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 D37, folder "Ford Broadcasts, 1961" of the
Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech File at the Gerald R. Ford
Presidential Library.
Copyright Notice
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of
photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. The Council donated to the United
States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.
Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public
domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to
remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid
copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Digitized from Box D37 of The Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech File at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
THE AMERICAN WAY OF LIFE
Radio Tape presentation, Gerald R. Ford, Jr.
for use 2/14/61
I want to congratulate the Student Council at Holland Christian High
School for sponsoring a series of radio programs on the general subject of
Communism and the American Way Of Life. That our American way of life is
being challenged by Communism is self-ovident. When Mr. Khrushchev said
"we will bury you" he meant just that. I know he was wrong, but I also know
that he was sincere in his misguided belief.
When Mr. Khrushchev told Vice President Nixon "your grandchildren will
live under Communism" he meant it. While I know that he was wrong in his
judgement, I also know he meant what he said. He and all other dedicated
Communists throughout the world are convinced that the Communist way of life
will eventually be dominant throughout the world.
This is consistent with the Marxiet philosophy which forms some of the
basis of the Communist ideology in this year 1961. Karl Marx and his philosophy
of dialectic materialism thought that the only reality is matter; there is
nothing of the spirit - all is material. Furthermore, Marx insisted that out
of the great conflicts of this life and of history, certain inevitable ends
are achieved. This fatalistic approach às applied to the Communist program
results in the conviction that the entire world will eventually be a socialistic
state. So when Mr. Khrushchev said "Your grandchildren will live under
Communism", he was stating a firm conviction and was not simply engaged in
Communist propaganda.
This is by no means to say that we agree with Mr. Khrushchev but it is
to point out that we have a determined and capable enemy in the atheistic
Communist conspiracy.
In discussing Communism and the American way of life I would like to
point out five specific tenets in the current Communist program and then show
how our way of life is diametrically opposed.
Communists today insist upon government ownership of all natural resources
and most industry and business. They would eliminate and prohibit the private
ownership of property, insisting that such ownership is an evil, but also
holding that when the all-powerful state becomes the owner, the general good
is served.
From the earliest fundations of our country our people have found that
the best interests of all are protected when each person is allowed to own and
operate his home, his farm and his business with the minimm of governmental
interference. This is not to say that we do not have many examples of govern-
mental ownership of natural resources and business enterprises within our own
country. We do have government ownership when experience has proved that the ORD
greater good is served by such control. But I must point out right here that
when we speak of government ownership we are speaking of the democratic control
LIBRARY
-2-
of these government-owned projects and not the dictatorial rules exercised
by a communist regime.
This brings me to the second major element in present-day Communism;
1.0., that the government is a dictatorship of a small group which makes up
the official Communist Party in any given country. Consequently, that when
the Government speaks it is not the freely expressed will of the majority of
the people -- it is rather the dictates of a small clique which has seised
and holds the reigns of government. This difference in definition of
"government" makes all the difference in the world when we talk about govern-
ment ownership or any governmental activity.
Under the American way of life government, the sovereignty of the state
lies in the expression of the will of the majority at the polls on election
day. With the power of the ballot the ordinary citizens in any community
participate, in the privacy of the voting booth, on an equal basis with the
most powerful officials in government or the most influential persons in the
economic or social sphere.
Our third great difference from the Communist, therefore, lies in the
fact that our government rules with the consent of the governed. Under the
Communist ideology, the dictatership must influence its will upon the masses
of people by the use of force of all types. In 1776 our fathers declared that
"Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is
the right of the people to alter or abolish it and to institute new government,
laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such
form as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness."
No Communist could subscribe to this fundamental principle. He cannot trust
the common people to know what is best for themselves. He can only force his
own will upon the great masses of humanity. According to the Communist
philosophy, only the Communist leaders know what 10 right and good and best
for all the people.
The Communist is able to assume this spirit and position of omniscionce
because he has replaced God with the Communist State. The atheistic Communist
must have some final authority. Without a supreme spiritual being, he must
establish his own final authority. This he has done in the Communist State,
80 the Government is absolutely supreme and consequently can do whatever it
pleases. This means that the Government may establish its own standards of
right and wrong. It means that the Government can do no wrong; whatever
it does or says is, by the very nature of their belief, right and good because
there is no higher authority.
An understanding of this fact will help us to realize that the Communist
dictators can change their program or their statement of principles as often
and as drastically as they pleased because there is no order or authority
greater than the Government, and the Government can do no wrong.
I am sure that all of us see in this principle the fundamental difference
between the American way of life and the Communist position. The basic tenet
of our American system is that God, the supreme ruler of the universe, created DRD
this world and still controls it. We insist that government as well as individuals
GERA
IBRAR
-3-
must be subject to the higher powers and must obey God's laws of the universe.
Government as well as individuals, therefore, are accountable for their con-
duct and must be judged by the way in which they follow the natural law of God.
I come now to the final distinction between the American way of life
and the Communist ideology. And that is important to everyone of us because
it concerns our relationship as an individual to the institution which we
know as a state or government. Because the Communist State is all supreme,
because 1t rules by force, and is a dictatorship, the individual person
within the regime is merely a servant of the State, He can have no inherent
and inalienable rights. He can only be expected to serve the impersonal thing
called Government. He, and that is you and me, loses all personality; he
becomes the well known "oog in the wheel."
When the new American Government was established on this continent, our
representatives in Congress assembled declared that "we hold these truths to
be self-evident that all men are created equal and that they are endowed by
their creator with certain inalienable rights that among these are life,
liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, govern-
ments are instituted among men deriving their just powers from the consent
of the governed." Here at the very beginning of the American way of life the
whole world was told that God had given to his creatures certain rights which
no government nor any other power could take away from him. In fact, a man
himself cannot give away these rights. They are inalienable. Government,
therefore, is the servant of the people rather than the individual being the
servant of the State,
If I were to summarise, therefore, the American way of life, I think I
would stress four basic principles characteristic of that way of life. First,
we firmly believe that every individual, just because he is a person, a
human being, has certain inalienable rights which cannot be taken away from
him. Our Declaration of Independence lists these as Life, Liberty and the
Pursuit of Happiness. For"us it means the right of choice of a job, a pro-
fession, or life's work. It means the right to choose the type of education
one wishes to receive, the kind of home one wants to establish. It means
raising his family in the way that he feels best. It means having the oppor-
tunity to develop one's talents and interests without the dictates of an all-
powerful state. It means the right to vote, to disagree with governmental
officials and to criticise them. It means the right to stand up and say "I am
a man."
Second, the American way of life envisions a government (because we do
need government) of free choice and consent. It means the right of any
qualified citizen to run for office; it means the right of every qualified
voter to vote for those officials in the secrecy of the voting place without
fear of intimidation. It means that the right and privilege of the people
easily to change the personnel and policies of any unit of government.
Our American way of life in the third place insists that the government
exists for the people, to help them, to serve them, to insure that they
develop all the potential which exists within them. The government, therefore,
GERALD LIBRARY
+
must do everything 1t can to help its people but must also permit the people
such freedom of action that they may continue to possess what our fathers
called "the inalienable rights."
Finally, the American way of life binds both citizens and government in
an obsdiance to God's law. Because neither the individual nor his government
are supreme, all must respect the natural law of the universe. This lavof
God is greater, broader, deeper than any past or present government or statement
of policy. It is spiritually given and spiritually authored, to be universally
obeyed in the past, present and future. We live under no blind fate, nor
ommiscient government. We live in a world in which God's laws and His will
must prevail.
Only when we sincerely believe and are willing to accept these four
principles are we in tune with what is called the American Way of Life.
As I said at the beginning, this way of life is challenged today by the
atheistic Communist conspiracy. Our Government is spending over $40 billion
a year to protest the United States and the other free nations of the world
against Communism. The United Nations and the other international jorganisa-
tions in which we participate likewise are organised to protect our freedoms.
We as individuals must also do our part. I think we must know what we
value and why. We must do everything we can as individuals to make pur system
work. This means we must not only believe in it, we must practice what it
teaches; we must be interested in public affiars, and we must value our
liberties but insist that what we demand for ourselves must also be readily
available to others. We have a great privilege of enjoying a free land. We
must accept the great responsibility of Keeping it free not only for ourselves
but also for every other human being.
RodisTop 2-14-61
an original +
THE AMERICAN WAY OF LIFE
3 cofores
I want to congratulate the Student Council at Highand Christian High
School for sponsoring a series of radio programs on the general subject of Communism
and the American way of life. That our American way of life is being challenged by
*** Communism is self-evident. When Mr. Khrushchev said "we will bury you" he meant
misguided
just that. I know he was wrong, but I also know that he was sincere in his belief.
When Mr Khrushchev told Vice President Nixon "your grandchildren will live
under Communism" he meant it. While I know that he was wrong in his judgement, I also
meant what have
know he was sincere in his belief. He and all other dedicated Communists throughout
the world are convinced that the Communist way of life will evendually be dominant
throughout the world.
This is consistent with the Marxist philosophy which forms some of the basis
of the Communist idealogy in this year 1961. Karl Marx and his philosphy of dealectic
materialism thought that the only reality is mater; there is nothihg of the spirit --- all
is material. Furthermore, Marx insisted that out of the great conflicts of this life and
of history, certain inevitable ends are achieved. This fatalistic approach as applied
to the Communist program results in the conviction that the entire world will eventually
rand-
be a socialistic state. So when Mr. Khrushchev said "Your children will live under
Communism" he was stating a firm conviction and was not simply engaged in the Communist
propaganda.
This is by nomeans to say that we agree with Mr. Khrushchev but it is to point
out that we have a determined and capable enemy in the atheistic Communist conspiracy.
In discussing Communism and the American way of life I would like to point
out five specific tenets in the current Communist program and then whow how our way of
life is diametrically opposed.
GERALD
LIBRARY
you (who) work in a cause that is bigger than any man's ambition, greater than any party.
It is the cause of freedom, of justiee, and peace of all mankind."
In these words Dick Nixon portrayed the strength of our American way of life and
set the basic goals for all our political and social activities. We endorse his words and
wish him well.
YOUR NATIONAL DEBT TODAY: Our total gross public debt and guaranteed obligations
now stand at $290.2 billion, a reduction of $2.5 billion from a year ago. This year's
budget calls for interest payments of $9.6 billions. This is for interest only and will
not be used to reduce the principal indebtedness.
On the opening day of this Congress a bill was introduced to provide for the re-
duction of the public debt by at least 10 percent of the estimated overall Federal receipts
for each fiscal year. Another bill would require that Federal expenditures not exceed
revenue except in time of grave emergency, and that the public debt be systematically
reduced. I'm sure that most of the citizens of the Fifth District endorse the aims and
objectives of these bills.
While many proposals requiring the expenditure of billions of dollars are being
considered, it is imperative that we continue our efforts to insure a stable dollar and a
sound economy. Inflation and fiscal irresponsibility remain potential enemies of every
American citizen. The Congress must retain the responsibility of examining carefully
and critically every new spending proposal, especially those which call for the expendi-
ture of millions or billions without specifically supplying the required revenue.
You may be interested to know that since the publication of the anonymous letter
addressed to me and donating $5 for the reduction of the national debt, the Treasury De-
partment has received other contributions for this purpose. A Grand Rapids citizen sent
the $5 shortly after the election with the suggestion that I send it to the Tressury or
buy a steak. Promptly I matched the $5 contribution and so an additional ten dollars
are in the Treasury account marked "for reduction of the public debt."
OUR LEGISLATION IN 87TH CONGRESS: Any bill on which action was not completed in the
last Congress has to be reintroduced if it is to be considered during the present session.
Among the bills which I have reintroduced is one to permit a widow with children to earn
up to $3,600 a year (rather than $1,200 as at present) without forfeiting her social
security benefits; another would require railroad cars to be equipped with reflectors or
luminous material so they can be readily seen at night at grade crossings. A third bill
would permit rec.1 pients of Old Age Assistance benefits to continue to receive payments
while a patient in a private mental hospital.
These bills and all others have been referred to the appropriate committees for
study and possible consideration. We have requested that the interested departments and
agencies in the executive branch of the government be asked to submit their views and re-
commendations on these bills. This is in line with regular procedure.
Communists today insist upon government ownership of all natural resourses
and most industry and business. They would eliminate and prohibit the private ownership
also holding
of property, insisting that such ownership is an evil but 1 that when the all-powerful
state becomes the owner the general good is served.
From the earliest foundations of our country our people have found that the
best interestes of all are protected when each person is allowed to own and operate
and
his home, his farm, his business with the minimum of governmental interference. This is
not to say that we do not have many examples of governmental ownership of natural
do
resources and business enterprises within our own country. We have this-government
such entral
ownership when experience has proved that the greater good Lis served by this gevern-
mental activity But I must point out right here that when we STYS speak of government
ownership we are speaking of the democratic control of these government-owned progeets
rule exercied tya regime
and not the dictatorial control of such projects.
This brings me to the second major element in present-day Communism; i.e.,
that the government is a distatorship of a small group which makesup the official
when the
Communist Party in any given country. Consequently, that XXI Government speaks it is
not the freely expressed will of the majority of the people -- it is rather the dictates
clique
of a small granty wherhate seized and holds the reigns of government. This difference in
definition of"government" makes all the difference in the world when we talk about
government owership or any governmental activity.
Under the A merican way of life goverhment, the sovereignty of the state lies
in the expression of the will of the majority at the polls on election day. With the
power of the ballot the individual and orginary ditizens in any community participate,
in the právacy of the voting booth on an equal basis with the most powerful officials in
government or the most influential persons in the economic or social sphere.
GERALD
LIBRARY
you (who) work in a cause that is bigger than any man's ambition, greater than any party.
It is the cause of freedom, of justice, and peace of all mankind."
In these words Dick Nixon portrayed the strength of our American way of life and
set the basic goals for all our political and social activities. We endorse his words and
wish him well.
YOUR NATIONAL DEBT TODAY: Our total gross public debt and guaranteed obligations
now stand at $290.2 billion, a reduction of $2.5 billion from a year ago. This year's
budget calls for interest payments of $9.6 billions. This is for interest only and will
not be used to reduce the principal indebtedness.
On the opening day of this Congress a bill was introduced to provide for the re-
duction of the public debt by at least 10 percent of the estimated overall Federal receipts
for
each
fiscal year. Another bill would require that Federal expenditures not exceed
revenue except in time of grave emergency, and that the public debt be systematically
reduced. I'm sure that most of the citizens of the Fifth District endorse the aims and
objectives of these bills.
While many proposals requiring the expenditure of bi lions of dollars are being
considered, it is imperative that we dontinue our efforts to insure a scable dollar and a
sound economy. Inflation and fiscal rresponsibility remain potential enemies of every
American citizen. The Congress must tetain the responsibility of examining carefully
and critically every new spending proposal, especially those which cal for the expendi-
ture of millions or billions without specifically supplying the required revenue.
You may be interested to know that since the publication of the anonymous letter
addressed to me and donating $5 for the reduction of the national debt, the Treasury De-
partment has received other contributions for this purpose. A Grand lapids citizen sent
the $5 shortly after the election with the suggestion that I send it to the Tressury or
buy a steak. Promptly I matched the $5 contribution and so an additional ten dollars
are in the Treasury account marked "For reduction of the public debt."
OUR LEGISLATION IN 87TH CONGRESS: Any bill on which action was not completed in the
last Congress has to be reintroduced if it is to be considered durin the present session.
Among the bills which I have reintroduced is one to permit a widow with children to earn
up to $3,600 a year (father than $1,200 as at present) without forfecting her social
security benefits; another would require railroad cars to be equippes with reflectors or
luminous material so they can be readily seen at night at grade crossings. A third bill
would permit rec.1 pients of Old Age Assistance benefits to continue to receive payments
while a patient in a private mental hospital.
These bills and all others have been referred to he appropriate committees for
study and possible consideration. We have requested that the interested departments and
agencies in the executive branch of the government be asked to submit their views and re-
commendations on these bills. This is in line with regular procedure.
3/
Our third great difference from the Communist, therefore, lies in the fact that
our government rules with the consent of the governed. Whenes Under the Communist
ideology, the dictatorship must influence its will upon the masses of people by the
any
use of force of all type S. In 1776 our fathers dembared that "Whenever we form of
government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or
abolish it and to institute new government, laying / its foundation on such principles
and organizing its powers in such form as to them shall seem most likely to effect ***/
their safety and happiness." No Communist could subscribe to this fundamental prin-
ciple. He cannot trust the common people to know what is best for themselves. He can
only force his own will upon the great masses of humanity. According to the Communist
philospphy, only the Communist leaders and their dictators know what is right and good and
best for all the ple.
The Comminist is able to assume this spirit and position of omniscience because
he has replaced God with the Communist State. The atheistic Communist must have some
final authority. Without a supreme spiritual being, he must establish his own final
authority. This he has done in the Communist State, so that the government is absolutely
supreme and consequently can do whatever it pleases. This means that the Government may
establish their its own standards of right and wrong. It means that the Government can do
no wrong; whatever it does or days is, by the very nature of their belief, right and good
because there is no higher authority.
dectators
An understanding of this fact will help us to realize that the Communists can
change their program their on their statement of principles as often or and as
order
drastically as they please because there is no standard or authority greater than the
Government, and the Gomgrnment can do no wrong.
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
I am sure that all of us see in this principle the fundamental difference between
the American way of life and the Communist position. The basic tenet of our American system
one of the logislative committees. With its power to recommend a "rule" by which a bill
is to be considered the committee decides whether a bill should be open to amendments,
what kind of changes may be made, and how long debate should last. By refusing a "rule"
or neglecting to take any action this Committee of 12 persons (8 Democrats, 4 Republicans
in the 86th Congress) can make it difficult to get a bill to the floor of the House for
debate and a vote,
Some criticism is directed at the Committee on the basis that it holds up legisla-
tion desired by a majority of the members by interjecting its own judgment on the merits
of the legislation rather than simply deciding when and how a bill will be considered.
In answer, the Chairman, Rep. Howard Smith, (Democrat of Virginia) points out that
there are three other ways of bringing legislation to the floor: suspension of the rules,
requiring a two-thirds vote; a discharge petition signed by a majority of members, and
the use of a method known as "Calendar Wednesday." Concerning the latter Chairman Smith
has said, "If a bill languishes in the Rules Committee or any other Committee, on that day
the Committee can bring that bill up and have it considered in the House. If a majority
wants to consider it, they can consider it." It has been my observation that very little
if any legislation desired by a majority of the House membership is actually tied up
permanently in the Committee on Rules.
An enlargement of the Committee has been suggested as has a change in membership
and procedure. A revival of the 21-day rule has been recommended. This would permit
consideration by the House of any bill which had been before the Rules Committee for
21 days or more. The first yea-and-nay vote which I cast as a freshman legislator in 1949
was in support of such a rule. Two years later when it was repealed I voted to retain it.
However, in light of additional experience and observation, I believe the Committee is
generally responsive to majority wishes. If it is not, adequate parliamentary remedies
exist to work the will of the majority.
COMMITTEE ON UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES: Rep. James Roosevelt (Democrat of California)
has again recommended that the House Committee on Un-American Activities be abolished or
its activities drastically reduced. Two years ago when he made a similar proposal I
stated in the WASHINGTON REVIEW: This Committee was established to carry on a continual
investigation of subversion in our country and to recommend legislation against the
Communist conspiracy
"Until a better plan for doing so is presented to the Congress, I will vote to
continue the Committee on Un-American Activities."
I reiterate this today. It seems to me the Committee serves a very useful purpose
as one means of alerting the public to the ways of the international Communist con-
spiracy.
is that God, the supreme ruler of the universe, reated this world and still
controls it. We insist that government as well as individuals must be subject to the
higher powers and must obey God's laws of the universe. Government as well as individuals
,
therefore, are acouuntable for their conduct and must be judged by the way in which they
follow the natural law of God.
I come now to the final distinction between the American way of life and the
Communist ideology. And that is important to everyone of us because it concerns our
relationships as an individual to the institution which we know as a state or government.
Because the Communist State is all supreme, because it rules by force, and is a distator-
ship, the individual person within the regime is merely but a servant of the State. He can
have no inherent and I analienable rights. He can only be expected to serve the impersonal
thing called government He, and that is you and me, loses all
=
11
personality; he becomes the well known cog in the wheel.
When the new American government was established on this continent, our
representatives in Congress assembled declared that "we hold these truths to be self-
evident that all men are created equal and that they are endowed by their creator with
I
certain unalienable rights that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men deriving their just powers
from the consent of the governed." Here at the very beginning of the /American way of life
the wholeworld was told that God had given to his creatures certain rights which no govern-
a
smill
ment nor any other power could take away from him. In fact, man cannot oven give away these
rights. They are analienable. Government, therefore, is the servant of the people rather
than the individual being the servant of the State.
If I were to summarize, therefore, the American way of life, I think Iwould
stress four basic principles characteristic of that way of life. First we firmly believe
I
that every individual, just because he is a person a human being, has certain unalienable
one of the legislative committees. With its power to recommend a "rule" by which a bill
is to be considered the committee decides whether a bill should be open to amendments,
what kind of changes may be made, and how long debate should last. By refusing a "rule"
or neglecting to take any action this Committee of 12 persons (8 Democrats, 4 Republicans
in
the 86th Congress) can make it difficult to get a bill to the floor of the House for
debate and a vote.
Some criticism is directed at the Committee on the basis that it holds up legisla-
tion desired by a majority of the members by interjecting its own judgment on the merits
of the legislation rather than simply deciding when and how a bill will be considered.
In answer, the Chairman, Rep. Howard Smith, (Democrat of Virginia) points out that
there are three other ways of bringing legislation to the floor: suspension of the rules,
requiring a two-thirds vote; a discharge petition signed by a majority of members, and
the use of a method known as "Calendar Wednesday." Concerning the latter Chairman Smith
has said, "If a bill languishes in the Rules Committee or any other Committee, on that day
the Committee can bring that bill up and have it considered in the House. If a majority
wants to consider it, they can consider it." It has been my observation that very little
if any legislation desired by a majority of the House membership is actually tied up
permanently in the Committee on Rules.
An enlargement of the Committee has been suggested as has a change in membership
and procedure. A revival of the 21-day rule has been recommended. This would permit
consideration by the House of any bill which had been before the Rules Committee for
21 days or more. The first yea-and-nay vote which I cast as a freshman legislator in 1949
was in support of such a rule. Two years later when it was repealed I voted to retain it.
However, in light of additional experience and observation, I believe the Committee is
generally responsive to majority wishes. If it is not, adequate parliamentary remedies
exist to work the will of the majority.
COMMITTEE ON UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES: Rep. James Roosevelt (Democrat of California)
has again recommended that the House Committee on Un-American Activities be abolished or
its activities drastically reduced. Two years ago when he made a similar proposal I
stated in the WASHINGTON REVIEW: "This Committee was established to carry on a continual
investigation of subversion in our country and to recommend legislation against the
Communist conspiracy..
"Until a better plan for doing so is presented to the Congress, I will vote to
continue the Committee on Un-American Activities."
I reiterate this today. It seems to me the Committee serves a very useful purpose
as one means of alerting the public to the ways of the international Communist con-
spiracy.
5/
rights which cannot be taken ### away from him. Our Declaration of I dependence lists
1913
these as Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. For us it means the wight of choice
of a job, a profession, or life's work. It means the right to choose the type of education
one
one wishes to receive, the kind of home we wants to establish. It means raising his
family in the way that he feels best. It means having the opportunity to develope
one's talents and interests without the dictates of an all-powerful state. It means
the Wright to vote, to disagree with governmental officials and to criticize them. It
means the right to stand up and say "I am a man".
Second, the American way of life envisions a government because we doneed dopaned
government of free choice and consent. It means the right of any qualified sitizen
to run for office; XXX it means the right of every qualified voter to vote for those
officials in the secrecy of the voting place without fear of intimidation. It means
the personnel and policies
that the right and privilege of the people easily to change those officers which are in
any whit of government
authority by peaceful means at the baldot box P Our American way oflife in the third place
insists that the government exists for the people, to help them, to serve them, to meure
that they develope all the potential which exists within them. The government, therefore,
must dis everything it can to help its people but must also permit the people such freedom
of faction that they may continue to possess what our fathers called "the unalienable I rights."
Finally, the American way of life binds both sitizens and government in an
obediance to God's law. Because neither the individual nor his government are wupreme,
all must respect the natural law of the universe. This law of God is greater, broader,
this
deeper than any past or present government or statement of policy. They are spiritually
and
given spiritually authoric to be universally obeyed in past, present and future. We
live under no blind fate nor omniscient government. We live in a world in which God's
laws and His will must prevail. Only when we sincerely #A believe and are willing to accept GERAL FORD
LIBRARY
these four principles are we in tune with what is called the Amemican Way of Life.
one of the legislative committees. With its power to recommend a "rule" by which a bill
is to be considered the committee decides whether a bill should be open to amendments,
what kind of changes may be made, and how long debate should last. By refusing a "rule"
or neglecting to take any action this Committee of 12 persons (8 Democrats, 4 Republicans
in the 86th Congress) can make it difficult to get a bill to the floor of the House for
debate and a vote.
Some criticism is directed at the Committee on the basis that it holds up legisla-
tion desired by a majority of the members by nterjecting. its own judgment on the merits
of the legislation rather than simply deciding when and how a bill will be considered.
In answer, the Chairman, Rep. Howard Smith, (Democrat of Virginia points out that
there are three other ways of bringing legislation to the floor: suspension of the rules,
requiring a two-thirds vote; a discharge petition signed by a majority of members, and
the use of a method known as "Calendar Wednesday." Concerning the latter Chairman Smith
has said, "If a bill languishes in the Rules Committee or any other Committee, on that day
the Committee can bring that bill up and have it considered in the House. If a majority
wants to consider it, they can consider it." It has been my observation that very little
if any legislation desired by a majority of the House membership is actually tied up
permanently in the Committee on Rules.
An enlargement 0. the Committee has been suggested as has a change in membership
and procedure. A revival of the 21-day ruld has been recommended. This would permit
consideration by the House of any bill which had been before the Rules Committee for
21 days or more. The first yea-and-nay vot which I cast as a freshean legislator in 1949
was in support of such a rule. Two years ter when it was repealed]I voted to retain it.
However, in light of additional experience Ind observation, I believe the Committee is
generally responsive to majority wishes. If it is not, adequate parliamentary remedies
exist to work the will of the majority.
COMMITTEE ON UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES: Rep. James Roosevelt (Democrat of California)
has again recommended the House Committee on Un-American Activities be abolished or
its activities drastically reduced. Two years ago when he made a similar proposal I
stated in the WASHINGTON REVIEW: "This Committee was established to carry on a continual
investigation of subversion in our country and to recommend legislation against the
Communist conspiracy
"Until a better plan for doing so is resented to the Congress, I will vote to
continue the Committee on Un-American Activities."
I reiterate this today. It seems to me the Committee serves a very useful purpose
as one means of alerting the public to the ays of the international Communist con-
spiracy.
6/
As I said at the beginnigg, this way of life is challenged today by the
a year
atheistic Communist conspiracy. Our Government is spending over $40 billion to
protect the United States and the other free nations of the world against Communism.
The United Nations and the other internaltional organizationsin which we participate
organized
likewise are to protect our freedoms.
We as individuals must also do our part. I think we must know what we value
and why. We must do everything we can as individuals to make our system work. This
X
Joy
means
we
must
not
believe
it, we must practice what it teaches; we must be interested in
n
public affairs, and we must value our libertieis but insist that what we 2 demand for
Mayself must also be readily available to others. we have a great privilege of enjoying
a free land. We must accept the graat responsibility of keeping *** it free not only
for ourselves but also for every other human being.
FORD
LIBRARI
one of the legislative committees. With its power to recommend a "rule" by which a bill
is to be considered the committee decides whether a bill should be open to amendments,
what kind of changes may be made, and how long debate should last. By refusing a "rule"
or neglecting to take any action this Committee of 12 persons (8 Democrats, 4 Republicans
in the 86th Congress) can make it difficult to get a bill to the floor of the House for
debate and a vote.
Some criticism is directed at the Committee on the basis that it holds up legisla-
tion desired by a majority of the members by interjecting its own judgment on the merits
of the legislation rather than simply deciding when and how a bill will be considered.
In answer, the Chairman, Rep. Howard Smith, (Democrat of Virginia) points out that
there are three other ways of bringing legislation to the floor: suspension of the rules,
requiring a two-thirds vote; a discharge petition signed by a majority of members, and
the use of a method known as "Calendar Wednesday." Concerning the latter Chairman Smith
has said, "If a bill languishes in the Rules Committee or any other Committee, on that day
the Committee can bring that bill up and have it considered in the House. If a majority
wants to consider it, they can consider it." It has been my observation that very little
if any legislation desired by a majority of the House membership is actually tied up
permanently in the Committee on Rules.
An enlargement of the Committee has been suggested as has a change in membership
and procedure. A revival of the 21-day rule has been recommended. This would permit
consideration by the House of any bill which had been before the Rules Committee for
21 days or more. The first yea-and-nay vote which I cast as a freshman legislator in 1949
was in support of such a rule. Two years later when it was repealed I voted to retain it.
However, in light of additional experience and observation, I believe the Committee is
generally responsive to majority wishes. If it is not, adequate parliamentary remedies
exist to work the will of the majority.
COMMITTEE ON UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES: Rep. James Roosevelt (Democrat of California)
has again recommended that the House Committee on Un-American Activities be abolished or
its activities drastically reduced. Two years ago when he made a similar proposal I
stated in the WASHINGTON REVIEW: "This Committee was established to carry on a continual
investigation of subversion in our country and to recommend legislation against the
Communist conspiracy
"Until a better plan for doing so is presented to the Congress, I will vote to
continue the Committee on Un-American Activities."
I reiterate this today. It seems to me the Committee serves a very useful purpose
as one means of alerting the public to the ways of the international Communist con-
spiracy.
Page data
- Page
- 1
- Source index
- 0
- Type
- document
- Media ID
- 3fd1c792554eb6ef
- Size
- unknown
Document data
- ID
- 4529679
- Core
- doc
- Type
- document
DTO data
{
"id": "4529679",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/4529679",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Ford Broadcasts, 1961",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/4529679",
"collections": [
"Gerald R. Ford Congressional Papers",
"Broadcasts Files"
],
"subjects": [
"Soviet Union",
"Communism"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0054/642085/4529679.pdf",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0054/642085/4529679.pdf",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0054/642085/4529679.pdf",
"imageCount": 1,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Context sent to Scholar
Document identity
{
"localId": "4529679",
"label": "Ford Broadcasts, 1961",
"core": "doc",
"dtoType": "document",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/4529679"
}
Document source metadata
{
"id": "4529679",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/4529679",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Ford Broadcasts, 1961",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/4529679",
"collections": [
"Gerald R. Ford Congressional Papers",
"Broadcasts Files"
],
"subjects": [
"Soviet Union",
"Communism"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0054/642085/4529679.pdf",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0054/642085/4529679.pdf",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0054/642085/4529679.pdf",
"imageCount": 1,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras
{
"url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/4529679",
"naId": 4529679,
"coverageEndDate": {
"logicalDate": "1961-02-28",
"month": 2,
"year": 1961
},
"coverageStartDate": {
"logicalDate": "1961-02-01",
"month": 2,
"year": 1961
},
"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-0054/642085/4529679.pdf",
"mediaId": "3fd1c792554eb6ef",
"ocrText": "The original documents are located in Box D37, folder \"Ford Broadcasts, 1961\" of the\nFord Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech File at the Gerald R. Ford\nPresidential 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.\nDigitized from Box D37 of The Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech File at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library\nTHE AMERICAN WAY OF LIFE\nRadio Tape presentation, Gerald R. Ford, Jr.\nfor use 2/14/61\nI want to congratulate the Student Council at Holland Christian High\nSchool for sponsoring a series of radio programs on the general subject of\nCommunism and the American Way Of Life. That our American way of life is\nbeing challenged by Communism is self-ovident. When Mr. Khrushchev said\n\"we will bury you\" he meant just that. I know he was wrong, but I also know\nthat he was sincere in his misguided belief.\nWhen Mr. Khrushchev told Vice President Nixon \"your grandchildren will\nlive under Communism\" he meant it. While I know that he was wrong in his\njudgement, I also know he meant what he said. He and all other dedicated\nCommunists throughout the world are convinced that the Communist way of life\nwill eventually be dominant throughout the world.\nThis is consistent with the Marxiet philosophy which forms some of the\nbasis of the Communist ideology in this year 1961. Karl Marx and his philosophy\nof dialectic materialism thought that the only reality is matter; there is\nnothing of the spirit - all is material. Furthermore, Marx insisted that out\nof the great conflicts of this life and of history, certain inevitable ends\nare achieved. This fatalistic approach às applied to the Communist program\nresults in the conviction that the entire world will eventually be a socialistic\nstate. So when Mr. Khrushchev said \"Your grandchildren will live under\nCommunism\", he was stating a firm conviction and was not simply engaged in\nCommunist propaganda.\nThis is by no means to say that we agree with Mr. Khrushchev but it is\nto point out that we have a determined and capable enemy in the atheistic\nCommunist conspiracy.\nIn discussing Communism and the American way of life I would like to\npoint out five specific tenets in the current Communist program and then show\nhow our way of life is diametrically opposed.\nCommunists today insist upon government ownership of all natural resources\nand most industry and business. They would eliminate and prohibit the private\nownership of property, insisting that such ownership is an evil, but also\nholding that when the all-powerful state becomes the owner, the general good\nis served.\nFrom the earliest fundations of our country our people have found that\nthe best interests of all are protected when each person is allowed to own and\noperate his home, his farm and his business with the minimm of governmental\ninterference. This is not to say that we do not have many examples of govern-\nmental ownership of natural resources and business enterprises within our own\ncountry. We do have government ownership when experience has proved that the ORD\ngreater good is served by such control. But I must point out right here that\nwhen we speak of government ownership we are speaking of the democratic control\nLIBRARY\n-2-\nof these government-owned projects and not the dictatorial rules exercised\nby a communist regime.\nThis brings me to the second major element in present-day Communism;\n1.0., that the government is a dictatorship of a small group which makes up\nthe official Communist Party in any given country. Consequently, that when\nthe Government speaks it is not the freely expressed will of the majority of\nthe people -- it is rather the dictates of a small clique which has seised\nand holds the reigns of government. This difference in definition of\n\"government\" makes all the difference in the world when we talk about govern-\nment ownership or any governmental activity.\nUnder the American way of life government, the sovereignty of the state\nlies in the expression of the will of the majority at the polls on election\nday. With the power of the ballot the ordinary citizens in any community\nparticipate, in the privacy of the voting booth, on an equal basis with the\nmost powerful officials in government or the most influential persons in the\neconomic or social sphere.\nOur third great difference from the Communist, therefore, lies in the\nfact that our government rules with the consent of the governed. Under the\nCommunist ideology, the dictatership must influence its will upon the masses\nof people by the use of force of all types. In 1776 our fathers declared that\n\"Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is\nthe right of the people to alter or abolish it and to institute new government,\nlaying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such\nform as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.\"\nNo Communist could subscribe to this fundamental principle. He cannot trust\nthe common people to know what is best for themselves. He can only force his\nown will upon the great masses of humanity. According to the Communist\nphilosophy, only the Communist leaders know what 10 right and good and best\nfor all the people.\nThe Communist is able to assume this spirit and position of omniscionce\nbecause he has replaced God with the Communist State. The atheistic Communist\nmust have some final authority. Without a supreme spiritual being, he must\nestablish his own final authority. This he has done in the Communist State,\n80 the Government is absolutely supreme and consequently can do whatever it\npleases. This means that the Government may establish its own standards of\nright and wrong. It means that the Government can do no wrong; whatever\nit does or says is, by the very nature of their belief, right and good because\nthere is no higher authority.\nAn understanding of this fact will help us to realize that the Communist\ndictators can change their program or their statement of principles as often\nand as drastically as they pleased because there is no order or authority\ngreater than the Government, and the Government can do no wrong.\nI am sure that all of us see in this principle the fundamental difference\nbetween the American way of life and the Communist position. The basic tenet\nof our American system is that God, the supreme ruler of the universe, created DRD\nthis world and still controls it. We insist that government as well as individuals\nGERA\nIBRAR\n-3-\nmust be subject to the higher powers and must obey God's laws of the universe.\nGovernment as well as individuals, therefore, are accountable for their con-\nduct and must be judged by the way in which they follow the natural law of God.\nI come now to the final distinction between the American way of life\nand the Communist ideology. And that is important to everyone of us because\nit concerns our relationship as an individual to the institution which we\nknow as a state or government. Because the Communist State is all supreme,\nbecause 1t rules by force, and is a dictatorship, the individual person\nwithin the regime is merely a servant of the State, He can have no inherent\nand inalienable rights. He can only be expected to serve the impersonal thing\ncalled Government. He, and that is you and me, loses all personality; he\nbecomes the well known \"oog in the wheel.\"\nWhen the new American Government was established on this continent, our\nrepresentatives in Congress assembled declared that \"we hold these truths to\nbe self-evident that all men are created equal and that they are endowed by\ntheir creator with certain inalienable rights that among these are life,\nliberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, govern-\nments are instituted among men deriving their just powers from the consent\nof the governed.\" Here at the very beginning of the American way of life the\nwhole world was told that God had given to his creatures certain rights which\nno government nor any other power could take away from him. In fact, a man\nhimself cannot give away these rights. They are inalienable. Government,\ntherefore, is the servant of the people rather than the individual being the\nservant of the State,\nIf I were to summarise, therefore, the American way of life, I think I\nwould stress four basic principles characteristic of that way of life. First,\nwe firmly believe that every individual, just because he is a person, a\nhuman being, has certain inalienable rights which cannot be taken away from\nhim. Our Declaration of Independence lists these as Life, Liberty and the\nPursuit of Happiness. For\"us it means the right of choice of a job, a pro-\nfession, or life's work. It means the right to choose the type of education\none wishes to receive, the kind of home one wants to establish. It means\nraising his family in the way that he feels best. It means having the oppor-\ntunity to develop one's talents and interests without the dictates of an all-\npowerful state. It means the right to vote, to disagree with governmental\nofficials and to criticise them. It means the right to stand up and say \"I am\na man.\"\nSecond, the American way of life envisions a government (because we do\nneed government) of free choice and consent. It means the right of any\nqualified citizen to run for office; it means the right of every qualified\nvoter to vote for those officials in the secrecy of the voting place without\nfear of intimidation. It means that the right and privilege of the people\neasily to change the personnel and policies of any unit of government.\nOur American way of life in the third place insists that the government\nexists for the people, to help them, to serve them, to insure that they\ndevelop all the potential which exists within them. The government, therefore,\nGERALD LIBRARY\n+\nmust do everything 1t can to help its people but must also permit the people\nsuch freedom of action that they may continue to possess what our fathers\ncalled \"the inalienable rights.\"\nFinally, the American way of life binds both citizens and government in\nan obsdiance to God's law. Because neither the individual nor his government\nare supreme, all must respect the natural law of the universe. This lavof\nGod is greater, broader, deeper than any past or present government or statement\nof policy. It is spiritually given and spiritually authored, to be universally\nobeyed in the past, present and future. We live under no blind fate, nor\nommiscient government. We live in a world in which God's laws and His will\nmust prevail.\nOnly when we sincerely believe and are willing to accept these four\nprinciples are we in tune with what is called the American Way of Life.\nAs I said at the beginning, this way of life is challenged today by the\natheistic Communist conspiracy. Our Government is spending over $40 billion\na year to protest the United States and the other free nations of the world\nagainst Communism. The United Nations and the other international jorganisa-\ntions in which we participate likewise are organised to protect our freedoms.\nWe as individuals must also do our part. I think we must know what we\nvalue and why. We must do everything we can as individuals to make pur system\nwork. This means we must not only believe in it, we must practice what it\nteaches; we must be interested in public affiars, and we must value our\nliberties but insist that what we demand for ourselves must also be readily\navailable to others. We have a great privilege of enjoying a free land. We\nmust accept the great responsibility of Keeping it free not only for ourselves\nbut also for every other human being.\nRodisTop 2-14-61\nan original +\nTHE AMERICAN WAY OF LIFE\n3 cofores\nI want to congratulate the Student Council at Highand Christian High\nSchool for sponsoring a series of radio programs on the general subject of Communism\nand the American way of life. That our American way of life is being challenged by\n*** Communism is self-evident. When Mr. Khrushchev said \"we will bury you\" he meant\nmisguided\njust that. I know he was wrong, but I also know that he was sincere in his belief.\nWhen Mr Khrushchev told Vice President Nixon \"your grandchildren will live\nunder Communism\" he meant it. While I know that he was wrong in his judgement, I also\nmeant what have\nknow he was sincere in his belief. He and all other dedicated Communists throughout\nthe world are convinced that the Communist way of life will evendually be dominant\nthroughout the world.\nThis is consistent with the Marxist philosophy which forms some of the basis\nof the Communist idealogy in this year 1961. Karl Marx and his philosphy of dealectic\nmaterialism thought that the only reality is mater; there is nothihg of the spirit --- all\nis material. Furthermore, Marx insisted that out of the great conflicts of this life and\nof history, certain inevitable ends are achieved. This fatalistic approach as applied\nto the Communist program results in the conviction that the entire world will eventually\nrand-\nbe a socialistic state. So when Mr. Khrushchev said \"Your children will live under\nCommunism\" he was stating a firm conviction and was not simply engaged in the Communist\npropaganda.\nThis is by nomeans to say that we agree with Mr. Khrushchev but it is to point\nout that we have a determined and capable enemy in the atheistic Communist conspiracy.\nIn discussing Communism and the American way of life I would like to point\nout five specific tenets in the current Communist program and then whow how our way of\nlife is diametrically opposed.\nGERALD\nLIBRARY\nyou (who) work in a cause that is bigger than any man's ambition, greater than any party.\nIt is the cause of freedom, of justiee, and peace of all mankind.\"\nIn these words Dick Nixon portrayed the strength of our American way of life and\nset the basic goals for all our political and social activities. We endorse his words and\nwish him well.\nYOUR NATIONAL DEBT TODAY: Our total gross public debt and guaranteed obligations\nnow stand at $290.2 billion, a reduction of $2.5 billion from a year ago. This year's\nbudget calls for interest payments of $9.6 billions. This is for interest only and will\nnot be used to reduce the principal indebtedness.\nOn the opening day of this Congress a bill was introduced to provide for the re-\nduction of the public debt by at least 10 percent of the estimated overall Federal receipts\nfor each fiscal year. Another bill would require that Federal expenditures not exceed\nrevenue except in time of grave emergency, and that the public debt be systematically\nreduced. I'm sure that most of the citizens of the Fifth District endorse the aims and\nobjectives of these bills.\nWhile many proposals requiring the expenditure of billions of dollars are being\nconsidered, it is imperative that we continue our efforts to insure a stable dollar and a\nsound economy. Inflation and fiscal irresponsibility remain potential enemies of every\nAmerican citizen. The Congress must retain the responsibility of examining carefully\nand critically every new spending proposal, especially those which call for the expendi-\nture of millions or billions without specifically supplying the required revenue.\nYou may be interested to know that since the publication of the anonymous letter\naddressed to me and donating $5 for the reduction of the national debt, the Treasury De-\npartment has received other contributions for this purpose. A Grand Rapids citizen sent\nthe $5 shortly after the election with the suggestion that I send it to the Tressury or\nbuy a steak. Promptly I matched the $5 contribution and so an additional ten dollars\nare in the Treasury account marked \"for reduction of the public debt.\"\nOUR LEGISLATION IN 87TH CONGRESS: Any bill on which action was not completed in the\nlast Congress has to be reintroduced if it is to be considered during the present session.\nAmong the bills which I have reintroduced is one to permit a widow with children to earn\nup to $3,600 a year (rather than $1,200 as at present) without forfeiting her social\nsecurity benefits; another would require railroad cars to be equipped with reflectors or\nluminous material so they can be readily seen at night at grade crossings. A third bill\nwould permit rec.1 pients of Old Age Assistance benefits to continue to receive payments\nwhile a patient in a private mental hospital.\nThese bills and all others have been referred to the appropriate committees for\nstudy and possible consideration. We have requested that the interested departments and\nagencies in the executive branch of the government be asked to submit their views and re-\ncommendations on these bills. This is in line with regular procedure.\nCommunists today insist upon government ownership of all natural resourses\nand most industry and business. They would eliminate and prohibit the private ownership\nalso holding\nof property, insisting that such ownership is an evil but 1 that when the all-powerful\nstate becomes the owner the general good is served.\nFrom the earliest foundations of our country our people have found that the\nbest interestes of all are protected when each person is allowed to own and operate\nand\nhis home, his farm, his business with the minimum of governmental interference. This is\nnot to say that we do not have many examples of governmental ownership of natural\ndo\nresources and business enterprises within our own country. We have this-government\nsuch entral\nownership when experience has proved that the greater good Lis served by this gevern-\nmental activity But I must point out right here that when we STYS speak of government\nownership we are speaking of the democratic control of these government-owned progeets\nrule exercied tya regime\nand not the dictatorial control of such projects.\nThis brings me to the second major element in present-day Communism; i.e.,\nthat the government is a distatorship of a small group which makesup the official\nwhen the\nCommunist Party in any given country. Consequently, that XXI Government speaks it is\nnot the freely expressed will of the majority of the people -- it is rather the dictates\nclique\nof a small granty wherhate seized and holds the reigns of government. This difference in\ndefinition of\"government\" makes all the difference in the world when we talk about\ngovernment owership or any governmental activity.\nUnder the A merican way of life goverhment, the sovereignty of the state lies\nin the expression of the will of the majority at the polls on election day. With the\npower of the ballot the individual and orginary ditizens in any community participate,\nin the právacy of the voting booth on an equal basis with the most powerful officials in\ngovernment or the most influential persons in the economic or social sphere.\nGERALD\nLIBRARY\nyou (who) work in a cause that is bigger than any man's ambition, greater than any party.\nIt is the cause of freedom, of justice, and peace of all mankind.\"\nIn these words Dick Nixon portrayed the strength of our American way of life and\nset the basic goals for all our political and social activities. We endorse his words and\nwish him well.\nYOUR NATIONAL DEBT TODAY: Our total gross public debt and guaranteed obligations\nnow stand at $290.2 billion, a reduction of $2.5 billion from a year ago. This year's\nbudget calls for interest payments of $9.6 billions. This is for interest only and will\nnot be used to reduce the principal indebtedness.\nOn the opening day of this Congress a bill was introduced to provide for the re-\nduction of the public debt by at least 10 percent of the estimated overall Federal receipts\nfor\neach\nfiscal year. Another bill would require that Federal expenditures not exceed\nrevenue except in time of grave emergency, and that the public debt be systematically\nreduced. I'm sure that most of the citizens of the Fifth District endorse the aims and\nobjectives of these bills.\nWhile many proposals requiring the expenditure of bi lions of dollars are being\nconsidered, it is imperative that we dontinue our efforts to insure a scable dollar and a\nsound economy. Inflation and fiscal rresponsibility remain potential enemies of every\nAmerican citizen. The Congress must tetain the responsibility of examining carefully\nand critically every new spending proposal, especially those which cal for the expendi-\nture of millions or billions without specifically supplying the required revenue.\nYou may be interested to know that since the publication of the anonymous letter\naddressed to me and donating $5 for the reduction of the national debt, the Treasury De-\npartment has received other contributions for this purpose. A Grand lapids citizen sent\nthe $5 shortly after the election with the suggestion that I send it to the Tressury or\nbuy a steak. Promptly I matched the $5 contribution and so an additional ten dollars\nare in the Treasury account marked \"For reduction of the public debt.\"\nOUR LEGISLATION IN 87TH CONGRESS: Any bill on which action was not completed in the\nlast Congress has to be reintroduced if it is to be considered durin the present session.\nAmong the bills which I have reintroduced is one to permit a widow with children to earn\nup to $3,600 a year (father than $1,200 as at present) without forfecting her social\nsecurity benefits; another would require railroad cars to be equippes with reflectors or\nluminous material so they can be readily seen at night at grade crossings. A third bill\nwould permit rec.1 pients of Old Age Assistance benefits to continue to receive payments\nwhile a patient in a private mental hospital.\nThese bills and all others have been referred to he appropriate committees for\nstudy and possible consideration. We have requested that the interested departments and\nagencies in the executive branch of the government be asked to submit their views and re-\ncommendations on these bills. This is in line with regular procedure.\n3/\nOur third great difference from the Communist, therefore, lies in the fact that\nour government rules with the consent of the governed. Whenes Under the Communist\nideology, the dictatorship must influence its will upon the masses of people by the\nany\nuse of force of all type S. In 1776 our fathers dembared that \"Whenever we form of\ngovernment becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or\nabolish it and to institute new government, laying / its foundation on such principles\nand organizing its powers in such form as to them shall seem most likely to effect ***/\ntheir safety and happiness.\" No Communist could subscribe to this fundamental prin-\nciple. He cannot trust the common people to know what is best for themselves. He can\nonly force his own will upon the great masses of humanity. According to the Communist\nphilospphy, only the Communist leaders and their dictators know what is right and good and\nbest for all the ple.\nThe Comminist is able to assume this spirit and position of omniscience because\nhe has replaced God with the Communist State. The atheistic Communist must have some\nfinal authority. Without a supreme spiritual being, he must establish his own final\nauthority. This he has done in the Communist State, so that the government is absolutely\nsupreme and consequently can do whatever it pleases. This means that the Government may\nestablish their its own standards of right and wrong. It means that the Government can do\nno wrong; whatever it does or days is, by the very nature of their belief, right and good\nbecause there is no higher authority.\ndectators\nAn understanding of this fact will help us to realize that the Communists can\nchange their program their on their statement of principles as often or and as\norder\ndrastically as they please because there is no standard or authority greater than the\nGovernment, and the Gomgrnment can do no wrong.\nGERALD FORD LIBRARY\nI am sure that all of us see in this principle the fundamental difference between\nthe American way of life and the Communist position. The basic tenet of our American system\none of the logislative committees. With its power to recommend a \"rule\" by which a bill\nis to be considered the committee decides whether a bill should be open to amendments,\nwhat kind of changes may be made, and how long debate should last. By refusing a \"rule\"\nor neglecting to take any action this Committee of 12 persons (8 Democrats, 4 Republicans\nin the 86th Congress) can make it difficult to get a bill to the floor of the House for\ndebate and a vote,\nSome criticism is directed at the Committee on the basis that it holds up legisla-\ntion desired by a majority of the members by interjecting its own judgment on the merits\nof the legislation rather than simply deciding when and how a bill will be considered.\nIn answer, the Chairman, Rep. Howard Smith, (Democrat of Virginia) points out that\nthere are three other ways of bringing legislation to the floor: suspension of the rules,\nrequiring a two-thirds vote; a discharge petition signed by a majority of members, and\nthe use of a method known as \"Calendar Wednesday.\" Concerning the latter Chairman Smith\nhas said, \"If a bill languishes in the Rules Committee or any other Committee, on that day\nthe Committee can bring that bill up and have it considered in the House. If a majority\nwants to consider it, they can consider it.\" It has been my observation that very little\nif any legislation desired by a majority of the House membership is actually tied up\npermanently in the Committee on Rules.\nAn enlargement of the Committee has been suggested as has a change in membership\nand procedure. A revival of the 21-day rule has been recommended. This would permit\nconsideration by the House of any bill which had been before the Rules Committee for\n21 days or more. The first yea-and-nay vote which I cast as a freshman legislator in 1949\nwas in support of such a rule. Two years later when it was repealed I voted to retain it.\nHowever, in light of additional experience and observation, I believe the Committee is\ngenerally responsive to majority wishes. If it is not, adequate parliamentary remedies\nexist to work the will of the majority.\nCOMMITTEE ON UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES: Rep. James Roosevelt (Democrat of California)\nhas again recommended that the House Committee on Un-American Activities be abolished or\nits activities drastically reduced. Two years ago when he made a similar proposal I\nstated in the WASHINGTON REVIEW: This Committee was established to carry on a continual\ninvestigation of subversion in our country and to recommend legislation against the\nCommunist conspiracy\n\"Until a better plan for doing so is presented to the Congress, I will vote to\ncontinue the Committee on Un-American Activities.\"\nI reiterate this today. It seems to me the Committee serves a very useful purpose\nas one means of alerting the public to the ways of the international Communist con-\nspiracy.\nis that God, the supreme ruler of the universe, reated this world and still\ncontrols it. We insist that government as well as individuals must be subject to the\nhigher powers and must obey God's laws of the universe. Government as well as individuals\n,\ntherefore, are acouuntable for their conduct and must be judged by the way in which they\nfollow the natural law of God.\nI come now to the final distinction between the American way of life and the\nCommunist ideology. And that is important to everyone of us because it concerns our\nrelationships as an individual to the institution which we know as a state or government.\nBecause the Communist State is all supreme, because it rules by force, and is a distator-\nship, the individual person within the regime is merely but a servant of the State. He can\nhave no inherent and I analienable rights. He can only be expected to serve the impersonal\nthing called government He, and that is you and me, loses all\n=\n11\npersonality; he becomes the well known cog in the wheel.\nWhen the new American government was established on this continent, our\nrepresentatives in Congress assembled declared that \"we hold these truths to be self-\nevident that all men are created equal and that they are endowed by their creator with\nI\ncertain unalienable rights that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.\nThat to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men deriving their just powers\nfrom the consent of the governed.\" Here at the very beginning of the /American way of life\nthe wholeworld was told that God had given to his creatures certain rights which no govern-\na\nsmill\nment nor any other power could take away from him. In fact, man cannot oven give away these\nrights. They are analienable. Government, therefore, is the servant of the people rather\nthan the individual being the servant of the State.\nIf I were to summarize, therefore, the American way of life, I think Iwould\nstress four basic principles characteristic of that way of life. First we firmly believe\nI\nthat every individual, just because he is a person a human being, has certain unalienable\none of the legislative committees. With its power to recommend a \"rule\" by which a bill\nis to be considered the committee decides whether a bill should be open to amendments,\nwhat kind of changes may be made, and how long debate should last. By refusing a \"rule\"\nor neglecting to take any action this Committee of 12 persons (8 Democrats, 4 Republicans\nin\nthe 86th Congress) can make it difficult to get a bill to the floor of the House for\ndebate and a vote.\nSome criticism is directed at the Committee on the basis that it holds up legisla-\ntion desired by a majority of the members by interjecting its own judgment on the merits\nof the legislation rather than simply deciding when and how a bill will be considered.\nIn answer, the Chairman, Rep. Howard Smith, (Democrat of Virginia) points out that\nthere are three other ways of bringing legislation to the floor: suspension of the rules,\nrequiring a two-thirds vote; a discharge petition signed by a majority of members, and\nthe use of a method known as \"Calendar Wednesday.\" Concerning the latter Chairman Smith\nhas said, \"If a bill languishes in the Rules Committee or any other Committee, on that day\nthe Committee can bring that bill up and have it considered in the House. If a majority\nwants to consider it, they can consider it.\" It has been my observation that very little\nif any legislation desired by a majority of the House membership is actually tied up\npermanently in the Committee on Rules.\nAn enlargement of the Committee has been suggested as has a change in membership\nand procedure. A revival of the 21-day rule has been recommended. This would permit\nconsideration by the House of any bill which had been before the Rules Committee for\n21 days or more. The first yea-and-nay vote which I cast as a freshman legislator in 1949\nwas in support of such a rule. Two years later when it was repealed I voted to retain it.\nHowever, in light of additional experience and observation, I believe the Committee is\ngenerally responsive to majority wishes. If it is not, adequate parliamentary remedies\nexist to work the will of the majority.\nCOMMITTEE ON UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES: Rep. James Roosevelt (Democrat of California)\nhas again recommended that the House Committee on Un-American Activities be abolished or\nits activities drastically reduced. Two years ago when he made a similar proposal I\nstated in the WASHINGTON REVIEW: \"This Committee was established to carry on a continual\ninvestigation of subversion in our country and to recommend legislation against the\nCommunist conspiracy..\n\"Until a better plan for doing so is presented to the Congress, I will vote to\ncontinue the Committee on Un-American Activities.\"\nI reiterate this today. It seems to me the Committee serves a very useful purpose\nas one means of alerting the public to the ways of the international Communist con-\nspiracy.\n5/\nrights which cannot be taken ### away from him. Our Declaration of I dependence lists\n1913\nthese as Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. For us it means the wight of choice\nof a job, a profession, or life's work. It means the right to choose the type of education\none\none wishes to receive, the kind of home we wants to establish. It means raising his\nfamily in the way that he feels best. It means having the opportunity to develope\none's talents and interests without the dictates of an all-powerful state. It means\nthe Wright to vote, to disagree with governmental officials and to criticize them. It\nmeans the right to stand up and say \"I am a man\".\nSecond, the American way of life envisions a government because we doneed dopaned\ngovernment of free choice and consent. It means the right of any qualified sitizen\nto run for office; XXX it means the right of every qualified voter to vote for those\nofficials in the secrecy of the voting place without fear of intimidation. It means\nthe personnel and policies\nthat the right and privilege of the people easily to change those officers which are in\nany whit of government\nauthority by peaceful means at the baldot box P Our American way oflife in the third place\ninsists that the government exists for the people, to help them, to serve them, to meure\nthat they develope all the potential which exists within them. The government, therefore,\nmust dis everything it can to help its people but must also permit the people such freedom\nof faction that they may continue to possess what our fathers called \"the unalienable I rights.\"\nFinally, the American way of life binds both sitizens and government in an\nobediance to God's law. Because neither the individual nor his government are wupreme,\nall must respect the natural law of the universe. This law of God is greater, broader,\nthis\ndeeper than any past or present government or statement of policy. They are spiritually\nand\ngiven spiritually authoric to be universally obeyed in past, present and future. We\nlive under no blind fate nor omniscient government. We live in a world in which God's\nlaws and His will must prevail. Only when we sincerely #A believe and are willing to accept GERAL FORD\nLIBRARY\nthese four principles are we in tune with what is called the Amemican Way of Life.\none of the legislative committees. With its power to recommend a \"rule\" by which a bill\nis to be considered the committee decides whether a bill should be open to amendments,\nwhat kind of changes may be made, and how long debate should last. By refusing a \"rule\"\nor neglecting to take any action this Committee of 12 persons (8 Democrats, 4 Republicans\nin the 86th Congress) can make it difficult to get a bill to the floor of the House for\ndebate and a vote.\nSome criticism is directed at the Committee on the basis that it holds up legisla-\ntion desired by a majority of the members by nterjecting. its own judgment on the merits\nof the legislation rather than simply deciding when and how a bill will be considered.\nIn answer, the Chairman, Rep. Howard Smith, (Democrat of Virginia points out that\nthere are three other ways of bringing legislation to the floor: suspension of the rules,\nrequiring a two-thirds vote; a discharge petition signed by a majority of members, and\nthe use of a method known as \"Calendar Wednesday.\" Concerning the latter Chairman Smith\nhas said, \"If a bill languishes in the Rules Committee or any other Committee, on that day\nthe Committee can bring that bill up and have it considered in the House. If a majority\nwants to consider it, they can consider it.\" It has been my observation that very little\nif any legislation desired by a majority of the House membership is actually tied up\npermanently in the Committee on Rules.\nAn enlargement 0. the Committee has been suggested as has a change in membership\nand procedure. A revival of the 21-day ruld has been recommended. This would permit\nconsideration by the House of any bill which had been before the Rules Committee for\n21 days or more. The first yea-and-nay vot which I cast as a freshean legislator in 1949\nwas in support of such a rule. Two years ter when it was repealed]I voted to retain it.\nHowever, in light of additional experience Ind observation, I believe the Committee is\ngenerally responsive to majority wishes. If it is not, adequate parliamentary remedies\nexist to work the will of the majority.\nCOMMITTEE ON UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES: Rep. James Roosevelt (Democrat of California)\nhas again recommended the House Committee on Un-American Activities be abolished or\nits activities drastically reduced. Two years ago when he made a similar proposal I\nstated in the WASHINGTON REVIEW: \"This Committee was established to carry on a continual\ninvestigation of subversion in our country and to recommend legislation against the\nCommunist conspiracy\n\"Until a better plan for doing so is resented to the Congress, I will vote to\ncontinue the Committee on Un-American Activities.\"\nI reiterate this today. It seems to me the Committee serves a very useful purpose\nas one means of alerting the public to the ays of the international Communist con-\nspiracy.\n6/\nAs I said at the beginnigg, this way of life is challenged today by the\na year\natheistic Communist conspiracy. Our Government is spending over $40 billion to\nprotect the United States and the other free nations of the world against Communism.\nThe United Nations and the other internaltional organizationsin which we participate\norganized\nlikewise are to protect our freedoms.\nWe as individuals must also do our part. I think we must know what we value\nand why. We must do everything we can as individuals to make our system work. This\nX\nJoy\nmeans\nwe\nmust\nnot\nbelieve\nit, we must practice what it teaches; we must be interested in\nn\npublic affairs, and we must value our libertieis but insist that what we 2 demand for\nMayself must also be readily available to others. we have a great privilege of enjoying\na free land. We must accept the graat responsibility of keeping *** it free not only\nfor ourselves but also for every other human being.\nFORD\nLIBRARI\none of the legislative committees. With its power to recommend a \"rule\" by which a bill\nis to be considered the committee decides whether a bill should be open to amendments,\nwhat kind of changes may be made, and how long debate should last. By refusing a \"rule\"\nor neglecting to take any action this Committee of 12 persons (8 Democrats, 4 Republicans\nin the 86th Congress) can make it difficult to get a bill to the floor of the House for\ndebate and a vote.\nSome criticism is directed at the Committee on the basis that it holds up legisla-\ntion desired by a majority of the members by interjecting its own judgment on the merits\nof the legislation rather than simply deciding when and how a bill will be considered.\nIn answer, the Chairman, Rep. Howard Smith, (Democrat of Virginia) points out that\nthere are three other ways of bringing legislation to the floor: suspension of the rules,\nrequiring a two-thirds vote; a discharge petition signed by a majority of members, and\nthe use of a method known as \"Calendar Wednesday.\" Concerning the latter Chairman Smith\nhas said, \"If a bill languishes in the Rules Committee or any other Committee, on that day\nthe Committee can bring that bill up and have it considered in the House. If a majority\nwants to consider it, they can consider it.\" It has been my observation that very little\nif any legislation desired by a majority of the House membership is actually tied up\npermanently in the Committee on Rules.\nAn enlargement of the Committee has been suggested as has a change in membership\nand procedure. A revival of the 21-day rule has been recommended. This would permit\nconsideration by the House of any bill which had been before the Rules Committee for\n21 days or more. The first yea-and-nay vote which I cast as a freshman legislator in 1949\nwas in support of such a rule. Two years later when it was repealed I voted to retain it.\nHowever, in light of additional experience and observation, I believe the Committee is\ngenerally responsive to majority wishes. If it is not, adequate parliamentary remedies\nexist to work the will of the majority.\nCOMMITTEE ON UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES: Rep. James Roosevelt (Democrat of California)\nhas again recommended that the House Committee on Un-American Activities be abolished or\nits activities drastically reduced. Two years ago when he made a similar proposal I\nstated in the WASHINGTON REVIEW: \"This Committee was established to carry on a continual\ninvestigation of subversion in our country and to recommend legislation against the\nCommunist conspiracy\n\"Until a better plan for doing so is presented to the Congress, I will vote to\ncontinue the Committee on Un-American Activities.\"\nI reiterate this today. It seems to me the Committee serves a very useful purpose\nas one means of alerting the public to the ways of the international Communist con-\nspiracy."
}