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
4526116
label
Allied Educational Foundation, Local 815, IBT, New York, NY, May 2, 1968
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
4526116
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Allied Educational Foundation, Local 815, IBT, New York, NY, May 2, 1968
citationUrl
collections
Gerald R. Ford Congressional Papers
Speeches
subjects
Civil disobedience
Inflation (Finance)
Unemployment
Urban policy
Vietnam War, 1961-1975
iiifBase
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
4526116
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1968-05-31
month
5
year
1968
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1968-05-01
month
5
year
1968
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
url
mediaId
f69b067ceffc61e1
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box D24, folder "Allied Educational Foundation,
Local 815, IBT, New York, NY, May 2, 1968" 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States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.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 D24 of The Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech File at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
ALLIED EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION, LOCAL 815, IBT,
12 NOON THURSDAY, MAY 2, 1968, AMERICANA
HOTEL, NEW YORK CITY
THERE ARE THOSE WHOSE IDEA OF AN
AGREEABLE PERSON IS SOMEONE WHO AGREES WITH
THEM.
I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT I FIND IT
NOT ONLY AGREEABLE BUT A DISTINCT PLEASURE TO
BE HERE WITH YOU -- AND THAT DOES NOT PRESUPPOSE
THAT YOU WILL AGREE WITH EVERYTHING I SAY, OR
EVEN WITH ANYTHING I SAY. of are droper drogger without
being
BUT THIS IS AN EDUCATIONAL FOUNDA-
TION, AND I HOPE TO DO A LITTLE EDUCATING TODAY,
PERHAPS WHEN I AM FINISHED I WILL FIND THAT MANY
OF YOU WHO ARE AGREEABLE PEOPLE BUT DO NOT
PRESENTLY SHARE MY VIEWS WILL WIND UP AGREEING
WITH ME. and perhaps the it can become a two way street,
with me shaving your views after m sphave of vero.
WELCOME THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK
TO YOU BECAUSE I FEEL SURE YOU ARE PEOPLE WITH
FORD
OPEN MINDS. THIS IS A REFRESHING CHANGE FOR ME
-2-
AFTER ENGAGING IN DEBATE IN THE HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES.
TO BE SERIOUS, SINCE THIS IS A LABOR
GROUP I WOULD LIKE TO BEGIN WITH THIS QUOTATION:
"LABOR IS PRIOR To, AND INDEPENDENT
OF, CAPITAL. CAPITAL IS ONLY THE FRUIT OF LABOR,
AND COULD NEVER HAVE EXISTED IF LABOR HAD NOT
FIRST EXISTED. LABOR IS THE SUPERIOR OF
CAPITAL, AND DESERVES MUCH HIGHER CONSIDERATION.
(HOWEVER) CAPITAL HAS ITS RIGHTS, WHICH ARE AS
WORTHY OF PROTECTION AS ANY OTHER RIGHTS."
WHO MADE THAT STATEMENT? EUGENE
DEBS? SAMUEL GOMPERS? FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT?
NOT ANY OF THESE. THOSE WORDS WERE
SPOKEN BY A GREAT REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT, ABRAHAM
LINCOLN, DURING HIS FIRST ANNUAL MESSAGE TO
CONGRESS ON DEC. 3, 1861.
I BEGAN WITH THIS QUOTE FROM LINCOLN
BECAUSE IT POINTS UP A POLITICAL TRUTH WHICH
NEEDS TELLING UNTIL IT IS ETCHED IN THE MIND OF
-3-
EVERY WORKING MAN IN AMERICA: THE REPUBLICAN
PARTY IS DEDICATED TO THE WELFARE OF ALL THE
WORKING PEOPLE OF THIS GREAT LAND OF OURS.
THIS WAS TRUE OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY LED BY
ABRAHAM LINCOLN AND it IS TRUE OF THE REPUBLICAN
PARTY OF TODAY.
THERE IS NO KIND OF HONEST LABOR
THAT DEMEANS A MAN. THE BEST SERVICE A MAN CAN
DO FOR HIMSELF AND HIS COUNTRY IS TO DO WELL
WHATEVER JOB HE IS CALLED UPON TO DO.
THE WORKING MAN IN AMERICA TODAY
ALSO WOULD DO HIMSELF AND HIS COUNTRY A GREAT
SERVICE IF HE WOULD BECOME DEEPLY INVOLVED IN
POLITICS. NOT IN TERMS OF BLINDLY AFFILIATING
HIMSELF WITH ONE POLITICAL PARTY OR THE OTHER
BUT IN SHARPLY ANALYZING THE RECORDS AND THE
PHILOSOPHIES OF THE TWO MAJOR POLITICAL PARTIES
+ consorentions
AND THEN MAKING AN INTELLIGENT CHOICE.
AS AN ELECTION APPROACHES MOST
AMERICAN VOTERS AT LEAST SUBCONSCIOUSLY MAKE
-4-
A CHOICE OF SOME KIND. OFTEN THIS IS SIMPLY
ox aparty labd
AN INTUITIVE REACTION TO A PARTICULAR CANDIDATE
AND IGNORES THE ISSUES.
TODAY I APPEAL TO THE AMERICAN
PEOPLE -- AND ESPECIALLY TO THE WORKING MEN AND
WOMEN OF AMERICA -- TO EXAMINE THE ISSUES
CAREFULLY BEFORE MAKING A CHOICE NEXT NOVEMBER 5.
TO QUOTE A MAN WHO RECENTLY PLACED
HIMSELF ABOVE POLITICS I AM SAYING, "COME. LET
US REASON TOGETHER."
AMERICA TODAY IS A COUNTRY IN
CRISIS. WE MUST MEET AND RESOLVE THE CHALLENGES
WHICH CONFRONT US IF OUR NATION IS TO SURVIVE.
I SHALL NOT SPEAK ABOUT VIETNAM
EXCEPT TO SAY THAT I APPLAUD THE PRESIDENT'S
DECISION TO LIMIT THE BOMBING OF NORTH VIETNAM
AS THE BASIS FOR INITIATING PEACE TALKS AND TO
GRADUALLY SHIFT THE BURDEN OF THE FIGHTING FROM
U.S. TROOPS TO THE SOUTH VIETNAMESE.
RALD FORD LIBRAI
INCIDENTALLY, IT MAY INTEREST YOU TO KNOW THAT
-4-A
THE BOMBING LIMITATION PLAN USED BY LYNDON
JOH
JOHNSON AS A BASIS FOR PEACE TALKS WAS URGED
UPON THE PRESIDENT PRIVATELY -- AND LATER MADE
PUBLIC -- BY A GROUP OF NINE HOUSE REPUBLICANS
A YEAR AGO.
But natural algetive is to bring NVN to peace
tabk. 2 will do nothing z desript etat that affort.
OTHER CRISES NOW ARE THRUSTING
penhaps
THEMSELVES UPON US WITH, GREATER URGENCY THAN
THE VIETNAM CONFLICT.
WE RECENTLY SAW PARTS OF MORE THAN
including
100 AMERICAN CITIES BURNED AND LOOTED IN A KIND
OF RE-RUN OF LAST YEAR'S CIVIL DISORDERS. THIS
IS THE CRISIS OF THE CITIES.
WE HAVE ALSO SEEN THE JOHNSON-
HUMPHREY ADMINISTRATION AND DEMOCRATIC-CONTROLLED
CONGRESS SPEND US INTO ACCUMULATED DEFICITS
TOTALLING $70 BILLION WHILE INFLATION PUFFED
UP THE ECONOMY AND CHEAPENED THE DOLLAR. THIS
HAS REACHED THE POINT WHERE EUROPEANS HAVE LOST
CONFIDENCE IN THE AMERICAN DOLLAR, OUR RECORD-
LOW GOLD STOCK IS SLIPPING AWAY FROM US, THE
-5-
DOLLAR IS IN QUESTION AS A WORLD CURRENCY, A
PARALYSIS OF WORLD TRADE THREATENS AND A
on wouse
RECESSION MAY AWAIT US.
IT IS DIFFICULT FOR WHITE AMERICANS
TO SEE THE BURNING AND THE LOOTING WITHOUT
SOME REACTING AS THE MAYOR OF CHICAGO DID WHEN
HE SAID POLICE SHOULD SHOOT TO KILL ARSONISTS
AND SHOOT TO MAIM LOOTERS. BUT I DON'T THINK
THIS IS THE ANSWER. Let me suggest-
WHEREVER POSSIBLE, OVERWHELMING
MANPOWER -- NOT FIREPOWER -- SHOULD BE USED TO
QUELL RIOTS.
NEITHER DO I THINK IT HELPFUL FOR A
HIGH PUBLIC OFFICIAL TO ENCOURAGE RIOTING BY
SPEAKING AS THOUGH SLUM CONDITIONS JUSTIFY
WIDESPREAD CIVIL DISORDERS.
I REFER TO THE STATEMENT MADE BY
VICE-PRESIDENT HUMPHREY ON JULY 18, 1966, BEFORE
THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES AT NEW
ORLEANS WHEN HE SAID: "IF I WERE IN THOSE
-6-
CONDITIONS -- IF THAT SHOULD HAPPEN TO HAVE
BEEN MY SITUATION, I THINK YOU WOULD HAVE A
LITTLE MORE TROUBLE THAN YOU HAVE HAD ALREADY,
BECAUSE I HAVE ENOUGH SPARK LEFT IN ME TO LEAD
A MIGHTY GOOD REVOLT UNDER THOSE CONDITIONS."
WELL, WE HAVE HAD MORE TROUBLE -- A
LOT MORE.
I AGREE WITH THOSE WHO BELIEVE WE
SHOULD DEAL FIRMLY WITH RIOTERS, AND I WANT AS
MUCH AS ANY OTHER PUBLIC OFFICIAL IN AMERICA
TO WIPE OUT SLUM CONDITIONS. BUT I SUBMIT
THAT BOTH THE MAYOR OF CHICAGO AND THE VICE-
PRESIDENT ERR ON THE SIDE OF EXTREMISM.
THE BEST WAY TO HANDLE RIOTS IS TO
PREVENT THEM. IF THAT PROVES IMPOSSIBLE, THEN
EXPERIENCE INDICATES WE SHOULD SMOTHER THEM
WITH POLICE AND MILITARY MANPOWER AND WHOLESALE
ARRESTS. AFTER SOME DELAY AND POSSIBLY SOME
INDECISION, THIS WORKED WELL IN THE RECENT
WASHINGTON, D. C., RIOT.
THE PROBLEM THERE WAS
-7-
THAT THE MILITARY WASN'T MOVED IN FAST ENOUGH
THE MISERABLE CONDITIONS OF THE
SLUMS ARE WELL KNOWN. THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR
SUCH CONDITIONS AND WE SHOULD MOVE TO ERADICATE
THEM AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. BUT NEITHER IS
THERE ANY EXCUSE FOR RIOTING -- EVEN UNDER THE
CONDITIONS THE VICE-PRESIDENT SPOKE OF.
ABRAHAM LINCOLN ONCE SAID: "THERE
IS NO GRIEVANCE THAT IS A FIT OBJECT OF REDRESS
BY MOB LAW.' THAT IS ALSO MY CREDO, AND I
COMMEND IT TO ALL OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
INCLUDING THE 24 MILLION NEGROES IN THIS NATION.
IF NEGROES WOULD REVOLUTIONIZE TO
RIGHT THE WRONGS DONE THEM, LET THEM USE THE
BALLOT AND NOT THE BULLET, THE SOAP BOX AND NOT
THE TORCH.
AS FOR THE 177 MILLION WHITE AMERICANS,
LET THEM ALL BEGIN LIVING THE TRUTH THAT THE
DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE HELD TO BE SELF-
EVIDENT -- THAT ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL.
-8-
HOW SHOULD WE GO ABOUT PREVENTING
RIOTS? THE NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMISSION ON
CIVIL DISORDERS HAS LAID OUT A BLUEPRINT FOR
US. WHILE I DO NOT AGREE WITH SOME OF THE
RECOMMENDATIONS, I FIND MUCH GOOD IN THE REPORT.
WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? LET'S
START WITH THE FACT THAT NEARLY ONE-THIRD OF
JOB-AGE NON-WHITE YOUTHS IN THE 20 LARGEST
METROPOLITAN AREAS ARE UNEMPLOYED. MOST OF
THESE YOUTHS ARE NEGROES.
DO WE SPEND BILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO
MAKE WORK FOR THESE YOUTHS? OR SHOULD WE INDUCE
INDUSTRY TO TRAIN AND HIRE THEM FOR DECENT,
GOOD-PAYING JOBS DESPITE THEIR PAST RECORDS.²
I THINK THE ONLY WAY TO LICK URBAN
POVERTY AND PREVENT RIOTS IS TO REBUILD NOT
ONLY THE CENTRAL CITIES BUT THE PEOPLE IN THEM.
THE BEST HOPE FOR ACHIEVING THIS IS
TO BRING INDUSTRY INTO THE PEOPLE-REBUILDING
PROCESS THROUGH A SYSTEM OF INCOME TAX CREDITS
-9-
OFFERED TO INDUSTRY AS AN INCENTIVE -- TAX
CREDITS TO PAY THE EXTRAORDINARILY HIGH COSTS
INVOLVED IN ON-THE-JOB TRAINING FOR THE POORLY
MOTIVATED HARD-CORE UNEMPLOYED AND THE UNDER-
EMPLOYED.
I AM COMPLETELY CONVINCED YOU WILL
SEE A RETURN FOR ALL OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE IN
THIS KIND OF GOVERNMENT INVESTMENT -- AN
INVESTMENT IN PEOPLE AND THE FREE ENTERPRISE
SYSTEM, AN INVESTMENT IN DOMESTIC TRANQUILLITY
WHICH WILL MAKE TAXPAYERS OUT OF TAX EATERS AND
POTENTIAL RIOTERS.
WHAT HAVE THE BILLIONS POURED INTO
THE WAR ON POVERTY ACCOMPLISHED? FROM WHAT I
HAVE SEEN THE RESULTS HAVE BEEN MEAGER IN TERMS
OF THE FUNDS SPENT. THE WAR ON POVERTY HAS
PRODUCED SOME TANGIBLE RESULTS -- BUT AT
EXTRAVAGANT COST.
THE REPUBLICAN APPROACH IS TO HELP
THE POOR AND DISADVANTAGED HELP THEMSELVES UP
-10-
THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL LADDER -- NOT TO RELY
ON FEDERAL TAX DOLLARS TO SOLVE ALL THE
PROBLEMS OF POVERTY. EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS,
ON-THE-JOB TRAINING, TAX INCENTIVES AND EQUAL
OPPORTUNITIES -- THESE ARE THE MEANS BY WHICH
POVERTY CAN BE ELIMINATED.
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CANNOT SOLVE
THE PROBLEMS OF THE CITIES. THAT TASK REQUIRES
THE TALENT, RESOURCES AND CREATIVITY OF PRIVATE
ENTERPRISE. BUSINESS ALREADY IS RESPONDING --
IN THE FIELD OF HOUSING AS WELL AS JOB TRAINING
AND RECRUITMENT FOR JOBS. IT IS THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT'S RESPONSIBILITY TO IDENTIFY THE
PROBLEMS AND TO PROVIDE THE INCENTIVES FOR
BUSINESS TO MAKE HUMAN RENEWAL A NATIONWIDE
INDUSTRY.
THERE ARE LIMITS -- PARTICULARLY IN
THIS TIME OF FEDERAL FINANCIAL CRISIS -- TO
FEDERAL FUNDING OF SOLUTIONS TO THE URBAN
CRISIS. I PERSONALLY FEEL THAT TAX CREDITS TO
-11-
TRIGGER A NATIONWIDE PROGRAM OF LOW-INCOME HOME
CONSTRUCTION AND ON-THE-JOB TRAINING BY INDUSTRY
IS THE ONLY REALISTIC COURSE BOTH IN TERMS OF
WHAT IS POSSIBLE AND WHAT IS MOST BENEFICIAL.
THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY WOULD LIKE THE
WORKING MEN AND WOMEN OF AMERICA TO BELIEVE
THAT ALL THE DO-GOODER DOLLARS SPENT BY
DEMOCRATIC ADMINISTRATIONS COME OUT OF THE
POCKETS OF THE RICH. THIS, OF COURSE, IS SHEER
NONSENSE. 2RS
I AM NOT SURPRISED THAT THERE IS A
POOR PEOPLE'S MARCH ON WASHINGTON. THIS IS AN
INDICATION OF JUST HOW FAR THE WAR ON POVERTY
HAS FALLEN SHORT. PERHAPS THERE SHOULD ALSO BE
A TAXPAYERS MARCH ON WASHINGTON TO ASK WHERE
ALL THE BILLIONS WENT THAT HAVE PUSHED THIS
COUNTRY'S NATIONAL DEBT PAST THE $350 BILLION
MARK SO THAT WE NOW PAY INTEREST ON THAT DEBT
OF NEARLY $15 BILLION A YEAR. THINK OF WHAT
THAT $15 BILLION ANNUALLY COULD DO FOR OUR
LIBRARY
-12-
POOR! INSTEAD IT IS GOING INTO THE POCKETS
OF INVESTORS RICH ENOUGH TO BUY HIGH-INTEREST-
PAYING GOVERNMENT SECURITIES.
at had in many sections country the
THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY, IS LARGELY
IDENTIFIED WITH LABOR. YET DEMOCRATIC PARTY
POLICIES IN RECENT YEARS HAVE BEEN DAMAGING
TO LABOR AND HAVE HURT THE WORKING MAN.
THE AMERICAN WORKER THINKS HE HAS
MADE STRONG WAGE GAINS IN THE PAST TWO YEARS.
BUT THE U.S. LABOR DEPARTMENT HAS FLATLY STATED
THAT INFLATION HAS WIPED OUT THOSE SUPPOSED
WAGE ADVANCES.
IT USED TO BE SAID THAT A EOOL AND
HIS MONEY WERE SOON PARTED. NOW IT HAPPENS TO
ALL OF US -- BECAUSE OF THE MISTAKEN FISCAL AND
MONETARY POLICIES PURSUED BY THE DEMOCRATIC
PARTY IN RECENT YEARS.
TO INVITE INFLATION IS TO INVITE
DISASTER, AND THAT IS JUST WHAT THE DEMOCRATIC
PARTY HAS DONE. WHEN PRESIDENT JOHNSON SAYS
-13-
"YOU NEVER HAD IT SO GOOD" HE IS EQUATING
INFLATION WITH PROSPERITY. HE IS SAYING
INFLATION IS PROSPERITY. I SAY HE IS DEAD
WRONG.
IT IS NOT PROSPERITY FOR THE
AMERICAN WORKER TO BE PLACED ON A TREADMILL WHERE
HE KEEPS RUNNING HARD BUT NEVER GETS ANYWHERE.
INFLATION IS A DELUSION. THE WORKER DOESN'
GET AHEAD WITH CHEAP DOLLARS THAT KEEP DROPPING
IN VALUE -- EVEN IF HE ACCUMULATES MORE OF THEM.
CONSIDER THE FACT THAT THE 1957-59
DOLLAR NOW IS WORTH JUST 83 CENTS IN PURCHASING
POWER. PONDER THE FACT THAT THE COST OF LIVING
HAS GONE UP NEARLY 20 PER CENT SINCE THE
1957-59 PERIOD. AND THEN LET THE PRESIDENT TELL
YOU THE AMERICAN WORKER NEVER HAD IT SO GOOD.
LET THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY ALSO
EXPLAIN WHY TOTAL FEDERAL SPENDING HAS GONE UP
80 PER CENT BETWEEN 1960 AND 1967 WHILE THE
POPULATION INCREASED ONLY 11 PER CENT AND WHY
-14-
THE NUMBER OF FEDERAL EMPLOYES HAS INCREASED
25 PER CENT AND THE COST OF THE FEDERAL
CIVILIAN PAYROLL HAS JUMPED 75 PER CENT DURING
THAT SAME PERIOD.
IS VIETNAM RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SHARP
JUMP IN SPENDING? BETWEEN 1960 AND 1967,
DEFENSE SPENDING ROSE 68 PER CENT WHILE NON-
DEFENSE SPENDING INCREASED BY 97 PER CENT.
THE WHOLE NATION IS IN TROUBLE BECAUSE
THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY HAS OVERCOMMITTED AMERICA
BOTH AT HOME AND ABROAD, AND BECAUSE THE
DEMOCRATIC PARTY BELIEVES ONLY IN FEDERAL
SOLUTIONS, FEDERALLY FINANCED AND FEDERALLY
ADMINISTERED. Anit big immplete,
I AM SURE SOME ADMINISTRATION
OFFICIALS PRIVATELY BLAME OUR INFLATIONARY
SPIRAL ON LABOR AND INDUSTRY. THIS IS
NONSENSE. THE TRUTH IS THAT THE JOHNSON-
HUMPHREY ADMINISTRATION COULD HAVE HALTED THE
ALD
LIBRAR
PRESENT INFLATION IN ITS BEGINNING STAGES TWO
-15-
YEARS AGO WITH A HOLD-DOWN IN FEDERAL SPENDING.
INSTEAD THE ADMINISTRATION KEPT RIGHT ON
STIMULATING AN ALREADY OVERHEATED ECONOMY. IN
DESPERATION, THE FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD
TIGHTENED UP ON THE MONEY SUPPLY. THE RESULT
WAS SHARPLY RISING PRICES DESPITE RECORD-HIGH
INTEREST RATES AND A VIRTUAL DEPRESSION IN HOME
CONSTRUCTION.
EARLY IN 1967 WE HAD A MINI -
RECESSION, AND THEN THE INFLATIONARY SPIRAL TOOK
HOLD AGAIN AS THE JOHNSON-HUMPHREY ADMINISTRATION
LED US TOWARD THE FIRST $20 BILLION DEFICIT SINCE
WORLD WAR II.
IN 1967 WORK STOPPAGES WERE THE
HIGHEST SINCE 1959. U.S. LABOR DEPARTMENT
ESTIMATES FOR THE FIRST NINE MONTHS OF 1967 SHOW
3,756 STOPPAGES INVOLVING 2.5 MILLION WORKERS,
WITH 28.3 MILLION MAN-DAYS LOST.
THE UNIONS CLEARLY WERE TRYING TO
CATCH UP WITH JOHNSON-HUMPHREY INFLATION.
GERALD
LIBRARY
-16-
BUT WHAT HAPPENED? WHEN WAGES ARE
j
2
ADJUSTED FOR CONSUMER PRICE INCREASES AND FOR
SOCIAL SECURITY AND INCOME TAXES, WE FIND THAT
the mal purchasing power
WEEKLY EARNINGS, OF THE AVERAGE WORKER IN NON-
AGRICULTURAL PRIVATE EMPLOYMENT WERE ACTUALLY A
TRIFLE LOWER IN 1966 THAN IN 1965 AND AGAIN A
TRIFLE LOWER IN 1967 THAN IN 1966.
YOU CAN'T WIN IN A RACE WITH
The working man of the nation lose in This contrat,
INFLATION, THE AMERICAN WORKER NEEDS REAL
PROGRESS -- REAL WAGE GAINS ACHIEVED THROUGH A
RESTORATION OF PRICE STABILITY.
NOW JOHNSON-HUMPHREY ADMINISTRATION
ly the federal got
SPENDING, LIKELY WILL RESULT IN AN INCOME TAX
INCREASE. WHERE WILL THAT LEAVE THE AMERICAN
WORKER?
I PLEAD TODAY FOR COMMON SENSE IN
GOVERNMENT. ΓT AM HERE TO TELL YOU THAT MOLLY
AND THE BABIES WANT AND NEED AND DESERVE MORE
THAN FOOD IN THE BELLY AND A DRIVE IN THE FAMILY
CAR ON SUNDAY.
-17-
THE AMERICAN WORKER WANTS TO
ADVANCE. THROUGHOUT HISTORY, OUR WORKERS HAVE
ALWAYS STOOD OUT BECAUSE THEY HAVE STOOD ON
THEIR OWN TWO FEET. THEY HAVE HELPED TO MAKE
AMERICA GREAT. THEY DESERVE TO ENJOY THEIR
JUST SHARE OF THE FRUITS OF THE AMERICAN
ECONOMY -- NOT HAVE IT TAKEN FROM THEM BY
INFLATION AND HIGH TAXES.
I WOULD LIKE TO CLOSE BY AGAIN
QUOTING A GREAT DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT WHOSE
WISE WORDS ARE BEING IGNORED BY HIS PARTY TODAY.
IN HIS FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS, ON
MARCH 4, 1801, THOMAS JEFFERSON SAID:
"STILL ONE THING MORE, FELLOW
CITIZENS -- A WISE AND FRUGAL GOVERNMENT, WHICH
SHALL RESTRAIN MEN FROM INJURING ONE ANOTHER,
WHICH SHALL LEAVE THEM FREE TO REGULATE THEIR
OWN PURSUITS OF INDUSTRY AND IMPROVEMENT, AND
SHALL NOT TAKE FROM THE MOUTH OF LABOR THE
FORD
BREAD IT HAS EARNED. THIS IS THE SUM OF GOOD
LIBRARY
-18-
GOVERNMENT, AND THIS IS NECESSARY TO CLOSE OUR
CIRCLE OF FELICITIES."
THANK YOU.
-END-
FORD NEBRASK
Distribution. Fall 5/2/68
20 Capies Mr. Ford
Office Copy
CONGRESSMAN
NEWS
GERALD R. FORD
HOUSE REPUBLICAN LEADER
RELEASE
--FOR RELEASE IN THURSDAY PMs--
May 2, 1968
A Speech by Rep. Gerald R. Ford, R-Mich., House Republican Leader, before the
Allied Educational Foundation, Local 815, IBT, at 12 noon Thursday, May 2,
1968, at the Americana Hotel, New York City.
There are those whose idea of an agreeable person is someone who agrees with
them.
I want you to know that I find it not only agreeable but a distinct
pleasure to be here with you--and that does not presuppose that you will agree
with everything I say, or even with anything I say.
But this is an Educational Foundation, and I hope to do a little educating
today. Perhaps when I am finished I will find that many of you who are agreeable
people but do not presently share my views will wind up agreeing with me.
I welcome this opportunity to speak to you because I feel sure you are
people with open minds. This is a refreshing change for me after engaging in
debate in the House of Representatives.
To be serious, since this is a labor group I would like to begin with this
quotation:
"Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit
of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is
the superior of capital, and deserves much higher consideration. (However) Capital
has its rights, which are as worthy of protection as any other rights."
Who made that statement? Eugene Debs? Samuel Gompers? Franklin D.
Roosevelt?
Not any of these. Those words were spoken by a great Republican president,
Abraham Lincoln, during his first annual message to Congress on December 3, 1861.
I began with this quote from Lincoln because it points up a political truth
which needs telling until it is etched in the mind of every working man in America:
The Republican Party is dedicated to the welfare of all the working people of
this great land of ours. This was true of the Republican Party led by Abraham
Lincoln and it is true of the Republican Party of today.
There is no kind of honest labor that demeans a man. The best service a man
can do for himself and his country is to do well whatever job he is called upon
to do.
(more)
GERALD FORD
-2-
The working man in America today also would do himself and his country a
great service if he would become deeply involved in politics. Not in terms of
blindly affiliating himself with one political party or the other but in sharply
analyzing the records and the philosophies of the two major political parties
and then making an intelligent choice.
As an election approaches most American voters at least subconsciously make
a choice of some kind. Often this is simply an intuitive reaction to a particular
candidate and ignores the issues.
Today I appeal to the American people--especially to the working men and
women of America--to examine the issues carefully before making a choice next
November 5.
To quote a man who recently placed himself above politics I am saying,
"Come. Let us reason together."
America today is a country in crisis. We must meet and resolve the
challenges which confront us, if our Nation is to survive.
I shall not speak about Vietnam except to say that I applaud the President's
decision to limit the bombing of North Vietnam as the basis for initiating peace
talks and to gradually shift the burden of the fighting from U.S. troops to the
South Vietnamese. Incidentally, it may interest you to know that the bombing
limitation plan used by Lyndon Johnson as a basis for peace talks was urged upon
the President privately--and later made public--by a group of nine House Republicans
a year ago.
Other crises now are thrusting themselves upon us with greater urgency than
the Vietnam conflict.
We recently saw parts of more than 100 American cities burned and looted
in a kind of re-run of last year's civil disorders. This is the crisis of the
cities.
We have also seen the Johnson-Humphrey Administration and Democratic-
controlled Congress spend us into accumulated deficits totalling $70 billion while
inflation puffed up the economy and cheapened the dollar. This has reached the
point where Europeans have lost confidence in the American dollar, our record-low
gold stock is slipping away from us, the dollar is in question as a world currency,
a paralysis of world trade threatens and a recession may await US.
It is difficult for white Americans to see the burning and the looting
without some reacting as the mayor of Chicago did when he said police should shoot
to kill arsonists and shoot to maim looters. But I don't think this is the answer.
(more)
-3-
Wherever possible, overwhelming manpower--not firepower--should be used to
quell riots.
Neither do I think it helpful for a high public official to encourage
rioting by speaking as though slum conditions justify widespread civil disorders.
I refer to the statement made by Vice-President Humphrey on July 18, 1966,
before the National Association of Counties at New Orleans when he said: "If I
were in those conditions-- that should happen to have been my situation, I think
you would have had a little more trouble than you have had already, because I have
enough spark left in me to lead a mighty good revolt under those conditions."
Well, we have had more trouble--a lot more.
I agree with those who believe we should deal firmly with rioters, and I
want as much as any other public official in America to wipe out slum conditions.
But I submit that both the mayor of Chicago and the Vice-President err on the side
of extremism.
The best way to handle riots is to prevent them. If that proves impossible,
then experience indicates we should smother them with police and military manpower
and wholesale arrests. After some delay and possibly some indecision, this worked
well in the recent Washington, D. C., riot. The problem there was that the military
wasn't moved in fast enough.
The miserable conditions of the slums are well known. There is no excuse
for such conditions and we should move to eradicate them as quickly as possible.
But neither is there any excuse for rioting--even under the conditions the
Vice-President spoke of.
Abraham Lincoln once said: "There is no grievance that is a fit object of
redress by mob law." That is also my credo, and I commend it to all of the
American people including the 24 million Negroes in this Nation.
If Negroes would revolutionize to right the wrongs done them, let them use
the ballot and not the bullet, the soap box and not the torch.
As for the 177 million white Americans, let them all begin living the truth
that the Declaration of Independence held to be self-evident--that all men are
created equal.
How should we go about preventing riots? The National Advisory Commission
on Civil Disorders has laid out a blueprint for US. While I do not agree with
some of the recommendations, I find much good in the report.
Where do we go from here? Let's start with the fact that nearly one-third
of job-age non-white youths in the 20 largest metropolitan areas are unemployed.
Most of these youths are Negroes.
(more)
-4-
Do we spend billions of dollars to make work for these youths? Or should
we induce industry to train and hire them for decent, good-paying jobs despite
their past records?
I think the only way to lick urban poverty and prevent riots is to rebuild
not only the central cities but the people in them.
The best hope for achieving this is to bring industry into the people-
rebuilding process through a system of income tax credits offered to industry as
an incentive--tax credits to pay the extraordinarily high costs involved in on-the-
job training for the poorly motivated hard-core unemployed and the underemployed.
I am completely convinced you will see a return for all of the American
people in this kind of government investment- an investment in people and the free
enterprise system, an investment in domestic tranquillity which will make taxpayers
out of tax eaters and potential rioters.
What have the billions poured into the War on Poverty accomplished? From
what I have seen the results have been meager in terms of the funds spent. The
War on Poverty has produced some tangible results--but at extravagant cost.
The Republican approach is to help the poor and disadvantaged help themselves
up the economic and social ladder--not to rely on Federal tax dollars to solve all
the problems of poverty. Educational programs, on-the-job training, tax incentives
and equal opportunities--the are the means by which poverty can be eliminated.
The Federal Government cannot solve the problems of the cities. That task
requires the talent, resources and creativity of private enterprise. Business
already is responding-- in the field of housing as well as job training and
recruitment for jobs. It is the Federal Government's responsibility to identify
the problems and to provide the incentive for business to make human renewal a
nationwide industry.
There are limits--particularly in this time of federal financial crisis- to
federal funding of solutions to the urban crisis. I personally feel that tax
credits to trigger a nationwide program of low-income home construction and on-the-
job training by industry is the only realistic course both in terms of what is
possible and what is most beneficial.
The Democratic Party would like the working men and women of America to
believe that all the do-gooder dollars spent by Democratic Administrations come
out of the pockets of the rich. This, of course, is sheer nonsense.
I am not surprised that there is a Poor People's March on Washington. This
is an indication of just how far the War on Pov erty has fallen short. Perhaps
(more)
-5-
there should also be a Taxpayers March on Washington to ask where all the billions
went that have pushed this country's national debt past the $350 billion mark so
that we now pay interest on the debt of nearly $15 billion a year. Think of what
that $15 billion annually could do for our poor! Instead it is going into the
pockets of investors rich enough to buy high-interest-paying government securities.
The Democratic Party is largely identified with labor. Yet Democratic Party
policies in recent years have been damaging to labor and have hurt the working man.
The American worker thinks he has made strong wage gains in the past two
years. But the U.S. Labor Department has flatly stated that inflation has wiped
out those supposed wage advances.
It used to be said that a fool and his money were soon parted. Now it
happens to all of is--because of the mistaken fiscal and monetary policies pursued
by the Democratic Party in recent years.
To invite inflation is to invite disaster, and that is just what the
Democratic Party has done. When President Johnson says "you never had it so good"
he is equating inflation with prosperity. He is saying inflation is prosperity.
I say he is dead wrong.
It is not prosperity for the American worker to be placed on a treadmill
where he keeps running hard but never gets anywhere. Inflation is a delusion. The
worker doesn't get ahead with cheap dollars that keep dropping in value--even if
he accumulates more of them.
Consider the fact that the 1957-59 dollar now is worth just 83 cents in
purchasing power. Ponder the fact that the cost of living has gone up nearly
20 per cent since the 1957-59 period. And then let the President tell you the
American worker never had it so good.
Let the Democratic Party also explain why total federal spending has gone
up 80 per cent between 1960 and 1967 while the population increased only 11 per
cent
and why the number of federal employes has increased 25 per cent and the
cost of the federal civilian payroll has jumped 75 per cent during that same
period.
Is Vietnam responsible for the sharp jump in spending? Between 1960 and
1967, defense spending rose 68 per cent while nondefense spending increased by
97 per cent.
The whole nation is in trouble because the Democratic Party has overcommitted
America both at home and abroad, and because the Democratic Party believes only
in federal solutions, federally financed and federally administered.
I am sure some Administration officials privately blame our inflationary
(more)
-6-
spiral on labor and industry. This is nonsense. The truth is that the Johnson-
Humphrey Administration could have halted the present inflation in its beginning
stages two years ago with a hold-down in federal spending. Instead the Administration
kept right on stimulating an already overheated economy. In desperation, the Federal
Reserve Board tightened up on the money supply. The result was sharply rising
prices despite record-high interest rates and a virtual depression in home
construction.
Early in 1967 we had a mini-recession, and then the inflationary spiral took
hold again as the Johnson-Humphrey Administration led us toward the first
$20 billion deficit since World War II.
In 1967 work stoppages were the highest since 1959. U.S. Labor Department
estimates for the first nine months of 1967 show 3,756 stoppages involving 2.5
million workers, with 28.3 million man-days lost.
The unions clearly were trying to catch up with Johnson-Humphrey inflation.
But what happened? When wages are adjusted for consumer price increases
and for social security and income taxes, we find that weekly earnings of the
average worker in non-agricultural private employment were actually a trifle lower
in 1966 than in 1965 and again a trifle lower in 1967 than in 1966.
You can't win in a race with inflation. The American worker needs real
progress--real wage gains achieved through a restoration of price stability.
Now Johnson-Humphrey Administration spending likely will result in an income
tax increase. Where will that leave the American worker?
I plead today for common sense in government. I am here to tell you that
Molly and the babies want and need and deserve more than food in the belly and a
drive in the family car on Sunday.
The American worker wants to advance. Throughout history, our workers have
always stood out because they have stood on their own two feet. They have helped
to make America great. They deserve to enjoy their just share of the fruits of
the American economy--not have it taken from them by inflation and high taxes.
I would like to close by again quoting a great Democratic President whose
wise words are being ignored by his party today.
In his first inaugural address, On March 4, 1801, Thomas Jefferson said:
"Still one thing more, fellow citizens--a wise and frugal government, which
shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them free to
regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from
the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government,
and this is necessary to close our circle of felicities."
Thank you.
# # #
CONGRESSMAN
NEWS
GERALD R. FORD
HOUSE REPUBLICAN LEADER
RELEASE
--FOR RELEASE IN THURSDAY PMs--
May 2, 1968
A Speech by Rep. Gerald R. Ford, R-Mich., House Republican Leader, before the
Allied Educational Foundation, Local 815, IBT, at 12 noon Thursday, May 2,
1968, at the Americana Hotel, New York City.
There are those whose idea of an agreeable person is someone who agrees with
them.
I want you to know that I find it not only agreeable but a distinct
pleasure to be here with you--and that does not presuppose that you will agree
with everything I say, or even with anything I say.
But this is an Educational Foundation, and I hope to do a little educating
today. Perhaps when I am finished I will find that many of you who are agreeable
people but do not presently share my views will wind up agreeing with me.
I welcome this opportunity to speak to you because I feel sure you are
people with open minds. This is a refreshing change for me after engaging in
debate in the House of Representatives.
To be serious, since this is a labor group I would like to begin with this
quotation:
"Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit
of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is
the superior of capital, and deserves much higher consideration. (However) Capital
has its rights, which are as worthy of protection as any other rights."
Who made that statement? Eugene Debs? Samuel Gompers? Franklin D.
Roosevelt?
Not any of these. Those words were spoken by a great Republican president,
Abraham Lincoln, during his first annual message to Congress on December 3, 1861.
I began with this quote from Lincoln because it points up a political truth
which needs telling until it is etched in the mind of every working man in America:
The Republican Party is dedicated to the welfare of all the working people of
this great land of ours. This was true of the Republican Party led by Abraham
Lincoln and it is true of the Republican Party of today.
There is no kind of honest labor that demeans a man. The best service a man
can do for himself and his country is to do well whatever job he is called upon
to do.
(more)
-2-
The working man in America today also would do himself and his country a
great service if he would become deeply involved in politics. Not in terms of
blindly affiliating himself with one political party or the other but in sharply
analyzing the records and the philosophies of the two major political parties
and then making an intelligent choice.
As an election approaches most American voters at least subconsciously make
a choice of some kind. Often this is simply an intuitive reaction to a particular
candidate and ignores the issues.
Today I appeal to the American people--especially to the working men and
women of America--to examine the issues carefully before making a choice next
November 5.
To quote a man who recently placed himself above politics I am saying,
"Come. Let us reason together."
America today is a country in crisis. We must meet and resolve the
challenges which confront us, if our Nation is to survive.
I shall not speak about Vietnam except to say that I applaud the President's
decision to limit the bombing of North Vietnam as the basis for initiating peace
talks and to gradually shift the burden of the fighting from U.S. troops to the
South Vietnamese. Incidentally, it may interest you to know that the bombing
limitation plan used by Lyndon Johnson as a basis for peace talks was urged upon
the President privately--and later made public--by a group of nine House Republicans
a year ago.
Other crises now are thrusting themselves upon us with greater urgency than
the Vietnam conflict.
We recently saw parts of more than 100 American cities burned and looted
in a kind of re-run of last year's civil disorders. This is the crisis of the
cities.
We have also seen the Johnson-Humphrey Administration and Democratic-
controlled Congress spend us into accumulated deficits totalling $70 billion while
inflation puffed up the economy and cheapened the dollar. This has reached the
point where Europeans have lost confidence in the American dollar, our record-low
gold stock is slipping away from us, the dollar is in question as a world currency,
a paralysis of world trade threatens and a recession may await US.
It is difficult for white Americans to see the burning and the looting
without some reacting as the mayor of Chicago did when he said police should shoot
to kill arsonists and shoot to maim looters. But I don't think this is the answer.
(more)
-3-
Wherever possible, overwhelming manpower--not firepower--should be used to
quell riots.
Neither do I think it helpful for a high public official to encourage
rioting by speaking as though slum conditions justify widespread civil disorders.
I refer to the statement made by Vice-President Humphrey on July 18, 1966,
before the National Association of Counties at New Orleans when he said: "If I
were in those conditions--if that should happen to have been my situation, I think
you would have had a little more trouble than you have had already, because I have
enough spark left in me to lead a mighty good revolt under those conditions."
Well, we have had more trouble--a lot more.
I agree with those who believe we should deal firmly with rioters, and I
want as much as any other public official in America to wipe out slum conditions.
But I submit that both the mayor of Chicago and the Vice-President err on the side
of extremism.
The best way to handle riots is to prevent them. If that proves impossible,
then experience indicates we should smother them with police and military manpower
and wholesale arrests. After some delay and possibly some indecision, this worked
well in the recent Washington, D. C., riot. The problem there was that the military
wasn't moved in fast enough.
The miserable conditions of the slums are well known. There is no excuse
for such conditions and we should move to eradicate them as quickly as possible.
But neither is there any excuse for rioting--even under the conditions the
Vice-President spoke of.
Abraham Lincoln once said: "There is no grievance that is a fit object of
redress by mob law." That is also my credo, and I commend it to all of the
American people including the 24 million Negroes in this Nation.
If Negroes would revolutionize to right the wrongs done them, let them use
the ballot and not the bullet, the soap box and not the torch.
As for the 177 million white Americans, let them all begin living the truth
that the Declaration of Independence held to be self-evident--that all men are
created equal.
How should we go about preventing riots? The National Advisory Commission
on Civil Disorders has laid out a blueprint for US. While I do not agree with
some of the recommendations, I find much good in the report.
Where do we go from here? Let's start with the fact that nearly one-third
of job-age non-white youths in the 20 largest metropolitan areas are unemployed.
Most of these youths are Negroes.
(more)
-4-
Do we spend billions of dollars to make work for these youths? Or should
we induce industry to train and hire them for decent, good-paying jobs despite
their past records?
I think the only way to lick urban poverty and prevent riots is to rebuild
not only the central cities but the people in them.
The best hope for achieving this is to bring industry into the people-
rebuilding process through a system of income tax credits offered to industry as
an incentive--tax credits to pay the extraordinarily high costs involved in on-the-
job training for the poorly motivated hard-core unemployed and the underemployed.
I am completely convinced you will see a return for all of the American
people in this kind of government investment--an investment in people and the free
enterprise system, an investment in domestic tranquillity which will make taxpayers
out of tax eaters and potential rioters.
What have the billions poured into the War on Poverty accomplished? From
what I have seen the results have been meager in terms of the funds spent. The
War on Poverty has produced some tangible results--but at extravagant cost.
The Republican approach is to help the poor and disadvantaged help themselves
up the economic and social ladder--not to rely on Federal tax dollars to solve all
the problems of poverty. Educational programs, on-the-job training, tax incentives
and equal opportunities--these are the means by which poverty can be eliminated.
The Federal Government cannot solve the problems of the cities. That task
requires the talent, resources and creativity of private enterprise. Business
already is responding-- in the field of housing as well as job training and
recruitment for jobs. It is the Federal Government's responsibility to identify
the problems and to provide the incentive for business to make human renewal a
nationwide industry.
There are limits--particularly in this time of federal financial crisis--to
federal funding of solutions to the urban crisis. I personally feel that tax
credits to trigger a nationwide program of low-income home construction and on-the-
job training by industry is the only realistic course both in terms of what is
possible and what is most beneficial.
The Democratic Party would like the working men and women of America to
believe that all the do-gooder dollars spent by Democratic Administrations come
out of the pockets of the rich. This, of course, is sheer nonsense.
I am not surprised that there is a Poor People's March on Washington. This
is an indication of just how far the War on erty has fallen short. Perhaps
(more)
-5-
there should also be a Taxpayers March on Washington to ask where all the billions
went that have pushed this country's national debt past the $350 billion mark so
that we now pay interest on the debt of nearly $15 billion a year. Think of what
that $15 billion annually could do for our poor! Instead it is going into the
pockets of investors rich enough to buy high-interest-paying government securities.
The Democratic Party is largely identified with labor. Yet Democratic Party
policies in recent years have been damaging to labor and have hurt the working man.
The American worker thinks he has made strong wage gains in the past two
years. But the U.S. Labor Department has flatly stated that inflation has wiped
out those supposed wage advances.
It used to be said that a fool and his money were soon parted. Now it
happens to all of us--because of the mistaken fiscal and monetary policies pursued
by the Democratic Party in recent years.
To invite inflation is to invite disaster, and that is just what the
Democratic Party has done. When President Johnson says "you never had it so good"
he is equating inflation with prosperity. He is saying inflation is prosperity.
I say he is dead wrong.
It is not prosperity for the American worker to be placed on a treadmill
where he keeps running hard but never gets anywhere. Inflation is a delusion. The
worker doesn't get ahead with cheap dollars that keep dropping in value--even if
he accumulates more of them.
Consider the fact that the 1957-59 dollar now is worth just 83 cents in
purchasing power. Ponder the fact that the cost of living has gone up nearly
20 per cent since the 1957-59 period. And then let the President tell you the
American worker never had it so good.
Let the Democratic Party also explain why total federal spending has gone
up 80 per cent between 1960 and 1967 while the population increased only 11 per
cent
and why the number of federal employes has increased 25 per cent and the
cost of the federal civilian payroll has jumped 75 per cent during that same
period.
Is Vietnam responsible for the sharp jump in spending? Between 1960 and
1967, defense spending rose 68 per cent while nondefense spending increased by
97 per cent.
The whole nation is in trouble because the Democratic Party has overcommitted
America both at home and abroad, and because the Democratic Party believes only
in federal solutions, federally financed and federally administered.
I am sure some Administration officials privately blame our inflationary
(more)
-6-
spiral on labor and industry. This is nonsense. The truth is that the Johnson-
Humphrey Administration could have halted the present inflation in its beginning
stages two years ago with a hold-down in federal spending. Instead the Administration
kept right on stimulating an already overheated economy. In desperation, the Federal
Reserve Board tightened up on the money supply. The result was sharply rising
prices despite record-high interest rates and a virtual depression in home
construction.
Early in 1967 we had a mini-recession, and then the inflationary spiral took
hold again as the Johnson-Humphrey Administration led us toward the first
$20 billion deficit since World War II.
In 1967 work stoppages were the highest since 1959. U.S. Labor Department
estimates for the first nine months of 1967 show 3,756 stoppages involving 2.5
million workers, with 28.3 million man-days lost.
The unions clearly were trying to catch up with Johnson-Humphrey inflation.
But what happened? When wages are adjusted for consumer price increases
and for social security and income taxes, we find that weekly earnings of the
average worker in non-agricultural private employment were actually a trifle lower
in 1966 than in 1965 and again a trifle lower in 1967 than in 1966.
You can't win in a race with inflation. The American worker needs real
progress--real wage gains achieved through a restoration of price stability.
Now Johnson-Humphrey Administration spending likely will result in an income
tax increase. Where will that leave the American worker?
I plead today for common sense in government. I am here to tell you that
Molly and the babies want and need and deserve more than food in the belly and a
drive in the family car on Sunday.
The American worker wants to advance. Throughout history, our workers have
always stood out because they have stood on their own two feet. They have helped
to make America great. They deserve to enjoy their just share of the fruits of
the American economy--not have it taken from them by inflation and high taxes.
I would like to close by again quoting a great Democratic President whose
wise words are being ignored by his party today.
In his first inaugural address, On March 4, 1801, Thomas Jefferson said:
"Still one thing more, fellow citizens--a wise and frugal government, which
shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them free to
regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from
the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government,
and this is necessary to close our circle of felicities."
Thank you.
# # #