Ask the Scholar
Page 1 of 1
I can add historical knowledge about this page.
Page image
OCR
The original documents are located in Box D35, folder "Fifth District Weekly Radio
Reports, February-May 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States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.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.
a Possibility for this meek
Trle
Radio-lelevision Script
NATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE
312 CONGRESSIONAL HOTEL
WASHINGTON 3, D. C.
LINCOLN 4-3010
Script No. 5
February 6, 1967
FEDERAL, STATE TAX-SHARING
This is Congressman
reporting to you from Washington.
America is a land of many climates. They vary from the sub-tropical weather of the
Southern States to the freezing cold of our Northern winters.
People are different, too. Americanism gives them a basic likeness, of course, but
a Texan, for instance, is as easily distinguishable from a New Englander as an Irishman is from
a Scot. They are alike, but they are different--especially do they differ in their local customs
and local habits.
This fact has, of course, been recognized for a long time. But until recently the
trend here in Washington has been to ignore it to treat the States and localities as though
they were all cut from the same pattern--to use Federal funds to shape the various areas into
a pro-conceived bureaucratic mold.
The root of this problem is, of course, money--Federal money, with the
Federal control that usually goes with it. Federal aid is granted to States under strict rules
and conditions laid down in Washington. In short, there are strings attached.
Something must be done to counteract the overwhelming weight of this Federal
money-club, to prevent every facet of the States' activity from being stamped "made in Wash-
ingtom."
I believe one answer is the tax-sharing plan recently sponsored by Republicans in
the House of Representatives. This plan would return more than two billion dollars directly
to the States and localities--without the government earmarking how the funds are to be spent
or specifying controls over its use.
The present system of Federal aid to the States and localities is an uncoordinated
spider web of confusion. State and local governments are now buried under a mass of over
400 different Federal appropriations covering 170 separate aid programs, administered by a
total of 21 Federal departments and agencies, 150 Washington bureaus and 400 regional
fices--each with its own way of passing out Federal tax dollars.
GERALD of FORD LIBRARY
- more -
Digitized from Box D35 of the Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech File at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
- 2 -
Here's how this tax-sharing plan would work:
First, it would allocate three per cent of Federal personal income tax revenue for
tax-sharing with the States. Over a four-year period, this would be raised to five per cent.
The 17 poorest States would first receive 10 per cent of the total funds as a form of equaliza-
tion. The other 90 per cent would then be divided among all 50 States on the basis of popu-
lation, with special incentives for States making a maximum tax effort.
Forty-five per cent of funds allocated to a State would go to local communities
for education or other costs and the remaining 55 per cent could be spent in any way the State
national
chose. Moreover, a news Council on Tax Sharing, with State representation, would be set
up to administer the program to insure simplified distribution--and to preclude Federal controls.
The 10-man bipartisan council would be appointed by the President® Five members would
be State governors.
I believe it is time that we start rovitalizing the initiative of our State and local
communities and reinvigorating our Federal system. The availability of more than two billion
dollars would provide the needed revenue for problem solving by States and localities without
rigid and wasteful Federal forms and control.
I am hopeful Congress will act on this plan.
This is your Congressman Juny Ford, reporting from Washington I'll be back
next. week the same time,
(Note: a copy of this script is avaliable on Teleprompter in the House TV Studio.
For additional information on this script or to suggest ideas for future scripts, contact Kirby
Hawkes at the Committee's Public Relations Office)
###
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
5th deatrict Rolio
2-9-67
ilternate
Tape
This is Jerry Ford your Congressman speaking to you from the Nation's
our
capital. In this first broadcast for 1967 I want to extend my appreciation to
this radio station for permitting me to report to you weekly.
Last Wednesday the House of Representatives apported an increase in the
public debt limit from $330 billion to $336 billion. The vote was 219 to 199.
I voted "NO" as I have done on the last 7 occasions when the President has
requested the Congress to raise the debt ceiling. It seems to me that some
P lace along the way we must call a halt to deficit financing and a constant
increase in the public debt.
The last time I voted to increase the debt was in response to President
Kennedy's request in 1962. Mr. Kennedy had pointed out that to effectively
manage the national debt and estalhish a sound fiscal policy, the debt ceiling
should be raised to $300 billion. I went along with his request but stated at
that time that something must be done to halt deficit financing. I said that the
Congress cannot blithely go on voting for new proposals to increase federal
spending. And added that Congress may have to refuse to increase further the
national debt limit. That was in 1962 when President Kennedy asked that the
limit be set at $300 billion.
The national debt now hovers near $330 billion and is on the way to $336 billion.
The Johnson Administration is guilty of excessive and
,
unnecessary
spending in many areas. By granting the Administration authority to further increase
the debt we are simply Asking for more irresponsible fiscal management.
Wednesday
It was interesting to note that the legisa last week to increase the
d ebt to $336 billion was passed by a margin of only 16 votes.
Before the bill was finally passed, the Republicans offered two amendments
would have been
which we think sould were have been sound, and ^ helpful to the Adminsi tration and to the
taxpayer.
Current law sets the interest rate on long-term United States bonds (those
running over 5 years) at 414% With the interest rates as they are today, this is
unrealistic and means that the Treasury cannot issue such bonds. No one will buy
them at 194 4½ % interest. In fact, in December the Treasury was paying an average
interest rate of 5%. Our amendment, therefore, would have permitted the
Treasury to issue long-term bonds at the going itherest rate which we feel in
the long run would result in a net savings to the taxpayers in overall interest
payments.
GERALD R. LIBRARY FORD
and
was
However, this amendment annd the second one we proposed were defeated 261 to 155.
Our other amendment simply required requested that money borrowed through the sale of
participation certificate be included as a part of the national debt.
You will remember that last year the Democratic Congress authorized the
President to sell certain assets held by the Treasury. The assets included FHA
mortgages and the like. When the government sells these participation certificates
is
or government assets, it has been paying well over 5% for the money it borrows,
and this is long-term borrowing.
However, the money borrowed by this method of selling government assets is
not included in the federal debt limit. Consequentily, the Administration can
ignore the debt limit as far as its borrowing through the sale of government
assets is concerned.
We do not think this is right. feel that it gives a distorted pictures of
the true debt situation. We propsed, therefore, that the money borrowed through
the sale of participation certificats be included in the debt limit. However,
this amendment, too, was votedo down.
I can assure you, however, that Republican members of the House will continue
their efforts to cut down unnecessary expenditures so that we can more nearly balance
the budget without increasing the tax burden on the American people.
This is Jerry Ford, your Congressman. I will be back next week with another
report from Washington.
FORD LIBRARY if BERALD
Fifth District Radio-TV Script
Feb. 15, 1967
This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington.
I'd like to talk with you today about something that concerns all
Ameticans--clean government.
You all have heard of the highly publicized Adam Clayton Powell case, and
maybe you're familiar with the investigation into the activities of Senator
Thomas Dodd of Connecticut.
You become incensed when you read about alleged shenanigans involving members
of Congress, and your should.
You should
get excited about wrongdoing in public office--just as I
do--regardless of whether it's just a few individuals who do the wrong and tarnish
the image of all of their colleagues. Unfortunately, people do tend to lump all
members of Congress together when they hear of the misdeeds of a few. That's why
I say the integrity of the entire Congress is at stake in the Powell and Dodd cases.
This is no time for injured feelings on the part of national lawmakers. Nor is
it a time for indignantly saying, "Who...Not me." But it is cleanup time in
Washington. It's time the American people were given laws
guaranteeing that members of Congress are properly elected and that
they conduct themselves properly after they assume office.
FORD LIBRARY 'y GERALD
That's why I am pressing for a congre ssional Code
2/
of Ethics-one with teeth in it. That's why I am urging that a Select Committee
of the House of Representatives be created to ride herd on all
congressmen and see to it that they toe the mark. That's why I want to see an
lection Reform Act passed by the Congressxx this year.
There obviously is an Integrity Gap in Washington, andtkmat the American
people are greatly alarmed.
I hope we can close the Integrity Gap. In that hope, I have introduced a
bill of my own to lay down a congressional code of ethics and
establish a special committee to see that this code is adhered too
The Integrity Gap can and must be closed. It will be plugged if Democrats
in Congress will cooperate with Republicans to establish a Code of Ethics for
Conduct and standards
congre ssmen and set up a fulltime Select Committee on
to enforce it. In
that way, no individual member-
will be able to claim he
is the victim of a "witch
hunt."
We can plug the Integrity Gap, too, if Democrats will work with Republic ans
to pass an Election Reform Act,
We must repeal the foolish and dangerous election bill that slipped
through FORD LIBRARY
the Congress late last year. That law would provide as much as 60 million
dollars to the political parties for the 1968 campaign by picking up $1 from each
3/
contributing taxpayer. What a gigantic slush fund for both major parties I
What we should do instead is to adequately police all political contributions
and expenditures, require both incumbents and their challengers for House and Senate
seats to disclose all of their gifts and honorariums, slap a
ceiling of $5,000
on donations to any one candidate or committee in a single year, and remove the
present meaningless ceiling on total contributions to any political committee and on the
expenditures by such committees.
We need a Committee on Conduct
It's cleanup time in Washington and that doesn't mean spring has arrived early.
and ttandards. We should enact the Election Reform bill,
Let's roll up our sleeves and got busy,
This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington. I'll be
talking with you again next week at this same time.
######
FORD LIBRARY & GERALD
Tabal Feb. 22, 1967
Radio-Television Script
NATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE
312 CONGRESSIONAL HOTEL
WASHINGTON 3, D.C.
LINCOLN 4-3010
Script No. 7
February 20, 1967
EAST-WEST TRADE
This your Congressman Jerrytord, reporting toyou Rom Washington.
There is a lot of talk in the Capital these days about building bridges--bridges
of trade between the East and the West.
Although the question of East-West trade is not new, it is becoming more con-
troversial because of the Vietnam war. Many of the Communist bloc countries which even
now benefit from limited trade with the United States are supplying hard goods to the North
Vietnamese.
This is an issue which the 90th Congress must face up to in the days ahead. Presi-
dent Johnson brought the question to a head in his State of the Union message last month when
he urged enactment of his plan to expand U.S. foreign and commercial trade with the East.
Some important questions come to mind. Is such a policy in our best interest? Is
Communism softening, thereby offering US new opportunities for friendly relationships? Should
we help build up somebody who has vowed to bury us?
Let's look closer at the issue. I, for one, see no evidence that the Soviet Union
has changed its basic goal of world domination. Somehow, many bridge-builders seem to over-
look the fact that it is the Communists who threaten the peace of this world--not U3,
Furthermore, there is no doubt that our exports to Communist bloc countries have
helped the enemy in Vietnam. What would happen if we expanded such trade? Of course,
the bridge-builders will tell you that we do not-and would not--send anything that could
help the Communists in a warlike way. But do you know what our Department of Commerce
lists as "non-strategic" material? Such things as: diese! engines, jet aircraft engines, machine
tools, fibres, plastics, computers and capital machinery.
Something which disturbs me is the recent disclosure that, although the Commerce
Department claimed it had checked with our American intelligence officials before licensing
such goods for shipment to Communist countries, it actually had made no such check. Just
GERALD R. LIBRARY FORD
why would the Commerce Department make such false claims as this?
- more -
- 2 -
This question, as well as the other facets of East-West trade, need some explor-
ation. This is why I support a proposal to set up a House Select Committee on the Export Con-
trol Act. This committee would undertake a penetrative study of the problem--to determine
if such trade was in the best interest of the United States, even in an economic sense. With
few exceptions--furs and platinum, for example--the Soviet Union produces little that What we
need. On the other hand, the Russians are seeking from US such items as chemicals, machine
tools and oil refineries.
And, of course, the overriding issue is the war in Southeast Asia, as it relates
to East-West trade. Building a bridge could well be a foolish undertaking if it sustains and
nourishes the enemy while draining our own country. I intend to do what I can to see that
Congress is not stampeded into building a bridge of East-West trade without a thorough study
first of the entire issue.
talking with you next. week againat this same time
This you is Congressman Jerryford, reporting to from you Washington. I'll he
(Note: Acopy of this script is available on Teleprompter in the House TV
Studio. For additional information on this script or to suggest ideas for future scripts, con-
tact the Committee's Public Relations Office)
###
GERALD LIDERSY FORD
Radio-Television Script
NATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE
312 CONGRESSIONAL HOTEL
WASHINGTON 3, D.C.
LINCOLN 4-3010
Script No. 8
February 27, 1967
GOOFY FEDERAL PROJECTS
This is Congressman
reporting from Washington.
This is the time of year when Americans begin to think about filing their Federal in-
come tax returns. I say "begin" to think about it--because most taxpayers find the chore so
painful that they put it off until the last minute.
As the tax deadline approaches, millions of Americans will discover that they owe
even more money, despite increased year-long withholding. But, you know, I believe that most
Americans do not begrudge paying Federal taxes, particularly in these tense times when hundreds
of thousands of our young men are fighting in the jungles of South Vietnam.
But, at the same time, I wonder how the average taxpayer would react if he knew
that his hard-eamed money was being spent on what I consider questionable and sometimes even
foolish "research" projects.
For example, the National Foundation on the Arts and Humanities--financed with
your tax dollars--has just awarded a grant of more than eighty-saven hundred dollars to a Cali-
fornia school for a study of comic strips. The foundation defends such an expenditure by saying
that Little Orphan Annie and other comics "have been an important source of political ideas for
the young and those not so young."
Mind you, I am not picking out an isolated example. This particular foundation,
among many similar tax-supported organizations, hands out awards which total nearly a million
dollars annually. Some of these awards are really far-out. For example, would you believe:
--A grant of more than twelve thousand dollars for a university study of "popular"
literature, such as dime novals?
--A grant of about ten thousand dollars to support c college microfilm center of liter-
ature and historical manuscripts written in European monasteries before 1600?
--A five thousand dollar grant to complete an experimental analysis of a violinevar-
nish known to have improved violin tone prior to 1737?
GETALD FORD LIBRARY
There are many more examples, too. Do you know, for instance, that some twenty
thousand of your tax dollars are being spent by the National Science Foundation to study German
- 2 -
cockroaches? Many of these projects involve even bigger amounts. The Department of Health,
Education and Welfare is spending half a million dollars to run two "laboratory" theaters to find
out whether the arts can be used to teach youngsters who can't learn from books. There's
another Federal grant of almost five hundred thousand dollars for a beautification project in the
District of Columbia. And I haven't even touched on the millions doled out under the so-called
"war" on poverty to finance everything from TV programs to summer theater projects.
The obvious question, of course, is: Are such uses of tax dollars justified in time
of war? It is estimated that government-subsidized research and development now totals 16
billion dollars a year. Only one other item in the Federal budget--that of defense--exceeds
this amount.
I am not suggesting that all of the government's research efforts are foolish, waste-
ful or unnecessary. Not at all. Some are valuable, vital. These I will support wholeheartedly.
Many research projects=although worthwhile--can and should be set aside, however, while
the Nation's taxpayers are carrying the burden of our military commitments in Southeast Asia.
We must set sensible priorities on these programs, in other words. This will be one of my ob-
jectives in this Congress.
This is Congressman
reporting from Washington.
(Note: A copy of this script is available on Teleprompter in the House TV Studio.
For additional information on this script or to suggest ideas for future scripts, contact the Com-
mittee's Public Relations Office).
###
GERALD R. LIBRARY FORD
RADIO SCRIPT TO BE TAPED MARCH 1, 1967, FOR BROADCAST OVER FIFTH DISTRICT STATIONS
This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington.
Today I'd like to talk with you about one of the problems demanding immediate
action in Washington--the need for an increase in Social Security benefits.
Millions of older Americans are continuing to live on fixed incomes which
have been eaten away by inflation. Their situation is not getting any better.
It is becoming worse.
I have introduced legislation which would provide for an 8 percent increase
in Social Security benefits without any increase in the Social Security payroll
tax paid by nearly all working Americans. This increase would be retroactive
to last January 1. My bill also pròvides for future increases in benefits when-
ever the cost-of-living rises at least 3 percent since the last Social Security
increase.
The President has offered a much more ambitious plan. It involves an
average 20 percent increase in Social Security benefits plus further broadening
of the program.
Under this proposal, payroll taxes would rise steadily over the next 20
years until they reached a maximum rate of 5.8 percent to be paid by every worker
on every dollar of his pay up to a maximum of $10,800. Every employer also would
pay this same levy--for a combined employee-employer payroll tax of 11.6 percent.
To put the President's plan in terms of a dollars-and-cents tax, the
maximum that could be deducted from a person's pay would jump from the present
FORD LIBEARY
$290.49 to $343.20 next year. That's a tax increase of $55 in 1968. In 1969
the tax would climb to $390--a hundred dollars more than at present. In 1971
-2-
the payroll tax would go up to $450. That's $160 more than now. By 1988-20 years
under the Pres, program
from now--the maximum payroll tax is scheduled to be $626.40--more than double
the present amount.
We need improvements in the Social Security system. There's no question
about that. And Congress will vote greater benefits this year. I am not wedded
to the figure of 8 percent. My guess is that the benefits increase will run
somewhere between the 8 percent that could be achieved without a payroll tax and
the 20 percent jump the President has proposed.
It is interesting to note that the President suggested a 10 percent Social
Security increase last fall and now has doubled it.
Congress, if it is to be at all responsible in the matter, must ask where
the money is going to come from. It must come, of course, from all Americans
who are working and are subject to Social Security taxes.
Whatever tax increase is approved will weigh most heavily on our young
people because they will be subject to the steadily increasing payroll levy for
a longer time than older Americans.
The payroll taxes proposed by the President would be especially burdensome
to young people, since they are just beginning to establish themselves. They are
hoping to scrape together the money to buy a home. They will be facing heavy
expenses as they have children and raise a family. America's young people, and
FORD
all other wage-earners, have good reason to look at the tax picture and to RALOR consider
ARY
what really sharp increases in the Social Security payroll tax will mean to them.
-3-
At the same time, we are concerned with the elderly who have been hurt by
inflation. The Congress surely will act to meet their problems.
It is the House Committee on Ways and Means which will play the most
important role in determining what the increases in Social Security benefits
and taxes will be.
And I can report to you that Democrat Wilbur Mills of Arkansas, the
chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, is troubled by the steep tax increases
involved in the President's plan. Indications are Mr. Mills thinks the plan
goes too far.
The Ways and Means Committee will opened start its hearings on the President's
on Welnesday,
Social Security proposals soon. There to need but corrfully considered
In any consideration If Social Security
Our goal should be to provide needed cost-of-living benefit increases, to
remove inequities, and to improve the system.
This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington.
I'll be talking with you again next week over this same station.
###
GERALD FORD
SCRIPT FOR 5TH DISTRICT RADIO STATION TAPE, RECORDED WEDNESDAY, MARCH 8, 1967
This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington.
Today I'd like to talk with you about a topic which is very much in the news--the
Selective Service System, or as we call it, the draft.
The Congress must act by July 1 to extend the present draft law in some
form. The present law will expire at midnight June 30.
To help Congress decide what to doabout the draft, President Johnson has
sent us recommendations based on a study by a presidential commission. The House
Armed Services Committee, which will handle the draft legislation, also has
received the advice of a study group headed by former Gen. Mark Clark of World
War II fame.
There seems to be little disagreement that the draft should be changed so
that 19-year-olds are called first. In fact, the President plans to put this
change into effect by his own order without waiting for any kind of action by Congress.
The President's draft law proposals are arousing controversy in Congress,
however. Most of the argument involves Mr. Johnson's plan to start using a lottery
system to pick draftees.
What's wrong with using a lottery system? The President knows it's going
to be hard to sell and so he has hung a special name tag on it. He calls it FAIR.
F-A-I-R... for "fair and impartial random," a blind system of selecting young
American men for military duty.
FORD
Maybe that's just what's wrong with a lottery system of compulsory military
RALD
LIBRARY
service. It's a blind kind of justice that dehumanizes the draft. It's been >tried
before and it just hasn't worked.
-2-
A lottery would blindly take some of the best young brains in the country.
It would take some of the best young farmers in the country. It would take some
of the best young workers in the defense industries of the Nation.
The President passed over the question of eliminating local draft boards,
as recommended by his presidential commission. But if you have a national lottery
system for picking draftees, what will local draft boards have to do?
I think our friends and neighbors have been doing a real good job of
handling their draft board chores. They have been performing a very important
service. I like the idea of giving a local board the discretion to grant deferments
in deserving cases. They know each case because they are familiar with local
situations. This is important. It preserves what I call "the human element"
in the draft. I'd hate to see the draft made a purely mechanical, computerized
kind of operation. Blind justice can lead to much injustice, it seems to me.
The President also skipped over the subject of deferments for college students.
There is no question the present system of deferments needs tightening up.
College should not become a haven for draft dodgers. For this reason I agree with
the President that graduate students should not be deferred unless they are studying
medicine or dentistry. However, many of these prospective doctors and dentists
will
under deferment should be required to serve in the Armed Forces after completing
their medical and dental training.
I would like to see the day when our Armed Forces are made up entirely of
volunteers. Unfortunately, we must keepp 3 million 300 thousand men under arms
LIBRARY
today to carry our out mission in Vietnam and guard the rest of our defense line
-3-
around the world. Experience indicates that an entirely volunteer force of men
would total no more than about 2 million.
Let us, then, see to it that we are as fair and as sensible as possible
in imposing on our young men the military obligation which is required of them as
the price of our Nation's freedom. I believe Congress will act in that spirit in
revising our draft law in the months ahead.
This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington.
I'll be talking with you again next week over this same station.
# # #
GERALD R. LIBRARY FORD
SCRIPT FOR TAPING WEDNESDAY, MARCH 15, 1967, FOR USE ON FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS.
This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington.
This week the Federal Bureau of Investigation reported an 11 per cent
increase in serious crimes last year in this country. And this week the House
began work on legislation we hope will be effective in a nationwide war against
crime.
The work began with hearings before the House Judiciary Committee, which
will examine President Johnson's recommendations for an omnibus crime bill. The
President's proposals are based on a report submitted by a commission he had
appointed to study the problem of crime and what to do about it.
The word is that the Judiciary Committee plans to concentrate almost
exclusively on the President's recommendations. I think Congress should also
look at ideas advanced by the crime commission but rejected by the President.
Congress also should consider other proposals that may have merit.
The President and all members of Congress are anxious to halt the swift
rise in the crime rate and to wipe out the fear that has gripped the hearts of
law-abiding Americans in recent years. We have the same goals. When we differ,
it is because we have different ideas about how to achieve those goals.
We're all agreed that the quality and quantity of local police forces should
be improved with the help of the federal government. At the same time, there
should be no federal intrusion, no federal officials telling local law enforcement
officials how to run their affairs. We at the federal level should only provide
whatever assistance we can, voluntarily given and voluntarily accepted. Basically,
law enforcement is a local responsibility.
(MORE)
-2-
Many of the President's anti-crime proposals have merit. But this does not
mean they cannot be improved upon.
There are many members of Congress, for instance, who believe local officials
WILL be dictated to under terms of the President's proposals. They point out that
there is no formula in the Administration bill for distributing federal anti-crime
money to the states. This is left up to the Attorney General of the United States.
The President would give him the sole authority to decide how the money should be
distributed.
The most important element in a nationwide war against crime, of course, is
for local communities to back the effort. We must all stand behind the man behind
the badge.
In that connection, many members of the House and Senate feel that the
President's anti-crime proposals are inadequate. The Administration bill would
do nothing to resolve the trouble police are having in dealing with criminals
because of the Supreme Court's interest in protecting individual rights.
Many members of Congress feel that the Court's decisions, which have
stretched the Fifth and Sixth Amendments to the Constitution, have contributed to
this Nation's trend toward lawlessness. These decisions have handicapped police
in the questioning of suspects and the use of confessions to obtain a conviction.
The Court, it may be said, has made it practically impossible to convict self-
confessed criminals in cases where the prosecution has to rely upon their own
voluntary confessions of guilt.
As a result, 20 senators have co-sponsored a bill providing that a confession
(MORE)
-3-
may be admitted as evidence in any trial court established by Congress as long as
it is obtained voluntarily.
These are some of the problems Congress is wrestling with as we join with
you in fighting the war against crime. There WILL be an omnibus crime bill--and
it will be the best that the Congress can put together.
This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington.
I'll be talking with you again next week over this same station.
###
SCRIPT RECORDED MARCH 22, 1967, FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS,
This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington.
Congress now is taking its annual Easter Recess. We won't be meeting
again until Monday, April 3rd. So now is a good time to take stock of what's
been happening in Congress and in the country.
Apart from our continuing search for the path to peace in Vietnam, we
should be most concerned right now with the state of the American economy.
Members of Congress are worried that we may be on the verge of a recession.
Some economists believe a recession has already started. Because there has been
a serious slowdown in the economy, the Congress this week moved quickly to stimulate
investments by business in new plant and equipment. We did this--at the request of
the President--by restoring the 7 per cent investment tax credit and accelerated
depreciation allowances.
The people of Michigan certainly are aware of the economic troubles we're
having. Automobile production has been cut back 15 per cent. Men are being laid
off. This country currently is experiencing the sharpest decline in industrial
production in 28 months.
Democrats and Republicans alike are alarmed. In Congress we have what is
known as the JointEconomic Committee, made up of congressmen and senators. This
group makes careful studies of our economic problems and has just issued a report.
In this report, we find the Democratic members of the Joint Economic
FORD
Committee agreeing with the Republican members that the Johnson Administration
Lionary
should cut non-defense spending and work to lower interest rates. Members of both
political parties agreed that the Administration can't go on spending money
-2-
on every project and program somebody might put on a list. What they are saying
is that we need to establish priorities and hold down domestic spending.
The Administration professes not to be worried about a possible recession,
and the President insists that we should still raise income taxes effective July 1.
Administration officials have predicted that the economy will show an upturn
about the middle of the year and will speed up in the last half.
I hope the Administration is right, but most of the signs are negative.
The members of the Joint Economic Committee--Democrats and Republicans--are inclined
to believe the President is wrong on his optimistic midyear forecast. They believe--
and I believe--that it would be a mistake to raise income taxes in July.
I think the President should take two actions now which would stiffen this
country's economic spine, restore confidence both to the consumer and to business,
and put us back on the road to healthy economic growth and prosperity.
I'd like to see the President forget about an increase in income taxes, at
least at this time, and move quickly to cut federal non-defense spending.
It's bad for a possible income tax increase to be hanging over the heads of
the American people at a time when the economy is slumping.
Does it make sense for the Johnson Administration to be stimulating business
investment on the one hand and taking money away from consumers with a tax increase
on the other?
If the economy does speed up later this year, the President then could
reinstate his request for an income tax increase to offset the Administration's
large deficit spending. He could do that--but he could also cut non-defense
spending and avoid a tax increase altogether.
-3-
It just doesn't seem right to load a tax increase on the backs of American
workers who are still trying to catch up with last year's sharp rise in prices.
I think you'll find when Income Tax Day rolls around on April 15 that your federal
income tax still is too high. Our goal should be to reduce taxes, not raise them.
This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington.
I'll be talking with you again soon over this same station.
# # #
SCRIPT RECORDED TUESDAY, MARCH 28, 1967, FOR USE BY 5th DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS.
This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington.
When Congress checks back in at the Capitol after Easter recess, we'll have
our work all cut out for us.
Thus far we've disposed of very few items on the agenda. We have yet to
deal with crime, the need for increases in Social Security benefits, extension and
revision of the draft law, the Presidents's proposal to increase the present level of
of anti-poverty spending by more than $400 million, the President's request for an
income tax increase, the Administration's proposed increase in foreign aid spending,
the President's new civil rights program, and aid for elementary and secondary
schools and for higher education.
This first session of the 90th Congress has been dominated by the Vietnam War
and the Adam Clayton Powell and Sen. Dodd cases. The Powell and Dodd cases have
not been resolved, and neither has the war.
To continue paying for the third largest foreign war in our history, the
Congress approved an extra $12.2 billion as a supplementary military appropriation.
Victnam
Other major actions taken by the Congress to date include a Keveen War
veterans pension bill and restoration of the 7 per cent investment tax credit on
new plant and machinery.
The pension bill passed the House last year but died in the Senate because
the Johnson Administration opposed it at that time. Now it will become law because
the President has withdrawn his opposition to it.
LIBRARY "y GE
(MORE)
-2-
The President asked Congress to restore the investment tax credit because
the economy isscontinuing to sag. Congress was glad to oblige but some members
spoke out against what they called "a yo-yo tax policy" because it was only last
October 10 that the investment tax credit was suspended at the President's request.
Many members of Congress also noted during action on the investment tax
credit that it doesn't make sense to stimulate business with a tax break now and
then come up a little later with an income tax increase for business and individuals.
Because I feel that the slump in the economy is serious enough to turn into
a recession, I urged the President to withdraw his request for an income tax
increase. I believe that if he would do this it would help to restore consumer and
business confidence in the health of the economy.
find
later
that
the
Bresident
then
sould
reinstate
tax
increase
request
the
$
fiscel
1960
I don't think it's at all likely the Congress will approve an income tax
increase even if the President sticks by his guns. The general feeling in Congress
is that we ought to cut non-essential federal spending instead of raising income
taxes.
After all, we're also faced with the prospect of increasing mail rates and
of boosting payroll taxes if the Social Security benefit increases we approve
require additional financing.
As we approach April 17, Tax Day, 1967, I sense that a backfire of protest
is building among our citizens against a federal income tax increase. A federal
GERALD LIBRARY FORD
increase would be a double blow, coming on top of an increase in state taxes.
Add
(MORE)
-3-
to this the possible increases in Social Security taxes and mail rates and the fact
that all is not well with the economy, and--well, I just don't believe Congress is
going to go for President Johnson's extra tax on income.
As my family and I observed Easter this year, I said a special prayer for
peace in Vietnam. I believe we can have peace thereif only North Vietnam's rulers
can be persuaded that Americans are determined to see the war through with honor.
It's now time for the other side to make a move toward the peace table. We have
already walked the extra mile.
This is Jerry Ford reporting to you from Washington. I'll be talking with
you again next week over this same station.
###
Radio-Television Script
NATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE
312 CONGRESSIONAL HOTEL
WASHINGTON 3, D.C.
LINCOLN 4-3010
Script No. II
April 3, 1967
THE CONCERNED AMERICAN
This is Congressman
reporting from Washington.
The more I travel across this country, the more I realize how concerned Americans
are about the course we are following=-concerned not only about Vietnam and our boys dying
over there, but about crime and walfare and high prices and growing taxes, just to mention a
few subjects.
This concern was pointed up again the other day in a letter I came across from the
wife of a public school official in one of our Western states. Referring to herself as "The Tired
Housewife," Mrs. J. P. Strickland spelled out in her letter some of the same concerns that a
year or so earlier bothered another citizen, Alan McIntosh, editor of a small-town Minnesota
weekly.
In an editorial in his newspaper entitled, "The Tired American," Mr. McIntosh
wrote in part--and I quote:
I am a tired American--fed up with mobs of scabby-faced, long-haired youths and
short-haired girls who claim they represent the "new wave" of America and who sneer at the
old-fashioned virtues of honesty, integrity and morality on which America grew to greainess.
Mr. McIntosh went on:
I am a tired American who resents those who try to peddle the belief in schools and
colleges that capitalism is a dirty word and that free enterprise and private initiative are only
synonyms for greed. They say they hate capitalism but they are always right at the head of the
line demanding their share of the American way of life.
Mrs. Strickland, writing as a concerned housewife, said in her letter--and again I
quote in part:
I am tired of trying, in this land of abundant food, to balance my budget when milk
prices jump three cents on the half-gallon, and meat which was 69 cents per pound goes to 89
cents in just one week's time.
I'm tired of attorneys and social workers and courts who continue to hand down
FORD LIBRARY "y GERALD
candy-coated sentences because, they claim, the poor dear hoodlum wasn't brought up in the
right environment--an environment that half the world would be envious to share.
- more
- 2 -
I'm tired of having to run to turn off my radio when smutty jokes come over the air,
often under the guise of folk songs.
Mrs. Strickland summed up by saying that, although she's tired of these and other
things, she's not too tired to pray.
Inscribed into the granite of the National Archives building here in Washington,
there is a line which says the "past is prologue." If this is true, as I am sure it is, perhaps we'd
all better start praying for America.
This is Congressman
reporting from Washington.
(Note: A copy of this script is available on Teleprompter in the House TV Studio.
For additional information on this script or to suggest ideas for future scripts, contact the Com-
mittee's Public Relations Office.)
###
SCRIPT TAPE-RECORDED WEINESDAY, APRIL 5, FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS
X
This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington.
The big topic of conversation here this week is Postmaster Larry O'Brien's proposal
to convert the Post Office Department into a non-profit government corporation.
I immediately welcomed the plan as a fresh idea, something that was worthy
of careful study by the Congress:.
There's no question that our mail service could stand a lot of improvement,
and this is no criticism of the men who pound the pavements to deliver the
mail to our doors.
The
problem
is
the
tremendous volume of mails and how to get it to our mailboxes accurately and
quickly.
Whether O'Brien's nonprofit government corporation is the answer nobody
need every available bit of
really knows at this point. The Congre SS would
information to make
a judgment on the proposal. Actually, the proposition is not even before the
Longress. O'Brient unveiled it at a luncheon meeting of magazine editors and
publishers and provided only a sketchy outline of the idea.
One aspect of it I like
It would take politics out of the Post
Office Department.
This
would be a healthy development. The
Republican leadership in the House of Representatives has been pushing hard to
rid the Post Office Department of politics. We will never have a first-class
postal system until we do SO.
There is bipartisan support for this drive to divorce the Post Office
Department from politics. It is one of the provisions in the
congressional reorganization bill passed by the Senate
and now awaiting action by the House.
The Post Office Department is big business. The Postmaster General, a political
appointee named by the President withthe consent of the Senate, oversees the work of
more than 700,000 employes. These employes handle more than 75 billion 600 million
pieces of mail a year.
One cause for concern in
Mr. O'Brien's plan to turn the
Post
Office
apparently would
Department into a nonprofit
government corporation is that the Congre SS
give up any say it has about the pay and working conditions of postal
employes. Under Mr. O'Brien's proposal, the department would be run by a
board
of directors and a chief executive. This, of course, has its
disadvantages.
advantages GERAL
and
MIBRARY
2/
To whom do the people and postal employes go
if they have a
complaint to make?
It bothers me, too, that Mr. O'Brien should simply throw up his hands and
say that the only way to solve our postal service problems is to
mbolish the Post Office Department. That's a neat way to solve a problem,
isn't it? Just abolish it.
We could, of course, revitalize the Post Office Department instead of
abolishing it. We could change it from a politteally-dominated agency where
appointments and promotions are based on political favoritism to one in which merit,
experience and good
management procedures count the most.
Ferhaps we could find a better system than the ZIP Code for letter sorting,
too, and thus take another] load off the backs of the American people while speeding
up mail deliveries.
I'm not willing to say at this point that the only way to make the Post Office
Department a profe ssional operation is to abolish it. Let's give this one plenty
of thought.
This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington. I'll
be talking with you again next week over this same station.
#######
BERALD R. LISBARY FORD
"SCRIPT TAPE-RECORDED WEDNESDAY, APRIL 12, FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS
This is your Congressman Jerry Ford reporting to you from Washington.
April the seventeenth--the last day for filing your federal income
tax returns--is almost here. I'm afraid that there is going to be a lot
of moaning and groaning when Americans find out how much taxes they paid the
government last year--and how much they may still owe.
As a taxpayer, like you, I am concerned over the continually-
increasing
amount of money we are all required to pay each year to run the
big government in Washington-and I would like to take a few minutes to discuss
this with you today. This, I might add, is the one truly bipartisan
political subject. It affects everybody, Republican and Democrat alike.
Let me start off by quoting some figures. First of all, the
budget deficit and the increasing size of our national debt. At the beginning
of this year, it was estimated that there would be a budget deficit of
8.1 billion dollars. Althought this is a large enough figure to make
the more economy-minded of us shudder, the actual deficit will be far, far
greater. The deficit will actually be between 15 and 20 billion dollars. And
there is a distinct possibility that the deficit may go as high as
25 to 30 billion dollars.
If this should happen, America is headed for very serious ecnnomic
trouble. The cost of everything will go up even further and employment figures
will go down. Indeed, the warning signals of a recession are already appearing
on our economic horizon.
Obviously, there is only one reason for a federal deficit and that is
over-spending by our government. As far as spending is concerned, the federal
government has simply got to learn where to draw the line. If it doesn't, then
y
LD
THEREIT
watch out for your taxes next year and the "private" deficit you personally
will
39
-2-
have to face.
As a member of Congress, I intend to do what I can to cut down on
unnecessary spending, even if it means that some worthwhile projects have to
be postponed until funds for them are available. In a time of war-when
vast sums are necessary to support our fighting men in the field--it is
essential that priorities be established.
If federal spending des on unchecked, our fiscal balance is thrown
out of whack. For example, fourteen cents out of every dollar that you pay
in taxes now goes just to pay the interest on the national debt which has
grown by ten billion dollars in the past year.
What can be done? First of all President Johnson and his Administration
must devote much more effort to restraining the growth of non-essential spending.
Rather than continually suggesting new spending schemes, Mr. Johnson must find
means for protecting and defending the taxpayer. As an immedaite step the
Adminsitration should suspend its request for a 6 percent increase in income taxes.
Present and future administrations should refrain from promising
more than can safely be accomplished for the good of the country. The President
and Congress at all times should keep the efforts of the government to achieve
desirable goals within the nation's current means.
Fiscal policy should be so planned as to produce a budget surplus in
years of high-level prosperity and substantial full employment, thereby reducing
inflationary pressures.
High priority should be given to developing a solution for the balance-
of-payments problem.
Overlapping and duplicating government programs should be consolidated,
and where appropriate eliminated, and in practical cases steps should be taken to
transfer their administration to state and local governments.
This is your Congressman Jerry Ford reporting to you from Washington.
April the seventeenth--the last day for filing your federal income tax returns--is
almost here. I'm
-3-
The Administration should do away with window dressing and camodiage
and should present a true and complete budget so that results will not appear
more favorable than they actually are.
I can assure you that I will continue to support sound fiscal
policy and to vote against unnecessary expenditures in an effort to obtain a
more nearly balanced budget and eliminate the necessity for a tax increase.
This is your Congressman Jerry Ford reporting to you from Washington.
Radio-Television Script
NATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE
312 CONGRESSIONAL HOTEL
WASHINGTON 3. D.C.
LINCOLN 4-3010
Script No. 13
April 17, 1967
THE NEW OPPORTUNITY CRUSADE
This is Congressman
reporting to you from Washington.
From the very beginning of its history, America has been fighting a series of domes-
tic wars. Parhaps I should call them police actions, since they've never actually been called
"wars," at least until now. I am talking about the continuing battles against ignorance and
illiteracy, the battles against the criminal element in our population, the battles against bigot
try and bias, the battles against poverty.
The last, against poverty, is the most publicized of these new wars. An army to
combat it has been raised. The top brass has been given a remarkably free hand in planning
its tactics. Ample money--perhaps too much--has been placed at their disposal.
But what has happened? The result has been, I am afraid, a stalemate that amounts
almost to stagnation. It has long been apparent to the entire country that something has to be
done, and done quickly, or the so-called anti-poverty war will turn into a rout.
In my opinion, this admission of defeat would be a black tragedy. It must not be
allowed to happen.
Obviously, what is needed is a thorough-going reorganization and more detailed
and more careful planning. In fact, there must be an entirely new crusade.
Two Republican Congressmen, Charles E. Goodell of New York and Albert H. Quie
of Minnesota, have already called for such a crusade--the new Opportunity Crusade. They
have put together an eleven-point program that is well worth serious consideration. These two
Congressmen are recognized experts in the poverty field. They are high-ranking members of
the House Education and Labor Committee, which handles poverty legislation, and their views
are widely-respected, by Republicans and Democrats alike.
To give their crusade new life and zest, they proposed that the poverty war be
given Cabinet status, This could be done without creating a new Cabinet post. The Commun-
FORD
ity Action and Job Corps programs should be turned over to the existing Department of Health,
LIBRARY
Education and Welfare. It calls for the dismantling of the Office of Economic Opportunity,
- more -
- 2 -
whose administration has more often "botched," rather than fought, poverty.
Other new proposals are these:
An Industry Youth Corps, offering youths 16 to 20 private productive employment
and on-the-job training.
Expansion of Head Start, the pre-school program for poor children, to take in
children up to the third grade.
New Military Career Centers for volunteers unable to meet Selective Service re-
quirements.
Conversion of the present in-school Neighborhood Youth Corps into a major work-
study program for youngsters likely to drop out of high school for economic reasons.
Creation of a new State Bonus program to encourage States to contribute up to 200
million dollars--their contribution to be matched by the Federal Government. The funds would
be used to supplement Community Action and Head Start programs.
Another facet of the Opportunity Crusade would be creation of a Hometown Peace
Corps, to enlist local volunteers in the anti-poverty effort.
Other recommendations include establishment of an automated employment service
to match individuals with available jobs, taking a "long overdue" national skill survey to pin-
point the thousands of skilled jobs already available, offering incentives to encourage the hiring
and training of the unskilled, and allowing retired persons to work without losing their Social
Security benefits.
We all know that the plight of the poor is something that our rich country has to
face. But it has to face it realistically and practically. Training the poor to help themselves
is the only real answer. Federal handouts are not in any way a solution, they are only an en-
couragement to idlaness. If the war against poverty is ever to end in victory, it has to have
the support of the American people. They have to have confidence in the way it is being waged
This confidence is rapidly being lost. It must be restored by constructive action.
I believe the legislative proposal just presented by Congressmen Goodell and Quie
embodies that spirit. I plan to do what I can to see that it receives early and serious attention
by this Congress.
This is
reporting from Washington,
(Note: A copy of this script is available on Teleprompter in the House TV Studio.
FORD LIBRARY
For additional information on this script or to suggest ideas for future scripts, contact the Com-
mittee's Public Relations Office.)
###
COMMENT :
REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE
RADIO NEWS
1625 EYE STREET N.W.
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006
AREA CODE 202 628-6800
Radio
FOR RELEASE
MONDAY AM's
April 17, 1967
Editors, Party Publications: The following is the commentary by Felix Cotten,
Republican National Committee, Public Relations Division, which is part of the
COMMENT, weekly radio news program. The transcript of this commentary is
being sent to you, for whatever use you care to make of it with or without credit.
Republicans are pressing at this session of Congress for the passage of
legislation providing various forms of relief for elderly persons, especially those
drawing Social Security benefits and other fixed incomes. Most of these people have
been hard hit by the rising cost of living, which has been triggered by extravagant
and uncontrolled Government spending.
To deal with some of the more urgent problems of elderly persons, the
Republican Coordinating Committee early this month recommended, among other things,
a double-barreled plan for increases in Social Security benefits. The plan includes
an immediate increase in benefits and an automatic escalator increase which would
go up as the cost of living goes up, both retroactive to last January 1.
The Coordinating Committee stressed the need for the automatic escalator
increase, pointing out that the cost of living has risen faster than Social Security
benefits.
The leadership group also recommended a plan that would allow persons over
65 to earn up to $2,100 a year without any loss of Social Security benefits, or
40 per cent more than the $1,500 now allowed. As an alternative, it recommended
that persons over 65 be permitted to have an income of $3,300 a year in Social
FORD
Security benefits and earnings without any loss of Social Security benefits.
LIBRARY
The Coordinating Committee recommended restoration of the right formerly
33
granted elderly people to deduct all uncompensated medical and drug expenses in
-MORE-
-2-
figuring their income taxes. This right was removed effective as of this year
when the Medicare bill was passed in 1965.
The group proposed that widows be permitted to draw 100 per cent of the
primary cash benefits of their late husbands.
At the same time, the Republican leaders strongly opposed Administration
efforts to tax Social Security and Railroad Retirement benefits, to repeal the
double exemption now allowed persons over 65, and to do away with the direct tax
credit permitted the elderly on retirement income.
This is Felix Cotten, Republican National Committee News, in Washington.
4/11/67
GERALD R. LIBRARY FORD
FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO SCRIPT, TAPED APRIL 19, 1967, FOR WEEKEND USE.
This is Enagnuzx your congre sssman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from
Wwashington.
The wheels of legislation sometimes turn very slowly
but when amzidmaxwizhx a sound idea pops up in Congress it usually winds up on
the lawbooks in time.
This is what appears to be happening to the proposal for helping parents
put their children through college by giving them a credit on their income tax for
part of the expenses involved.
For the first time, this proposal has moved halfway through the Congress.
The Senate on April 14 xxx approved a tax credit for college expenses by tacking it
onto xxhill a bill restoring the tax credit for investments by busine ssmen in new
buildings and equipment.
Now that a tax credit covering part of the expense of high education has
cleared the Senate, pressure is building up for it in the House.
Every Republican in the Senate voted for the taxx college tax credit proposal.
The only votes against it were cast by Required Democrats.
In the House, Republicans are taking the lead in pushing the college tax credit
plan. I cited this plan as one fn of the legislative objectives of the Republican
Party when I XX deliwered the domestic affairs portion of the Republican State of
the Union Message last Jan. 19.
In that message I said: "We will continue our efforts to provide assistance
to those who bear the rising cost of higher education through tax credits."
I now urge my Democratic friends in the House to support the Republican
effort to gain passage of a college tax credit plan.
certain
College tax credits would win full congressional approval if the Democratic
members of the House Ways and Means Committee would back the idea when they must and
selected Кинки Republican members meet with their Senate counterparts to work out a
compromise on the investment tax credit bill.
But the Johnson Administration is strongly opposed to the college tax credits
House
plan, and there is reason to believe that the/Democrats who are members of the
conference committee will move to knock it out of the investment tax credit bill.
Even if this happens, I think the time will come fairly soon when college tax
credits will be recognized as the proper and necessary means of helping parents foot
the bill for their children's college expenses.
FORD
The time definitely has come for Congress to write the into law /edmo tax relief
for parents who invest tx in higher education for their children.
GERALD
-2-
Steadily rising college costs have put a tremendous squeeze on family
budgets.
Congress has accepted the idea of giving businessmen a tax break on
their investments in new buildings and equipment. Should we do lessi for Americans
investaing in human betterment? Are new machines more important than an educated
citizenry?
Education is not a luxury. It is a necessity. And the day when a
high school education was enough is long past. We should make every effort to
encourage our young people to continue their education beyond high school. Tax
credits for part of college expenses is an effective means of doing
just that.
I believe there is a definite shift of sentiment in the House of Representatives
toward support of the college tax credit plan. This gives me strong hope for
early enactment of this measure.
It is vital that we encourage individual investment in education,
the better educated our people are the stronger our Nation will be.
This is your congre ssman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington. I'll
be talking with you again next week over this same station.
GERALD FORD
This is finagement your congre assman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from
Midfashington.
The wheels of legislation sometimes turn very slowly
but when a sound idea pops up in Congress it usually winds up on
the lawbooks in time.
This is what appears to be happening to the preposal for helping parents
put their children through college by giving them a credit on their income tax for
part of the expenses involved.
For the first time, this proposal has moved halfway through the Congress.
The Senate on April 14 XXX approved a tax credit for college expenses by tacking it
onto uxisit a bill restoring the tax credit for investments by busine ssmen in new
buildings and equipment.
Now that a tax credit covering part of the expense of high education has
eleared the Senate, pressure is building up for it in the House.
Every Republican in the Senate voted for the *** college tax credit propesal.
The only votes against it were east by Republic Democrats.
In the House, Republicens are taking the lead in pushing the sollege tax credit
plan. I eited this plan as one tx of the legislative objectives of the Republican
Party when I XX delivered the domestic affairs pertion of the Republican State of
the Union Message last Jan. 19.
In that message I saids "Wo will continue our efforts to provide assistance
to those who bear the rising sest of higher education through tax credits."
I now urge my Democratic friends in the House to support the Republican
effort to gain passage of a college tax credit plan.
certain
Gollege tax credits would win full congressional approval if *** Democratic
members of the House Ways and Home Committee would back the idea when they must and
selected Republican members meet with their Senate counterparts to work out a
compromise on the investment tax credit bill.
But the Johnson Administration is strongly opposed to the college tax credits
House
plan, and there is reason to believe that the/Domecrate who are members of the
conference committee will move to knock it out of the investment tax credit bill.
Even if this happens, I think the time will come fairly soon when college tax
credits will be recognised as the preper and necessary means of helping parents foot
the bill for their children's college expenses.
The time definitely has come for Congres SB to write txx into low some tax relief
Steadily rising college costs have put a tremendous squeeze on family
budgets.
Congress has accepted the idea of giving inux businessmen a tax break on
@heir investments in new buildings and equipment. Should we do lessfux for American
investming in human Inc betterment? Are new machines more important than an educated
citizenry?
Education is not ** a taxy luxury. It is a necessity. And the day when a
high school education was enough is long past. We should make every effort to
encourage our young people to continue their education beyond high school. Tax
credits for anlingex part of college expenses is NHE an effective means of doing
just that.
I believe there is a definite shift of sentiment in the House of Representati
toward support of the college tax credit plan. This givesux me strong hope for
early enactment of this measure.
It is vital that we encourage individual investment in education,
because the better educated our people are the stronger our Nation will be.
This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington. I'll
be talking with you against next week over this same nut station.
####
SCRIPT TAPED APRIL 26, 1967, FOR WEEKEND USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS
aft
Thispy is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington.
3
These are most eventful times in the Nation's capital.
On Friday, the two houses of Congress met jointly to hear Gen. William
Westmoreland, commander of our forces in Vietnam and a good personal friend of
mine.
I
attended a luncheon at the White House in Gen. Westmoreland's
honor.
The news wires also were humming with stories about a new approach to aid
for elementary and secondary schools, known as the Quie Amendment, and a proposal
to help low-income families buy homes of their own. I am working hard for the
adoption in Congress of both of these proposals because I think they are good for
America.
The school aid legislation, ingroduced by Rep. Albert Quie of Minnesota,
would provide block - federalgrants for elementary and secondary schools. It
would give local school people much more freedom in attacking local school
problems with federal dollars.
non-public
for private schools in the
At the same time, it would continue all the benefits
present
school
andparochial
aid law
Mr. Quie and I met a few days ago with private school
officials and reached agreement on Quie Amendment provisions which will
guabantee private schools full benefits.
Definite assurances regarding
those benefits have been written into the Quie Amendment. The Quie amenhment
will take away no benefits from any non- public achool.
Mail Has been flooding into my office from people who feared the Quie
non-public
Amendment would eliminate present benefits to private schools under the existing
Federal School Aid Act. I am happy to set those fears at rest. There
and parachial
nobody in the Congress who is more determined than I that
private ^ schools will
afforded
continue to enjoy the benefits now being
them
I and the many, many others in the House of Representatives who favor the
Quie Amendment are simply interested in cutting federal red tape
and easing
federal controls. We want to make it possible for local educators to
set their
own priorities on the use of some of the federal school aid dollars made available
to them.
Legislation to give low-income families a "leg up" on owning their own homes
was introduced recently in the Congress by Sen. Charles Percy of Illinois and Rep.
William Widnall of New Jersey. I immedinately endorsed it because I believe
it will be of tremendous help to slum dwellers who want to better themselves.
All Republican members of the Senate co-sponsored the Percy Bill,
and
more
than 100 Republican members of the House introduced bills identical with
-2-
Prospects are good for bipartisan support of the Percy-Widnall Bill. I
would very much like to see such support develop in the days ahead because this
is a bill that would help low-income Americans help themselves. I think all
America would benefits as a result.
The Percy-Widnall Bill is designed to fill a great unmet need--the need to
provide home loan funds for people who cannot get a home loan from a regular
lending institution.
The bill would bridge this home loan gap by creating a Home Ownership Foundation
with a board of
trustees made up of some of the
top people in the country.
This board would raise mortgage money by selling
bonds. This money then
would be made available, through neighborhood nonprofit associations, to those of
our citizens unable to afford regular home loans.
The neighborhood
association also would select the potential home-owners, help them find
suitable housing and give them a dvice about employment,
family
finances and family planning. Where necessary, the Federal Government would
help out witht he initial interest payments--payments to be repaid later
by the
home-owner as his income increases.
Every American should be concerned with this legislation because it is aimed
at achieving one of our country's foremost goals--a decent home and favorable
living conditions for all our
citizens.
This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington. I'll
be talking with you next week over this same station.
GERALD LIBRARY FORD
Taped 5-3-67
Radio Television Script
NATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE
312 CONGRESSIONAL HOTEL
WASHINGTON 3. D.C.
LINCOLN 4-3010
Script No. 15
May 1, 1967
A NEW EDUCATION PLAN
This
is your Congressman Jerry Ford
reporting to you from Washington.
"As the twig is bent, the tree inclines," is an old saying about our youngsters that
has a timely meaning. I am reminding you of it because very soon a decision is going to be made
in the Congress as to just how our little twigs are going to be bent. Will the "bending" be
entrusted to the Federal Government or will it be kept much nearer to the home and the school?
In other words, is Washington going to have the power to dictate-through the withholding or
granting of federal funds--the content of our kids' schoolbooks, for instance? Or are we going to
give our State governments and our localities this prerogative?
This affects every father and mother in the country--and, of course, their children.
It is a nationwide issue. It is also a family matter.
And, because it is a family matter, I believe decisions on education should be made
as near to the home as possible where the parents can have some "say" about it and can keep a
closer eye on how their tax money is being spent.
So far, Washington has made too many of our educational decisions. It has, so to
speak, laid down a very considerable part of America's educational "line."
Recently, however, a bill has been introduced in the House of Representatives
designed to return responsibility for primary and secondary education to the States and localities.
This bill would substitute lump-sum grants to the States for the present system of "categorical
grants" for specific school programs. Funds would continue to come from the Federal Government,
in other words, but the administration of these funds would be shifted to the States to prevent
Federal control.
This will mean that you yourself will have much more chance to say about how your
little twig is going to be bent--about how your tax money will be spent to help educate your
youngsters.
R' FORD LIBRARY
Congressman Albert H. Quie of Minnesota, author of this new legislation, pul the
whole matter very succinetly the other day when he said, and I quote:
(more)
-2-
"I believe we have reached a crucial turning point in Federal programs for education--
the point at which we must decide whether the Federal role will merely support the broad goals of
education, or whether it will direct the objectives, structure, methods and ultimately the content
of education. In a word, Congress must decide which course to take: whether to continue
smothering our schools in Federal regulations, imposing Federal notions about how they are to do
their job, or, on the contrary, to give our educators a vote of confidence in their ability to make
the best school system on earth a better one."
I subscribe to those views expressed by Congressman Quie--and plan to do what I
can to see that educators at the local level are given greater say and responsibility over the
programs they administer.
Efforts are being made by bureaucrats in Washington to defeat this
legislation by claiming that it would shortchange private and parochial schools.
This is not an accurate interpretation of the Quie Amendment. The fact is that
the Quie legislation would not take any benefits away from private school
children--but rather would continue all present benefits.
The purpose of Congressman Quie's bill--which is receiving support from
Republicans and Democrats alike--is to substitute Federal block grants for the
present maze of separately-funded school aid programs. This would free State
and local school systems from Federal red tape and control. The Quie Amendment
would give States more responsibility for their public school systems and would
fully protect the private and parochial school students.
Such a concept must be appealing to most parents with school-age children.
I only hope we can translate this appeal into the law of the land.
This is Congressman Jerry Gerald-Ford reporting toyou ^ from Washington.
###
GERALD R. FORD
Radio-Television Script
NATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE
312 CONGRESSIONAL HOTEL
WASHINGTON 3. D.C.
LINCOLN 4-3010
cript No. 16
May 3, 1967
SALUTE TO OUR ARMED FORCES.
(Note: This script is sent to you in advance of Armed Forces Day,
Saturday, May 20, and includes a place for insertion of special
film showing servicemen in action around the globe. Although
this insert has its own narration as part of the film, you may use
the text as your own without the film insert if you prefer. Contact
Bob Gaston at the Committee to make arrangements for the film
insert or for further information.)
This is Congressman
reporting from Washington.
May 20 is Armed Forces Day--the day we honor all branches of our Armed Forces
and all the men and women in them. It is a day which finds our country still at war in Vietnam.
Almost half-a-million men are already engaged in that conflict and still more are likely to be
needed before we gain even the "limited objectives" which it seems we are fighting for.
So it is with deep solemnity that I say to the men and women in uniform: "We
honor you, every single one of you. We thank you from the bottom of our hearts for the sacrifices
you are making. We pray for your safe return and for a quick and victorious conclusion of your
efforts."
Perhaps some of you will wonder what I mean when I say that our objectives in the
Vietnamese war are "limited." Some of you may be shocked and say to yourselves, "What, aren't
we fighting to win?" And you may want to know what grounds I have for making such a statement.
Let me quote to you a comment by one of the Pentagon's civilian leaders, Phil G.
Goulding, assistant secretary of defense. Mr. Goulding said--and I quote-- "We are engaged
in a limited war for limited objectives. Our military actions must be weighed against those limited
objectives. Our bombing operations in the North are conducted within certain constraints
because they are tied to our limited objectives in the South."
Now, I'm not going to discuss at this time the wisdom or un-wisdom of engaging
in a limited war for limited objectives. But I am going to say that this country--except for a
paltry, noisy few "longhairs"--is solidly behind America's men in uniform, especially those
now FORD LIBRARY
facing the enemy in Vietnam. And that it is pledged to support them in every way it can.
E
(more)
-2-
honor them for the bravery and determination they are showing.
Join me now in a brief salute to our men in uniform.
FILM INSERT HERE
Cut to closeup of globe
Narrator: Around the globe, our mighty defense forces are spread. Their job is
to keep the peace and to fight only when the Communists deliberately encroach on free territory--
as happened in South Vietnam.
Cut to shot of troops in Korea
They are in Korea, still guarding the free South from the Chinese menace in the
North.
Cut to shot of troops in Germany
And, of course, they are in West Germany, ready and poised, should the Russians
suddenly decide on a new military adventure.
Cut to shot of Berlin Wall
The Berlin Wall--at best a flimsy barrier between East and West Germany--is
made strong because American troops and their superb equipment are poised behind it.
Cut to shot of Navy
Our Navy is indeed world-encircling. It is the mightiest Navy in the world, its
sailors the finest, the best-trained, We salute the officers and men of the Navy. They defend
the free world better than any Iron Curtain or Bamboo Curtain defends the Communist countries.
Cut to shot of Army in Vietnam
We salute the officers and men of the Army, whose job is to do the dreadful,
weary fighting in the jungles of Vietnam. Their job is indeed a bitter one with vile Eastern
diseases thinning their ranks.
Cut to shot of Marine Corps in Vietnam
We salute the officers and men of the Marine Corps, whose splendid courage is
mentioned again and again in dispatches from Vietnam. Always, it seems they are the first into
battle. Always, it seems they are there where the fighting is thickest.
Cut to shot of Air Force
And our Air Force--who can find the words to express our admiration for the job
it is doing? At speeds faster than sound, our pilots have to pinpoint targets often hidden away
(more)
GERAL
LIBRARY
-3-
Cut to Congressman
Yes, we can all be proud of our men and women in uniform. They are unmatched
by the armed forces of any nation in the world. And what a history behind them! Two world wars
fought against tyranny and aggression--fought through to victory to save freedom for the world.
On Saturday, May 20--as on all days--I am proud to join in this salute to the
men and women of our Armed Forces.
This is Congressman
reporting from Washington.
(Note: A copy of this script is available on Teleprompter in the House TV Studio.
For additional information on this script or to suggest ideas for future scripts, contact the
Committee's Public Relations Office.)
###
FORD LIBRAR &
SCRIPT TAPE-RECORDED XXXXX MAY 10, 1967, EUR FOR FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS
This is your congre ssman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington.
As we
approach the Memorial Labor Day holiday--just a little more than two
weeks away-it is perhaps appropriate to note that the 90th Congress has been
laboring and laboring and has produced little more than a mouse.
There is a mountain of work to be done by the Congress--and not the least
n
"
important piece on the work pile is a bill to reorganize and modernize the
Congre SS so it can serve the people better can function more
efficiently and effectively.
I call this to your attentionb ecause there is some evidence to indicate
that the majority party in the House is--for some strange reason tapparently
not too interested in congressional reform. In fact, the majority party leaders
may be seeking to block it.
We now have before the House Rules Committee a congressional reorganization
bill passed by the Senate last March 7--more than two months ago. The Rules
Committee is conducting hearings on this bill, but there is no assurance that any
kind of a reorganization bill will be sent to the floor of the House for action.
Other members of the House Republican Leadership and I feel it is imperative
that Congre SS enact a bill to modernize and strengthen Congress.
After all, the wise men who carefully shaped the United States Constitution
established the Congress as the First Branch of our Federal Government. It was
intended that Congress serve to check the power of the Executive Branch. The
members of the House of Representatives, elected every two years, are closer
to the people and serve as their direct spokesmen.
One way in which congre S sional reform legislation
would strengthmen Congre $8 and thus strengthen the voice of the people--is in the
control of feder spending.
The federal budget has become so huge and complex--and the devices for
concealing the truth about federal spending so numerous--that federal spending
is spiralling out of control. We have not had a balanced federal budget since
1960, the last year that President Eisenhower was in office. Instead we have
been going deeper and deeper into debt each year--even in times of seeming
prosperity.
enough
Congre SS needs help to check this
tfiscal madness. Lacking
detailed
experts and given information only by Executive Branch fiscal officers, Congre
SS
is hard put to make an independent judgment on budget matters. There is no question
that the Executive Branch often seeks to confuse or even to deceive Congress
rather than to enlighten it.
So Congress needs help--help that
can only
come if the entire
appropriations process is beefed up under provisions of a Congre ssional Reorganization
Act.
It does without saying,
too, that Congre: SS would serve the people better
through congre ssional reform legislation.
if the minority party's role on Capitol Hill were strengthened I say this even
though there is a good chance the Republican Party may win control of the House of
Representatives in the next election.
The two-party system has made a great contribution to the success of the
American political
process.
Competition is good in politics just as in business. In the same fashion
that competition in busine SS tends to bring the consumer a better product, so
competition in Congre SS serves to produce better legislation.
Yet the word I get is that the majority party leadership--if it does let a
congressional reorganization bill get to the House
floor--is planning to
serve up a dish with all beefing-up of rights the minority chopped out. If
that
occurs--and the majority party makes it stick--I think it would be tragic for the
country.
I hope the people will make their voices heard on this most important issue--and
will insist that Congress be strengthened as a check on the Executive
and that
the minority party, whichever it is, is aided in its role as watchdog for the people.
This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington. I'll be
talking with you again next week over this same station.
GERALD LISEARY FORD
RADIO SCRIPT FOR TAPING MAY 17, 1967, FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS
This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington.
We are coming down to the wire on a struggle in the House of Representatives
which will determine whether federal aid to elementary and secondary schools will
continue to be strangled by federal red tape or will be llowed to flow
freely to the states and local school districts.
The House is scheduled to
consider Monday an Administration
bill which would continue the present Elementary-Secondary Education Act and
substitute legislation sponsored by Rep. Albert Quie of Minnesota
known as
the Quie Amendment.
The outcome of this legislative test in the House is highly important.
Democrats take the position that the present system of federal aid to elementary
and secondary schools cannot be improved upon.
Republicans believe that state
and local school officials are being
prevented from making bestruse possible
of federal aid dollars because of feder al interference and red tape.
The sole objective of House Republicans is to
improve the quality of education in our local schools,
private as well as public,
We also believe that the Quie Amendment would--in the words of the Council
of Chief State School Officers-eliminate vast inequities that exist under the present
Elementary-Secondary Education Act.
Many charges have been made concerning the Quie Amendment. These charges
stem from baseless fears conjured up by the Administration. None
of them is true.
Republicans ask only that the Quie Amendment be judged on its merits--that it
be judged on the following
facts.
In providing assistance to non-public schools, the Quie Amendment follows
exactly the same procedure as the existing Elementary-Secondary Education Act. It
requires state and local school officials to provide equitably for private school
students. It actually expands the type of services that must be made available to
instructional
private school students by including the loan of laboratory and other equipment on the
same basis as textbooks and library materials.
Most states will get more money under the Quie Amendment's allocation formula.
No state can get le SS than it receives in the fiscal year beginning this July 1.
The Quie Amendment does not affect either handicapped children or the Teacher
Corps.
RALD
The Quie Amendment requires that at least 50 per cent of a state's federal aid
for elementary and secondary schools be spent on educationally deprived children,
including those in private schools. In addition, it requires that the state
- 2-
must give highest priority in spending ALL of the federal aid funds to
"heavy concentrations of economically and culturally deprived children, areas
of rapid increase in school enrollment and areas of economic depression." The
net result would be to concentrate federal funds on inner-city slum schools and
impoverished rural areas to a greater extent than under the existing school aid
Act. The present Act is written so that funds for the educationally
indiscriminately
deprived are scattered over 90 per cent of the country's school districts,
including the wealthiest as well as the poorest.
The Quie Amendment does not
in any way alter civil rights enforcement
as it applies to school aid under the Civil Rights Act of
1964. But the
Administration and the Democratic leadership
are making
a deal with the Southern Democrats in the Housez: to weaken
enforcement
of school desegregation guidelines.
The Quie Amendment does not provide GENERAL aid for school construction or
teadher salaries.
Special programs would qualify for construction aid
to meet special problems.
The Quie Amendment is simply a move to return local schools to local people.
With the approval of a State plan by the U.S. Office of Education, local school
districts would work with their state school of ficers to make the best possible
use of federal aid dollars instead of running to
Washington with a think and
complicated application form.
Shouldn't we
take this one small step toward better schools?
This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington. I'll
be talking with you again next week over this same station.
####
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
SCRIPT RECORDED WEDNESDAY, MAY 24, 1967, FOR WEEKEND USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS
This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington.
Two issues are shaping up in the first sessionmf of the 90th Congress as
legislation of substance finally comes before the House.
One of these is fiscal responsibility--an attempt to convince the American
people and the majority party in the Congress that the federal money well is not
bottomless and there's a war going on.
The other is state and local responsibility- an attempt to shift control of
local education away from the federal government and back to the states and local
school districts where it belongs.
Republicans in the House struck a blow for fiscal responsibility last week
by seeking to block further expansion of the Johnson
Administration's rent subsidies program and to keep the model cities
program in the planning stage for a year. We succeeded in holding the rent subsidies
program to the present level but failed in our move to hold up on model cities
construction money.
In an historic attempt to reverse the flow of power to Washington that began
with the New Deal, Republicans in the House also
moved to
free
local school districts from the
federal
red tape that has
hampered best use of federal school aid funds. That
action took place this week.
Republican moves on rent subsidies and model cities drew sharp criticism from
those individuals who believe there should be no limit on federal spending or the
federal debt smith They have no concern for the fact that the interest, alone, on the federal
debt now is costing the American people $14 billion a year.
These individuals would have you believe that the federal government is doing
precious little
to assist local communities with their urban problems and that the
Republican motions to block additional huge outlays
were an attack on the cities
themselves.
For that reason I took the floor of the House to point out just
how much federal money was being poured out in the same appropriations bill containing
the rent subsidies and model cities funds-$750 million for the traditional urban
renewal program, $275 million in contributions to low-rent public housing, $175 million
for
mass transportation,
$165 million for water
and sewer programs $27 million for nei ghborhood facilities plus $31, 50,000
for salaries for that program, $20 million for housing for the elderly and nandicapped
with an additional $100 mibbion to be raised through sale of participation ficates
a form of federal borrowing at high interest cost, $75 million for metropolitan
-2-
$5
incentive
and planning grants, million for urban research and technological
research, $2.5 million for community development training programs, $2 million for
urban information and technical assistance, and $2 million for low-income housing
demonstration projects.
For anyone to argue that the appropriations bill House Republicans tried to
cut neglected the problems of the cities is sheer nonsense. The truth is that
some individuals
appetita for federal spending is insatiable. They have no regard
for the taxpayer. Republicans do not believe it is necessary to bleed the taxpayer
white or plunge the National into bankruptcy to make an affirmative attack on city
problems.
We halted further growth of the rent subsidies program. This, it was said,
was "just" a $10 million item. What was really involved was a federal commitment of
$10 million for 40 years--for a grand total of $400 million. This would have been
an irrevocable step--a deeper plunge into still another huge federal spending program,
a program more costly than public housing and far more costly than a federal subsidy
for home ownership.
These are thei issues, these are the problems I face as I represent you
in the House.
This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington. I'll
be talking with you against next week over this same station.
#####
GERALD LISAARY FORD
Radio-Television Script
NATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE
312 CONGRESSIONAL HOTEL
WASHINGTON 3. D. C.
LINCOLN 4-3010
Script No. 19
May 29, 1967
THE CUBA THREAT
This is Congressman
reporting to you from Washington.
For some time now, Americans have been so concerned about the war in Vietnam--
and more recently, of course, the Mideast situation-that they have forgotten about a very
grave danger right here on our doorstep: Communist Cuba.
Today, I would like to bring you up-to-date on a new crisis we soon may be facing
there--namely, Cuba's rapid development as a Russian missile base.
Just the other day, Paul Bethel, a former Foreign Service officer who now serves as
director of the Citizens Committee for a Free Cuba,told the Senate Internal Security Sub-
committee about what he referred to as "completely credible" eyewitness accounts from
more than 60 different refugees of the movements in Cuba of missiles 70 to 80 feet in
length and five to seven feet in diameter. This would place them in the Intermediate-range
ballistic missile category, capable of attacking targets 800 to 1,500 miles distant.
An acknowledged Cuban authority, Bethel also reported that five Russian missile
experts, two of general rank, arrived in Cuba last November. He said they took charge of
a battery of long-range ballistic missiles whose warhead are now aimed at American
targets. Obviously, the Soviet Union did not send their missile experts of general rank just
to show the Cubans their smart new uniforms and their brilliant display of ribbons. A Red
plot is being hatched 90 miles off the Florida coast--and the U.S. and other Latin
republics are the victims!
Only a month ago, Dean Rusk, our Secretary of State, tried to play down the
Russian-Cuban threat, claiming that it had subsided. The fact is that the threat has been
growing. Recently, there has been an alarming and mysterious increase in the number of
Soviet bloc ships arriving in Cuba. General Robert Porter, head of the U.S. Southern
Command, testified before Congress that during one recent seven-day period, 70 to 75
vessels arrived with vast amounts of military supplies and additional Soviet troops.
The
LIBRARY
FFF
(more)
-2-
general noted ominously that this traffic represents the largest number of Soviet bloc ship
arrivals in Cuba since the 1962 crisis.
I am afraid that we have to face the fact that the Communists are plotting a series
of Vietnam-type wars in South America in order to sap U.S. resources and also to sap
our determination to win in Vietnam.
General Porter is convinced that the situation in Cuba is going to worsen. In
recent testimony before Congress, he said--and I quote--"Serious disorders, riots and
insurgency could develop rapidly in a dozen Latin American countries-Bolivia, Colombia,
Guatemala, Panama, Haiti and the Dominican Republic are all targets." The general's
comments sum up what we're in for in the months ahead.
In closing, let me quote from Castro's "blueprint" for Latin subverison made public
by him only last month. In it he called for "two, three or many Vietnams" to sap America's
strength.
This document, which leaves no doubt as to the viciousness of his efforts or the
target he is aiming at, states--and again I quote: "In order to focus destruction on
imperialism, we have to aim at the head--which is none other than the United States of
America." End of quote.
Castro, in short, is determined to step up his war of subversion in this hemisphere
and it can only mean more trouble for the United States. We must be on guard, lest the
war in Vietnam blind us to the Communist threat just off our southern coast.
This is Congressman
reporting from Washington.
(Note: A copy of this script is available on Teleprompter in the House TV Studio.
For additional information on this script or to suggest ideas for future scripts, contact the
Committee's Public Relations Office.)
...
BERALD R.
SCRIPT TAPERECORDED MAY 31, 1967, FOR WEEKEND USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS
This is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington.
Rights now, just after the Memorial Day holiday, is a good time to take
a reading on what has happened in Congress this year and what is yet to come.
The most important single happening, in terms of future impact, was what the
House
did to the Administration's elementary-secondary school aid bill.
There seems to be a lot of confusion about just what the House did do.
But
there clearly was one highly significant development. The House voted
to
loosen federal control over school aid and turn some federal power over to the
states.
House members did this by giving states control over experimental programs to
a
develop new teaching techniques and by declaring federal hands-off regarding funds to
strengthen State departments of education.
From the standpoint of what's best for the country, it doesn't matter whether
the
author of these changes was a Republican or a Democrat.
It happens that the sponsor was Rep. Edith Green, Democrat of Oregon. But the net
result was that the House went a good step of the way toward the greater state
control proposed by House Republicans. Republicans therefore accomplished much of
what they had set out to assuming that the House changes in elementary-secondary
school aid are not S truck down after this legislation moves through the Senate.
These changes in the school aid bill are a sign of the times--a reflection of
the changed complexion of Congre SS resulting from the net gain of 47 seats in the
House
achieved by the Republican Party in the last election.
Congress has been in session for five months to date but there's not much on
the scoreboard. Most of the floor action still lies ahead.
Legislation through one or both # houses of Congress includes draft law
revision, half a dozen appropriation bills, a supplemental appropriation for Vietnam,
the investment tax credit bill,
Food for India,
national
an increase in the temporary debt limit from $330 billion to $336 billion
through
June 30, and a veterans pension and benefits bill.
In individual action, the House voted to exclude Adam Clayton Powell from
membership, to challenge his court test of the separation of powers doctrine, and to
establish a permanent committee on Official Standards of Conduct for House members.
The Senate, acting alone,
approved the consular and outer space
treaties.
FORD
The list of legislation still to be disposed of by the Congress
staggering.
It
includes
the President's income proposed income tax increase, his equest for
an increase in the permanent national debt ceiling from $285 billion to $365 billion,
-2-
an increase in Social Security benefits, the President's proposal for expanding
trade with Communist countriesm in Eastern Europe, foreign aid authorization and
funding, legislation to deal with a threatened railroad strike, the President's
proposals to continue and expand the Teacher Corps, an omnibus anti-crime law and
the use of wiretapping, firearms control, college aid,
air pollution control, reorganization of Congress, election reform, educational
television, picketing at construction sites,
struth-in-lending, and
civil rights.
The House is showing some inclination-as urged by House Republicans--to
keep the President from spending as much as he would like to on Great Society
programs. To date we have cut roughly $1.5 billion from the regular fiscal 1968
appropriation bills. But the Administration refuses to pull in its horns on spending
despite the continued sharp rise in Vietnam War costs. For that reason it is
becoming doubtful whe ther Republicans in Congress can succeed in their determination
to
head off the President's income tax increase.
This is your congressman, Jerry Ford,
reporting to you from Washington.
I'tll be talking with you again next week over this same station.
GEENLD FORD LIBRARY
Page data
- Page
- 1
- Source index
- 0
- Type
- document
- Media ID
- bff609f218b11261
- Size
- unknown
Document data
- ID
- 4526520
- Core
- doc
- Type
- document
DTO data
{
"id": "4526520",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/4526520",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Fifth District Weekly Radio Reports, February-May 1967",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/4526520",
"collections": [
"Gerald R. Ford Congressional Papers",
"Weekly Radio Reports"
],
"subjects": [
"Cuba",
"Compulsory national service",
"Crime",
"Debts, Public",
"Economics",
"Education",
"Ethics",
"Federal aid",
"Government reorganization",
"Housing",
"Labor disputes",
"Legislation",
"Postal matters",
"Poverty programs",
"Private schools",
"Revenue sharing",
"Social security",
"Soldiers",
"Taxation",
"Universities and colleges",
"Urban policy",
"Vietnam War, 1961-1975"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0054/642083/4526520.pdf",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0054/642083/4526520.pdf",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0054/642083/4526520.pdf",
"imageCount": 1,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Context sent to Scholar
Document identity
{
"localId": "4526520",
"label": "Fifth District Weekly Radio Reports, February-May 1967",
"core": "doc",
"dtoType": "document",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/4526520"
}
Document source metadata
{
"id": "4526520",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/4526520",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Fifth District Weekly Radio Reports, February-May 1967",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/4526520",
"collections": [
"Gerald R. Ford Congressional Papers",
"Weekly Radio Reports"
],
"subjects": [
"Cuba",
"Compulsory national service",
"Crime",
"Debts, Public",
"Economics",
"Education",
"Ethics",
"Federal aid",
"Government reorganization",
"Housing",
"Labor disputes",
"Legislation",
"Postal matters",
"Poverty programs",
"Private schools",
"Revenue sharing",
"Social security",
"Soldiers",
"Taxation",
"Universities and colleges",
"Urban policy",
"Vietnam War, 1961-1975"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0054/642083/4526520.pdf",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0054/642083/4526520.pdf",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0054/642083/4526520.pdf",
"imageCount": 1,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras
{
"url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/4526520",
"naId": 4526520,
"coverageEndDate": {
"logicalDate": "1967-05-31",
"month": 5,
"year": 1967
},
"coverageStartDate": {
"logicalDate": "1967-02-01",
"month": 2,
"year": 1967
},
"levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
"recordType": "description",
"ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}
Page context
{
"seq": 1,
"pageIndex": 0,
"type": "document",
"url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0054/642083/4526520.pdf",
"mediaId": "bff609f218b11261",
"ocrText": "The original documents are located in Box D35, folder \"Fifth District Weekly Radio\nReports, February-May 1967\" of the Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and\nSpeech File at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.\nCopyright Notice\nThe copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of\nphotocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. The Council donated to the United\nStates of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.\nWorks prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public\ndomain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to\nremain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid\ncopyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.\na Possibility for this meek\nTrle\nRadio-lelevision Script\nNATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE\n312 CONGRESSIONAL HOTEL\nWASHINGTON 3, D. C.\nLINCOLN 4-3010\nScript No. 5\nFebruary 6, 1967\nFEDERAL, STATE TAX-SHARING\nThis is Congressman\nreporting to you from Washington.\nAmerica is a land of many climates. They vary from the sub-tropical weather of the\nSouthern States to the freezing cold of our Northern winters.\nPeople are different, too. Americanism gives them a basic likeness, of course, but\na Texan, for instance, is as easily distinguishable from a New Englander as an Irishman is from\na Scot. They are alike, but they are different--especially do they differ in their local customs\nand local habits.\nThis fact has, of course, been recognized for a long time. But until recently the\ntrend here in Washington has been to ignore it to treat the States and localities as though\nthey were all cut from the same pattern--to use Federal funds to shape the various areas into\na pro-conceived bureaucratic mold.\nThe root of this problem is, of course, money--Federal money, with the\nFederal control that usually goes with it. Federal aid is granted to States under strict rules\nand conditions laid down in Washington. In short, there are strings attached.\nSomething must be done to counteract the overwhelming weight of this Federal\nmoney-club, to prevent every facet of the States' activity from being stamped \"made in Wash-\ningtom.\"\nI believe one answer is the tax-sharing plan recently sponsored by Republicans in\nthe House of Representatives. This plan would return more than two billion dollars directly\nto the States and localities--without the government earmarking how the funds are to be spent\nor specifying controls over its use.\nThe present system of Federal aid to the States and localities is an uncoordinated\nspider web of confusion. State and local governments are now buried under a mass of over\n400 different Federal appropriations covering 170 separate aid programs, administered by a\ntotal of 21 Federal departments and agencies, 150 Washington bureaus and 400 regional\nfices--each with its own way of passing out Federal tax dollars.\nGERALD of FORD LIBRARY\n- more -\nDigitized from Box D35 of the Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech File at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library\n- 2 -\nHere's how this tax-sharing plan would work:\nFirst, it would allocate three per cent of Federal personal income tax revenue for\ntax-sharing with the States. Over a four-year period, this would be raised to five per cent.\nThe 17 poorest States would first receive 10 per cent of the total funds as a form of equaliza-\ntion. The other 90 per cent would then be divided among all 50 States on the basis of popu-\nlation, with special incentives for States making a maximum tax effort.\nForty-five per cent of funds allocated to a State would go to local communities\nfor education or other costs and the remaining 55 per cent could be spent in any way the State\nnational\nchose. Moreover, a news Council on Tax Sharing, with State representation, would be set\nup to administer the program to insure simplified distribution--and to preclude Federal controls.\nThe 10-man bipartisan council would be appointed by the President® Five members would\nbe State governors.\nI believe it is time that we start rovitalizing the initiative of our State and local\ncommunities and reinvigorating our Federal system. The availability of more than two billion\ndollars would provide the needed revenue for problem solving by States and localities without\nrigid and wasteful Federal forms and control.\nI am hopeful Congress will act on this plan.\nThis is your Congressman Juny Ford, reporting from Washington I'll be back\nnext. week the same time,\n(Note: a copy of this script is avaliable on Teleprompter in the House TV Studio.\nFor additional information on this script or to suggest ideas for future scripts, contact Kirby\nHawkes at the Committee's Public Relations Office)\n###\nGERALD FORD LIBRARY\n5th deatrict Rolio\n2-9-67\nilternate\nTape\nThis is Jerry Ford your Congressman speaking to you from the Nation's\nour\ncapital. In this first broadcast for 1967 I want to extend my appreciation to\nthis radio station for permitting me to report to you weekly.\nLast Wednesday the House of Representatives apported an increase in the\npublic debt limit from $330 billion to $336 billion. The vote was 219 to 199.\nI voted \"NO\" as I have done on the last 7 occasions when the President has\nrequested the Congress to raise the debt ceiling. It seems to me that some\nP lace along the way we must call a halt to deficit financing and a constant\nincrease in the public debt.\nThe last time I voted to increase the debt was in response to President\nKennedy's request in 1962. Mr. Kennedy had pointed out that to effectively\nmanage the national debt and estalhish a sound fiscal policy, the debt ceiling\nshould be raised to $300 billion. I went along with his request but stated at\nthat time that something must be done to halt deficit financing. I said that the\nCongress cannot blithely go on voting for new proposals to increase federal\nspending. And added that Congress may have to refuse to increase further the\nnational debt limit. That was in 1962 when President Kennedy asked that the\nlimit be set at $300 billion.\nThe national debt now hovers near $330 billion and is on the way to $336 billion.\nThe Johnson Administration is guilty of excessive and\n,\nunnecessary\nspending in many areas. By granting the Administration authority to further increase\nthe debt we are simply Asking for more irresponsible fiscal management.\nWednesday\nIt was interesting to note that the legisa last week to increase the\nd ebt to $336 billion was passed by a margin of only 16 votes.\nBefore the bill was finally passed, the Republicans offered two amendments\nwould have been\nwhich we think sould were have been sound, and ^ helpful to the Adminsi tration and to the\ntaxpayer.\nCurrent law sets the interest rate on long-term United States bonds (those\nrunning over 5 years) at 414% With the interest rates as they are today, this is\nunrealistic and means that the Treasury cannot issue such bonds. No one will buy\nthem at 194 4½ % interest. In fact, in December the Treasury was paying an average\ninterest rate of 5%. Our amendment, therefore, would have permitted the\nTreasury to issue long-term bonds at the going itherest rate which we feel in\nthe long run would result in a net savings to the taxpayers in overall interest\npayments.\nGERALD R. LIBRARY FORD\nand\nwas\nHowever, this amendment annd the second one we proposed were defeated 261 to 155.\nOur other amendment simply required requested that money borrowed through the sale of\nparticipation certificate be included as a part of the national debt.\nYou will remember that last year the Democratic Congress authorized the\nPresident to sell certain assets held by the Treasury. The assets included FHA\nmortgages and the like. When the government sells these participation certificates\nis\nor government assets, it has been paying well over 5% for the money it borrows,\nand this is long-term borrowing.\nHowever, the money borrowed by this method of selling government assets is\nnot included in the federal debt limit. Consequentily, the Administration can\nignore the debt limit as far as its borrowing through the sale of government\nassets is concerned.\nWe do not think this is right. feel that it gives a distorted pictures of\nthe true debt situation. We propsed, therefore, that the money borrowed through\nthe sale of participation certificats be included in the debt limit. However,\nthis amendment, too, was votedo down.\nI can assure you, however, that Republican members of the House will continue\ntheir efforts to cut down unnecessary expenditures so that we can more nearly balance\nthe budget without increasing the tax burden on the American people.\nThis is Jerry Ford, your Congressman. I will be back next week with another\nreport from Washington.\nFORD LIBRARY if BERALD\nFifth District Radio-TV Script\nFeb. 15, 1967\nThis is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington.\nI'd like to talk with you today about something that concerns all\nAmeticans--clean government.\nYou all have heard of the highly publicized Adam Clayton Powell case, and\nmaybe you're familiar with the investigation into the activities of Senator\nThomas Dodd of Connecticut.\nYou become incensed when you read about alleged shenanigans involving members\nof Congress, and your should.\nYou should\nget excited about wrongdoing in public office--just as I\ndo--regardless of whether it's just a few individuals who do the wrong and tarnish\nthe image of all of their colleagues. Unfortunately, people do tend to lump all\nmembers of Congress together when they hear of the misdeeds of a few. That's why\nI say the integrity of the entire Congress is at stake in the Powell and Dodd cases.\nThis is no time for injured feelings on the part of national lawmakers. Nor is\nit a time for indignantly saying, \"Who...Not me.\" But it is cleanup time in\nWashington. It's time the American people were given laws\nguaranteeing that members of Congress are properly elected and that\nthey conduct themselves properly after they assume office.\nFORD LIBRARY 'y GERALD\nThat's why I am pressing for a congre ssional Code\n2/\nof Ethics-one with teeth in it. That's why I am urging that a Select Committee\nof the House of Representatives be created to ride herd on all\ncongressmen and see to it that they toe the mark. That's why I want to see an\nlection Reform Act passed by the Congressxx this year.\nThere obviously is an Integrity Gap in Washington, andtkmat the American\npeople are greatly alarmed.\nI hope we can close the Integrity Gap. In that hope, I have introduced a\nbill of my own to lay down a congressional code of ethics and\nestablish a special committee to see that this code is adhered too\nThe Integrity Gap can and must be closed. It will be plugged if Democrats\nin Congress will cooperate with Republicans to establish a Code of Ethics for\nConduct and standards\ncongre ssmen and set up a fulltime Select Committee on\nto enforce it. In\nthat way, no individual member-\nwill be able to claim he\nis the victim of a \"witch\nhunt.\"\nWe can plug the Integrity Gap, too, if Democrats will work with Republic ans\nto pass an Election Reform Act,\nWe must repeal the foolish and dangerous election bill that slipped\nthrough FORD LIBRARY\nthe Congress late last year. That law would provide as much as 60 million\ndollars to the political parties for the 1968 campaign by picking up $1 from each\n3/\ncontributing taxpayer. What a gigantic slush fund for both major parties I\nWhat we should do instead is to adequately police all political contributions\nand expenditures, require both incumbents and their challengers for House and Senate\nseats to disclose all of their gifts and honorariums, slap a\nceiling of $5,000\non donations to any one candidate or committee in a single year, and remove the\npresent meaningless ceiling on total contributions to any political committee and on the\nexpenditures by such committees.\nWe need a Committee on Conduct\nIt's cleanup time in Washington and that doesn't mean spring has arrived early.\nand ttandards. We should enact the Election Reform bill,\nLet's roll up our sleeves and got busy,\nThis is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington. I'll be\ntalking with you again next week at this same time.\n######\nFORD LIBRARY & GERALD\nTabal Feb. 22, 1967\nRadio-Television Script\nNATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE\n312 CONGRESSIONAL HOTEL\nWASHINGTON 3, D.C.\nLINCOLN 4-3010\nScript No. 7\nFebruary 20, 1967\nEAST-WEST TRADE\nThis your Congressman Jerrytord, reporting toyou Rom Washington.\nThere is a lot of talk in the Capital these days about building bridges--bridges\nof trade between the East and the West.\nAlthough the question of East-West trade is not new, it is becoming more con-\ntroversial because of the Vietnam war. Many of the Communist bloc countries which even\nnow benefit from limited trade with the United States are supplying hard goods to the North\nVietnamese.\nThis is an issue which the 90th Congress must face up to in the days ahead. Presi-\ndent Johnson brought the question to a head in his State of the Union message last month when\nhe urged enactment of his plan to expand U.S. foreign and commercial trade with the East.\nSome important questions come to mind. Is such a policy in our best interest? Is\nCommunism softening, thereby offering US new opportunities for friendly relationships? Should\nwe help build up somebody who has vowed to bury us?\nLet's look closer at the issue. I, for one, see no evidence that the Soviet Union\nhas changed its basic goal of world domination. Somehow, many bridge-builders seem to over-\nlook the fact that it is the Communists who threaten the peace of this world--not U3,\nFurthermore, there is no doubt that our exports to Communist bloc countries have\nhelped the enemy in Vietnam. What would happen if we expanded such trade? Of course,\nthe bridge-builders will tell you that we do not-and would not--send anything that could\nhelp the Communists in a warlike way. But do you know what our Department of Commerce\nlists as \"non-strategic\" material? Such things as: diese! engines, jet aircraft engines, machine\ntools, fibres, plastics, computers and capital machinery.\nSomething which disturbs me is the recent disclosure that, although the Commerce\nDepartment claimed it had checked with our American intelligence officials before licensing\nsuch goods for shipment to Communist countries, it actually had made no such check. Just\nGERALD R. LIBRARY FORD\nwhy would the Commerce Department make such false claims as this?\n- more -\n- 2 -\nThis question, as well as the other facets of East-West trade, need some explor-\nation. This is why I support a proposal to set up a House Select Committee on the Export Con-\ntrol Act. This committee would undertake a penetrative study of the problem--to determine\nif such trade was in the best interest of the United States, even in an economic sense. With\nfew exceptions--furs and platinum, for example--the Soviet Union produces little that What we\nneed. On the other hand, the Russians are seeking from US such items as chemicals, machine\ntools and oil refineries.\nAnd, of course, the overriding issue is the war in Southeast Asia, as it relates\nto East-West trade. Building a bridge could well be a foolish undertaking if it sustains and\nnourishes the enemy while draining our own country. I intend to do what I can to see that\nCongress is not stampeded into building a bridge of East-West trade without a thorough study\nfirst of the entire issue.\ntalking with you next. week againat this same time\nThis you is Congressman Jerryford, reporting to from you Washington. I'll he\n(Note: Acopy of this script is available on Teleprompter in the House TV\nStudio. For additional information on this script or to suggest ideas for future scripts, con-\ntact the Committee's Public Relations Office)\n###\nGERALD LIDERSY FORD\nRadio-Television Script\nNATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE\n312 CONGRESSIONAL HOTEL\nWASHINGTON 3, D.C.\nLINCOLN 4-3010\nScript No. 8\nFebruary 27, 1967\nGOOFY FEDERAL PROJECTS\nThis is Congressman\nreporting from Washington.\nThis is the time of year when Americans begin to think about filing their Federal in-\ncome tax returns. I say \"begin\" to think about it--because most taxpayers find the chore so\npainful that they put it off until the last minute.\nAs the tax deadline approaches, millions of Americans will discover that they owe\neven more money, despite increased year-long withholding. But, you know, I believe that most\nAmericans do not begrudge paying Federal taxes, particularly in these tense times when hundreds\nof thousands of our young men are fighting in the jungles of South Vietnam.\nBut, at the same time, I wonder how the average taxpayer would react if he knew\nthat his hard-eamed money was being spent on what I consider questionable and sometimes even\nfoolish \"research\" projects.\nFor example, the National Foundation on the Arts and Humanities--financed with\nyour tax dollars--has just awarded a grant of more than eighty-saven hundred dollars to a Cali-\nfornia school for a study of comic strips. The foundation defends such an expenditure by saying\nthat Little Orphan Annie and other comics \"have been an important source of political ideas for\nthe young and those not so young.\"\nMind you, I am not picking out an isolated example. This particular foundation,\namong many similar tax-supported organizations, hands out awards which total nearly a million\ndollars annually. Some of these awards are really far-out. For example, would you believe:\n--A grant of more than twelve thousand dollars for a university study of \"popular\"\nliterature, such as dime novals?\n--A grant of about ten thousand dollars to support c college microfilm center of liter-\nature and historical manuscripts written in European monasteries before 1600?\n--A five thousand dollar grant to complete an experimental analysis of a violinevar-\nnish known to have improved violin tone prior to 1737?\nGETALD FORD LIBRARY\nThere are many more examples, too. Do you know, for instance, that some twenty\nthousand of your tax dollars are being spent by the National Science Foundation to study German\n- 2 -\ncockroaches? Many of these projects involve even bigger amounts. The Department of Health,\nEducation and Welfare is spending half a million dollars to run two \"laboratory\" theaters to find\nout whether the arts can be used to teach youngsters who can't learn from books. There's\nanother Federal grant of almost five hundred thousand dollars for a beautification project in the\nDistrict of Columbia. And I haven't even touched on the millions doled out under the so-called\n\"war\" on poverty to finance everything from TV programs to summer theater projects.\nThe obvious question, of course, is: Are such uses of tax dollars justified in time\nof war? It is estimated that government-subsidized research and development now totals 16\nbillion dollars a year. Only one other item in the Federal budget--that of defense--exceeds\nthis amount.\nI am not suggesting that all of the government's research efforts are foolish, waste-\nful or unnecessary. Not at all. Some are valuable, vital. These I will support wholeheartedly.\nMany research projects=although worthwhile--can and should be set aside, however, while\nthe Nation's taxpayers are carrying the burden of our military commitments in Southeast Asia.\nWe must set sensible priorities on these programs, in other words. This will be one of my ob-\njectives in this Congress.\nThis is Congressman\nreporting from Washington.\n(Note: A copy of this script is available on Teleprompter in the House TV Studio.\nFor additional information on this script or to suggest ideas for future scripts, contact the Com-\nmittee's Public Relations Office).\n###\nGERALD R. LIBRARY FORD\nRADIO SCRIPT TO BE TAPED MARCH 1, 1967, FOR BROADCAST OVER FIFTH DISTRICT STATIONS\nThis is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington.\nToday I'd like to talk with you about one of the problems demanding immediate\naction in Washington--the need for an increase in Social Security benefits.\nMillions of older Americans are continuing to live on fixed incomes which\nhave been eaten away by inflation. Their situation is not getting any better.\nIt is becoming worse.\nI have introduced legislation which would provide for an 8 percent increase\nin Social Security benefits without any increase in the Social Security payroll\ntax paid by nearly all working Americans. This increase would be retroactive\nto last January 1. My bill also pròvides for future increases in benefits when-\never the cost-of-living rises at least 3 percent since the last Social Security\nincrease.\nThe President has offered a much more ambitious plan. It involves an\naverage 20 percent increase in Social Security benefits plus further broadening\nof the program.\nUnder this proposal, payroll taxes would rise steadily over the next 20\nyears until they reached a maximum rate of 5.8 percent to be paid by every worker\non every dollar of his pay up to a maximum of $10,800. Every employer also would\npay this same levy--for a combined employee-employer payroll tax of 11.6 percent.\nTo put the President's plan in terms of a dollars-and-cents tax, the\nmaximum that could be deducted from a person's pay would jump from the present\nFORD LIBEARY\n$290.49 to $343.20 next year. That's a tax increase of $55 in 1968. In 1969\nthe tax would climb to $390--a hundred dollars more than at present. In 1971\n-2-\nthe payroll tax would go up to $450. That's $160 more than now. By 1988-20 years\nunder the Pres, program\nfrom now--the maximum payroll tax is scheduled to be $626.40--more than double\nthe present amount.\nWe need improvements in the Social Security system. There's no question\nabout that. And Congress will vote greater benefits this year. I am not wedded\nto the figure of 8 percent. My guess is that the benefits increase will run\nsomewhere between the 8 percent that could be achieved without a payroll tax and\nthe 20 percent jump the President has proposed.\nIt is interesting to note that the President suggested a 10 percent Social\nSecurity increase last fall and now has doubled it.\nCongress, if it is to be at all responsible in the matter, must ask where\nthe money is going to come from. It must come, of course, from all Americans\nwho are working and are subject to Social Security taxes.\nWhatever tax increase is approved will weigh most heavily on our young\npeople because they will be subject to the steadily increasing payroll levy for\na longer time than older Americans.\nThe payroll taxes proposed by the President would be especially burdensome\nto young people, since they are just beginning to establish themselves. They are\nhoping to scrape together the money to buy a home. They will be facing heavy\nexpenses as they have children and raise a family. America's young people, and\nFORD\nall other wage-earners, have good reason to look at the tax picture and to RALOR consider\nARY\nwhat really sharp increases in the Social Security payroll tax will mean to them.\n-3-\nAt the same time, we are concerned with the elderly who have been hurt by\ninflation. The Congress surely will act to meet their problems.\nIt is the House Committee on Ways and Means which will play the most\nimportant role in determining what the increases in Social Security benefits\nand taxes will be.\nAnd I can report to you that Democrat Wilbur Mills of Arkansas, the\nchairman of the Ways and Means Committee, is troubled by the steep tax increases\ninvolved in the President's plan. Indications are Mr. Mills thinks the plan\ngoes too far.\nThe Ways and Means Committee will opened start its hearings on the President's\non Welnesday,\nSocial Security proposals soon. There to need but corrfully considered\nIn any consideration If Social Security\nOur goal should be to provide needed cost-of-living benefit increases, to\nremove inequities, and to improve the system.\nThis is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington.\nI'll be talking with you again next week over this same station.\n###\nGERALD FORD\nSCRIPT FOR 5TH DISTRICT RADIO STATION TAPE, RECORDED WEDNESDAY, MARCH 8, 1967\nThis is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington.\nToday I'd like to talk with you about a topic which is very much in the news--the\nSelective Service System, or as we call it, the draft.\nThe Congress must act by July 1 to extend the present draft law in some\nform. The present law will expire at midnight June 30.\nTo help Congress decide what to doabout the draft, President Johnson has\nsent us recommendations based on a study by a presidential commission. The House\nArmed Services Committee, which will handle the draft legislation, also has\nreceived the advice of a study group headed by former Gen. Mark Clark of World\nWar II fame.\nThere seems to be little disagreement that the draft should be changed so\nthat 19-year-olds are called first. In fact, the President plans to put this\nchange into effect by his own order without waiting for any kind of action by Congress.\nThe President's draft law proposals are arousing controversy in Congress,\nhowever. Most of the argument involves Mr. Johnson's plan to start using a lottery\nsystem to pick draftees.\nWhat's wrong with using a lottery system? The President knows it's going\nto be hard to sell and so he has hung a special name tag on it. He calls it FAIR.\nF-A-I-R... for \"fair and impartial random,\" a blind system of selecting young\nAmerican men for military duty.\nFORD\nMaybe that's just what's wrong with a lottery system of compulsory military\nRALD\nLIBRARY\nservice. It's a blind kind of justice that dehumanizes the draft. It's been >tried\nbefore and it just hasn't worked.\n-2-\nA lottery would blindly take some of the best young brains in the country.\nIt would take some of the best young farmers in the country. It would take some\nof the best young workers in the defense industries of the Nation.\nThe President passed over the question of eliminating local draft boards,\nas recommended by his presidential commission. But if you have a national lottery\nsystem for picking draftees, what will local draft boards have to do?\nI think our friends and neighbors have been doing a real good job of\nhandling their draft board chores. They have been performing a very important\nservice. I like the idea of giving a local board the discretion to grant deferments\nin deserving cases. They know each case because they are familiar with local\nsituations. This is important. It preserves what I call \"the human element\"\nin the draft. I'd hate to see the draft made a purely mechanical, computerized\nkind of operation. Blind justice can lead to much injustice, it seems to me.\nThe President also skipped over the subject of deferments for college students.\nThere is no question the present system of deferments needs tightening up.\nCollege should not become a haven for draft dodgers. For this reason I agree with\nthe President that graduate students should not be deferred unless they are studying\nmedicine or dentistry. However, many of these prospective doctors and dentists\nwill\nunder deferment should be required to serve in the Armed Forces after completing\ntheir medical and dental training.\nI would like to see the day when our Armed Forces are made up entirely of\nvolunteers. Unfortunately, we must keepp 3 million 300 thousand men under arms\nLIBRARY\ntoday to carry our out mission in Vietnam and guard the rest of our defense line\n-3-\naround the world. Experience indicates that an entirely volunteer force of men\nwould total no more than about 2 million.\nLet us, then, see to it that we are as fair and as sensible as possible\nin imposing on our young men the military obligation which is required of them as\nthe price of our Nation's freedom. I believe Congress will act in that spirit in\nrevising our draft law in the months ahead.\nThis is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington.\nI'll be talking with you again next week over this same station.\n# # #\nGERALD R. LIBRARY FORD\nSCRIPT FOR TAPING WEDNESDAY, MARCH 15, 1967, FOR USE ON FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS.\nThis is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington.\nThis week the Federal Bureau of Investigation reported an 11 per cent\nincrease in serious crimes last year in this country. And this week the House\nbegan work on legislation we hope will be effective in a nationwide war against\ncrime.\nThe work began with hearings before the House Judiciary Committee, which\nwill examine President Johnson's recommendations for an omnibus crime bill. The\nPresident's proposals are based on a report submitted by a commission he had\nappointed to study the problem of crime and what to do about it.\nThe word is that the Judiciary Committee plans to concentrate almost\nexclusively on the President's recommendations. I think Congress should also\nlook at ideas advanced by the crime commission but rejected by the President.\nCongress also should consider other proposals that may have merit.\nThe President and all members of Congress are anxious to halt the swift\nrise in the crime rate and to wipe out the fear that has gripped the hearts of\nlaw-abiding Americans in recent years. We have the same goals. When we differ,\nit is because we have different ideas about how to achieve those goals.\nWe're all agreed that the quality and quantity of local police forces should\nbe improved with the help of the federal government. At the same time, there\nshould be no federal intrusion, no federal officials telling local law enforcement\nofficials how to run their affairs. We at the federal level should only provide\nwhatever assistance we can, voluntarily given and voluntarily accepted. Basically,\nlaw enforcement is a local responsibility.\n(MORE)\n-2-\nMany of the President's anti-crime proposals have merit. But this does not\nmean they cannot be improved upon.\nThere are many members of Congress, for instance, who believe local officials\nWILL be dictated to under terms of the President's proposals. They point out that\nthere is no formula in the Administration bill for distributing federal anti-crime\nmoney to the states. This is left up to the Attorney General of the United States.\nThe President would give him the sole authority to decide how the money should be\ndistributed.\nThe most important element in a nationwide war against crime, of course, is\nfor local communities to back the effort. We must all stand behind the man behind\nthe badge.\nIn that connection, many members of the House and Senate feel that the\nPresident's anti-crime proposals are inadequate. The Administration bill would\ndo nothing to resolve the trouble police are having in dealing with criminals\nbecause of the Supreme Court's interest in protecting individual rights.\nMany members of Congress feel that the Court's decisions, which have\nstretched the Fifth and Sixth Amendments to the Constitution, have contributed to\nthis Nation's trend toward lawlessness. These decisions have handicapped police\nin the questioning of suspects and the use of confessions to obtain a conviction.\nThe Court, it may be said, has made it practically impossible to convict self-\nconfessed criminals in cases where the prosecution has to rely upon their own\nvoluntary confessions of guilt.\nAs a result, 20 senators have co-sponsored a bill providing that a confession\n(MORE)\n-3-\nmay be admitted as evidence in any trial court established by Congress as long as\nit is obtained voluntarily.\nThese are some of the problems Congress is wrestling with as we join with\nyou in fighting the war against crime. There WILL be an omnibus crime bill--and\nit will be the best that the Congress can put together.\nThis is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington.\nI'll be talking with you again next week over this same station.\n###\nSCRIPT RECORDED MARCH 22, 1967, FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS,\nThis is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington.\nCongress now is taking its annual Easter Recess. We won't be meeting\nagain until Monday, April 3rd. So now is a good time to take stock of what's\nbeen happening in Congress and in the country.\nApart from our continuing search for the path to peace in Vietnam, we\nshould be most concerned right now with the state of the American economy.\nMembers of Congress are worried that we may be on the verge of a recession.\nSome economists believe a recession has already started. Because there has been\na serious slowdown in the economy, the Congress this week moved quickly to stimulate\ninvestments by business in new plant and equipment. We did this--at the request of\nthe President--by restoring the 7 per cent investment tax credit and accelerated\ndepreciation allowances.\nThe people of Michigan certainly are aware of the economic troubles we're\nhaving. Automobile production has been cut back 15 per cent. Men are being laid\noff. This country currently is experiencing the sharpest decline in industrial\nproduction in 28 months.\nDemocrats and Republicans alike are alarmed. In Congress we have what is\nknown as the JointEconomic Committee, made up of congressmen and senators. This\ngroup makes careful studies of our economic problems and has just issued a report.\nIn this report, we find the Democratic members of the Joint Economic\nFORD\nCommittee agreeing with the Republican members that the Johnson Administration\nLionary\nshould cut non-defense spending and work to lower interest rates. Members of both\npolitical parties agreed that the Administration can't go on spending money\n-2-\non every project and program somebody might put on a list. What they are saying\nis that we need to establish priorities and hold down domestic spending.\nThe Administration professes not to be worried about a possible recession,\nand the President insists that we should still raise income taxes effective July 1.\nAdministration officials have predicted that the economy will show an upturn\nabout the middle of the year and will speed up in the last half.\nI hope the Administration is right, but most of the signs are negative.\nThe members of the Joint Economic Committee--Democrats and Republicans--are inclined\nto believe the President is wrong on his optimistic midyear forecast. They believe--\nand I believe--that it would be a mistake to raise income taxes in July.\nI think the President should take two actions now which would stiffen this\ncountry's economic spine, restore confidence both to the consumer and to business,\nand put us back on the road to healthy economic growth and prosperity.\nI'd like to see the President forget about an increase in income taxes, at\nleast at this time, and move quickly to cut federal non-defense spending.\nIt's bad for a possible income tax increase to be hanging over the heads of\nthe American people at a time when the economy is slumping.\nDoes it make sense for the Johnson Administration to be stimulating business\ninvestment on the one hand and taking money away from consumers with a tax increase\non the other?\nIf the economy does speed up later this year, the President then could\nreinstate his request for an income tax increase to offset the Administration's\nlarge deficit spending. He could do that--but he could also cut non-defense\nspending and avoid a tax increase altogether.\n-3-\nIt just doesn't seem right to load a tax increase on the backs of American\nworkers who are still trying to catch up with last year's sharp rise in prices.\nI think you'll find when Income Tax Day rolls around on April 15 that your federal\nincome tax still is too high. Our goal should be to reduce taxes, not raise them.\nThis is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington.\nI'll be talking with you again soon over this same station.\n# # #\nSCRIPT RECORDED TUESDAY, MARCH 28, 1967, FOR USE BY 5th DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS.\nThis is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington.\nWhen Congress checks back in at the Capitol after Easter recess, we'll have\nour work all cut out for us.\nThus far we've disposed of very few items on the agenda. We have yet to\ndeal with crime, the need for increases in Social Security benefits, extension and\nrevision of the draft law, the Presidents's proposal to increase the present level of\nof anti-poverty spending by more than $400 million, the President's request for an\nincome tax increase, the Administration's proposed increase in foreign aid spending,\nthe President's new civil rights program, and aid for elementary and secondary\nschools and for higher education.\nThis first session of the 90th Congress has been dominated by the Vietnam War\nand the Adam Clayton Powell and Sen. Dodd cases. The Powell and Dodd cases have\nnot been resolved, and neither has the war.\nTo continue paying for the third largest foreign war in our history, the\nCongress approved an extra $12.2 billion as a supplementary military appropriation.\nVictnam\nOther major actions taken by the Congress to date include a Keveen War\nveterans pension bill and restoration of the 7 per cent investment tax credit on\nnew plant and machinery.\nThe pension bill passed the House last year but died in the Senate because\nthe Johnson Administration opposed it at that time. Now it will become law because\nthe President has withdrawn his opposition to it.\nLIBRARY \"y GE\n(MORE)\n-2-\nThe President asked Congress to restore the investment tax credit because\nthe economy isscontinuing to sag. Congress was glad to oblige but some members\nspoke out against what they called \"a yo-yo tax policy\" because it was only last\nOctober 10 that the investment tax credit was suspended at the President's request.\nMany members of Congress also noted during action on the investment tax\ncredit that it doesn't make sense to stimulate business with a tax break now and\nthen come up a little later with an income tax increase for business and individuals.\nBecause I feel that the slump in the economy is serious enough to turn into\na recession, I urged the President to withdraw his request for an income tax\nincrease. I believe that if he would do this it would help to restore consumer and\nbusiness confidence in the health of the economy.\nfind\nlater\nthat\nthe\nBresident\nthen\nsould\nreinstate\ntax\nincrease\nrequest\nthe\n$\nfiscel\n1960\nI don't think it's at all likely the Congress will approve an income tax\nincrease even if the President sticks by his guns. The general feeling in Congress\nis that we ought to cut non-essential federal spending instead of raising income\ntaxes.\nAfter all, we're also faced with the prospect of increasing mail rates and\nof boosting payroll taxes if the Social Security benefit increases we approve\nrequire additional financing.\nAs we approach April 17, Tax Day, 1967, I sense that a backfire of protest\nis building among our citizens against a federal income tax increase. A federal\nGERALD LIBRARY FORD\nincrease would be a double blow, coming on top of an increase in state taxes.\nAdd\n(MORE)\n-3-\nto this the possible increases in Social Security taxes and mail rates and the fact\nthat all is not well with the economy, and--well, I just don't believe Congress is\ngoing to go for President Johnson's extra tax on income.\nAs my family and I observed Easter this year, I said a special prayer for\npeace in Vietnam. I believe we can have peace thereif only North Vietnam's rulers\ncan be persuaded that Americans are determined to see the war through with honor.\nIt's now time for the other side to make a move toward the peace table. We have\nalready walked the extra mile.\nThis is Jerry Ford reporting to you from Washington. I'll be talking with\nyou again next week over this same station.\n###\nRadio-Television Script\nNATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE\n312 CONGRESSIONAL HOTEL\nWASHINGTON 3, D.C.\nLINCOLN 4-3010\nScript No. II\nApril 3, 1967\nTHE CONCERNED AMERICAN\nThis is Congressman\nreporting from Washington.\nThe more I travel across this country, the more I realize how concerned Americans\nare about the course we are following=-concerned not only about Vietnam and our boys dying\nover there, but about crime and walfare and high prices and growing taxes, just to mention a\nfew subjects.\nThis concern was pointed up again the other day in a letter I came across from the\nwife of a public school official in one of our Western states. Referring to herself as \"The Tired\nHousewife,\" Mrs. J. P. Strickland spelled out in her letter some of the same concerns that a\nyear or so earlier bothered another citizen, Alan McIntosh, editor of a small-town Minnesota\nweekly.\nIn an editorial in his newspaper entitled, \"The Tired American,\" Mr. McIntosh\nwrote in part--and I quote:\nI am a tired American--fed up with mobs of scabby-faced, long-haired youths and\nshort-haired girls who claim they represent the \"new wave\" of America and who sneer at the\nold-fashioned virtues of honesty, integrity and morality on which America grew to greainess.\nMr. McIntosh went on:\nI am a tired American who resents those who try to peddle the belief in schools and\ncolleges that capitalism is a dirty word and that free enterprise and private initiative are only\nsynonyms for greed. They say they hate capitalism but they are always right at the head of the\nline demanding their share of the American way of life.\nMrs. Strickland, writing as a concerned housewife, said in her letter--and again I\nquote in part:\nI am tired of trying, in this land of abundant food, to balance my budget when milk\nprices jump three cents on the half-gallon, and meat which was 69 cents per pound goes to 89\ncents in just one week's time.\nI'm tired of attorneys and social workers and courts who continue to hand down\nFORD LIBRARY \"y GERALD\ncandy-coated sentences because, they claim, the poor dear hoodlum wasn't brought up in the\nright environment--an environment that half the world would be envious to share.\n- more\n- 2 -\nI'm tired of having to run to turn off my radio when smutty jokes come over the air,\noften under the guise of folk songs.\nMrs. Strickland summed up by saying that, although she's tired of these and other\nthings, she's not too tired to pray.\nInscribed into the granite of the National Archives building here in Washington,\nthere is a line which says the \"past is prologue.\" If this is true, as I am sure it is, perhaps we'd\nall better start praying for America.\nThis is Congressman\nreporting from Washington.\n(Note: A copy of this script is available on Teleprompter in the House TV Studio.\nFor additional information on this script or to suggest ideas for future scripts, contact the Com-\nmittee's Public Relations Office.)\n###\nSCRIPT TAPE-RECORDED WEINESDAY, APRIL 5, FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS\nX\nThis is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington.\nThe big topic of conversation here this week is Postmaster Larry O'Brien's proposal\nto convert the Post Office Department into a non-profit government corporation.\nI immediately welcomed the plan as a fresh idea, something that was worthy\nof careful study by the Congress:.\nThere's no question that our mail service could stand a lot of improvement,\nand this is no criticism of the men who pound the pavements to deliver the\nmail to our doors.\nThe\nproblem\nis\nthe\ntremendous volume of mails and how to get it to our mailboxes accurately and\nquickly.\nWhether O'Brien's nonprofit government corporation is the answer nobody\nneed every available bit of\nreally knows at this point. The Congre SS would\ninformation to make\na judgment on the proposal. Actually, the proposition is not even before the\nLongress. O'Brient unveiled it at a luncheon meeting of magazine editors and\npublishers and provided only a sketchy outline of the idea.\nOne aspect of it I like\nIt would take politics out of the Post\nOffice Department.\nThis\nwould be a healthy development. The\nRepublican leadership in the House of Representatives has been pushing hard to\nrid the Post Office Department of politics. We will never have a first-class\npostal system until we do SO.\nThere is bipartisan support for this drive to divorce the Post Office\nDepartment from politics. It is one of the provisions in the\ncongressional reorganization bill passed by the Senate\nand now awaiting action by the House.\nThe Post Office Department is big business. The Postmaster General, a political\nappointee named by the President withthe consent of the Senate, oversees the work of\nmore than 700,000 employes. These employes handle more than 75 billion 600 million\npieces of mail a year.\nOne cause for concern in\nMr. O'Brien's plan to turn the\nPost\nOffice\napparently would\nDepartment into a nonprofit\ngovernment corporation is that the Congre SS\ngive up any say it has about the pay and working conditions of postal\nemployes. Under Mr. O'Brien's proposal, the department would be run by a\nboard\nof directors and a chief executive. This, of course, has its\ndisadvantages.\nadvantages GERAL\nand\nMIBRARY\n2/\nTo whom do the people and postal employes go\nif they have a\ncomplaint to make?\nIt bothers me, too, that Mr. O'Brien should simply throw up his hands and\nsay that the only way to solve our postal service problems is to\nmbolish the Post Office Department. That's a neat way to solve a problem,\nisn't it? Just abolish it.\nWe could, of course, revitalize the Post Office Department instead of\nabolishing it. We could change it from a politteally-dominated agency where\nappointments and promotions are based on political favoritism to one in which merit,\nexperience and good\nmanagement procedures count the most.\nFerhaps we could find a better system than the ZIP Code for letter sorting,\ntoo, and thus take another] load off the backs of the American people while speeding\nup mail deliveries.\nI'm not willing to say at this point that the only way to make the Post Office\nDepartment a profe ssional operation is to abolish it. Let's give this one plenty\nof thought.\nThis is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington. I'll\nbe talking with you again next week over this same station.\n#######\nBERALD R. LISBARY FORD\n\"SCRIPT TAPE-RECORDED WEDNESDAY, APRIL 12, FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS\nThis is your Congressman Jerry Ford reporting to you from Washington.\nApril the seventeenth--the last day for filing your federal income\ntax returns--is almost here. I'm afraid that there is going to be a lot\nof moaning and groaning when Americans find out how much taxes they paid the\ngovernment last year--and how much they may still owe.\nAs a taxpayer, like you, I am concerned over the continually-\nincreasing\namount of money we are all required to pay each year to run the\nbig government in Washington-and I would like to take a few minutes to discuss\nthis with you today. This, I might add, is the one truly bipartisan\npolitical subject. It affects everybody, Republican and Democrat alike.\nLet me start off by quoting some figures. First of all, the\nbudget deficit and the increasing size of our national debt. At the beginning\nof this year, it was estimated that there would be a budget deficit of\n8.1 billion dollars. Althought this is a large enough figure to make\nthe more economy-minded of us shudder, the actual deficit will be far, far\ngreater. The deficit will actually be between 15 and 20 billion dollars. And\nthere is a distinct possibility that the deficit may go as high as\n25 to 30 billion dollars.\nIf this should happen, America is headed for very serious ecnnomic\ntrouble. The cost of everything will go up even further and employment figures\nwill go down. Indeed, the warning signals of a recession are already appearing\non our economic horizon.\nObviously, there is only one reason for a federal deficit and that is\nover-spending by our government. As far as spending is concerned, the federal\ngovernment has simply got to learn where to draw the line. If it doesn't, then\ny\nLD\nTHEREIT\nwatch out for your taxes next year and the \"private\" deficit you personally\nwill\n39\n-2-\nhave to face.\nAs a member of Congress, I intend to do what I can to cut down on\nunnecessary spending, even if it means that some worthwhile projects have to\nbe postponed until funds for them are available. In a time of war-when\nvast sums are necessary to support our fighting men in the field--it is\nessential that priorities be established.\nIf federal spending des on unchecked, our fiscal balance is thrown\nout of whack. For example, fourteen cents out of every dollar that you pay\nin taxes now goes just to pay the interest on the national debt which has\ngrown by ten billion dollars in the past year.\nWhat can be done? First of all President Johnson and his Administration\nmust devote much more effort to restraining the growth of non-essential spending.\nRather than continually suggesting new spending schemes, Mr. Johnson must find\nmeans for protecting and defending the taxpayer. As an immedaite step the\nAdminsitration should suspend its request for a 6 percent increase in income taxes.\nPresent and future administrations should refrain from promising\nmore than can safely be accomplished for the good of the country. The President\nand Congress at all times should keep the efforts of the government to achieve\ndesirable goals within the nation's current means.\nFiscal policy should be so planned as to produce a budget surplus in\nyears of high-level prosperity and substantial full employment, thereby reducing\ninflationary pressures.\nHigh priority should be given to developing a solution for the balance-\nof-payments problem.\nOverlapping and duplicating government programs should be consolidated,\nand where appropriate eliminated, and in practical cases steps should be taken to\ntransfer their administration to state and local governments.\nThis is your Congressman Jerry Ford reporting to you from Washington.\nApril the seventeenth--the last day for filing your federal income tax returns--is\nalmost here. I'm\n-3-\nThe Administration should do away with window dressing and camodiage\nand should present a true and complete budget so that results will not appear\nmore favorable than they actually are.\nI can assure you that I will continue to support sound fiscal\npolicy and to vote against unnecessary expenditures in an effort to obtain a\nmore nearly balanced budget and eliminate the necessity for a tax increase.\nThis is your Congressman Jerry Ford reporting to you from Washington.\nRadio-Television Script\nNATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE\n312 CONGRESSIONAL HOTEL\nWASHINGTON 3. D.C.\nLINCOLN 4-3010\nScript No. 13\nApril 17, 1967\nTHE NEW OPPORTUNITY CRUSADE\nThis is Congressman\nreporting to you from Washington.\nFrom the very beginning of its history, America has been fighting a series of domes-\ntic wars. Parhaps I should call them police actions, since they've never actually been called\n\"wars,\" at least until now. I am talking about the continuing battles against ignorance and\nilliteracy, the battles against the criminal element in our population, the battles against bigot\ntry and bias, the battles against poverty.\nThe last, against poverty, is the most publicized of these new wars. An army to\ncombat it has been raised. The top brass has been given a remarkably free hand in planning\nits tactics. Ample money--perhaps too much--has been placed at their disposal.\nBut what has happened? The result has been, I am afraid, a stalemate that amounts\nalmost to stagnation. It has long been apparent to the entire country that something has to be\ndone, and done quickly, or the so-called anti-poverty war will turn into a rout.\nIn my opinion, this admission of defeat would be a black tragedy. It must not be\nallowed to happen.\nObviously, what is needed is a thorough-going reorganization and more detailed\nand more careful planning. In fact, there must be an entirely new crusade.\nTwo Republican Congressmen, Charles E. Goodell of New York and Albert H. Quie\nof Minnesota, have already called for such a crusade--the new Opportunity Crusade. They\nhave put together an eleven-point program that is well worth serious consideration. These two\nCongressmen are recognized experts in the poverty field. They are high-ranking members of\nthe House Education and Labor Committee, which handles poverty legislation, and their views\nare widely-respected, by Republicans and Democrats alike.\nTo give their crusade new life and zest, they proposed that the poverty war be\ngiven Cabinet status, This could be done without creating a new Cabinet post. The Commun-\nFORD\nity Action and Job Corps programs should be turned over to the existing Department of Health,\nLIBRARY\nEducation and Welfare. It calls for the dismantling of the Office of Economic Opportunity,\n- more -\n- 2 -\nwhose administration has more often \"botched,\" rather than fought, poverty.\nOther new proposals are these:\nAn Industry Youth Corps, offering youths 16 to 20 private productive employment\nand on-the-job training.\nExpansion of Head Start, the pre-school program for poor children, to take in\nchildren up to the third grade.\nNew Military Career Centers for volunteers unable to meet Selective Service re-\nquirements.\nConversion of the present in-school Neighborhood Youth Corps into a major work-\nstudy program for youngsters likely to drop out of high school for economic reasons.\nCreation of a new State Bonus program to encourage States to contribute up to 200\nmillion dollars--their contribution to be matched by the Federal Government. The funds would\nbe used to supplement Community Action and Head Start programs.\nAnother facet of the Opportunity Crusade would be creation of a Hometown Peace\nCorps, to enlist local volunteers in the anti-poverty effort.\nOther recommendations include establishment of an automated employment service\nto match individuals with available jobs, taking a \"long overdue\" national skill survey to pin-\npoint the thousands of skilled jobs already available, offering incentives to encourage the hiring\nand training of the unskilled, and allowing retired persons to work without losing their Social\nSecurity benefits.\nWe all know that the plight of the poor is something that our rich country has to\nface. But it has to face it realistically and practically. Training the poor to help themselves\nis the only real answer. Federal handouts are not in any way a solution, they are only an en-\ncouragement to idlaness. If the war against poverty is ever to end in victory, it has to have\nthe support of the American people. They have to have confidence in the way it is being waged\nThis confidence is rapidly being lost. It must be restored by constructive action.\nI believe the legislative proposal just presented by Congressmen Goodell and Quie\nembodies that spirit. I plan to do what I can to see that it receives early and serious attention\nby this Congress.\nThis is\nreporting from Washington,\n(Note: A copy of this script is available on Teleprompter in the House TV Studio.\nFORD LIBRARY\nFor additional information on this script or to suggest ideas for future scripts, contact the Com-\nmittee's Public Relations Office.)\n###\nCOMMENT :\nREPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE\nRADIO NEWS\n1625 EYE STREET N.W.\nWASHINGTON, D.C. 20006\nAREA CODE 202 628-6800\nRadio\nFOR RELEASE\nMONDAY AM's\nApril 17, 1967\nEditors, Party Publications: The following is the commentary by Felix Cotten,\nRepublican National Committee, Public Relations Division, which is part of the\nCOMMENT, weekly radio news program. The transcript of this commentary is\nbeing sent to you, for whatever use you care to make of it with or without credit.\nRepublicans are pressing at this session of Congress for the passage of\nlegislation providing various forms of relief for elderly persons, especially those\ndrawing Social Security benefits and other fixed incomes. Most of these people have\nbeen hard hit by the rising cost of living, which has been triggered by extravagant\nand uncontrolled Government spending.\nTo deal with some of the more urgent problems of elderly persons, the\nRepublican Coordinating Committee early this month recommended, among other things,\na double-barreled plan for increases in Social Security benefits. The plan includes\nan immediate increase in benefits and an automatic escalator increase which would\ngo up as the cost of living goes up, both retroactive to last January 1.\nThe Coordinating Committee stressed the need for the automatic escalator\nincrease, pointing out that the cost of living has risen faster than Social Security\nbenefits.\nThe leadership group also recommended a plan that would allow persons over\n65 to earn up to $2,100 a year without any loss of Social Security benefits, or\n40 per cent more than the $1,500 now allowed. As an alternative, it recommended\nthat persons over 65 be permitted to have an income of $3,300 a year in Social\nFORD\nSecurity benefits and earnings without any loss of Social Security benefits.\nLIBRARY\nThe Coordinating Committee recommended restoration of the right formerly\n33\ngranted elderly people to deduct all uncompensated medical and drug expenses in\n-MORE-\n-2-\nfiguring their income taxes. This right was removed effective as of this year\nwhen the Medicare bill was passed in 1965.\nThe group proposed that widows be permitted to draw 100 per cent of the\nprimary cash benefits of their late husbands.\nAt the same time, the Republican leaders strongly opposed Administration\nefforts to tax Social Security and Railroad Retirement benefits, to repeal the\ndouble exemption now allowed persons over 65, and to do away with the direct tax\ncredit permitted the elderly on retirement income.\nThis is Felix Cotten, Republican National Committee News, in Washington.\n4/11/67\nGERALD R. LIBRARY FORD\nFIFTH DISTRICT RADIO SCRIPT, TAPED APRIL 19, 1967, FOR WEEKEND USE.\nThis is Enagnuzx your congre sssman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from\nWwashington.\nThe wheels of legislation sometimes turn very slowly\nbut when amzidmaxwizhx a sound idea pops up in Congress it usually winds up on\nthe lawbooks in time.\nThis is what appears to be happening to the proposal for helping parents\nput their children through college by giving them a credit on their income tax for\npart of the expenses involved.\nFor the first time, this proposal has moved halfway through the Congress.\nThe Senate on April 14 xxx approved a tax credit for college expenses by tacking it\nonto xxhill a bill restoring the tax credit for investments by busine ssmen in new\nbuildings and equipment.\nNow that a tax credit covering part of the expense of high education has\ncleared the Senate, pressure is building up for it in the House.\nEvery Republican in the Senate voted for the taxx college tax credit proposal.\nThe only votes against it were cast by Required Democrats.\nIn the House, Republicans are taking the lead in pushing the college tax credit\nplan. I cited this plan as one fn of the legislative objectives of the Republican\nParty when I XX deliwered the domestic affairs portion of the Republican State of\nthe Union Message last Jan. 19.\nIn that message I said: \"We will continue our efforts to provide assistance\nto those who bear the rising cost of higher education through tax credits.\"\nI now urge my Democratic friends in the House to support the Republican\neffort to gain passage of a college tax credit plan.\ncertain\nCollege tax credits would win full congressional approval if the Democratic\nmembers of the House Ways and Means Committee would back the idea when they must and\nselected Кинки Republican members meet with their Senate counterparts to work out a\ncompromise on the investment tax credit bill.\nBut the Johnson Administration is strongly opposed to the college tax credits\nHouse\nplan, and there is reason to believe that the/Democrats who are members of the\nconference committee will move to knock it out of the investment tax credit bill.\nEven if this happens, I think the time will come fairly soon when college tax\ncredits will be recognized as the proper and necessary means of helping parents foot\nthe bill for their children's college expenses.\nFORD\nThe time definitely has come for Congress to write the into law /edmo tax relief\nfor parents who invest tx in higher education for their children.\nGERALD\n-2-\nSteadily rising college costs have put a tremendous squeeze on family\nbudgets.\nCongress has accepted the idea of giving businessmen a tax break on\ntheir investments in new buildings and equipment. Should we do lessi for Americans\ninvestaing in human betterment? Are new machines more important than an educated\ncitizenry?\nEducation is not a luxury. It is a necessity. And the day when a\nhigh school education was enough is long past. We should make every effort to\nencourage our young people to continue their education beyond high school. Tax\ncredits for part of college expenses is an effective means of doing\njust that.\nI believe there is a definite shift of sentiment in the House of Representatives\ntoward support of the college tax credit plan. This gives me strong hope for\nearly enactment of this measure.\nIt is vital that we encourage individual investment in education,\nthe better educated our people are the stronger our Nation will be.\nThis is your congre ssman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington. I'll\nbe talking with you again next week over this same station.\nGERALD FORD\nThis is finagement your congre assman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from\nMidfashington.\nThe wheels of legislation sometimes turn very slowly\nbut when a sound idea pops up in Congress it usually winds up on\nthe lawbooks in time.\nThis is what appears to be happening to the preposal for helping parents\nput their children through college by giving them a credit on their income tax for\npart of the expenses involved.\nFor the first time, this proposal has moved halfway through the Congress.\nThe Senate on April 14 XXX approved a tax credit for college expenses by tacking it\nonto uxisit a bill restoring the tax credit for investments by busine ssmen in new\nbuildings and equipment.\nNow that a tax credit covering part of the expense of high education has\neleared the Senate, pressure is building up for it in the House.\nEvery Republican in the Senate voted for the *** college tax credit propesal.\nThe only votes against it were east by Republic Democrats.\nIn the House, Republicens are taking the lead in pushing the sollege tax credit\nplan. I eited this plan as one tx of the legislative objectives of the Republican\nParty when I XX delivered the domestic affairs pertion of the Republican State of\nthe Union Message last Jan. 19.\nIn that message I saids \"Wo will continue our efforts to provide assistance\nto those who bear the rising sest of higher education through tax credits.\"\nI now urge my Democratic friends in the House to support the Republican\neffort to gain passage of a college tax credit plan.\ncertain\nGollege tax credits would win full congressional approval if *** Democratic\nmembers of the House Ways and Home Committee would back the idea when they must and\nselected Republican members meet with their Senate counterparts to work out a\ncompromise on the investment tax credit bill.\nBut the Johnson Administration is strongly opposed to the college tax credits\nHouse\nplan, and there is reason to believe that the/Domecrate who are members of the\nconference committee will move to knock it out of the investment tax credit bill.\nEven if this happens, I think the time will come fairly soon when college tax\ncredits will be recognised as the preper and necessary means of helping parents foot\nthe bill for their children's college expenses.\nThe time definitely has come for Congres SB to write txx into low some tax relief\nSteadily rising college costs have put a tremendous squeeze on family\nbudgets.\nCongress has accepted the idea of giving inux businessmen a tax break on\n@heir investments in new buildings and equipment. Should we do lessfux for American\ninvestming in human Inc betterment? Are new machines more important than an educated\ncitizenry?\nEducation is not ** a taxy luxury. It is a necessity. And the day when a\nhigh school education was enough is long past. We should make every effort to\nencourage our young people to continue their education beyond high school. Tax\ncredits for anlingex part of college expenses is NHE an effective means of doing\njust that.\nI believe there is a definite shift of sentiment in the House of Representati\ntoward support of the college tax credit plan. This givesux me strong hope for\nearly enactment of this measure.\nIt is vital that we encourage individual investment in education,\nbecause the better educated our people are the stronger our Nation will be.\nThis is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington. I'll\nbe talking with you against next week over this same nut station.\n####\nSCRIPT TAPED APRIL 26, 1967, FOR WEEKEND USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS\naft\nThispy is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington.\n3\nThese are most eventful times in the Nation's capital.\nOn Friday, the two houses of Congress met jointly to hear Gen. William\nWestmoreland, commander of our forces in Vietnam and a good personal friend of\nmine.\nI\nattended a luncheon at the White House in Gen. Westmoreland's\nhonor.\nThe news wires also were humming with stories about a new approach to aid\nfor elementary and secondary schools, known as the Quie Amendment, and a proposal\nto help low-income families buy homes of their own. I am working hard for the\nadoption in Congress of both of these proposals because I think they are good for\nAmerica.\nThe school aid legislation, ingroduced by Rep. Albert Quie of Minnesota,\nwould provide block - federalgrants for elementary and secondary schools. It\nwould give local school people much more freedom in attacking local school\nproblems with federal dollars.\nnon-public\nfor private schools in the\nAt the same time, it would continue all the benefits\npresent\nschool\nandparochial\naid law\nMr. Quie and I met a few days ago with private school\nofficials and reached agreement on Quie Amendment provisions which will\nguabantee private schools full benefits.\nDefinite assurances regarding\nthose benefits have been written into the Quie Amendment. The Quie amenhment\nwill take away no benefits from any non- public achool.\nMail Has been flooding into my office from people who feared the Quie\nnon-public\nAmendment would eliminate present benefits to private schools under the existing\nFederal School Aid Act. I am happy to set those fears at rest. There\nand parachial\nnobody in the Congress who is more determined than I that\nprivate ^ schools will\nafforded\ncontinue to enjoy the benefits now being\nthem\nI and the many, many others in the House of Representatives who favor the\nQuie Amendment are simply interested in cutting federal red tape\nand easing\nfederal controls. We want to make it possible for local educators to\nset their\nown priorities on the use of some of the federal school aid dollars made available\nto them.\nLegislation to give low-income families a \"leg up\" on owning their own homes\nwas introduced recently in the Congress by Sen. Charles Percy of Illinois and Rep.\nWilliam Widnall of New Jersey. I immedinately endorsed it because I believe\nit will be of tremendous help to slum dwellers who want to better themselves.\nAll Republican members of the Senate co-sponsored the Percy Bill,\nand\nmore\nthan 100 Republican members of the House introduced bills identical with\n-2-\nProspects are good for bipartisan support of the Percy-Widnall Bill. I\nwould very much like to see such support develop in the days ahead because this\nis a bill that would help low-income Americans help themselves. I think all\nAmerica would benefits as a result.\nThe Percy-Widnall Bill is designed to fill a great unmet need--the need to\nprovide home loan funds for people who cannot get a home loan from a regular\nlending institution.\nThe bill would bridge this home loan gap by creating a Home Ownership Foundation\nwith a board of\ntrustees made up of some of the\ntop people in the country.\nThis board would raise mortgage money by selling\nbonds. This money then\nwould be made available, through neighborhood nonprofit associations, to those of\nour citizens unable to afford regular home loans.\nThe neighborhood\nassociation also would select the potential home-owners, help them find\nsuitable housing and give them a dvice about employment,\nfamily\nfinances and family planning. Where necessary, the Federal Government would\nhelp out witht he initial interest payments--payments to be repaid later\nby the\nhome-owner as his income increases.\nEvery American should be concerned with this legislation because it is aimed\nat achieving one of our country's foremost goals--a decent home and favorable\nliving conditions for all our\ncitizens.\nThis is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington. I'll\nbe talking with you next week over this same station.\nGERALD LIBRARY FORD\nTaped 5-3-67\nRadio Television Script\nNATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE\n312 CONGRESSIONAL HOTEL\nWASHINGTON 3. D.C.\nLINCOLN 4-3010\nScript No. 15\nMay 1, 1967\nA NEW EDUCATION PLAN\nThis\nis your Congressman Jerry Ford\nreporting to you from Washington.\n\"As the twig is bent, the tree inclines,\" is an old saying about our youngsters that\nhas a timely meaning. I am reminding you of it because very soon a decision is going to be made\nin the Congress as to just how our little twigs are going to be bent. Will the \"bending\" be\nentrusted to the Federal Government or will it be kept much nearer to the home and the school?\nIn other words, is Washington going to have the power to dictate-through the withholding or\ngranting of federal funds--the content of our kids' schoolbooks, for instance? Or are we going to\ngive our State governments and our localities this prerogative?\nThis affects every father and mother in the country--and, of course, their children.\nIt is a nationwide issue. It is also a family matter.\nAnd, because it is a family matter, I believe decisions on education should be made\nas near to the home as possible where the parents can have some \"say\" about it and can keep a\ncloser eye on how their tax money is being spent.\nSo far, Washington has made too many of our educational decisions. It has, so to\nspeak, laid down a very considerable part of America's educational \"line.\"\nRecently, however, a bill has been introduced in the House of Representatives\ndesigned to return responsibility for primary and secondary education to the States and localities.\nThis bill would substitute lump-sum grants to the States for the present system of \"categorical\ngrants\" for specific school programs. Funds would continue to come from the Federal Government,\nin other words, but the administration of these funds would be shifted to the States to prevent\nFederal control.\nThis will mean that you yourself will have much more chance to say about how your\nlittle twig is going to be bent--about how your tax money will be spent to help educate your\nyoungsters.\nR' FORD LIBRARY\nCongressman Albert H. Quie of Minnesota, author of this new legislation, pul the\nwhole matter very succinetly the other day when he said, and I quote:\n(more)\n-2-\n\"I believe we have reached a crucial turning point in Federal programs for education--\nthe point at which we must decide whether the Federal role will merely support the broad goals of\neducation, or whether it will direct the objectives, structure, methods and ultimately the content\nof education. In a word, Congress must decide which course to take: whether to continue\nsmothering our schools in Federal regulations, imposing Federal notions about how they are to do\ntheir job, or, on the contrary, to give our educators a vote of confidence in their ability to make\nthe best school system on earth a better one.\"\nI subscribe to those views expressed by Congressman Quie--and plan to do what I\ncan to see that educators at the local level are given greater say and responsibility over the\nprograms they administer.\nEfforts are being made by bureaucrats in Washington to defeat this\nlegislation by claiming that it would shortchange private and parochial schools.\nThis is not an accurate interpretation of the Quie Amendment. The fact is that\nthe Quie legislation would not take any benefits away from private school\nchildren--but rather would continue all present benefits.\nThe purpose of Congressman Quie's bill--which is receiving support from\nRepublicans and Democrats alike--is to substitute Federal block grants for the\npresent maze of separately-funded school aid programs. This would free State\nand local school systems from Federal red tape and control. The Quie Amendment\nwould give States more responsibility for their public school systems and would\nfully protect the private and parochial school students.\nSuch a concept must be appealing to most parents with school-age children.\nI only hope we can translate this appeal into the law of the land.\nThis is Congressman Jerry Gerald-Ford reporting toyou ^ from Washington.\n###\nGERALD R. FORD\nRadio-Television Script\nNATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE\n312 CONGRESSIONAL HOTEL\nWASHINGTON 3. D.C.\nLINCOLN 4-3010\ncript No. 16\nMay 3, 1967\nSALUTE TO OUR ARMED FORCES.\n(Note: This script is sent to you in advance of Armed Forces Day,\nSaturday, May 20, and includes a place for insertion of special\nfilm showing servicemen in action around the globe. Although\nthis insert has its own narration as part of the film, you may use\nthe text as your own without the film insert if you prefer. Contact\nBob Gaston at the Committee to make arrangements for the film\ninsert or for further information.)\nThis is Congressman\nreporting from Washington.\nMay 20 is Armed Forces Day--the day we honor all branches of our Armed Forces\nand all the men and women in them. It is a day which finds our country still at war in Vietnam.\nAlmost half-a-million men are already engaged in that conflict and still more are likely to be\nneeded before we gain even the \"limited objectives\" which it seems we are fighting for.\nSo it is with deep solemnity that I say to the men and women in uniform: \"We\nhonor you, every single one of you. We thank you from the bottom of our hearts for the sacrifices\nyou are making. We pray for your safe return and for a quick and victorious conclusion of your\nefforts.\"\nPerhaps some of you will wonder what I mean when I say that our objectives in the\nVietnamese war are \"limited.\" Some of you may be shocked and say to yourselves, \"What, aren't\nwe fighting to win?\" And you may want to know what grounds I have for making such a statement.\nLet me quote to you a comment by one of the Pentagon's civilian leaders, Phil G.\nGoulding, assistant secretary of defense. Mr. Goulding said--and I quote-- \"We are engaged\nin a limited war for limited objectives. Our military actions must be weighed against those limited\nobjectives. Our bombing operations in the North are conducted within certain constraints\nbecause they are tied to our limited objectives in the South.\"\nNow, I'm not going to discuss at this time the wisdom or un-wisdom of engaging\nin a limited war for limited objectives. But I am going to say that this country--except for a\npaltry, noisy few \"longhairs\"--is solidly behind America's men in uniform, especially those\nnow FORD LIBRARY\nfacing the enemy in Vietnam. And that it is pledged to support them in every way it can.\nE\n(more)\n-2-\nhonor them for the bravery and determination they are showing.\nJoin me now in a brief salute to our men in uniform.\nFILM INSERT HERE\nCut to closeup of globe\nNarrator: Around the globe, our mighty defense forces are spread. Their job is\nto keep the peace and to fight only when the Communists deliberately encroach on free territory--\nas happened in South Vietnam.\nCut to shot of troops in Korea\nThey are in Korea, still guarding the free South from the Chinese menace in the\nNorth.\nCut to shot of troops in Germany\nAnd, of course, they are in West Germany, ready and poised, should the Russians\nsuddenly decide on a new military adventure.\nCut to shot of Berlin Wall\nThe Berlin Wall--at best a flimsy barrier between East and West Germany--is\nmade strong because American troops and their superb equipment are poised behind it.\nCut to shot of Navy\nOur Navy is indeed world-encircling. It is the mightiest Navy in the world, its\nsailors the finest, the best-trained, We salute the officers and men of the Navy. They defend\nthe free world better than any Iron Curtain or Bamboo Curtain defends the Communist countries.\nCut to shot of Army in Vietnam\nWe salute the officers and men of the Army, whose job is to do the dreadful,\nweary fighting in the jungles of Vietnam. Their job is indeed a bitter one with vile Eastern\ndiseases thinning their ranks.\nCut to shot of Marine Corps in Vietnam\nWe salute the officers and men of the Marine Corps, whose splendid courage is\nmentioned again and again in dispatches from Vietnam. Always, it seems they are the first into\nbattle. Always, it seems they are there where the fighting is thickest.\nCut to shot of Air Force\nAnd our Air Force--who can find the words to express our admiration for the job\nit is doing? At speeds faster than sound, our pilots have to pinpoint targets often hidden away\n(more)\nGERAL\nLIBRARY\n-3-\nCut to Congressman\nYes, we can all be proud of our men and women in uniform. They are unmatched\nby the armed forces of any nation in the world. And what a history behind them! Two world wars\nfought against tyranny and aggression--fought through to victory to save freedom for the world.\nOn Saturday, May 20--as on all days--I am proud to join in this salute to the\nmen and women of our Armed Forces.\nThis is Congressman\nreporting from Washington.\n(Note: A copy of this script is available on Teleprompter in the House TV Studio.\nFor additional information on this script or to suggest ideas for future scripts, contact the\nCommittee's Public Relations Office.)\n###\nFORD LIBRAR &\nSCRIPT TAPE-RECORDED XXXXX MAY 10, 1967, EUR FOR FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS\nThis is your congre ssman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington.\nAs we\napproach the Memorial Labor Day holiday--just a little more than two\nweeks away-it is perhaps appropriate to note that the 90th Congress has been\nlaboring and laboring and has produced little more than a mouse.\nThere is a mountain of work to be done by the Congress--and not the least\nn\n\"\nimportant piece on the work pile is a bill to reorganize and modernize the\nCongre SS so it can serve the people better can function more\nefficiently and effectively.\nI call this to your attentionb ecause there is some evidence to indicate\nthat the majority party in the House is--for some strange reason tapparently\nnot too interested in congressional reform. In fact, the majority party leaders\nmay be seeking to block it.\nWe now have before the House Rules Committee a congressional reorganization\nbill passed by the Senate last March 7--more than two months ago. The Rules\nCommittee is conducting hearings on this bill, but there is no assurance that any\nkind of a reorganization bill will be sent to the floor of the House for action.\nOther members of the House Republican Leadership and I feel it is imperative\nthat Congre SS enact a bill to modernize and strengthen Congress.\nAfter all, the wise men who carefully shaped the United States Constitution\nestablished the Congress as the First Branch of our Federal Government. It was\nintended that Congress serve to check the power of the Executive Branch. The\nmembers of the House of Representatives, elected every two years, are closer\nto the people and serve as their direct spokesmen.\nOne way in which congre S sional reform legislation\nwould strengthmen Congre $8 and thus strengthen the voice of the people--is in the\ncontrol of feder spending.\nThe federal budget has become so huge and complex--and the devices for\nconcealing the truth about federal spending so numerous--that federal spending\nis spiralling out of control. We have not had a balanced federal budget since\n1960, the last year that President Eisenhower was in office. Instead we have\nbeen going deeper and deeper into debt each year--even in times of seeming\nprosperity.\nenough\nCongre SS needs help to check this\ntfiscal madness. Lacking\ndetailed\nexperts and given information only by Executive Branch fiscal officers, Congre\nSS\nis hard put to make an independent judgment on budget matters. There is no question\nthat the Executive Branch often seeks to confuse or even to deceive Congress\nrather than to enlighten it.\nSo Congress needs help--help that\ncan only\ncome if the entire\nappropriations process is beefed up under provisions of a Congre ssional Reorganization\nAct.\nIt does without saying,\ntoo, that Congre: SS would serve the people better\nthrough congre ssional reform legislation.\nif the minority party's role on Capitol Hill were strengthened I say this even\nthough there is a good chance the Republican Party may win control of the House of\nRepresentatives in the next election.\nThe two-party system has made a great contribution to the success of the\nAmerican political\nprocess.\nCompetition is good in politics just as in business. In the same fashion\nthat competition in busine SS tends to bring the consumer a better product, so\ncompetition in Congre SS serves to produce better legislation.\nYet the word I get is that the majority party leadership--if it does let a\ncongressional reorganization bill get to the House\nfloor--is planning to\nserve up a dish with all beefing-up of rights the minority chopped out. If\nthat\noccurs--and the majority party makes it stick--I think it would be tragic for the\ncountry.\nI hope the people will make their voices heard on this most important issue--and\nwill insist that Congress be strengthened as a check on the Executive\nand that\nthe minority party, whichever it is, is aided in its role as watchdog for the people.\nThis is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington. I'll be\ntalking with you again next week over this same station.\nGERALD LISEARY FORD\nRADIO SCRIPT FOR TAPING MAY 17, 1967, FOR USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS\nThis is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington.\nWe are coming down to the wire on a struggle in the House of Representatives\nwhich will determine whether federal aid to elementary and secondary schools will\ncontinue to be strangled by federal red tape or will be llowed to flow\nfreely to the states and local school districts.\nThe House is scheduled to\nconsider Monday an Administration\nbill which would continue the present Elementary-Secondary Education Act and\nsubstitute legislation sponsored by Rep. Albert Quie of Minnesota\nknown as\nthe Quie Amendment.\nThe outcome of this legislative test in the House is highly important.\nDemocrats take the position that the present system of federal aid to elementary\nand secondary schools cannot be improved upon.\nRepublicans believe that state\nand local school officials are being\nprevented from making bestruse possible\nof federal aid dollars because of feder al interference and red tape.\nThe sole objective of House Republicans is to\nimprove the quality of education in our local schools,\nprivate as well as public,\nWe also believe that the Quie Amendment would--in the words of the Council\nof Chief State School Officers-eliminate vast inequities that exist under the present\nElementary-Secondary Education Act.\nMany charges have been made concerning the Quie Amendment. These charges\nstem from baseless fears conjured up by the Administration. None\nof them is true.\nRepublicans ask only that the Quie Amendment be judged on its merits--that it\nbe judged on the following\nfacts.\nIn providing assistance to non-public schools, the Quie Amendment follows\nexactly the same procedure as the existing Elementary-Secondary Education Act. It\nrequires state and local school officials to provide equitably for private school\nstudents. It actually expands the type of services that must be made available to\ninstructional\nprivate school students by including the loan of laboratory and other equipment on the\nsame basis as textbooks and library materials.\nMost states will get more money under the Quie Amendment's allocation formula.\nNo state can get le SS than it receives in the fiscal year beginning this July 1.\nThe Quie Amendment does not affect either handicapped children or the Teacher\nCorps.\nRALD\nThe Quie Amendment requires that at least 50 per cent of a state's federal aid\nfor elementary and secondary schools be spent on educationally deprived children,\nincluding those in private schools. In addition, it requires that the state\n- 2-\nmust give highest priority in spending ALL of the federal aid funds to\n\"heavy concentrations of economically and culturally deprived children, areas\nof rapid increase in school enrollment and areas of economic depression.\" The\nnet result would be to concentrate federal funds on inner-city slum schools and\nimpoverished rural areas to a greater extent than under the existing school aid\nAct. The present Act is written so that funds for the educationally\nindiscriminately\ndeprived are scattered over 90 per cent of the country's school districts,\nincluding the wealthiest as well as the poorest.\nThe Quie Amendment does not\nin any way alter civil rights enforcement\nas it applies to school aid under the Civil Rights Act of\n1964. But the\nAdministration and the Democratic leadership\nare making\na deal with the Southern Democrats in the Housez: to weaken\nenforcement\nof school desegregation guidelines.\nThe Quie Amendment does not provide GENERAL aid for school construction or\nteadher salaries.\nSpecial programs would qualify for construction aid\nto meet special problems.\nThe Quie Amendment is simply a move to return local schools to local people.\nWith the approval of a State plan by the U.S. Office of Education, local school\ndistricts would work with their state school of ficers to make the best possible\nuse of federal aid dollars instead of running to\nWashington with a think and\ncomplicated application form.\nShouldn't we\ntake this one small step toward better schools?\nThis is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington. I'll\nbe talking with you again next week over this same station.\n####\nGERALD FORD LIBRARY\nSCRIPT RECORDED WEDNESDAY, MAY 24, 1967, FOR WEEKEND USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS\nThis is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington.\nTwo issues are shaping up in the first sessionmf of the 90th Congress as\nlegislation of substance finally comes before the House.\nOne of these is fiscal responsibility--an attempt to convince the American\npeople and the majority party in the Congress that the federal money well is not\nbottomless and there's a war going on.\nThe other is state and local responsibility- an attempt to shift control of\nlocal education away from the federal government and back to the states and local\nschool districts where it belongs.\nRepublicans in the House struck a blow for fiscal responsibility last week\nby seeking to block further expansion of the Johnson\nAdministration's rent subsidies program and to keep the model cities\nprogram in the planning stage for a year. We succeeded in holding the rent subsidies\nprogram to the present level but failed in our move to hold up on model cities\nconstruction money.\nIn an historic attempt to reverse the flow of power to Washington that began\nwith the New Deal, Republicans in the House also\nmoved to\nfree\nlocal school districts from the\nfederal\nred tape that has\nhampered best use of federal school aid funds. That\naction took place this week.\nRepublican moves on rent subsidies and model cities drew sharp criticism from\nthose individuals who believe there should be no limit on federal spending or the\nfederal debt smith They have no concern for the fact that the interest, alone, on the federal\ndebt now is costing the American people $14 billion a year.\nThese individuals would have you believe that the federal government is doing\nprecious little\nto assist local communities with their urban problems and that the\nRepublican motions to block additional huge outlays\nwere an attack on the cities\nthemselves.\nFor that reason I took the floor of the House to point out just\nhow much federal money was being poured out in the same appropriations bill containing\nthe rent subsidies and model cities funds-$750 million for the traditional urban\nrenewal program, $275 million in contributions to low-rent public housing, $175 million\nfor\nmass transportation,\n$165 million for water\nand sewer programs $27 million for nei ghborhood facilities plus $31, 50,000\nfor salaries for that program, $20 million for housing for the elderly and nandicapped\nwith an additional $100 mibbion to be raised through sale of participation ficates\na form of federal borrowing at high interest cost, $75 million for metropolitan\n-2-\n$5\nincentive\nand planning grants, million for urban research and technological\nresearch, $2.5 million for community development training programs, $2 million for\nurban information and technical assistance, and $2 million for low-income housing\ndemonstration projects.\nFor anyone to argue that the appropriations bill House Republicans tried to\ncut neglected the problems of the cities is sheer nonsense. The truth is that\nsome individuals\nappetita for federal spending is insatiable. They have no regard\nfor the taxpayer. Republicans do not believe it is necessary to bleed the taxpayer\nwhite or plunge the National into bankruptcy to make an affirmative attack on city\nproblems.\nWe halted further growth of the rent subsidies program. This, it was said,\nwas \"just\" a $10 million item. What was really involved was a federal commitment of\n$10 million for 40 years--for a grand total of $400 million. This would have been\nan irrevocable step--a deeper plunge into still another huge federal spending program,\na program more costly than public housing and far more costly than a federal subsidy\nfor home ownership.\nThese are thei issues, these are the problems I face as I represent you\nin the House.\nThis is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington. I'll\nbe talking with you against next week over this same station.\n#####\nGERALD LISAARY FORD\nRadio-Television Script\nNATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE\n312 CONGRESSIONAL HOTEL\nWASHINGTON 3. D. C.\nLINCOLN 4-3010\nScript No. 19\nMay 29, 1967\nTHE CUBA THREAT\nThis is Congressman\nreporting to you from Washington.\nFor some time now, Americans have been so concerned about the war in Vietnam--\nand more recently, of course, the Mideast situation-that they have forgotten about a very\ngrave danger right here on our doorstep: Communist Cuba.\nToday, I would like to bring you up-to-date on a new crisis we soon may be facing\nthere--namely, Cuba's rapid development as a Russian missile base.\nJust the other day, Paul Bethel, a former Foreign Service officer who now serves as\ndirector of the Citizens Committee for a Free Cuba,told the Senate Internal Security Sub-\ncommittee about what he referred to as \"completely credible\" eyewitness accounts from\nmore than 60 different refugees of the movements in Cuba of missiles 70 to 80 feet in\nlength and five to seven feet in diameter. This would place them in the Intermediate-range\nballistic missile category, capable of attacking targets 800 to 1,500 miles distant.\nAn acknowledged Cuban authority, Bethel also reported that five Russian missile\nexperts, two of general rank, arrived in Cuba last November. He said they took charge of\na battery of long-range ballistic missiles whose warhead are now aimed at American\ntargets. Obviously, the Soviet Union did not send their missile experts of general rank just\nto show the Cubans their smart new uniforms and their brilliant display of ribbons. A Red\nplot is being hatched 90 miles off the Florida coast--and the U.S. and other Latin\nrepublics are the victims!\nOnly a month ago, Dean Rusk, our Secretary of State, tried to play down the\nRussian-Cuban threat, claiming that it had subsided. The fact is that the threat has been\ngrowing. Recently, there has been an alarming and mysterious increase in the number of\nSoviet bloc ships arriving in Cuba. General Robert Porter, head of the U.S. Southern\nCommand, testified before Congress that during one recent seven-day period, 70 to 75\nvessels arrived with vast amounts of military supplies and additional Soviet troops.\nThe\nLIBRARY\nFFF\n(more)\n-2-\ngeneral noted ominously that this traffic represents the largest number of Soviet bloc ship\narrivals in Cuba since the 1962 crisis.\nI am afraid that we have to face the fact that the Communists are plotting a series\nof Vietnam-type wars in South America in order to sap U.S. resources and also to sap\nour determination to win in Vietnam.\nGeneral Porter is convinced that the situation in Cuba is going to worsen. In\nrecent testimony before Congress, he said--and I quote--\"Serious disorders, riots and\ninsurgency could develop rapidly in a dozen Latin American countries-Bolivia, Colombia,\nGuatemala, Panama, Haiti and the Dominican Republic are all targets.\" The general's\ncomments sum up what we're in for in the months ahead.\nIn closing, let me quote from Castro's \"blueprint\" for Latin subverison made public\nby him only last month. In it he called for \"two, three or many Vietnams\" to sap America's\nstrength.\nThis document, which leaves no doubt as to the viciousness of his efforts or the\ntarget he is aiming at, states--and again I quote: \"In order to focus destruction on\nimperialism, we have to aim at the head--which is none other than the United States of\nAmerica.\" End of quote.\nCastro, in short, is determined to step up his war of subversion in this hemisphere\nand it can only mean more trouble for the United States. We must be on guard, lest the\nwar in Vietnam blind us to the Communist threat just off our southern coast.\nThis is Congressman\nreporting from Washington.\n(Note: A copy of this script is available on Teleprompter in the House TV Studio.\nFor additional information on this script or to suggest ideas for future scripts, contact the\nCommittee's Public Relations Office.)\n...\nBERALD R.\nSCRIPT TAPERECORDED MAY 31, 1967, FOR WEEKEND USE BY FIFTH DISTRICT RADIO STATIONS\nThis is your congressman, Jerry Ford, reporting to you from Washington.\nRights now, just after the Memorial Day holiday, is a good time to take\na reading on what has happened in Congress this year and what is yet to come.\nThe most important single happening, in terms of future impact, was what the\nHouse\ndid to the Administration's elementary-secondary school aid bill.\nThere seems to be a lot of confusion about just what the House did do.\nBut\nthere clearly was one highly significant development. The House voted\nto\nloosen federal control over school aid and turn some federal power over to the\nstates.\nHouse members did this by giving states control over experimental programs to\na\ndevelop new teaching techniques and by declaring federal hands-off regarding funds to\nstrengthen State departments of education.\nFrom the standpoint of what's best for the country, it doesn't matter whether\nthe\nauthor of these changes was a Republican or a Democrat.\nIt happens that the sponsor was Rep. Edith Green, Democrat of Oregon. But the net\nresult was that the House went a good step of the way toward the greater state\ncontrol proposed by House Republicans. Republicans therefore accomplished much of\nwhat they had set out to assuming that the House changes in elementary-secondary\nschool aid are not S truck down after this legislation moves through the Senate.\nThese changes in the school aid bill are a sign of the times--a reflection of\nthe changed complexion of Congre SS resulting from the net gain of 47 seats in the\nHouse\nachieved by the Republican Party in the last election.\nCongress has been in session for five months to date but there's not much on\nthe scoreboard. Most of the floor action still lies ahead.\nLegislation through one or both # houses of Congress includes draft law\nrevision, half a dozen appropriation bills, a supplemental appropriation for Vietnam,\nthe investment tax credit bill,\nFood for India,\nnational\nan increase in the temporary debt limit from $330 billion to $336 billion\nthrough\nJune 30, and a veterans pension and benefits bill.\nIn individual action, the House voted to exclude Adam Clayton Powell from\nmembership, to challenge his court test of the separation of powers doctrine, and to\nestablish a permanent committee on Official Standards of Conduct for House members.\nThe Senate, acting alone,\napproved the consular and outer space\ntreaties.\nFORD\nThe list of legislation still to be disposed of by the Congress\nstaggering.\nIt\nincludes\nthe President's income proposed income tax increase, his equest for\nan increase in the permanent national debt ceiling from $285 billion to $365 billion,\n-2-\nan increase in Social Security benefits, the President's proposal for expanding\ntrade with Communist countriesm in Eastern Europe, foreign aid authorization and\nfunding, legislation to deal with a threatened railroad strike, the President's\nproposals to continue and expand the Teacher Corps, an omnibus anti-crime law and\nthe use of wiretapping, firearms control, college aid,\nair pollution control, reorganization of Congress, election reform, educational\ntelevision, picketing at construction sites,\nstruth-in-lending, and\ncivil rights.\nThe House is showing some inclination-as urged by House Republicans--to\nkeep the President from spending as much as he would like to on Great Society\nprograms. To date we have cut roughly $1.5 billion from the regular fiscal 1968\nappropriation bills. But the Administration refuses to pull in its horns on spending\ndespite the continued sharp rise in Vietnam War costs. For that reason it is\nbecoming doubtful whe ther Republicans in Congress can succeed in their determination\nto\nhead off the President's income tax increase.\nThis is your congressman, Jerry Ford,\nreporting to you from Washington.\nI'tll be talking with you again next week over this same station.\nGEENLD FORD LIBRARY"
}