Ask the Scholar

Document scope · 1 page
doc
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory. For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.

Scholar Source Context

Document identity
localId
4525681
label
Lincoln Day Speeches, Wabash, IN, February 12, 1951 and Frankfort, February 28, 1951 (same speech)
core
doc
dtoType
document
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
4525681
contentType
document
title
Lincoln Day Speeches, Wabash, IN, February 12, 1951 and Frankfort, February 28, 1951 (same speech)
collections
Gerald R. Ford Congressional Papers
Speeches
subjects
Republican National Committee (U.S.)
Federal budget
National security
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
4525681
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1951-02-28
month
2
year
1951
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1951-02-01
month
2
year
1951
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
68e15263f5af7e01
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box D14, folder "Lincoln Day Speeches, Wabash, IN, February 12, 1951 and Frankfort, February 28, 1951 (same speech)" 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 The Council donated to the United States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.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. Excerpts from Day Speeches Walmoh, Ind, - 2/12/51 Frankfort " - 2/13/51 & ord REPUBLICAN RESPONSIBILITY speeches The Republican Party's responsibility is as great today as it was when it saved the Union under the leadership of Abraham Lincoln. As Republicans, we want to win the election of 1952. It is possible that we could win the election by simply pointing up the failures of the present Administration. Particularly in the field of foreign policy, this Administration during the past five years has been responsible for the adoption of a program which has led the nation virtually to the brink of disaster. As a result, there has never been a time in our history when the people generally lacked confidence in an administration as at present. But while criticism of the present Administration, and particularly criticism of its foreign policy, might bring victory for the Republican Party, in 1952, criticism alone is not good enough for the Party, and it is not good enough for the nation. The survival of the nation, our way of life, and our very lives, is at stake. The nation needs leadership, and the people are looking for leadership. The Democratic Party is completely unable to furnish the leadership the nation needs and, therefore, it is the responsibility and the opportunity of the Republican Party to step into the breach and lead the forces of freedom and democracy to victory. FORD is LIBRARY GERALD Digitized from Box D14 of The Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech File at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library In 1860, Lincoln recognized that a Nation cannot be half slave and half free. Today, we must recognize that our civilization cannot exist half slave and half free. When freedom is lost anyplace in the world, we run the risk of losing it here in the United States. The Republican Party, therefore, again has as great a mission as it had almost a hundred years ago. That mission is to save not only the nation, but to provide hope for peoples all over the world who are free and want to remain free or who are enslaved and want to become free. As the Republican Party recognizes this issue and meets it, we not only will win a great election victory in 1952, but we will deserve to win that victory and we will be realizing the great destiny which Lincoln and the founders of the Party envisioned so many years ago. Constructive Criticism a Duty What course of action should the Republican Party follow during this period of crisis? There are some who say that we must have unity at all costs and that no criticism whatever of the policies of the Administration should be tolerated. But too much emphasis has been placed upon the necessity of re- quiring unity behind the Administration's leadership and its policy, and too little emphasis upon the desirability of developing new leadership and new policy which will command the unity and the support of a great majority of the people. We need unity, but we can best obtain it by developing a policy in the traditional American manner of constructive criticism and debate. Today the American people are angry, confused and bewildered because of the failure of our past policy. People have lost confidence in the adminis- tration because of those failures. The country wants unity, but it does not FORD i LIBRARY GERALD want unity on a policy which has led to disaster or on the perpetuation and power of those who made that policy and who cannot be expected to make good on any other. In other words, the country does not want unity on defeat, or unity on disaster. Disunity hurts our cause without question but unity on a policy which was wrong could bring even greater disaster. As Republicans, we should support the Administration's policy, when we conclude that it is a policy which is in the best interests of the American people. But we have a solemn duty to criticize that policy wherever we think it is wrong and to do what we can to develop a new policy which will be more effective to meet the problems which we face. We must never let the American people forget the mistakes that have been made in the past in the field of foreign policy, because only by recognizing those mistakes will we avoid making the same mistakes in the future. What kind of a policy can we as Republicans and Americans support? Our policy must be one which is geared to meet the tactics and the strategy of the enemy. For that reason it is essential that we analyze the Communist strategy and meet it on all fronts. Unless we do, we may find that we will be victorious in one phase of the struggle and defeated in another. For our policy to be successful, it is essential that we develop programs which will be effective in the following fields: 1. We must be militarily strong. 2. We must keep the economy of the United States strong. 3. We must have an effective program of internal security. 4. We must win the ideological struggle which is going on all over the world. FORD j LIBRARY GERALD Unless we develop effective programs in all these fields, we shall ultimately fail. The Communists realize this. They have said over and over again that they may not have to defeat the United States and the Capitalist countries in a war-that they may be able to destroy us by subversion from within-that they may be able to win our people to the Communist side in the ideological battle. Importance of Military Strength Military strength is important because we are faced by the most realistic men in the world. As long as the men in Moscow are convinced that because of the military strength on our side as compared with the strength on their side, if they begin a war they might lose it, they will not begin one. But once they are convinced because of their strength as against our weakness, that if they begin a war they might win, war will be inevitable. Therefore, if we want peace, it is essential that we remain stronger militarily than the Communists. In recognizing the necessity for military strength, we must also recog- nize that the United States cannot do the job alone. We do not have the men nor the resources to wage a successful struggle against all the rest of the people of the world. That is why it is essential for us to develop as many allies as we can, both in Europe and in Asia. If Europe were to fall under Soviet domination, it might not mean that we would be faced with defeat in war during our time. But in the end, such defeat would be inevitable. The odds in resources and in manpower would be weighted too heavily on the other side. FORD i LIBRARY GERALD The same conclusion must be reached when we look at the situation in Asia. If all of Asia comes under Communist domination, the Soviet Union would have the resources and the manpower which can eventually be developed into military strength which we could not possibly match. On the other hand, while we realize that it would be in our self-interest to deny Europe to the Communists, we must also recognize that the United States cannot do the job alone. Any future military aid to Europe must be conditioned on the hard, realistic fact that the primary responsibility for furnishing the ground troops for the defense of Europe must come from Europe itself. This position is one which has solid support both in Congress and the country. Sound Economy Necessary In the great debate on foreign policy which is going on in the nation today, the major emphasis, and properly so, has been placed upon the necessity for rebuilding our military strength at home and abroad. We have failed to give adequate consideration, however, to the fact that the economic and ideological phases of the present world conflict can be just as decisive in the long run as military strength. The Communists have long recognized this fact and have built their whole strategy around it. Marx, Lenin and Stalin have said over and over again that they may not have to defeat the capitalist nations in a military conflict; that on the contrary they may be able to force us to spend our way into bankruptcy in our efforts to defend ourselves from our enemies abroad. That is why it becomes necessary as we prepare ourselves militarily to defend the nation against enemies abroad, that we declare war on waste and FORD & LIBRARY GERALD inefficiency in our government at home. Otherwise, we will run the risk of winning the war militarily and losing it economically. In his State of the Union message, the President declared that he favored reducing non-essential government expenditures, but his 71 billion dollar bud- get on the contrary indicates that as far as he is concerned, it will be "politics and government as usual" at a time when our soldiers abroad and our people at home are asked to make sacrifices for the national security. A study of the budget indicates no cut whatever in the overall mumber of Federal employees in the non-military agencies. On the contrary, socialized medicine, aid to education and the Brannan Farm Plan, have been sneaked into the budget on the pretense that such programs "are essential to the war effort." It is now admitted that taxes cannot be, or will not be raised sufficiently to balance the budget. Price control admittedly will only delay the day when the inflationary forces will make themselves felt in reducing the value of the dollar. A threatening danger signal is the fact that during the past two months the public has cashed in government bonds worth millions of dollars more than those purchased during the same period. This is easily understandable when we consider what happened during the last war. Even with price controls, the value of the dollar was cut almost in half during the war period. The only effective answer is for the Congress to make some real cuts in the President's budget. Since it is estimated that higher taxes and prices will reduce the standard of living of the people by 25%, it would seem there is no good reason why the non-military agencies should not be asked to reduce their budgets by a similar amount. Now is the time also for both the Congress and the Administration to make a really honest effort to put into effect the Hoover Commission recommendations for economy in the Federal Government. FORD i LIBRARY GERALD Before the current emergency developed, the Hoover recommendations were receiving strong public support because of the desire to reduce taxes. They should receive even stronger support now because of our recognition of the unpleasant fact that unless we do cut unessential spending, we shall run the risk of losing the battle for our way of life itself. Internal Security It does not make sense to spend billions of dollars and thousands of lives fighting Communism abroad and not to develop an effective program of dealing with the Communist Fifth Column in the United States. It is essential that the people have confidence in the loyalty and integrity of their govern- ment officials during this critical period. Whatever the cause and whether justified or not, a substantial number of people do not have that confidence today. There are some who claim that this lack of confidence has been created solely by alleged unfounded charges made by Senator McCarthy. On the other hand, the Administration itself has contributed to the lack of confidence by its refusal and failure to initiate a full-fledged non-partisan investigation of the charges which have been made. The records in the Hiss, Remington and Amerasia cases could not be expected to create any degree of public confidence that the Administration is doing everything it can to remove disloyal people from the payroll, regardless of political consequences. The conviction of William Remington in Federal Court yesterday points up the necessity for a complete overhauling of the Federal loyalty program. Remington, it must be remembered, was cleared by the top loyalty review board after a Senatorial Investigating Committee recommended his discharge. He had a key position as a $10,000 a year executive in the Commerce Department FORD & LIBRARY GERALD clearing exports to iron curtain countries, yet the record shows that in his Civil Service file at the time he was employed was testimony which raised a grave doubt as to whether he was a good security risk. We must not forget that Remington's prosecution was not initiated by the Loyalty Board nor by the Justice Department, but by the Committee on Un-American Activities. Had it not been for the Committee on Un-American Activities, Remington would still be a top Commerce Department employee. This case points up the necessity for a thorough non-partisan investi- gation of the whole loyalty program. It is to be hoped that the Nimitz Commission will conduct such an investigation. In any such investigation, the guiding principle should be that in determining eligibility for Federal employment, any doubts as to whether the individual would be a security risk should be resolved in favor of the Government rather than in favor of the individual. In other words, the test in all instances should not be whether the individual involved might be personally loyal, but whether his background is such that he might constitute a security risk in the position to which he is assigned. Ideological Offensive Needed The greatest failure of our policy today is in the ideological field. Here where we should be the strongest, the Communists with an inferior product to sell, have done a far better job selling it. We should recognize that one of the greatest assets on our side in the present struggle are the millions of people behind the iron curtain who are not Communists. Recent reports have indicated that resistance groups are FORD & LIBRARY GERALD growing in strength in the iron curtain countries, and that with additional encouragement from abroad, they would be able to immobilize several divisions of Communist troops because of the threat they would present to the Communists governments. We should quit talking about containment and defense and go on the offen- sive in the ideological conflict. We must never write off the people behind the iron curtain and must give them hope and encouragement in their struggle to become free. An indication of our failure in the ideological field becomes apparent when we study the backgrounds of those who have become Communists in the United States. If men like Hiss and Remington from good families, with top- paying government jobs and the best educational backgrounds become Communists, what can we expect abroad? What is needed is a campaign of truth to combat the falsehoods of the opposition on a scale far greater than any we have ever contemplated before. The Voice of America organization is not competent to handle this assignment. The whole program should be taken out of the State Department and set up as a separate agency similar to the ECA. It must be staffed with the best personnel available. The amount of funds appropriated for this purpose should be at least equal to that appropriated by the Communists rather than less which is the case at present. Our task is to prove to people everywhere on both sides of the iron curtain that the hope of the world today does not lie in turning toward dictatorship of any type but that it lies in the development of a strong, free and intelligent democracy. GERALD FORD LIBRARY Cocurpts from address by Congressimen Herel And Jr. REPUBLICAN RESPONSIBILITY The Republican Party's responsibility is as great today as it vas when it saved the Union under the leadership of Abraham Lincoln. As Republicans, we want to win the election of 1952. It is possible that we could win the election by simply pointing up the failures of the present Administration. Particularly in the field of foreign policy, this Administration during the past five years has been responsible for the adoption of a program which has led the nation virtually to the brink of disaster. As a result, there has never been a time in our history when the people generally lacked confidence in an administration as at present. But while eriticism of the present Administration, and particularly criticism of its foreign policy, might bring victory for the Republican Party, in 1952, criticism alone is not good enough for the Party, and it is not good enough for the nation. The survival of the nation, our way of life, and our very lives, is at stake. The nation needs leadership, and the people are looking for leadership. The Democratic Party is completely unable to furnish the leadership the nation needs and, therefore, it is the responsibility and the opportunity of the Republican Party to step into the breach and lead the forces of freedom and democracy to victory. СОБЛ FORD i LIBRARY GERALD In 1860, Lincoln recomised that Nation cannot be half slave and half free. Today, we must recognize that our civilization cannot exist half slave and half free. When freedom is lost anyplace in the world, we run the risk of losing it here in the United States. The Republican Party, therefore, again has as great a mission as it had almost a hundred years ago. That mission is to save not only the nation, but to provide hope for peoples all over the world who are free and want to remain free or who are enslaved and want to become free. As the Republican Party recognizes this issue and meets it. we not only will win a great election victory in 1952, but we will deserve to win that victory and we will be realizing the great destiny which Lincoln and the founders of the Party envisioned so 10 many years ago. Constructive Criticism a Duty What course of action should the Republican Party follow during this period of crisis? There are some who say that ve must have unity at all costs and that no criticism whatever of the policies of the Administration should be tolerated. But too much emphasis has been placed upon the necessity of requir- ing unity behind the Administration's leadership and its policy, and too little emphasis upon the desirability of developing new leadership and new policy which will command the unity and the support of & great majority of the people. We need unity, but we can best obtain it by developing a policy in the tradi- tional American manner of constructive criticism and debate. Today the American people are angry, confused and bewildered because of the failure of our past policy. People have lost confidence in the Adminis- tration because of those failures. The country wants unity, but it does not GERALD R. want unity on a policy which has led to disaster or on the perpetuation and power of those who made that policy and who cannot be expected to make good on any other. In other words, the country does not want unity on defeat, or unity on disaster. Disunity hurts our cause without question but unity on a policy which was wrong could bring even greater disaster. As Republicans, we should support the Administration's pelicy, when we cenclude that it is a policy which is in the best interests of the American people. But we have a solemn duty to criticise that policy wherever we think it is wrong and to do what we can to develop a new policy which will be more effective to meet the problems which we face. We must never let the American people forget the mistakes that have been made in the past in the field of foreign pelicy, because only by recognising those mistakes will we avoid making the same mistakes in the future. What kind of a pelicy can we as Republicans and Americans support? Our policy must be one which is geared to meet the tasties and the strategy of the enemy. For that reason it is essential that we analyse the Communist strategy and meet it on all fronts. Unless we do, we may find that we will be vistorious in one phase of the struggle and defeated in another. For our policy to be successful, it is essential that we develop programs which will be effective in the following fields: 1. We must be militarily strong. 2. We must keep the economy of the United States strong. 3. We must have an effective program of internal security. 4. We must win the ideological struggle which is going on all over the world. СОБЛ FORD is LIBRARY 938870 Unless we develop effective programs in all these fields, we shall ultimately fail. The Communists realise this. They have said over and over again that they may not have to defeat the United States and the Capitalist countries in a war-that they may be able to destroy us by subversion from within-that they may be able to win our people to the Communist side in the ideological battle. Importance of Military Strength Military strength is important because we are faced by the most realistie men in the world. As long as the men in Meseow are convinced that because of the military strength on our side as compared with the strength on their side, if they begin a war they might lose it, they will not begin one. But once they are convinced because of their strength as against our weakness, that if they begin a war they might win, var will be inevitable. Therefore, if we want peace, it is essential that we remain stronger militarily than the Communists. In recognising the necessity for military strength, we must also recog- nise that the United States cannot do the job alone. We do not have the men nor the resources to wage a successful struggle against all the rest of the people of the world. That is why it is essential for us to develop as many allies as we can, both in Europe and in Asia. If Europe were to fall under Soviet domination, it might not mean that we would be faced with defeat in war during our time. But in the end, such defeat would be inevitable. The odde in resources and in manpover would be weighted too heavily on the other side. СОБЛ FORD & LIBRARY QERALD The same conclusion must be reached when we look at the situation in Asia. If all of Asia comes under Communist domination, the Soviet Union would have the resources and the manpower which can eventually be developed into military strength which we could not possibly match. On the other hand, while we realise that it would be in our self-interest to deny Europe to the Communists, we must also recognise that the United States cannot do the job alone. Any future military aid to Europe must be conditioned on the hard, realistic fact that the primary responsibility for furnishing the ground treops for the defense of Europe must come from Europe itself. This position is one which has solid support both in Congress and the country. Sound Economy Necessary In the great debate on foreign policy which is going on in the nation today, the major emphasis, and properly so, has been placed upon the necessity for rebuilding our military strength at home and abroad. We have failed to give adequate consideration, however, to the fact that the economic and ideological phases of the present world conflict can be just as decisive in the long run as military strength. The Communists have long recognised this fact and have built their whole strategy around it. Marx, Lenin and Stalin have said over and over again that they may not have to defeat the capitalist nations in a military confliet; that on the contrary they may be able to force us to spend our way into bankruptcy in our efforts to defend ourselves from our enemies abroad. That is why it becomes necessary as we prepare ourselves militarily to defend the nation against enemies abread, that we declare war on waste and СОБЛ FORD & LIBRARY GERALD inefficiency in our government at home. Otherwise, we will run the risk of winning the war militarily and losing it economically. In his State of the Union message, the President declared that he favored reducing non-essential government expenditures, but his 71 billion dollar bud- get on the contrary indicates that as far as he is concerned, it will be "polities and goverment as usual" at a time when our soldiers abroad and our people at home are asked to make sacrifices for the national security. A study of the budget indicates no out whatever in the overall number of Federal employees in the non-military agencies. On the contrary, socialized medicine, aid to education and the Brannan Farm Plan, have been sneaked into the budget on the pretense that such programs "are essential to the war effort." It is now admitted that taxes cannot be, or will not be raised sufficiently to balance the budget. Price control admittedly will only delay the day when the inflationary forces will make themselves felt in reducing the value of the dollar. A threatening danger signal is the fact that during the past two months the public has cashed in government bonds worth millions of dollars more than those purchased during the same period. This is easily understandable when we consider what happened during the last war. Even with price controls, the value of the dollar was out almost in half during the war period. The only effective answer is for the Congress to make some real cuts in the President's budget. Since it is estimated that higher taxes and prices will reduce the standard of living of the people by 25%, it would seem there is no good reason why the non-military agencies should not be asked to reduce their budgets by a similar amount. Now is the time also for both the Congress and the Administration to make a really honest effort to put into effect the Hoover Commission recommendations for economy in the Federal Government. FORD i LIBRAR SERALD Before the current emergency developed, the Hoover recomendations were receiving strong public support because of the desire to reduce taxes. They should receive even stronger support now because of our recognition of the unpleasant fact that unless we do cut unessential spending, we shall run the risk of losing the battle for our way of life itself. Internal Security It does not make sense to spend billions of dollars and thousands of lives fighting Communism abroad and not to develop an effective program of dealing with the Communist Fifth Column in the United States. It is essential that the people have confidence in the loyalty and integrity of their govern- ment officials during this critical period. Whatever the cause and whether justified or not, a substantial mmber of people do not have that confidence today. There are some who claim that this lack of confidence has been created solely by alleged unfounded charges made by Senator McCarthy. On the other hand, the Administration itself has contributed to the lack of confidence by its refusal and failure to initiate a full-fledged non-partisan investigation of the charges which have been made. The records in the Hiss, Remington and Amerasia cases could not be expected to create any degree of public confidence that the Administration is doing everything it can to remove disloyal people from the payroll, regardless of political consequences. the day The conviction of William Remington in Federal Court yesterday points up the necessity for a complete overhauling of the Federal loyalty program. Remington, it must be remembered, vas cleared by the top leyalty review board after a Senatorial Investigating Committee recomiended his discharge. He had a key position as a $10,000 a year executive in the Commetice Department FORD i LIBRARY SERALD clearing exports to iron curtain countries, yet the record shows that in his Civil Service file at the time he was employed was testimony which raised a grave doubt as to whether he vas a good security risk. We must not forget that Renington's prosecution vas not initiated by the Loyalty Board nor by the Justice Department, but by the Committee on Un-American Activities. Had it not been for the Committee on Un-American Activities, Remington would still be a top Commerce Department employee. This case points up the necessity for a thorough non-partisan investi- gation of the whole loyalty program. It is to be hoped that the Nimits Commission will conduct such an investigation. In any such investigation, the guiding principle should be that in determining eligibility for Federal employment, any doubts as to whether the individual would be a security risk should be resolved in favor of the Government rather than in favor of the individual. In other words, the test in all instances should not be whether the individual involved might be personally loyal, but whether his background is such that he might constitute a security risk in the position to which he is assigned. Ideological Offensive Needed The greatest failure of our policy today is in the ideological field. Here where we should be the strongest, the Communists with an inferior product to sell, have done & far better job selling it. We should recognise that one of the greatest assets on our side in the present struggle are the millions of people behind the iron curtain who are not Communists. Recent reports have indicated that resistance groups are СОБЛ FORD i LIBRARY GERALD growing in strength in the iron curtain countries, and that with additional encouragement from abroad, they would be able to immobilise several divisions of Communist troops because of the threat they would present to the Communists governments. We should quit talking about containment and defense and go on the offen- sive in the ideological conflict. We must never write off the people behind the iron ourtain and must give them hope and ensouragement in their struggle to become free. An indication of our failure in the ideological field becomes apparent when we study the backgrounds of those who have become Communists in the United States. If men like Hiss and Remington from good families, with top- paying government jobs and the best educational backgrounds become Communists, what can we expect abroad? What is needed is a campaign of truth to combat the falsehoods of the opposition on a scale far greater than any we have ever contemplated before. The Voice of America organisation is not competent to handle this assignment. The whole program should be taken out of the State Department and set up as a separate agency similar to the ECA. It must be staffed with the best personnel available. The amount of funds apprepriated for this purpose should be at least equal to that appropriated by the Communists rather than less which is the case at present. Our task is to prove to people everywhere on both sides of the iron curtain that the hope of the world today does not lie in turning toward distatorship of any type but that it lies in the development of a strong, free and intelligent democracy. СОБЛ FORD i LIBRARY GERALD