see any evidence of
government spending cuts since President Johnson announced his in-
tentions last month. Meantime the Democrats in the Congress have
further inflated the President's budget with increased federal ex-
penditures.
The cost-of-living figures for September indicate a consumer
price rise for the entire year of roughly 4 per cent or more. That
is twice the increase for 1965 and a shocking blow for all Americans,
particularly those on fixed incomes. We are supposedly engaged in a
war on poverty. Inflation is truly a war against the poor.
###
BERRAD FORD LIBRARY