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
4526029
label
Bowling Green University, Bowling Green, OH, May 10, 1967
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
4526029
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Bowling Green University, Bowling Green, OH, May 10, 1967
citationUrl
collections
Gerald R. Ford Congressional Papers
Speeches
subjects
Republican National Committee (U.S.)
Congressional elections
Economics
Inflation (Finance)
Presidential campaigns
Vietnam War, 1961-1975
iiifBase
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
4526029
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1967-05-31
month
5
year
1967
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1967-05-01
month
5
year
1967
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
url
mediaId
fce7672fd8799626
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box D22, folder "Bowling Green University, Bowling
Green, OH, May 10, 1967" 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States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.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 D22 of The Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech File at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
SPEECH AT BOWLING GREEN UNIVERSITY, BOWLING GREEN, OHIO
8 P.M.--MAY 10, 1967
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. THE TASK YOU HAVE GIVEN ME IS TO
LOOK AT THE REPUBLICAN PARTY AND INTO MY CRYSTAL BALL AND GIVE
YOU A READING ON REPUBLICAN PROSPECTS FOR 1968.
I START FROM WHAT I CONSIDER TO BE AN UNDEBATABLE
& willwork
PREMISE--REPUBLICANS WANT TO WIN IN 1968. LET US GO ON FROM
THERE.
A CALIFORNIA WOMAN WHO EDITS A REPUBLICAN NEWSLETTER
RECENTLY WROTE TO ME, SAYING SHE WANTED ME TO COMPLETE IN AS
FEW WORDS AS POSSIBLE A SENTENCE THAT BEGAN, "THE MISSION OF
THE MINORITY PARTY IS
"
I PROMPTLY WROTE BACK: "THE MISSION OF THE MINORITY PARTY
IS TO BECOME THE MAJORITY."
accomplish objective
NOW HOW DO WE IN THE MINORITY HOPE TO DO THAT?
FORD i LIBRARY GERALD
all indications clearly show-
-2-
THINK WE ARE ON OUR WAY. WE ARE ON THE MOVE. I
BELIEVE THERE IS A GOOD CHANCE A REPUBLICAN WILL BE ELECTED
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES IN 1968 AND THAT THE REPUBLICAN
PARTY WILL TAKE CONTROL OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND
MAKE SUBSTANTIAL GAINS IN THE SENATE.
WHY DO I BELIEVE THIS? sincerely 1 BELIEVE IT/BECAUSE OF WIDE-
SPREAD VOTER DISSATISFACTION WITH THE PRESENT ADMINISTRATION
In depth suchss
AS REFLECTED IN THE OUTCOME OF THE 1966 ELECTIONS. THAT DIS-
SATISFACTION IS CONTINUING AND GROWING. I ALSO BELIEVE IT
BECAUSE THE REPUBLICAN PARTY HAS BECOME A PARTY OF IDEAS, A
PARTY OF YOUNG PEOPLE, A PARTY WITH STRONG NEW LEADERSHIP, A
PROBLEM-SOLVING PARTY, A PARTY OF THE FUTURE.
LET ME EMPHASIZE AT THE OUTSET THAT NO INCUMBENT PRESIDENT
HAS
IS EASY TO BEAT. HISTORYAPROVED THAT.
REPUBLICANS WILL HAVE TO PICK "THE RIGHT MAN" AS THEIR
17071 FORD LIBRARY
South Bend
-3-
CANDIDATE IN 68.1 THE PARTY WILL HAVE TO UNITE BEHIND HIM.
THE CANDIDATE WILL HAVE TO WAGE A SKILLFUL, WELL-ORGANIZED
CAMPAIGN AND KEEP MISTAKES AT A MINIMUM. HE WILL HAVE TO
a sound
OFFER AN APPEALING DOMESTIC PROGRAM AND A VIABLE POSITION ON
VIETNAM. AND, ASSUMING THAT GEORGE WALLACE IS A THIRD-PARTY
CANDIDATE--AND I BELIEVE HE WILL BE-THE REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE
WILL HAVE TO OVERCOME CERTAIN VOTER DEFECTIONS TO THE WALLACE
CAMP. On the other side 2 the coin - my D emocrat friends will have
some problems with splenter pasty candidates - Wallace on others
HAVING SKETCHED THIS "TALL ORDER." I STILL FEEL ENCOURAGED.
I FEEL ENCOURAGED BECAUSE THERE IS A NEW SPIRIT PULSING
THROUGH THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. THERE IS NEW YOUNG BLOOD IN THE
REPUBLICAN PARTY AND LT IS RUSHING TO THE SURFACE MUCH FASTER
Review the wrichage after The 1964 debacle & compare our cituation now
THAN MANY HAD EXPECTED., AND THE REPUBLICAN PARTY HAS BEEN
BUILDING--IN TERMS OF ORGANIZATION, PROGRAM AND IDEAS.
MUCH OF THIS NEW SPIRIT, THIS NEW EXCITEMENT, IS EVIDENT
-4-
IN THE CONGRESS AND, MORE SPECIFICALLY, IN THE HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES.
IN THE HOUSE AND IN THE SENATE, REPUBLICANS HAVE SET IN
MOTION A SWIFT FLOW OF PROPOSALS. THIS ACTIVITY STANDS IN
SHARP CONTRAST TO THE INACTION AND INERTIA OF THE MAJORITY
as Republicans
PARTY. WE, WOULD LIMIT THE FEDERAL ROLE AND EXPAND THAT OF THE
PRIVATE SECTOR AND THE STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS IN A FRESH
ASSAULT ON PROBLEMS THAT HAVE DEFIED ATTACKS BY GOVERNMENT
ALONE.
ROUGHLY HALF OF ALL AMERICANS TODAY ARE UNDER 25 YEARS
OF AGE. WE ARE WITNESSING WHAT MIGHT BE CALLED A "YOUTHQUAKE."
MOST YOUNG AMERICANS DO NOT FEEL A STRONG ALLEGIANCE TO ANY
POLITICAL PARTY. THEY ARE INTERESTED IN PROBLEM-SOLVING AND
IN PROGRAMS THAT ACTUALLY WORK.
GERALD LIBRARY
I THINK THE NEW REPUBLICAN PARTY HAS MUCH TO OFFER YOUNG
-5-
AMERICANS TODAY. THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS WHERE THE ACTION IS.
Athe 1930s
ITS IDEAS ARE NOT ROOTED IN THE BIG DEPRESSION--A TIME THAT
A
IS ALIEN TO THE THOUGHTS AND FEELINGS OF TODAY'S YOUTH.
UNLIKE THE PRESENT MAJORITY PARTY, THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS
EAGERLY LOOKING FOR NEW IDEAS AND NEW SOLUTIONS. WE ARE PRO-
POSING SENSIBLE SOLUTIONS FOR THE SEVENTIES. WE DO NOT RELY
ON THE TIRED THEORIES OF THE THIRTIES. THE OTHER PARTY SEEMS
BOUND BY THEM.
THE 1968 REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE WILL NEED ISSUES. HE WILL
FIND THEM NOT ONLY IN THE OTHER PARTY'S BLUNDERS AND DIVISIVE-
NESS BUT IN THE BANK OF NEW IDEAS NOW BEING BUILT UP BY
REPUBLICAN ACTIVISTS IN THE CONGRESS.
YOU HAVE READ OF MANY OF THESE IDEAS--SHARING OF FEDERAL
TAX REVENUE WITH THE CITIES AND STATES TO CUT RED TAPE AND
1817
PROMOTE A LARGER LOCAL ROLE IN PROBLEM-SOLVING, ESTABLISHMENT
-6-
THROUGH THE PERCY-WIDNALL BILL OF A NATIONAL HOME OWNERSHIP
FOUNDATION WHICH WOULD RAISE MORTGAGE FUNDS AND HELP SLUM
DWELLERS BECOME PROUD HOME OWNERS, AN ATTACK ON HARD-CORE
UNEMPLOYMENT AND POVERTY THROUGH TAX CREDITS ENCOURAGING
INDUSTRY TO TRAIN THE UNSKILLED AND MAKE THEM PRODUCTIVE
- we call it the Human Investment act-
CITIZENS, A MOVEMENT TO RAISE A MAJORITY OF AMERICANS TO THE
COLLEGE LEVEL THROUGH TAX CREDITS FOR A PORTION OF COLLEGE
EXPENSES, AN OPPORTUNITY CRUSADE ENLISTING PRIVATE ENTERPRISE
IN A REVAMPED WAR ON POVERTY.
THIS IS NOT RHETORIC. THIS IS A PROGRAM. REPUBLICANS IN
CONGRESS ARE MAKING A RECORD FOR THEIR PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE
OF 1968 TO RUN ON.
HOUSE REPUBLICANS ALSO ARE MAKING A RECORD FOR REPUBLICAN
TAKE OVER THE HOUSE--AND I THINK THERE S A GOOD CHANCE WE'LL
CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATES TO RUN ON. WE NEED 31 MORE SEATS DIBRARY
MAKE IT. WE HAVE A GOOD CHANCE FOR MANY REASONS. ONE OF
-7-
THESE IS WHAT MIGHT BE CALLED MY SOUTHERN STRATEGY - to put it
another way - The termination on extenction 1 what was called Jon so many years the Republican/Anth
THE STRATEGY IS TO DRIVE SOUTHERN DEMOCRATS IN THE HOUSED
national LI imocratic
coldtion
INTO THE ARMS OF THE ADMINISTRATION--WHERE THEY BELONG--ON
VOTES THAT WILL HURT THEM politically IN THEIR HOME CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS
THIS STRATEGY RUNS EXACTLY COUNTER TO THE OLD PATTERN OF
A SOUTHERN DEMOCRAT-REPUBLICAN COALITION THAT OFTEN PREVAILED
Democratic
OVER, ADMINISTRATION FORCES IN THE HOUSE IN YEARS PAST.
for House Requblicans
BUT I THINK IT IS FAR BETTER TO LOSE A FEW LEGISLATIVE
BATTLES AND WIN THE NEXT ELECTION. BESIDES, IN FOLLOWING MY
SOUTHERN STRATEGY WE REPUBLICANS IN THE HOUSE ARE STAKING OUT
POSITIONS IN WHICH WE BELIEVE RESPONSIBLE, CONSTRUCTIVE
POSITIONS.
although outmerbered 258/187 in House of 64t,36
THERE WILL BE TIMES WHEN REPUBLICANS WILL WIN IN THE 90TH
whe House
CONGRESS. WE WON'T WIN AS MANY LEGISLATIVE FIGHTS AS WE COULD
IF WE RESORTED TO THE OLD COALITION TACTICS, BUT IT'S THE BIG
-8-
PRIZE THAT
THE BIG PRIZE 1s CONTROL OF AT LEAST ONE HOUSE OF CONGRESS
COUNTS is a truly national AND THAT'S Republican WHAT Party WE. with elected AFTER Congressman in way state,
AND CONTROL OF THE WHITE HOUSE. WE WANT THAT PRIZE NOT BECAUSE
WE RELISH POWER FOR THE SAKE OF POWER BUT BECAUSE WE SINCERELY
our leadership
BELIEVE THAT OUR COURSE, OUR PROGRAM IS A BETTER WAY THAN LBJ.
IT IS ONLY SOME 14 MONTHS BEFORE THE TWO MAJOR POLITICAL
PARTIES MEET IN CONVENTION TO NAME THEIR PRESIDENTIAL CANDI -
DATES. ALREADY THE ISSUES OF THE 1968 CAMPAIGN ARE TAKING
SHAPE. IT WILL BE AN HISTORIC CAMPAIGN--A CAMPAIGN THAT WILL
SHAPE THE DESTINY OF AMERICA FAR INTO THE FUTURE.
IN ALL RECENT-YEAR NATIONAL ELECTIONS THERE HAVE BEEN TWO
MAJOR ISSUES--PEACE AND PROSPERITY.
NEXT YEAR WE MAY FIND OURSELVES WITH STILL ANOTHER ISSUE--
ONE OF GREAT IMPORTANCE IN THE 1966 ELECTIONS.
GERALD LIBRARY
THAT ISSUE, TO PUT IT SIMPLY, IS THE CREDIBILITY GAP.
IT
-9-
HAS BEEN VARIOUSLY DEFINED AS A CRISIS OF CONFIDENCE--THE
PEOPLE'S LACK OF TRUST IN THE PRESENT ADMINISTRATION--AND THE
GULF THAT SEPARATES THINKING PEOPLE FROM THE ADMINISTRATION.
AFTER BEING MISLED ON MANY OCCASIONS BY TOP ADMINISTRATION
OFFICIALS, THE ATTITUDE OF MILLIONS OF AMERICANS TOWARD THEIR
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS BECOME, "WHO AND WHAT CAN WE BELIEVE?"
REPUBLICANS DIDN'T CREATE THE CREDIBILITY GAP. NEITHER
DID THE NEWSMEN WHO ARE SO OFTEN CRITICIZED BY THE PRESIDENT
AND SOME OF HIS CABINET HEADS. IT WAS THE ADMINISTRATION
ITSELF WHICH DUG THE CREDIBILITY GAP AND HAS PROCEEDED TO MAKE
IT DEEPER AND WIDER IN A VARIETY OF WAYS.
VIETNAM GAVE RISE TO THE CREDIBILITY GAP. IT HAD ITS
BEGINNING WHEN TOP ADMINISTRATION SPOKESMEN REPEATEDLY UNDER-
ESTIMATED THE GRAVITY, SCOPE AND DURATION OF WHAT HAS BECOME
THE THIRD LARGEST FOREIGN WAR IN AMERICAN HISTORY. Some allys RALD LIBRAR
it began with the Presidents political operatory + promises made in the 1964 campaign.
-10-
THE ADMINISTRATION'S CONDUCT OF THE WAR ALSO HAS PRO-
DUCED IN THE AMERICAN PEOPLE A DEEP SENSE OF FRUSTRATION, A
CRISIS OF CONFIDENCE AT A TIME OF INTERNATIONAL CRISIS FOR
THE NATION.
ON AT LEAST THREE OCCASIONS THE ADMINISTRATION AROUSED
HOPES FOR PEACE IN THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND LEFT THEM FEELING
"LET DOWN." THOSE OCCASIONS WERE THE BOMBING PAUSE IN EARLY
1966, THE HONOLULU CONFERENCE IN FEBRUARY, 1966, AND PRESIDENT
JOHNSON'S TRIP TO MANILA, AUSTRALIA AND VIETNAM LAST FALL.
JUST BEFORE THE ELECTION.
ALL OF THIS RELATES TO THE CREDIBILITY GAP. THAT IS WHY
THE POLLS SHOW A SEEMING CONTRADICTION. A MAJORITY OF THE
AMERICAN PEOPLE APPROVE OF OUR BASIC POLICY IN VIETNAM--THEY
WANT TO THWART COMMUNIST AGRESSION IN SOUTHEAST ASIA--BUT THEY
in various ways
DISAPPROVE, OF MR. JOHNSON'S HANDLING OF THE VIETNAM SITUATION.
-11-
4 I underline MAY
A CLUE TO MR. JOHNSON'S VIETNAM TROUBLES MAY LIE, IN HIS
POLICY OF GRADUALISM, HIS POLICY OF MILITARILY UNSOUND
RESTRAINT IN FIGHTING THE WAR.
IT SEEMS CLEAR TO ME THAT THIS POLICY HAS BEEN A FAILURE
WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE TOTAL PICTURE. AND THE ADMINISTRATION
IS ADMITTING THE FAILURE OF ITS POLICY OF GRADUALISM BY DOING
NOW WHAT IT REFUSED TO DO A YEAR AGO.
OUR COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF NOW IS ORDERING OUR AIRMEN TO
BOMB TARGETS IN NORTH VIETNAM THAT heretofore HAVE BEEN STRICTLY OFF-
LIMITS. IF IT IS RIGHT TO HIT THOSE TARGETS NOW, WHY WASN'T
from a military verpoint + otherwise
IT SMARTER TO STRIKE THEM BEFORE? AGAIN, THE CREDIBILITY GAP.
OUR AIRMEN ARE GOING THROUGH MURDEROUS ANTI-AIRCRAFT
FIRE TO HIT TARGETS THEY COULD HAVE KNOCKED OUT WITH EASE IN
EARLY 1966, AND THE RESPONSIBILITY RESTS SOLELY ON THE ADMINI
STRATION.
GERALD
LIBRARY
-12-
WHEN THE NORTH VIETNAMESE SURF,ACE-TO-AIR MISSILE SITES
by the is hite Hum
WERE BEING BUILT, THEY WERE DECLARED OFF-LIMITS TO OUR FLYERS.
WHEN THE RUSSIAN-BUILT MIGS FIRST APPEARED IN VIETNAM, WE
ALLOWED THEM SANCTUARY ON THE GROUND.
NOW OUR PILOTS MUST FLY IN LOW OVER NORTH VIETNAMESE
TARGETS TO ESCAPE THE MISSILES AND THUS ARE SUBJECT TO TERRIBLE
FIRE FROM RADAR-CONTROLLED ANTI-AIRCRAFT GUNS AND EVEN SMALL
ARMS. OUR AIR LOSSES ARE APPALLINGLY HIGH, AND THE ENEMY
SEEMS ENTRENCHED.
it is neasmable 4 national to argue
I SUBMIT--WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO THOSE IN HIGHER AUTHOR-
ITY--THAT WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN DOING 12 MONTHS AGO WHAT WE ARE
DOING NOW. IF WE HAD, WE WOULD BE 12 MONTHS CLOSER TO THE
one can logically contend
BARGAINING TABLE. THE PROBLEM OF PREVAILING IN VIETNAM HAS
BEEN MADE INFINITELY GREATER BY THE DELAY.
TO THOSE WHO SAY THIS IS NOTHING BUT MONDAY MORNING
FORD LIBRARY 07643
-13-
QUARTERBACKING--AND I DON'T HAVE ANY USE FOR MONDAY MORNING
QUARTERBACKS--I WOULD POINT OUT THAT I REPEATEDLY URGED WE
DESTROY THE SAM SITES AT THE TIME THEY WERE BEING CONSTRUCTED.
I MADE THOSE REMARKS ON THE FLOOR OF THE HOUSE. THEY ARE IN
THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.
NOW WE SEE STATEMENTS BY SOUTH VIETNAMESE OFFICIALS, AS
REPORTED IN THE CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR, THAT THE PACIFI-
CATION PROGRAM IS ON THE POINT OF COLLAPSE. Weak about to have another
IF THERE IS SUBSTANCE TO THESE STATEMENTS, THEN THE
SITUATION IN VIETNAM IS EXCEEDINGLY GRAVE. FOR WE WILL NEVER
SUCCEED IN OUR MISSION IN VIETNAM--TO ESTABLISH A VIABLE
POPULAR GOVERNMENT THERE--UNLESS WE WIN THE MINDS AND THE
HEARTS OF THE SOUTHVIETNAMESE PEASANT.
Political
THE REPUBLICAN PARTY WILL NOT MAKE THE VIETNAM WAR AN
ISSUE IN 1968. BUT IT WILL BE AN ISSUE, OF COURSE.
BERALD, FORD LIBRARY
-14-
IT WILL BE AN ISSUE IN THE SENSE THAT THE AMERICAN
PEOPLE MAY WELL ASK THEMSELVES WHETHER THE REPUBLICAN CANDI -
DATE CANNOT SOMEHOW BREAK THE DEADLOCK AND END THE WAR ON AN
HONORABLE BASIS.
I CANNOT LEAVE THE VIETNAM QUESTION WITHOUT COMMENTING
THAT IT IS A COMPLETE MYTH THAT PRESIDENT EISENHOWER SOMEHOW,
SOMEWHERE, COMMITTED THE PRESENT ADMINISTRATION TO A LAND WAR
IN SOUTH VIETNAM. a 4.5. program was instrated by former President Truman
Driving 8 y years of it was an econtmic aid of melitary Examing program when the
AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, PROSPERITY ALONG WITH PEACE HAS
BEEN A KEY ISSUE IN RECENT-YEAR NATIONAL ELECTIONS. LET'S LOOK
AT THE PROSPERITY ISSUE.
THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT THE MASSIVE TAX CUTS OF 1964
AND 1965 TOUCHED OFF A BOOM. THAT WAS A GOOD ACTION, SUPPORTED
BY BOTH PARTIES. BUT THERE IS ALSO NO QUESTION IN MIND THAT
THE JOHNSON ADMINISTRATION DOOMED THE BOOM BY FAILING TO GERALD SLOW
-15-
DOWN THE ECONOMY WHEN IT BECAME OVERHEATED IN LATE 1965 AND
EARLY 1966.
THE SITUATION CALLED FOR DEEP CUTS IN DOMESTIC SPENDING
POSSIBLY COUPLED WITH AN INCOME TAX INCREASE THE ADMINI -
Certainly The uncumstarces required me or the other
STRATION REFUSED TO INITIATE EITHER COURSE AND, IN FACT
The dollar costs ofthe expanding military iffort in Unit nam were groody understand & when the hnown Incto were
in the
CONTINUED TO OVERSTIMULATE THE ECONOMY AT THE SAME TIME
Pentagen The
under hundred
THE FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD LAUNCHED ITS OWN FIGHT AGAINST sought to hide
on discount the
INFLATION AND SUCCEEDED IN PUSHING UP INTEREST RATES TO THE truth
HIGHEST LEVEL IN 40 YEARS.
THE COST OF LIVING ROSE SHARPLY, HURTING ALL AMERICANS
BUT ESPECIALLY THE AGED AND OTHERS ON FIXED INCOMES. WE SAW
THE GREATEST PRICE ADVANCE FOR ANY 12-MONTH PERIOD EXCEPT AT
THE OUTSET OF THE KOREAN WAR.
THE EFFECTS OF THE INFLATIONARY SURGE OF 1966 ARE STILL
WITH US IN THE FORM OF HIGH PRICES. AT THE SAME TIME, THE
LIBRARY
-16-
3.3 PER CENT INCREASE IN THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX FOR 1966
HAS LAID THE FOUNDATION FOR BIG WAGE INCREASES IN 1967 AS
WORKERS IN ALL INDUSTRIE ligitimately STRIVE TO CATCH UP. THIS IN TURN
THREATENS A NEW INFLATIONARY SPIRAL-AS INCREASED PRODUCTION
COSTS PUT NEW PRESSURE BEHIND EXISTING PRICE LEVELS.
biglur uage demands
Today THERE IS SAG AND DRAG IN THE ECONOMY
We are in paraddrical predicamentin our domistes seriously + shrimping profits from which
THE ADMINISTRATION
addel colt.
HAS SOUGHT TO STIMULATE BUSINESS INVESTMENT IN NEW PLANT AND
EQUIPMENT BY ASKING CONGRESS TO RESTORE THE 7 PER CENT TAX
CREDIT FOR SUCH INVESTMENT. THE HOUSE PASSED THE INVESTMENT
TAX CREDIT LEGISLATION NEARLY TWO MONTHS AGO, BUT IT HAS BEEN
BOGGED DOWN IN THE SENATE. IRONICALLY, THE PRESIDENT URGED
SWIFT PASSAGE OF THE INVESTMENT TAX CREDIT BILL AND STRESSED
THE NEED FOR QUICK ACTION. YET HE SENT HIS WHITE HOUSE
FORD
LIEUTENANTS TO CAPITOL HILL TO FIGHT FOR THE ELECTION CAMPAIGN
TAX CHECKOFF AMENDMENT WHICH HAS FOULED UP THE TAX CREDIT BILL
-17-
IN THE SENATE. THIS ADDED TO THE DELAY.
WHILE OSTENSIBLY SEEKING TO STIMULATE THE ECONOMY WITH
THE TAX CREDIT LEGISLATION, THE PRESIDENT STILL INSISTS THE
COUNTRY NEEDS AN INCOME TAX INCREASE - THE 6 PER CENT SURTAX.
THE PROPOSED TAX INCREASE DOESN'T MAKE ANY MORE SENSE NOW THAN
IT DID IN JANUARY WHEN THE PRESIDENT ADVANCED IT.
THIS ADMINISTRATION MISMANAGED THE AMERICAN ECONOMY IN
1966. NOW IT WOULD ADD TO THE DAMAGE WROUGHT BY INFLATION BY
LOADING AN INCOME TAX INCREASE ON THE WORKER AND ON AN ECONOMY
THROWN INTO IMBALANCE BY ITS UNWISE POLICIES.
THERE ARE MANY ISSUES OTHER THAN THE OVERRIDING QUESTIONS
OF PEACE AND PROSPERITY--THE APPALLING INCREASE IN CRIME, THE
FAILURE TO DEAL ADEQUATELY WITH AIR AND WATER POLLUTION, THE
MISFIRING OF GUNS ON THE NATIONAL FRONT IN THE WAR ON POVERTY,
THE THRUST TOWARD GREATER FEDERAL POWER AT A TIME WHEN FAILURE
-18-
OF CATEGORICAL FEDERAL GRANT-IN-AID PROGRAMS IS BECOMING
INCREASINGLY OBVIOUS.
I FIRMLY BELIEVE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE-WITH TRADITIONAL
MIDDLE-OF-THE-ROAD WISDOM--ARE LOOKING FOR A CHANGE OF DIRECTION
IN THEIR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT and new leadership.
I BELIEVE THE REPUBLICAN PARTY OFFERS THEM THIS NEW
DIRECTION--FEDERAL TAX-SHARING WITH THE CITIES AND STATES.
THE ENLISTING OF PRIVATE ENTERPRISE IN TRULY EFFECTIVE ATTACKS
ON THE EVILS OF POVERTY, SLUMMISM, GHETTOISM, AIR AND WATER
POLLUTION, THE PROPERLY-TIMED USE OF FEDERAL FISCAL AND
MONETARY POLICY TO GIVE THE NATION A SOUNDLY GROWING ECONOMY
WITH RELATIVE PRICE STABILITY AND A TAX STRUCTURE THAT
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
STIMULATES RATHER THAN DISCOURAGES PRIVATE INITIATIVE.
I SEE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE SEEKING THIS NEW DIRECTION IN
A REBIRTH OF THE SPIRIT THAT BROUGHT THIS NATION TO GREATNESS.
-19-
THE REPUBLICAN PARTY STANDS READY TO SERVE THEN
THANK YOU.
XXXX
with the imagenation, the
will, The unity of The candidates.
FORD : LIBRARY GERALD
FOR USE IN AM'S OF THURSDAY, MAY 11, 1967
RFK AN ADDRESS
BY REP. GERALD R. FORD, R-MICH., HOUSE MINORITY
FOR DELIVERY AT 8 P.M., WEDNESDAY, MAY 10, 1967
AT BOWLING GREEN UNIVERSITY, BOWLING GREEN, OHIO
flow an LEADER does whr them
Ladies and Gentlemen, the task you have given me is to look at the Republican
Party and into my crystal ball and to give you a reading on Republican prospects
for 1968.
I start from what I consider to be an undebatable premise--Republicans want
to win in 1968. Let us go on from there.
A California woman who edits a Republican newsletter recently wrote to me,
saying she wanted me to complete in as few words as possible a sentence that
began, "The mission of the minority party is "
I promptly wrote back: "The mission of the minority party is to become the
majority."
Now, how do we in the minority hope to do that?
I
think we are on our way. We are on the move. I believe there is a good
chance a Republican will be elected President of the United States in 1968 and
that the Republican Party will take control of the House of Representatives and
make substantial gains in the Senate.
Why do I believe this? I believe it because of widespread voter dissatis-
faction with the present Administration as reflected in the outcome of the 1966
elections. That dissatisfaction is continuing and growing. I also believe it
because the Republican Party has become a party of ideas, a party of young people,
a party with strong new leadership, a problem-solving party, a party of the
future.
Let me emphasize at the outset that no incumbent President is easy to beat.
History has proved that.
Republicans will have to pick "the right man" as their candidate in '68. The
Party will have to unite behind him. The candidate will have to wage a skillful,
well-organized campaign and keep mistakes at a minimum. He will have to offer an
appealing domestic program and a viable position on Vietnam. And, assuming that
George Wallace is a third-party candidate--and I believe he will be--the Republican
candidate will have to overcome certain voter defections to the Wallace camp.
sketched
this
"tall
"I
feel
The
Descocrats
also
still
candidates. have Wallace Having I feel encouraged to content because there order, with is a new spirit pulsing encouraged. other through Splinter the Republican group
Party. There is new young blood in the Republican Party and it is rushing to the
surface much faster than many had expected. And the Republican Party has been
(more)
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
-3-
there's a good chance we'll make it.
We have a good chance for many reasons.
One of these is what might be called my Southern Strategy.
The strategy is to drive Southern Democrats in the House into the arms of
the Administration--where they belong--on votes that will hurt them in their home
congressional districts.
This strategy runs exactly counter to the old pattern of a Southern
Democrat-Republican coalition that often prevailed over Administration forces
in the House in years past.
But I think it is far better to lose a few legislative battles and win the
next election. Besides, in following my Southern Strategy we Republicans in the
House are staking out positions in which we believe responsible, constructive
positions.
There will be times when Republicans will win in the 90th Congress. We
won't win as many legislative fights as we could if we resorted to the old
coalition tactics, but it's the Big Prize that counts, and that's what we're
after.
The Big Prize is control of at least one House of Congress and control of
the White House. We want that prize not because we relish power for the sake of
power but because we sincerely believe that our course, our program, is a better
way than LBJ.
It is only some 14 months before the two major political parties meet in
convention to name their presidential candidates. Already the issues of the 1968
campaign are taking shape. It will be an historic campaign--a campaign that will
shape the destiny of America far into the future.
In all recent-year national elections there have been two major issues--
peace and prosperity.
Next year we may find ourselves with still another major issue-one of great
importance in the 1966 elections.
That issue, to put it simply, is the Credibility Gap. It has been variously
defined as a Crisis of Confidence--the people's lack of trust in the present
Administration--and the gulf that separates thinking people from the Administration.
After being misled on many occasions by top Administration officials, the attitude
of millions of Americans toward their federal government has become, "Who and what
can we believe?"
Republicans didn't create the Credibility Gap. Neither did the newsmen who
are so often criticized by the President and some of his cabinet heads. It was
(more)
LIBRARY
-4-
the Administration itself which dug the Credibility Gap and has proceeded to make
it deeper and wider in a variety of ways.
Vietnam gave rise to the Credibility Gap. It had its beginning when top
Administration spokesmen repeatedly underestimated the gravity, scope and
duration of what has become the third largest foreign war in American history.
The Administration's conduct of the war also has produced in the American
people a deep sense of frustration, a crisis of confidence at a time of inter-
national crisis for the Nation.
On at least three occasions the Administration aroused hopes for peace in
the American people and left them feeling "let down." Those occasions were the
bombing pause in early 1966, the Honolulu Conference in February, 1966, and
President Johnson's trip to Manila, Australia and Vietnam last fall, just before
the election.
All of this relates to the Credibility Gap. That is why the polls show a
seeming contradiction. A majority of the American people approve of our basic
policy in Vietnam--they want to thwart Communist agression in Southeast Asia--but
they disapprove of Mr. Johnson's handling of the Vietnam situation.
A clue to Mr. Johnson's Vietnam troubles may lie in his policy of gradualism,
his policy of militarily unsound restraint in fighting the war.
It seems clear to me that this policy has been a failure when you look at the
total picture. And the Administration is admitting the failure of its policy of
gradualism by doing now what it refused to do a year ago.
Our commander-in-chief now is ordering our airmen to bomb targets in North
Vietnam that have been strictly off-limits. If it is right to hit those targets
now, why wasn't it smarter to strike them before? Again, the credibility gap.
Our airmen are going through murderous anti-aircraft fire to hit targets
they could have knocked out with ease in early 1966, and the responsibility rests
solely on the Administration.
When the North Vietnamese surface-to-air missile sites were being built,
they were declared off-limits to our flyers. When the Russian-built MIGs first
appeared in Vietnam, we allowed them sanctuary on the ground.
Now our pilots must fly in low over North Vietnamese targets to escape the
missiles and thus are subject to terrible fire from radar-controlled anti-aircraft
guns and even small arms. Our air losses are appallingly high, and the enemy
seems entrenched.
I submit-with all due respect to those in higher authority--that we should
(more)
-5-
have been doing 12 months ago what we are doing now. If we had, we would be
12 months closer to the bargaining table. The problem of prevailing in Vietnam
has been made infinitely greater by the delay.
To those who say this is nothing but Monday morning quarterbacking--ane I
don't have any use for Monday morning quarterbacks--I would point out that I
repeatedly urged we destroy the SAM sites at the time they were being constructed.
I made those remarks on the floor of the House. They are in the Congressional
Record.
Now we see statements by South Vietnamese officials, as reported in the
Christian Science Monitor, that the pacification program is on the point of collapse.
If there is substance to these statements, then the situation in Vietnam is
exceedingly grave. For we will never succeed in our mission in Vietnam--to
establish a viable popular government there--unless we win the minds and the hearts
of the Southvietnamese peasant.
The Republican Party will not make the Vietnam War an issue in 1968. But it
will be an issue, of course.
It will be an issue in the sense that the American people may well ask them-
selves whether the Republican candidate cannot somehow break the deadlock and end
the war on an honorable basis.
I cannot leave the Vietnam question without commenting that it is a complete
myth that President Eisenhower somehow, somewhere, committed the present Admini-
stration to a land war in South Vietnam.
As I mentioned earlier, prosperity along with peace has been a key issue in
recent-year national elections. Let's look at the prosperity issue.
There is no question that the massive tax cuts of 1964 and 1965 touched off
a boom. That was a good action, supported by both parties. But there is also no
question in my mind that the Johnson Administration doomed the boom by failing to
slow down the economy when it became overheated in late 1965 and early 1966.
The situation called for deep cuts in domestic spending, possibly coupled
with an income tax increase. The Administration refused to initiate either course
and, in fact, continued to overstimulate the economy. At the same time, the
Federal Reserve Board launched its own fight against inflation and succeeded in
pushing up interest rates to the highest level in 40 years.
The cost of living rose sharply, hurting all Americans but especially the
aged and others on fixed incomes. We saw the greatest price advance for any
12-month period except at the outset of the Korean War.
(more)
-6-
The effects of the inflationary surge of 1966 are still with us in the form
of high prices. At the same time, the 3.3 per cent increase in the consumer
price index for 1966 has laid the foundation for big wage increases in 1967 as
workers in all industries strive to catch up. This in turn threatens a new
inflationary spiral--as increased production costs put new pressure behind exist-
ing price levels.
There is sag and drag in the economy. The Administration has sought to
stimulate business investment in new plant and equipment by asking Congress to
restore the 7 per cent tax credit for such investment. The House passed the
investment tax credit legislation nearly two months ago, but it has been bogged
down in the Senate. Ironically, the President urged swift passage of the invest-
ment tax credit bill and stressed the need for quick action. Yet he sent his
White House lieutenants to Capitol Hill to fight for the election campaign tax
checkoff amendment which has fouled up the tax credit bill in the Senate. This
added to the delay.
While ostensibly seeking to stimulate the economy with the tax credit legis-
lation, the President still insists the country needs an income tax increase--
the 6 per cent surtax. The proposed tax increase doesn't make any more sense now
than it did in January when the President advanced it.
This Administration mismanaged the American economy in 1966. Now it would
add to the damage wrought by inflation by loading an income tax increase on the
worker and on an economy thrown into imbalance by its unwise policies.
There are many issues other than the overriding questions of peace and
prosperity--the appalling increase in crime, the failure to deal adequately with
air and water pollution, the misfiring of guns on the national front in the war
on poverty, the thrust toward greater federal power at a time when failure of
categorical federal grant-in-aid programs is becoming increasingly obvious.
I firmly believe the American people--with traditional middle-of-the-road
wisdom--are looking for a change of direction in their federal government.
I believe the Republican Party offers them this New Direction--federal
tax-sharing with the cities and states, the enlisting of private enterprise in
truly effective attacks on the evils of poverty, slummism, ghettoism, air and
water pollution, the properly-timed use of federal fiscal and monetary policy to
give the Nation a soundly growing economy with relative price stability and a tax
structure that stimulates rather than discourages private initiative.
I see the American people seeking this New Direction in a rebirth of the
Spirit that brought this Nation to greatness. The Republican Party stands
ready to serve them. Thank you.
###
FOR USE IN AM'S OF THURSDAY, MAY 11, 1967
AN ADDRESS BY REP. GERALD R. FORD, R-MICH., HOUSE MINORITY LEADER
FOR DELIVERY AT 8 P.M., WEDNESDAY, MAY 10, 1967
AT BOWLING GREEN UNIVERSITY, BOWLING GREEN, OHIO
Ladies and Gentlemen, the task you have given me is to look at the Republican
Party and into my crystal ball and to give you a reading on Republican prospects
for 1968.
I start from what I consider to be an undebatable premise--Republicans want
to win in 1968. Let us go on from there.
A California woman who edits a Republican newsletter recently wrote to me,
saying she wanted me to complete in as few words as possible a sentence that
began, "The mission of the minority party is..."
I promptly wrote back: "The mission of the minority party is to become the
majority."
Now, how do we in the minority hope to do that?
I think we are on our way. We are on the move. I believe there is a good
chance a Republican will be elected President of the United States in 1968 and
that the Republican Party will take control of the House of Representatives and
make substantial gains in the Senate.
Why do I believe this? I believe it because of widespread voter dissatis-
faction with the present Administration as reflected in the outcome of the 1966
elections. That dissatisfaction is continuing and growing. I also believe it
because the Republican Party has become a party of ideas, a party of young people,
a party with strong new leadership, a problem-solving party, a party of the
future.
Let me emphasize at the outset that no incumbent President is easy to beat.
History proved that.
Republicans will have to pick "the right man" as their candidate in '68. The
Party will have to unite behind him. The candidate will have to wage a skillful,
well-organized campaign and keep mistakes at a minimum. He will have to offer an
appealing domestic program and a viable position on Vietnam. And, assuming that
George Wallace is a third-party candidate--and I believe he will be--the Republican
candidate will have to overcome certain voter defections to the Wallace camp.
Having sketched this "tall order," I still feel encouraged.
I feel encouraged because there is a new spirit pulsing through the Republican
Party. There is new young blood in the Republican Party and it is rushing to the
surface much faster than many had expected. And the Republican Party has been
(more)
-2-
building--in terms of organization, program and ideas.
Much of this new spirit, this new excitement, is evident in the Congress
and, more specifically, in the House of Representatives.
In the House and in the Senate, Republicans have set in motion a swift flow
of proposals. This activity stands in sharp contrast to the inaction and inertia
of the majority party. Our proposals also contrast sharply in content with those
of the majority party. We would limit the Federal role and expand that of the
private sector and the state and local governments in a fresh assault on problems
that have defied attacks by government alone.
Roughly half of all Americans today are under 25 years of age. We are
witnessing what might be called a "Youthquake." Most young Americans do not feel
a strong allegiance to any political party. They are interested in problem-solving
and in programs that actually work.
I think the new Republican Party has much to offer young Americans today.
The Republican Party is where the action is. Its ideas are not rooted in the Big
Depression--a time that is alien to the thoughts and feelings of today's youth.
Unlike the present majority party, the Republican Party is eagerly looking for
new ideas and new solutions. We are proposing sensible solutions for the
Seventies. We do not rely on the tired theories of the Thirties. The other party
seems bound by them.
The 1968 Republican candidate will need issues. He will find them not only
in the other party's blunders and divisiveness but in the bank of new ideas now
being built up by Republican activists in the Congress.
You have read of many of these ideas--sharing of federal tax revenue with
the cities and states to cut red tape and promote a larger local role in problem-
solving, establishment through the Percy-Widnall Bill of a National Home Ownership
Foundation which would raise mortgage funds and help slum dwellers become proud
home owners, an attack on hard-core unemployment and poverty through tax credits
encouraging industry to train the unskilled and make them productive citizens, a
movement to raise a majority of Americans to the college level through tax
credits for a portion of college expenses, an opportunity crusade enlisting
private enterprise in a revamped war on poverty.
This is not rhetoric. This is a program. Republicans in Congress are making
a record for their presidential candidate of 1968 to run on.
House Republicans also are making a record for Republican congressional
candidates to run on. We need 31 more seats to take over the House--and I think
(more)
-3-
there's a good chance we'll make it. We have a good chance for many reasons.
One of these is what might be called my Southern Strategy.
The strategy is to drive Southern Democrats in the House into the arms of
the Administration--where they belong--on votes that will hurt them in their home
congressional districts.
This strategy runs exactly counter to the old pattern of a Southern
Democrat-Republican coalition that often prevailed over Administration forces
in the House in years past.
But I think it is far better to lose a few legislative battles and win the
next election. Besides, in following my Southern Strategy we Republicans in the
House are staking out positions in which we believe responsible, constructive
positions.
There will be times when Republicans will win in the 90th Congress. We
won't win as many legislative fights as we could if we resorted to the old
coalition tactics, but it's the Big Prize that counts, and that's what we're
after.
The Big Prize is control of at least one House of Congress and control of
the White House. We want that prize not because we relish power for the sake of
power but because we sincerely believe that our course, our program, is a better
way than LBJ.
It is only some 14 months before the two major political parties meet in
convention to name their presidential candidates. Already the issues of the 1968
campaign are taking shape. It will be an historic campaign--a campaign that will
shape the destiny of America far into the future.
In all recent-year national elections there have been two major issues--
peace and prosperity.
Next year we may find ourselves with still another major issue--one of great
importance in the 1966 elections.
That issue, to put it simply, is the Credibility Gap. It has been variously
defined as a Crisis of Confidence--the people's lack of trust in the present
Administration--and the gulf that separates thinking people from the Administration.
After being misled on many occasions by top Administration officials, the attitude
of millions of Americans toward their federal government has become, "Who and what
can we believe?"
Republicans didn't create the Credibility Gap. Neither did the newsmen who
are so often criticized by the President and some of his cabinet heads. It was
(more)
-4-
the Administration itself which dug the Credibility Gap and has proceeded to make
it deeper and wider in a variety of ways.
Vietnam gave rise to the Credibility Gap. It had its beginning when top
Administration spokesmen repeatedly underestimated the gravity, scope and
duration of what has become the third largest foreign war in American history.
The Administration's conduct of the war also has produced in the American
people a deep sense of frustration, a crisis of confidence at a time of inter-
national crisis for the Nation.
On at least three occasions the Administration aroused hopes for peace in
the American people and left them feeling "let down." Those occasions were the
bombing pause in early 1966, the Honolulu Conference in February, 1966, and
President Johnson's trip to Manila, Australia and Vietnam last fall, just before
the election.
All of this relates to the Credibility Gap. That is why the polls show a
seeming contradiction. A majority of the American people approve of our basic
policy in Vietnam--they want to thwart Communist agression in Southeast Asia--but
they disapprove of Mr. Johnson's handling of the Vietnam situation.
A clue to Mr. Johnson's Vietnam troubles may lie in his policy of gradualism,
his policy of militarily unsound restraint in fighting the war.
It seems clear to me that this policy has been a failure when you look at the
total picture. And the Administration is admitting the failure of its policy of
gradualism by doing now what it refused to do a year ago.
Our commander-in-chief now is ordering our airmen to bomb targets in North
Vietnam that have been strictly off-limits. If it is right to hit those targets
now, why wasn't it smarter to strike them before? Again, the credibility gap.
Our airmen are going through murderous anti-aircraft fire to hit targets
they could have knocked out with ease in early 1966, and the responsibility rests
solely on the Administration.
When the North Vietnamese surface-to-air missile sites were being built,
they were declared off-limits to our flyers. When the Russian-built MIGs first
appeared in Vietnam, we allowed them sanctuary on the ground.
Now our pilots must fly in low over North Vietnamese targets to escape the
missiles and thus are subject to terrible fire from radar-controlled anti-aircraft
guns and even small arms. Our air losses are appallingly high, and the enemy
seems entrenched.
I submit-with all due respect to those in higher authority--that we should
(more)
-5-
have been doing 12 months ago what we are doing now. If we had, we would be
12 months closer to the bargaining table. The problem of prevailing in Vietnam
has been made infinitely greater by the delay.
To those who say this is nothing but Monday morning quarterbacking--and I
don't have any use for Monday morning quarterbacks--I would point out that I
repeatedly urged we destroy the SAM sites at the time they were being constructed.
I made those remarks on the floor of the House. They are in the Congressional
Record.
Now we see statements by South Vietnamese officials, as reported in the
Christian Science Monitor, that the pacification program is on the point of collapse.
If there is substance to these statements, then the situation in Vietnam is
exceedingly grave. For we will never succeed in our mission in Vietnam--to
establish a viable popular government there--unless we win the minds and the hearts
of the Southvietnamese peasant.
The Republican Party will not make the Vietnam War an issue in 1968. But it
will be an issue, of course.
It will be an issue in the sense that the American people may well ask them-
selves whether the Republican candidate cannot somehow break the deadlock and end
the war on an honorable basis.
I cannot leave the Vietnam question without commenting that it is a complete
myth that President Eisenhower somehow, somewhere, committed the present Admini-
stration to a land war in South Vietnam.
As I mentioned earlier, prosperity along with peace has been a key issue in
recent-year national elections. Let's look at the prosperity issue.
There is no question that the massive tax cuts of 1964 and 1965 touched off
a boom. That was a good action, supported by both parties. But there is also no
question in my mind that the Johnson Administration doomed the boom by failing to
slow down the economy when it became overheated in late 1965 and early 1966.
The situation called for deep cuts in domestic spending, possibly coupled
with an income tax increase. The Administration refused to initiate either course
and, in fact, continued to overstimulate the economy. At the same time, the
Federal Reserve Board launched its own fight against inflation and succeeded in
pushing up interest rates to the highest level in 40 years.
The cost of living rose sharply, hurting all Americans but especially the
aged and others on fixed incomes. We saw the greatest price advance for any
12-month period except at the outset of the Korean War.
(more)
-6-
The effects of the inflationary surge of 1966 are still with us in the form
of high prices. At the same time, the 3.3 per cent increase in the consumer
price index for 1966 has laid the foundation for big wage increases in 1967 as
workers in all industries strive to catch up. This in turn threatens a new
inflationary spiral--as increased production costs put new pressure behind exist-
ing price levels.
There is sag and drag in the economy. The Administration has sought to
stimulate business investment in new plant and equipment by asking Congress to
restore the 7 per cent tax credit for such investment. The House passed the
investment tax credit legislation nearly two months ago, but it has been bogged
down in the Senate. Ironically, the President urged swift passage of the invest-
ment tax credit bill and stressed the need for quick action. Yet he sent his
White House lieutenants to Capitol Hill to fight for the election campaign tax
checkoff amendment which has fouled up the tax credit bill in the Senate. This
added to the delay.
While ostensibly seeking to stimulate the economy with the tax credit legis-
lation, the President still insists the country needs an income tax increase--
the 6 per cent surtax. The proposed tax increase doesn't make any more sense now
than it did in January when the President advanced it.
This Administration mismanaged the American economy in 1966. Now it would
add to the damage wrought by inflation by loading an income tax increase on the
worker and on an economy thrown into imbalance by its unwise policies.
There are many issues other than the overriding questions of peace and
prosperity--the appalling increase in crime, the failure to deal adequately with
air and water pollution, the misfiring of guns on the national front in the war
on poverty, the thrust toward greater federal power at a time when failure of
categorical federal grant-in-aid programs is becoming increasingly obvious.
I firmly believe the American people--with traditional middle-of-the-road
wisdom--are looking for a change of direction in their federal government.
I believe the Republican Party offers them this New Direction--federal
tax-sharing with the cities and states, the enlisting of private enterprise in
truly effective attacks on the evils of poverty, slummism, ghettoism, air and
water pollution, the properly-timed use of federal fiscal and monetary policy to
give the Nation a soundly growing economy with relative price stability and a tax
structure that stimulates rather than discourages private initiative.
I see the American people seeking this New Direction in a rebirth of the
Spirit that brought this Nation to greatness. The Republican Party stands
ready to serve them. Thank you.
###