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
4526053
label
Business - Government Relations Council, Hershey, PA, October 16, 1967
core
doc
dtoType
document
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
4526053
contentType
document
title
Business - Government Relations Council, Hershey, PA, October 16, 1967
collections
Gerald R. Ford Congressional Papers
Speeches
subjects
Republican National Committee (U.S.)
U.S. Congress. 1789-
Business
Political parties
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
4526053
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1967-10-31
month
10
year
1967
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1967-10-01
month
10
year
1967
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
1fa030b17b52d397
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box D22, folder "Business - Government Relations Council, Hershey, PA, October 16, 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 The Council donated to the United States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.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. REMARKS OF GERALD R. FORD TO THE BUSINESS-GOVERNMENT RELATIONS COUNCIL, HERSHEY, PA., OCTOBER 16, 1967 THE LAST TIME I WAS HOME IN GRAND RAPIDS, I RAN INTO A VERY INTERESTING LADY WHO COLLECTS STAMPS. ILE SHE CLAIMS THAT YOU CAN LEARN A LOT FROM THEM. SHE SHOWED ME, FOR INSTANCE, A NEW U.S. STAMP RECENTLY ISSUED HONORING DAVY CROCKETT. SHE SAID IT WAS VERY SIGNIFICANT THAT LBJ APPROVED THIS STAMP JUST AT THIS POINT, BECAUSE DAVY CROCKETT IS REALLY LBJ'S SECRET HERO NSTEAD OF LINCOLN OR FDR. AND SHE MENTIONED HOW THE PRESIDENT USED ONE OF DAVY'S FAMOUS PHRASES HEN HE VISITED THE TROOPS IN VIETNAM JUST BEFORE THE LAST ELECTION, YOU REMEMBER, HE TOLD THEM TO" BRING HOME THAT COONSKIN AND NAIL IT TO THE WALL." WELL, THIS LADY WHO INTERPRETS STAMPS HAS MADE QUITE A STUDY OF DAVY CROCKETT'S CAREER, AND SHE REMINDED ME THAT LIBRARY Digitized from Box D22 of The Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech File at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library -2- DAVY WAS ELECTED TO CONGRESS AND CAME DOWN TO WASHINGTON FOR THREE TERMS IN THE HOUSE, THAT IS, SIX YEARS. AND THAT THE FOLKS BACK HOME GOT INCREASINGLY FED UP WITH HIM AND FINALLY DEFEATED whyoped HIM IN 1834. MY STAMP LADY SAID SHE DIDN'T THINK SHE OUGHT TO SAY IT RIGHT OUT TO ME, BUT THAT IF I WOULD CHECK UP ON DAVY CROCKETT'S LAST WORDS AS HE LEFT WASHINGTON, I WOULD HAVE AN IMPORTANT TIP ABOUT PRESIDENT JOHNSON'S PLANS FOR 1968. SO I LOOKED UP DAVY CROCKETT'S FAREWELL SPEECH AS AN ELECTED OFFICIAL AND YOU KNOW WHAT HE SAID? "I AM GOING TO TEXAS, AND YOU-ALL CAN GO TO HELL!" BILL WHYTE LET ME LOOK AT THE REMARKS HE AND LARRY WOOD MADE AT YOUR FIRST ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING, OUTLINING THE PURPOSES OF THE COUNCIL. AS AN ORGANIZATION, YOU ARE ABOUT BRARY -3- AS OLD AS THE 90TH CONGRESS. BOTH GROUPS SHOULD ASK -- WHAT'S OUR SCORECARD OR BATTING AVERAGE SO FAR. SPEAKING FOR THE MINORITY, I WAS GRATIFIED TO FIND UPON TOTING UP THE TALLY CARD DURING THE LABOR DAY RECESS THAT THE REINFORCED REPUBLICANS HAVE MADE VISIBLE PROGRESS ON 16 OF THE 30 SPECIFIC, CONSTRUCTIVE DOMESTIC PROPOSALS EV AND I MADE IN OUR "STATE OF THE UNION" APPRAISAL LAST JANUARY. NOW, I HEAR RUMORS THAT THE PRESIDENT WANTS THIS CONGRESS TO PACK UP AND GO HOME IN A HURRY. FRANKLY, I CAN'T BLAME HIM BECAUSE THIS CONGRESS HAS A BIT OF OLD-FASHIONED AMERICAN INDEPENDENCE IN ITS BONES. BUT/WE HAVE SOME UNFINISHED BUSINESS WE OUGHT TO ATTEND TO FIRST. I COULD GO ON ABOUT THIS SUBJECT, BUT I WOULD RATHER -- IF I MAY -- LEAVE THE EYEBALL-TO-EYEBALL LEGISLATIVE BATTLEGROUND AND TALK FORD INSTEAD TO THE POINT, BILL MADE, IN HIS JANUARY PAPER -- THE LIBRARY -4- NEED TO IMPROVE THE DIALOGUE BETWEEN GOVERNMENT AND THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY. I WAS PARTICULARLY IMPRESSED BY THE OBSERVATION THAT, HISTORICALLY, THIS DIALOGUE FOCUSES TOO EXCLUSIVELY ON SHORT-RUN PROBLEMS -- ON WHAT THE ADMINISTRATION WILL DO ABOUT INTEREST RATES, IF ANYTHING; WAGE-PRICE GUIDELINES, IF ANY; TAX ESSUES, INCREASES OR SUSPENSIONS, OR THE BALANCE OF PAYMENTS -- AND TOO LITTLE ON LONG-RUN ISSUES. FOR EXAMPLE, ON THE RELATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES OF GOVERNMENT AND OF PRIVATE ENTERPRISE FOR THE CREATION OF JOBS, FOR THE PRODUCTIVITY OF WORKERS, FOR THE ASSUMPTION OF RISK, AND FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF TASKS THAT WERE ONCE THE BUSINESS OF BUSINESS. RIGHT AT THE START OF THIS EXCELLENT CAPSULE OF THE PROBLEM IS AN INVOLUNTARY REFLEX THAT REVEALS SOMETHING ABOUT BUSINESS-GOVERNMENT RELATIONS. ISN'T THERE TOO MUCH CONCERN -5- WITH "WHAT THE ADMINISTRATION IS DOING ABOUT THIS AND THAT. THIS IS/A SORT OF FREUDIAN SLIP THAT SHOWS EVEN THE MOST THOUGHTFUL STUDENTS OF THE PROBLEM TEND TO EQUATE THE GOVERNMENT WITH THE ADMINISTRATION. YET WE IN THE CONGRESS CAN MODESTLY CLAIM TO BE PART OF THE GOVERNMENT. WASHINGTON REPRESENTATIVES CERTAINLY ARE WELL AWARE OF THIS EVEN IF SOME OF THE FOLKS IN THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH WISH IT WEREN T SO. WHEN I ACCEPTED YOUR INVITATION TO SAY A FEW WORDS AT THIS GATHERING I REALIZED THE painful RISK I WAS RUNNING. EVERYBODY WHO MAKES PUBLIC SPEECHES WORRIES ABOUT THE ONE GUY IN THE AUDIENCE WHO KNOWS MORE ABOUT HIS SUBJECT THAN HE DOES. TO STAND BEFORE A WHOLE ROOMFULL OF EXPERTS ON BUSINESS-GOVERNMENT RELATIONS AND TALK ABOUT THAT TOPIC, YOU EITHER HAVE TO BE VERY FOOLHARDY OR VERY FRIENDLY. BEING BOTH, I WANT TO FURL MY PARTISAN COLORS HERE AND NOW AND DISCUSS AN IDEA I HAVE BEEN WORKING ON FOR SEVERAL -6- MONTHS ALONG LINES THAT SEEM TO PARALLEL YOUR OWN OBJECTIVES. IT MAY SURPRISE YOU WHEN I SAY MY IDEA MAY BE OF GREAT HELP TO THE DEMOCRATS DURING THE YEARS AHEAD. I AM HAPPY -- EVEN EAGER -- TO LEAVE THEM THIS LEGACY OF THE MINORITY. LET ME SPEAK CANDIDLY ABOUT SOME OF THE PECULIAR PROBLEMS OF THE MINORITY PARTY. LET'S EXAMINE THIS AS PRACTICING POLITICAL SCIENTISTS -- FOR I THINK YOUR PROFESSION AND MINE CAN PROPERLY CLAIM TO BE PART SCIENCE, PART INTUITION, AND EVEN PART GOLF. MY CREDENTIALS TO DISCUSS THE MINORITY ROLE ARE MUCH TOO GOOD TO SUIT ME -- I HAVE BEEN A MEMBER OF THE MINORITY IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES FOR 17 OF MY 19 YEARS IN CONGRESS. I HAD ONE HAPPY INTERLUDE AS A MAJORITY MEMBER DURING A REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATION AND AM LOOKING FORWARD TO ANOTHER. BUT BEFORE LAUNCHING A FORMAL CAMPAIGN FOR A G.O.P. LIBRA -7- MAJORITY IN THE 91ST CONGRESS 1'D LIKE TO UNBURDEN MYSELF ON THE MINORITY'S ROLE, WHETHER IT IS DEMOCRATIC OR REPUBLICAN, AND HOW IT MIGHT FUNCTION MORE EFFECTIVELY. ALL CAN AGREE AT THE OUTSET THAT A VIGOROUS TWO-PARTY SYSTEM IS FUNDAMENTAL TO FREEDOM AND PROGRESS. IN AMERICA, HOWEVER, THE TWO-PARTY SYSTEM OPERATES NATIONALLY ONLY EVERY FOUR YEARS. BETWEEN TIMES, / IT FUNCTIONS ON THE FEDERAL LEVEL PRIMARILY IN THE CONGRESS. WHILE IT IS STILL CONSIDERED "NORMAL" FOR THE PRESIDENT AND THE MAJORITY IN CONGRESS TO BE OF THE SAME PARTY, THE EXCEPTIONS IN RECENT YEARS HAVE BEEN MORE FREQUENT. SINCE PRESIDENT FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT, WE HAVE HAD DIVIDED GOVERNMENT FOR EIGHT OUT OF 23 YEARS, WITH ONE PARTY IN THE This dursnon 8 responsibility WHITE HOUSE AND THE OTHER COMMANDING CONGRESS. # HAS NOT PROVED PARTICULARLY PARALYZING OR DISASTROUS. IN FACT, SOME -8- OBSERVERS VIEW IT AS A COMPENSATING FACTOR AGAINST THE RECENT CONCENTRATION OF EXECUTIVE AUTHORITY. SO THE SECOND PRECEPT, WHICH I HOPE WILL HAVE UNANIMOUS CONSENT WITHIN THIS GROUP, IS THAT A VIGOROUS LEGISLATIVE BRANCH IS ESSENTIAL AND THAT A ROUGH BALANCE BETWEEN IT AND THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH MAKES FOR BETTER GOVERNMENT. AS A COROLLARY TO THIS, THE DIVISION BETWEEN MINORITY AND MAJORITY IN THE CONGRESS SHOULD NOT BE SO LOPSIDED AS TO STIFLE DEBATE AND TRANSFORM THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS INTO A STEAMROLLER OR RUBBER STAMP. COMPETITION IS AS HEALTHY IN POLITICS AS IT IS IN BUSINESS. NOW, LET'S GET DOWN TO CASES. ONE OF THE MOST COMMON CRITICISMS OF CONGRESS, AND ESPECIALLY OF THE MINORITY PARTY IN CONGRESS, IS THAT IT IS ESSENTIALLY NEGATIVE -- THAT ALL IT DOES IS OPPOSE -- THAT IT SHOULD BE MORE CONSTRUCTIVE -- LIBRARY of -9- THAT IT CANNOT LOOK VERY FAR DOWN THE ROAD. I HAVE HAD AMPLE OPPORTUNITY THESE PAST TWO-AND-A-HALF YEARS TO LEARN HOW HARD IT IS, WITH ALL THE LEVERS OF LEGISLATIVE MACHINERY IN THE HANDS OF THE MAJORITY, ACTUALLY TO GET POSITIVE AND CONSTRUCTIVE ALTERNATIVES OFF THE GROUND -- THOUGH SURPRISINGLY WE SOMETIMES DO IT. BUT IT IS EASY TO CYNICS SEE HOW PRAGMATISTS ON THE WASHINGTON SCENE CONCLUDE GYNICALLY THAT THE PRIMARY DUTY OF THE OPPOSITION IS TO OPPOSE. WHILE WE HAVE OUR HAIR DOWN I HAVE TO SAY THAT WASHINGTON REPRESENTATIVES QUITE OFTEN FALL IN STEP WITH THIS CONCEPT OF THE MINORITY'S PRIME PURPOSE. WHEN YOU WANT SOMETHING STOPPED, YOU COME TO US; WHEN YOU WANT TO INITIATE OR INNOVATE, YOU GO "DOWNTOWN." POWER ATTRACTS POWER, I KNOW, AND THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO VISIT WITH ME IN THIS 90TH CONGRESS HAS INCREASED ROUGHLY -10- IN PROPORTION TO OUR NET GAIN OF 47 SEATS IN THE HOUSE LAST NOVEMBER. BUT WE NOW ARE TALKING AS POLITICAL SCIENTISTS, AND WHAT I AM CONCERNED ABOUT IS THE NEED FOR A CHANGE IN THE TRADITIONAL CONCEPT OF OUR TWO-PARTY SYSTEM. INSTEAD OF A CONCEPT OF "INS" AND "OUTS", IN THE "60'S" WE ARE MOVING TO ONE OF CONTINUOUS GOVERNMENT, WITH AN INTERCHANGABLE MAJORITY AND MINORITY, BOTH CONCERNED WITH PROBLEM-SOLVING AND BOTH RESPONDING REALISTICALLY TO PEOPLE' S NEEDS. IF THIS SOUNDS OVERLY IDEALISTIC TO SUCH A SOPHISTICATED GROUP, LET ME SAY I AM CONVINCED THAT, UNLESS WE PROGRESS TOWARD SUCH AN IDEAL, NEITHER OUR TWO-PARTY SYSTEM/NOR OUR CHECK-AND-BALANCE SYSTEM IS LIKELY TO SURVIVE. AMERICAN BUSINESS -- CERTAINLY THE SOLID, SUCCESSFUL BUSINESSES REPRESENTED HERE -- LEARNED SOME TIME AGO THAT IT IS NOT FORD ENOUGH TO TURN A FAST PROFIT, THAT BUSINESS HAS TO MEET GERA THE LIBRARY -11- GENUINE NEEDS OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS A NATION. BUSINESS TODAY MUST KNOW REAL NEEDS AND PROJECT THEM ACCURATELY INTO THE FUTURE. THIS INVOLVES VAST EXPENDI - TURES OF MONEY AND TALENT FOR CONTINUING SUCCESS. THE KNOWLEDGE EXPLOSION, THE INFORMATION REVOLUTION, THE COMMUNICATION BREAKTHROUGHS THAT HAVE TAKEN PLACE IN OUR LIFETIMES ARE WORKING A SIMILAR CHANGE IN POLITICAL COMPETITION. PERHAPS MORE SLOWLY, POLITICAL PARTIES AND CANDIDATES SEEKING PUBLIC SUPPORT ARE COMING TO REPHRASE ABRAHAM LINCOLN AND CONCLUDE THAT YOU CAN'T FOOL VERY MANY OF THE PEOPLE VERY MUCH OF THE TIME. TRY IT, AND you HAVE A CREDIBILITY GAP YOU CAN NEVER CLOSE. THE POLITICAL PARTY THAT SUCCEEDS IN THE FUTURE IS GOING TO BE THE ONE WHICH BEST FORESEES, AND BEST MEETS, THE LIBRARI GENUINE NEEDS OF OUR PEOPLE, INDIVIDUALLY AND COLLECTIVELY. -12- LIKE BUSINESS, WE WILL BE JUDGED ON PERFORMANCE RATHER THAN PROMISES. ALSO LIKE BUSINESS, WE CANNOT SUCCEED BY MIS- LEADING, OVERSELLING AND BANKRUPTING OUR CUSTOMERS AND THEN GOING BROKE OURSELVES. I WANT MY PARTY TO BE A PROBLEM- SOLVING PARTY. THE OTHER PARTY SHOULD BE ALSO. IN THE political COMPETITIVE ARENA THE ONE THAT COMES UP WITH THE BEST SOLUTIONS SHOULD WIN. WHEN A NATIONAL ADMINISTRATION FOCUSES ON A PROBLEM, THE PRESIDENT OR ONE OF IHS CABINET OFFICERS USUALLY APPOINTS A BLUE RIBBON COMMISSION TO ANALYZE ALL ASPECTS OF THE PROBLEM AND RECOMMEND ACTION, OR ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS. THE PRESIDENT CAN DRAW UPON THE VERY ABLEST PEOPLE IN THE COUNTRY -- IN BUSINESS, IN THE UNIVERSITIES, IN LABOR OR ANY OTHER FIELD -- AND THROUGH THESE TOP PEOPLE THE WHITE HOUSE HAS ACCESS TO ALL THE RESEARCH AND RESOURCES OF THE VITAL PRIVATE -13- SECTOR OF AMERICAN SOCIETY. WHEN HE DOES SO, CITIZENS HASTEN TO ACCEPT THE PRESIDENT'S CALL AS A PATRIOTIC DUTY AND A HIGH HONOR, WITHOUT FEAR OF COMMUNITY MISUNDERSTANDING OR PARTISAN RECRIMINATION. FOR INSTANCE, JUST A MONTH AGO LIFE MAGAZINE HAD AN EDITORIAL ESSAY BY HUGH SIDNEY ON THE PRESIDENCY -- THE PARTY THAT THE WRITER THINKS IT OWNS THE PLACE." OBSERVED OF PRESIDENT JOHNSON'S METHOD: 2 quate "HE BELIEVES THAT IT IS HIS RIGHT TO CONDUCT THE CREATIVE PROCESSES OF GOVERNMENT BEHIND CLOSED DOORS AND TELL THE PUBLIC ONLY AS MUCH AS HE SEES FIT. HE Johnson IS NOW PREPARING 1 HIS PROGRAM FOR 1968, WHICH WILL BE VITAL TO HIM POLITICALLY BUT ALSO WILL BE VITAL TO THE NATION. HE HAS SENT HIS MEN TO GATHER IDEAS FROM MORE THAN 100 OF THE BEST MINDS IN FORD LIBRAR AMERICA AND ALL THE SUGGESTIONS HAVE BEEN COLLECTED IN A -14- MASSIVE BOOK FROM WHICH JOHNSON WILL CHOOSE THE THINGS HE WANTS. NEITHER THE NAMES OF THE CONTRIBUTORS NOR THEIR SUGGESTIONS WILL BE MADE PUBLIC (END OF QUOTE) I HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THIS -- IT'S NECESSARY AND COMMENDABLE. BUT THE MINORITY PARTY -- THE PARTY WHICH DOESN'T CONTROL THE WHITE HOUSE AT ANY GIVEN TIME -- RECOGNIZES AND THE SAME NATIONAL INTERNATIONAL PROBLEMS AND BROAD AREAS OF PUBLIC CONCERN. THERE'S NO GREAT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS WHEN IT COMES TO PINPOINTING PROBLEMS -- THEY ARE OBVIOUS TO EVERYBODY. WHERE WE DIFFER, AND SHOULD DIFFER, IS WHAT PRIORITY WE GIVE THEM AND WHAT WE PROPOSE TO DO ABOUT THEM. THE POINT TO CLARIFY TONIGHT IS THIS: THE MINORITY PARTY NEEDS, PERHAPS EVEN MORE THAN THE MAJORITY PARTY, THE LIBRAR TALENT, COUNSEL AND RESOURCES OF THE PRIVATE SECTOR OF -15- AMERICA -- BECAUSE THE PRIVATE SECTOR IS WHERE THE GREATEST AMOUNT OF TALENT AND RESOURCES ARE GATHERED. BUT, UNFOR- TUNATELY, THE MINORITY HAS NOT HAD EQUAL ACCESS OR ATTENTION IN THE PAST. SINCE THE OPERATIVE ELEMENT IN THE MINORITY PARTY, SO FAR AS FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS CONCERNED, IS ITS CONGRESSIONAL LEADERSHIP, I CONFESS THIS IS PARTLY INHERENT IN THE SYSTEM AND PARTLY OUR OWN FAULT. IN THEORY, BOTH THE MAJORITY AND THE MINORITY PERFORM ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS IN A FREE GOVERNMENT. EACH IS EQUALLY ENTITLED TO, AND EQUALLY IN NEED OF, ADEQUATE INFORMATION AND ASSISTANCE FROM OTHER ELEMENTS OF OUR COMPLEX SOCIETY, AMONG THEM, OF COURSE, THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY. VIEWED FROM ANOTHER ANGLE, AGAIN IN THEORY, IT IS CLEARLY TO THE ADVANTAGE OF THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY TO MAINTAIN CLOSE, HIGH-LEVEL CONTACT WITH BOTH THE MINORITY AND THE MAJORITY AND SPECIFICALLY WITH -16- CONGRESS -- WITH THE CONTINUOUS PART OF OUR TRIPARTITE GOVERNMENT AS WELL AS THE PART WHICH UNDERGOES COMPLETE AND SUDDEN CHANGEOVER WHEN THE PRESIDENCY CHANGES HANDS. THIS IS SUMMED UP IN THE RATHER CYNICAL OBSERVATION THAT "BUSINESS PLAYS BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET" IN ITS RELATIONS WITH GOVERNMENT. MY POINT -- IT SHOULD DO EXACTLY THAT, ONLY MORE SO. IT SHOULD DO IT CONTINUOUSLY INSTEAD OF SPORADICALLY. IT MUST 00 SO EVEN-HANDEDLY IF POLITICAL play both sides COMPETITION BETWEEN THE TWO PARTIES IS TO BE EFFECTIVE. REPUBLICANS HAVE HEARD SO LONG THAT THEY WERE THE PARTY OF BIG BUSINESS THAT ONLY RECENTLY HAVE WE BEGUN TO REALIZE WE ARE GETTING ALL THE ONUS AND NOT ENOUGH OF THE BENEFITS OF THIS ALLEGED AFFINITY. WE ARE DETERMINED TO FIND A REMEDY. IT HAS BEEN SAID THAT MONEY IS THE LIFEBLOOD OF FORD & LIBRARY GERALD -17- OF POLITICS. NOW, I AM NOT GOING TO is KNOCK greater than THAT IDEA. even THE NEED FOR POLITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS MAS SCARED, BUT THE REASONS HAVE CHANGED. ON THE OLD FRONTIER, A GOOD SHARE OF DAVY CROCKETT'S CAMPAIGN KITTY WENT TO BUY BARRELS OF WHISKEY. ON THE NEW FRONTIER AND BEYOND, IT PAYS FOR RESEARCH AND PEOPLE SKILLED IN USLNG LT,FOR FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND COMMUNICATION OF INFORMATION AND IDEAS ON A MASSIVE SCALE. THE INTOXICATION OF PROSPECTIVE VOTERS HAS BECOME A MOST SOPHISTICATED AND EXPENSIVE AFFAIR. WE IN THE CONGRESSIONAL LEADERSHIP OF THE TEMPORARY MINORITY ARE WELL AWARE OF OUR LONG-RANGE INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION GAP. WE UNDERSTAND THAT COOPERATION AND CONSULTATION BETWEEN TOP LEADERSHIP OF BUSINESS AND THE EXECUTIVE BRANOH OF GOVERNMENT IS NATURALLY EASIER BECAUSE FORD BOTH THE ADMINISTRATION AND BUSINESS CORPORATIONS ARE PYRAMIDAL -18- ORGANIZATIONS. DIRECT LINES OF AUTHORITY FLOW DOWNWARD FROM ONE MAN AT THE TOP. AND DECISIONS AND ACTION FOLLOW IN A RELATIVELY UNCOMPLICATED SEQUENCE IN BOTH SET-UPS. I NEEDN'T WASTE WORDS TELLING YOU THAT CONGRESS JUST DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY! THERE ARE 535 SOVEREIGN DECISION- MAKERS -- THOUGH SOMETIMES THEY DO ALMOST ANYTHING TO AVOID THAT ULTIMATE STEP. NOT ONE OF US IS REALLY DEPENDENT UPON ANY OTHER MEMBER, NOT dear UPON THE PRESIDENT NOR UPON ANYONE EXCEPT HIMSELF AND HIS, FOLKS BACK HOME. NO TWO OF US HAVE IDENTICAL IDEAS OR IDENTICAL INTERESTS -- DESPITE OUR DIVISION ALONG PARTY LINES. THAT IS, OF COURSE, PART OF THE GENIUS OF OUR POLITICAL SYSTEM. BUT IT MAKES IT DIFFICULT, I NEEDN'T TELL YOU, TO DEAL WITH "THE CONGRESS." YET THE KNOWLEDGE EXPLOSION, THE INFORMATION REVOLUTION AND THE COMMUNICATIONS BREAKTHROUGHS THAT SINCE WORLD WAR II -19- HAVE TRANSFORMED OUR SOCIETY, AND OUR POLITICS, CAN LEAD US TO GREAT PERIL. FOR KNOWLEDGE IS POWER. TO VEST A MONOPOLY OFF THIS FORM OF POWER IN ONE BRANCH OF OUR GOVERNMENT, OR ONE OF OUR TWO PARTIES, ISAS DANGEROUS AS THE CONCENTRATION OF FINANCIAL POWER, MILITARY POWER OR ANY OTHER POWER. THE REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP OF CONGRESS; SENATOR DIRKSEN, RAY BLISS AND MYSELF, HAVE HELD EIGHT MEETINGS OVER THE LAST FOUR MONTHS WRESTLING WITH THIS PROBLEM. WE HAVE JUST LAUNCHED A PILOT PROGRAM IN THE AREA OF ECONOMIC POLICY THROUGH WHICH WE HOPE, IN THE MONTHS AHEAD, TO DRAW UPON THE RESOURCES AND TALENTS OF THE BUSINESS, THE ACADEMIC AND THE FINANCIAL COMMUNITIES TO FIND SOUND SOLUTIONS TO THE GRAVE FISCAL PROBLEMS OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. ONE OF YOUR MEMBERS, BRYCE HARLOW, HAS PERFORMED HIS USUAL HEROIC SERVICE IN GETTING THIS PROGRAM GOING. IF ERAD IT IBRARY -20- GOES AS WELL AS NOW APPEARS, WE WILL MOVE INTO OTHER AREAS OF NATIONAL CONCERN TO DEVELOP A CONTINUING EXCHANGE OF IDEAS, INFORMATION AND INTERPRETATIONS TO INVIGORATE OUR ROLE AS A RESPONSIBLE AND RESPONSIVE MINORITY. WE TRUST THIS SAME SET UP WOULD BE AVAILABLE TO OUR FRIENDS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE WHEN THEY ARE THE MINORITY AFTER NOV., 1968. I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT FUND-RAISING NOW, NOR ABOUT PARTISAN CAMPAIGN AMMUNITION, WITH WHICH WE MANAGE TO KEEP REASONABLE WELL-SUPPLIED. WE ARE SEEKING THE KIND OF BEDROCK FACTS AND FORECASTS, HARD-HEADED APPRAISALS OF FUTURE NEEDS OF THE NATION, THAT WE MUST ALL HAVE IF THIS AMERICAN POLITICAL SYSTEM IS TO SUCCEED. I AM DELIGHTED YOU HAVE FORMED THIS UNIQUE COUNCIL, BECAUSE IT SEEMS TO ME WE ARE ENGAGED IN THE SAME EFFORT, WHICH INDEED WAS THE GOAL OF THE FRAMERS OF RALD OUR LIBRAR CONSTITUTION: HOW TO MAKE INDIVIDUAL SELF-INTEREST SERVE THE -21- COMMON GOOD. WE HAVE DONE PRETTY WELL SO FAR, BUT WE MUST MOVE WITH THE TIMES. ONE LAST WORD TO MY DEMOCRATIC FRIENDS -- EVERYTHING P VE SAID I THINK I CAN LIVE WITH WHEN, AS # PROF OUNDLY HOPE OUR ROLES ARE REVERSED AND WE BECOME THE MAJORITY AND THEY THE MINORITY. THE LOT OF A MINORITY LEADER IS NOT AN EASY ONE, BUT IT IS ENDURABLE BECAUSE IT IS NOT SUPPOSED TO LAST FOREVER. I FOR ONE HOPE WE CAN KEEP BOTH PARTIES IN BUSINESS -- AND BUSINESS INTERESTED IN BOTH PARTIES, SO THAT RUGGED COMPE- TITION IS THE RULE IN BOTH BUSINESS AND GOVERNMENT. THANK YOU. -END- FORD is LIBRARY 07V839 I HOPE I HAVEN'T DISAPPOINTED YOU BY BEING SO NONPARTISAN TONIGHT. ACTUALLY, I SAVED THAT FOR THE LAST. I' D LIKE TO ADDRESS ONE FINAL WORD TO THE NEXT PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. GOOD NIGHT, GEORGE. GOOD NIGHT, DICK. GOOD NIGHT, ROCKY. GOOD NIGHT, RONNIE. GOOD NIGHT, CHUCK. AND GOOD NIGHT HAROLD STASSEN, WHEREVER YOU ARE. end FORD is LIBRARY 07V839 inabant? I 1001 4.11-101 DDD ACD HAD 30 MUG M3M -YE GENNY distributed uot O Spuck not HAD ve Note : - JOY or ⑉ oT no 466339 WANTER THA MADE HAD LITH SUDY OY OF as EINT THE FORD & LIBRARY GERALD -16 bevines same centains - 101-50 REMARKS BY GERALD R. FORD (R-MICH.), HOUSE MINORITY LEADER TO THE BUSINESS-GOVERNMENT RELATIONS COUNCIL HERSHEY, PENNSYLVANIA OCTOBER 16, 1967 Bill Whyte let me look at the remarks he and Larry Wood made at your first organizational meeting, outlining the purposes of the council. As an organization, you are about as old as the 90th Congress. Both groups should ask--what's our scorecard or batting average so far. Speaking for the Minority, I was gratified to find upon toting up the tally card during the Labor Day recess that the reinforced Republicans have made visible progress on 16 of the 30 specific, constructive domestic proposals Ev and I made in our "State of the Union" appraisal last January. Now, I hear rumors that the President wants this Congress to pack up and go home in a hurry. Frankly, I can't blame him because this Congress has a bit of old-fashioned American independence in its bones. But we have some unfinished business we ought to attend to first. I could go on about this subject, but I would rather--if I may--leave the eyeball-to-eyeball legislative battleground and talk instead to the point Bill made in his January paper--the need to improve the dialogue between government and the business community. I was particularly impressed by the observation that, historically, this dialogue focuses too exclusively on short-run problems-on what the Administration will do about interest rates, Nf anything; wage-price guidelines, if any: tax increases or suspensions, or the balance of payments--and too little on long-run issues. For example, on the relative responsibilities of government and of private enterprise for the creation of jobs, for the productivity of workers, for the assumption of risk, and for the performance of tasks that were once the business of business. Right at the start of this excellent capsule of the problem is an involuntary reflex that reveals something about business-government relations. Isn't there too much concern with "what the Administration is doing." This is a sort of Freudian slip that shows even the most thoughtful students of the problem tend to equate the government with the Administration. Yet we in the Congress can modestly claim to be part of the government. Washington (more) GERALD FORD LIBRARI -2- Representatives certainly are well aware of this, even if some of the folks in the Executive Branch wish it weren't SO. When I accepted your invitation to say a few words at this gathering I realized the painful risk I was running. Everybody who makes public speaches worries about the one guy in the audience who knows more about his subject than he does. To stand before a whole roomful of experts on business-government relations and talk about that topic, you either have to be very foolhardy or very friendly. Being both, I want to furl my partisan colors here and now and discuss an idea I have been working on for several months along lines that seem to parallel your own objectives. It may surprise you when I say my idea may be of great help to the Democrats during the years ahead. I am happy--even eager--to leave them this legacy of the Minority. Let me speak candidly about some of the peculiar problems of the Minority Party. Let's examine this as practicing political scientists--for I think your profession and mine can properly claim to be part science, part intuition, and even part golf. My credentials to discuss the Minority role are much too good to suit me-- I have been a member of the Minority in the House of Representatives for 17 of my 19 years in Congress. I had one happy interlude as a Majority Member during a Republican Administration and am looking forward to another. But before launching a formal campaign for a G.O.P. majority in the 91st Congress I'd like to unburden myself on the Minority's role, whether it is Democratic or Republican, and how it might function more effectively. All can agree at the outset that a vigorous two-party system is fundamental to freedom and progress. In America, however, the two-party system operates nationally only every four years. Between times, it functions on the federal level primarily in the Congress. While it is still considered "normal" for the President and the Majority in Congress to be of the same party, the exceptions in recent years have been more frequent. Since President Franklin D. Roosevelt, we have had divided government for eight out of 23 years, with one party in the White House and the other commanding Congress. This division of responsibility has not proved paralyzing or disastrous. In fact, some observers view it as a compensating factor against the recent concentration of Executive authority. (more) -3- So the second precept, which I hope will have unanimous consent within this group, is that a vigorous Legislative Branch is essential and that a rough balance between it and the Executive Branch makes for better government. As a corollary to this, the division between Minority and Majority in the Congress should not be so lopsided as to stifle debate and transform the legislative process into a steamroller or rubber stamp. Competition is as healthy in politics as it is in business. Now, let's get down to cases. One of the most common criticisms of Congress, and especially of the Minority Party in Congress, is that it is essentially negative--that all it does is oppose--that it should be more constructive--that it cannot look very far down the road. I have had ample opportunity these past two-and-a-half years to learn how hard it is, with all the levers of legislative machinery in the hands of the Majority, actually to get positive and constructive alternatives off the ground-- though surprisingly we sometimes do it. But it is easy to see how cynics on the Washington scene conclude that the primary duty of the opposition is to oppose. While we have our hair down I have to say that Washington Representatives quite often fall in step with this concept of the Minority's prime purpose. When you want something stopped, you come to us; when you want to initiate or innovate, you go "downtown." Power attracts power, I know, and the number of people who visit with me in this 90th Congress has increased roughly in proportion to our net gain of 47 seats in the House last November. But we now are talking as political scientists, and what I am concerned about is the need for a change in the traditional concept of our two-party system. Instead of a concept of "ins" and "outs," in the "60's" we are moving to one of continuous government, with an interchangable Majority and Minority, both concerned with problem-solving and both responding realistically to people's needs. If this sounds overly idealistic to such a sophisticated group, let me say I am convinced that, unless we progress toward such an ideal, neither our two-party system nor our check-and-balance system is likely to survive. American business--certainly the solid, successful businesses represented here-- learned some time ago that it is not enough to turn a fast profit, that business has to meet the genuine needs of the American people, individually and as a (more) -4- nation. Business today must know real needs and project them accurately into the future. This involves vast expenditures of money and talent for continuing success. The knowledge explosion, the information revolution, the communication breakthroughs that have taken place in our lifetimes are working a similar change in political competition. Perhaps more slowly, political parties and candidates seeking public support are coming to rephrase Abraham Lincoln and conclude that you can't fool very many of the people very much of the time. Try it, and you have a credibility gap you can never close. The political party that succeeds in the future is going to be the one which best foresees, and best meets, the genuine needs of our people, individually and collectively. Like business, we will be judged on performance rather than promises. Also like business, we cannot succeed by misleading, overselling and bankrupting our customers and then going broke ourselves. I want my Party to be a problem-solving party. The other Party should be also. In the competitive political arena the one that comes up with the best solutions should win. When a national administration focuses on a problem, the President usually appoints a blue ribbon commission to analyze all aspects of the problem and recommend action, or alternative solutions. The President can draw upon the very ablest people in the country--in business, in the universities, in labor or any other field--and through these top people the White House has access to all the research and resources of the vital private sector of American society. When he does so, citizens hasten to accept the President's call as a patriotic duty and a high honor, without fear of community misunderstanding or partisan recrimination. For instance, just a month ago Life Magazine had an editorial by Hugh Sidey on "The Presidency--The Party That Thinks It Owns The Place." The writer observed of President Johnson's method: "He believes that it is his right to conduct the creative processes of government behind closed doors and tell the public only as much as he sees fit. He is now preparing his program for 1968, which will be vital to him politically but also will be vital to the nation. He has sent his men to gather ideas from more than 100 of the best minds in America and all the suggestions have been collected in a massive book from which Johnson will choose the things he wants. (more) -5- Neither the names of the contributors nor their suggestions will be made public " I have no objection to this--it's necessary and commendable. But the Minority Party--the Party which doesn't control the White House at any given time--recognizes the same national and international problems and broad areas of public concern. There's no great difference between Republicans and Democrats when it comes to pinpointing problems--they are obvious to everybody. Where we differ, and should differ, is what priority we give them and what we propose to do about them. The point to clarify tonight is this: The Minority Party needs, perhaps even more than the Majority Party, the talent, counsel and resources of the private sector of America--because the private sector is where the greatest amount of talent and resources are gathered. But, unfortunately, the Minority has not had equal access or attention in the past. Since the operative element in the Minority Party, so far as federal government is concerned, is its congressional leadership, I confess this is partly inherent in the system and partly our own fault. In theory, both the Majority and the Minority perform essential functions in a free government. Each is equally entitled to, and equally in need of, adequate information and assistance from other elements of our complex society, among them, of course, the business community. Viewed from another angle, again in theory, it is clearly to the advantage of the business community to maintain close, high-level contact with both the Minority and the Majority and specifically with Congress--with the continuous part of our tripartite govern- ment as well as the part which undergoes sudden changeover when the Presidency changes hands. This is summed up in the rather cynical observation that "business plays both sides of the street" in its relations with government. My point--it should do exactly that, only more SO. It should do it continuously instead of sporadically. It must play both sides even-handedly if political competition between the two parties is to be effective. Republicans have heard so long that they were the party of big business that only recently have we begun to realize we are getting all the onus, if any, and not enough of the benefits of this alleged affinity. We are determined to find a remedy. (more) -6- It has been said that money is the lifeblood of politics. Now, I am not going to knock that idea. The need for political contributions is greater than ever, but the reasons have changed. On the old frontier, a good share of Davy Crockett's campaign kitty went to buy barrels of whiskey. On the new frontier and beyond, it pays for research and people skilled in the development and communication of information and ideas on a massive scale. The intoxication of prospective voters has become a most sophisticated and expensive affair. We in the congressional leadership of the temporary Minority are well aware of our long-range information and communication gap. We understand that cooperation and consultation between top leadership of business and the Executive Branch of government is naturally easier because both the Administration and a business corporation are pyramidal organizations. Direct lines of authority flow downward from one man at the top. Decisions and action follow in a relatively uncomplicated sequence in both set-ups. I needn't waste words telling you that Congress just doesn't work that way! There are 535 sovereign decision-makers--though sometimes they do almost anything to avoid that ultimate step. Not one of us is really dependent upon any other member, not upon the President nor upon anyone except himself and his dear folks back home. No two of us have identical ideas or identical interests- despite our division along party lines. That is, of course, part of the genius of our political system. But it makes it difficult, I needn't tell you, to deal with "The Congress." Yet the knowledge explosion, the information revolution and the communi- cations breakthroughs that since World War II have transformed our society, and our politics, can lead us to great peril. For knowledge is power. To vest a monopoly of this form of power in one branch of our government, or one of our two parties, is as dangerous as the concentration of financial power, military power or any other power. The Republican Leadership of Congress; Senator Dirksen, Ray Bliss and myself, have held eight meetings over the last four months wrestling with this problem. We have just launched a pilot program in the area of economic policy through which we hope, in the months ahead, to draw upon the resources and talents of the business, the academic and the financial communities to find sound solutions to the grave fiscal problems of the federal government. One of your members, Bryce Harlow, has performed his usual heroic service (more) -7- in getting this program going. If it goes as well as now appears, we will move into other areas of national concern to develop a continuing exchange of ideas, information and interpretations to invigorate our role as a responsible and responsive Minority. I am not talking about fund-raising now, nor about partisan campaign ammunition, with which we manage to keep reasonably well-supplied. We are seeking the kind of bedrock facts and forecasts, hard-headed appraisals of future needs of the nation, that we must all have if this American political system is to succeed. I am delighted you have formed this unique council, because it seems to me we are engaged in the same effort, which indeed was the goal of the framers of our Constitution: How to make individual self- interest serve the common good. We have done pretty well so far, but we must move with the times. One last word to my Democratic friends--everything I've said I think I can live with when our roles are reversed and we become the Majority and they the Minority. The lot of a Minority Leader is not an easy one, but it is endurable because it is not supposed to last forever. I for one hope we can keep both parties in business--and business interested in both parties, so that rugged competition is the rule in both business and government. # # #