Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
1563156
label
State of the Union Address, 1976 - Democratic Response by Senator Edmund Muskie
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
1563156
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
State of the Union Address, 1976 - Democratic Response by Senator Edmund Muskie
citationUrl
collections
John O. Marsh Files (Ford Administration)
John Marsh's General Subject Files
subjects
Democratic National Committee (U.S.)
Speeches, addresses, etc.
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
1563156
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1976-01-31
month
1
year
1976
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1976-01-01
month
1
year
1976
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
c1abc918518e17b9
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box 30, folder "State of the Union Address, 1976 -
Democratic Response by Senator Edmund Muskie" of the John Marsh Files 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. Gerald R. Ford 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States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.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.
[Ed Muskie speech?
ESMDICTATION/JANUARY 21
The friend print , world like To make
in This
TALK THIS EVENING IS THAT GOVERNMENT--
AND POLITICS--IN THIS COUNTRY IS US--YOU AND ME--AND ALL
OF THE 215 MILLION AMERICANS WHO SHARE OUR PAST, PRESENT
AND FUTURE TOGETHER.
THE STATE OF THE UNION IS NOT WHAT THE PRESIDENT SAYS
IT IS, NOR IS IT WHAT THE CONGRESS SAYS IT IS. IT IS
THE CONDITION IN WHICH WE--ALL OF US TOGETHER--FIND OUR-
SELVES, OUR PROSPECTS FOR THE FUTURE AND WHAT WE CAN DO
TOGETHER TO IMPROVE THOSE PROSPECTS.
I EMPHASIZE THIS POINT AT THE OUTSET FOR A REASON.
I HAVE JUST RETURNED FROM TWO INTENSIVE WEEKS OF TRAVEL,
LISTENING AND TALKING AMONG MY PEOPLE BACK HOME IN MAINE.
WE TALKED ABOUT ALOT OF VERY SERIOUS PROBLEMS WHICH ARE
SHARED BY MILLIONS OF AMERICANS FROM COAST TO COAST. THEY
ARE ALL PROBLEMS WHICH MUST HAVE OUR CONCENTRATED ATTENTION.
THE PROBLEM WHICH CONCERNS ME MORE THAN ALL THE REST--
BECAUSE UNLESS WE SOLVE IT, WE CANNOT SOLVE THE REST--IS
THE EXTENT TO WHICH
YOU
HAVE LOST CONFIDENCE IN
YOUR POLITICAL SYSTEM AND YOUR ABILITY TO GOVERN YOURSELVES.
TOO MANY OF YOU DO NOT BELIEVE THE GOVERNMENT CARES ABOUT
YOU AND YOUR PROBLEMS.
TOO MANY OF YOU BELIEVE THAT GOVERNMENT CAN'T DO ANYTHING
ABOUT YOUR PROBLEMS
FORD is LIBRARY 028870
Digitized from Box 30 of the John Marsh Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
ESM DICTATION/JANUARY 21
PAGE 2
TOO MANY OF YOU BELIEVE THAT GOVERNMENT EXISTS ONLY FOR
THE BENEFIT OF THE FEW WHO ARE RICH AND POWERFUL.
TOO MANY OF YOU BELIEVE THAT YOU CAN DO NOTHING TO
IMPROVE THE PERFORMANCE OF YOUR GOVERNMENT.
TOO FEW OF YOU ARE WILLING TO TRY.
POLITICAL POWER IN OUR SYSTEM IS STILL YOURS TO USE--
IF YOU WILL.
IF YOU DOUBT WHAT I SAY, RECALL IF YOU WILL THE WATERGATE
affair
AND THE REASON WHY IT WAS FINALLY RESOLVED BY AN ORDERLY
TRANSFER OF POWER INVOLVING THE FIRST RESIGNATION FROM OFFICE
OF A PRESIDENT IN OUR ENTIRE HISTORY. IT WAS YOU WHO PRO-
DUCED THAT RESULT--NOT THE CONGRESS--NOT EVEN THE COURTS.
YOUR POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS MOVED WHEN YOU INSISTED THAT
THEY DO.
YOU AND YOUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES ARE IN THIS BUSINESS
OF GOVERNING TOGETHER. WHEN COMMUNICATION BETWEEN US BREAKS
DOWN, WHEN WE LOSE CONFIDENCE IN EACH OTHER, WE LOSE THE
VERY ESSENCE OF SELF GOVERNMENT.
YOUR REPRESENTATIVES IN THE CONGRESS HAVE RETURNED TO
WASHINGTON FOLLOWING A MONTH LONG RECESS. WE HAVE SPENT
MUCH OF THAT TIME WITH YOU, GETTING OURSELVES UP TO. DATE
ON YOUR PROBLEMS, SOLICITING YOUR VIEWS AS TO WHAT WE
SHOULD DO, IT IS ONLY RIGHT THAT YOU SHOULD KNOW WHAT WE
THINK WE HAVE LEARNED ABOUT YOUR PROBLEMS AND SOMETHING
ABOUT OUR PRIORITIES FOR ACTION.
Tonight, I want to discuss with you the real State of
the Union.
It won't be found in the budget, or legislation pending
in Congress, or on the editorial pages of our newspapers.
It is in your minds and hearts -- in you -- that the
real message about the state of our union resides.
I want to talk about what you have told me -- as I
traveled through Maine in the last month -- as I traveled in
other parts of the nation.
You told me a lot about problems -- taxes, inflation,
unemployment, big government, crime
But there was one great concern -- one burden -- that
lies heavily on you -- that draws together virtually all
these problems ---
-- That was your loss of confidence in government.
For nowhere did I find confidence that government could
help solve the deep and frustrating problems that each of
you confront.
with it,
We can assain have
can
Nowhere did T find confidence that government could-
4
restore economic health to our nationa -- put people back to
the
work - get our factories open again --- and stop this inflation
deprive
that robs our elderly and poor -- and stop every one of us
of our hard-earned dollars.
Nowhere did I find confidence that government could
has
shake off the ineffectiveneis that Fed dealyged down so many
good, useful programs.
We can coqiesing have
can
Nowbere did I Find confidence that government could do
of comme that makes
something effective about this siege in your homes, behind
many T doors you that presonces lock out in the your threat of homes. darkness. Celluine
which multa in the
can
-- That government could make schools again into houses
where children can learn and prepare themselves for the
future.
Com slow
-- That government sould basing down spiralling health
costs, that add more misery to your lives each year.
can
-- That government could bring our powerful oil in-
hold down
dustry back under control, to I the price of energy.
on
-- That government could stop a disastrous retreat from
the goal of environmental quality we set so resolutely not
MA
long ago.
We can have
Nowhere did I find confidence that government would
begin to curb the abuses of power that threaten you.
that
-- The abuse of power by corporations who dominate the
marketplace, charging what they want -- who ignore the
quality of our air and water -- the safety of workers the
quality of goods -- who each year push and shove for more
tax privileges and more exemptions from law --- corporations,
in other words, that each year grow more wealthy and more
powerful.
me becain to do what we must do to
And nowhere, finally, did I find that you are confident
where
will
at all that government can curb its own abuses.
The abuse of Presidential power goes on -- the abuse of
AND
our rights by the FBI the CIA have been exposed but they
still go on -- the war in Vietnam went on for years -- the
secret war in Angola goes on.
there are the problem
Everywhere I turn in this nation, this is what I hear.
9 hear from wear ligus
This is the State of the Union.
And it is also a Congressional agenda for action.
#40
The goodness and strength of the American people are
not diminished by the corruption of a few of our leaders.
Our system of reward for hard work is not discredited
by a few years of hard times.
Our government -- the model for free people everywhere
in the world -- has not been destroyed by the wrong-headed
policies of a few Presidents or the failure of Congress to
block them in time.
We have had some very bad times in our country in these
last few years.
But our people are still strong.
The Republic still stands.
Our freely elected government can still work.
ANY
Who among us would trade America for bother country in
the the long history of the world?
We don't need a new system.
What we need is the will to make our system work.
We must reject those of timid vision and weak heart who
counsel us to go back ---
To go back to simpler times now gone forever.
To go back on the promises we have made to each other.
To go back on our guarantees to every American for a
decent job and secure retirement.
To go back on our commitment to quality education and
affordable health care.
To go back on consumer protection and worker safety.
To go back on our commitment to a clean environment.
To go back and give up.
We cannot go back.
We cannot give up.
And we will not.
If we've learned anything as a nation -- from Valley
Forge to Yorktown, from the Great Depression to the landing
on the moon - it is this: Give Americans the tools and
they 11 do the job.
We are entering a period when the country's capacity to
produce and create can be greater than at any time in recent
history. There are houses to design and build. There are
roads to build and repair. There are rivers to clean. There
are railroads to mend. There are day-care centers [to
build
and
operate so that more young women can participate in
revitalizing America. There are books to be written and
printed. There are farms to be expanded and worked. There
are cities to rebuild. There are new sources of energy to
be developed and produced. Oh, we have work to do.
Clearly, something is wrong in a system in which there
is so much work to be done at the same time there are so
many people without work.
That problem is not only the business of business. It
is also the business of government.
We all have a big stake in that effort. We all pay for
unemployment.
For every one percent increase in unemployment -- for
every one million more Americans out of work -- we all pay
three billion dollars more in unemployment compensation and
welfare checks and lose 14 billion dollars in taxes. That
means that today's unemployment costs us taxpayers more than
T
65 billion dollars a year.
President Ford's budgets for these two years of re-
cession have included more than 40 billion dollars for
unemployment compensation and jobless payments alone
And
another fourteen billion dollars in interest on the extra
national debt Erom the tux1100000 that unemployment has cost.
But the President's budget offers no new jobs. In
fact, it proposes cutbacks in the existing, limited eme ergency
Exjency jobs program Congress has enacted.
The President's plans for our economy are penny-wise
and pound-foolish. Under them, America's factories are
producing only three fourths as many goods as they actually
could.
That means fewer jobs and higher prices.
If we Had just enough jobs this year to match the un-
employment rate of 1968, we would collect enough federal
taxes to wipe out the entire deficit, this year and next.
But the President's budget is designed to keep un-
for another year and more
employment over seven percent
To keep seven million Americans unemployed at this
time a year from now. And most economists believe that if
the Administration's policies are followed, unemployment
will not fall nortwyoars below seven parcenT in This decade.
We American taxpayers pay a staggering price for these
jobless policies.
But the Americans who want work and can't find it pay
so much more.
What price does a father or mother pay who can't
support their children? What price does a master carpenter
pay when he is reduced to welfare? How can we calculate the
cost to America's jobless in lost seniority, johtraining,
and pension rights? What price will we all pay when two out
of every five inner city youths grow up without ever having
had a full-time job? Not only will the unemployed lose
confidence in government, they will lose confidence in them
selves
Experts in both government and private enterprise tell
us that we can, if we choose, significantly reduce the
present unemployment during the next fiscal year. Direct
employment programs -- using federal dollars to pay for
public service jobs like classroom teaching aides and
hospital attendants --would produce the most jobs at the
lowest total cost.
Federal assistance to local communities for short-term
37
public works projects and to avoid layoffs in local govern-
ment services --- like police protection and trash collec-
Job
tion --also have high yields in job creation for the tax
dollars invested.
Yet President Ford says he intends to veto even the
limited program pending in the Congress for short-term
public works and financial assistance to local communities
41
which have high jobless rates. This anti-recession bill --
which the President seeks to block -- would create
00,000 jobs this year.
The President says we cannot afford to help Americans
find work.
I say we cannot, as taxpayers, afford not to.
And those jobs should be in addition to the jobs
Congress could create in private industry by additional tax
cuts without increasing present federal spending levels.
And Congress could avoid discouraging private sector em-
ployment by rejecting the President's proposals to increase
payroll taxes.
As I listen to my people in Maine, it is clear that one
of the most frightening economic results of recent years is
aspecially
inflation --- and its companion, the quadrupling of oil
The
prices. The have Adrastically reduced Landards of living
They have put the very necessities of life beyond the reach
of more and more of our citizens.
The Administration has tried hard to make the case that
budget deficits are a direct cause of inflation. I wish the
American economy were that simple. Curing inflation then
would be a simple matter of cutting the budget. Unfor-
tunately, the facts do not bear our the Administration
claim.
In 1974, the federal government deficit was the small-
est in the past several years. In 1974, both inflation and
interest rates reached their highest points in 21 years.
Prices were high that year because of the sudden
increase in oil prices, steep increases in food prices, and
a deliberate policy by the Federal Reserve Board to keep
interest rates high. The size of the deficit was inciden-
tal.
The Administration did not raise oil prices. It was
not responsible for poor crops around the world during the
late 1960's and late 1970's. But it compounded the prob-
lems, partly by inept, often panicky management of the
economy, starting with the first Nixon Administration. The
Administration raced the economy's engine in election years
and then created recessions to curb the resulting inflation.
It moved too quickly from one set of wage-price controls to
another without ever giving any of them a chance to work.
It tried to impose domestic oil price increases on top of
the foreign increases that would have doubled the impact.
It compounded the poor crop years by selling too much of
this nation's grain reserves to Russia.
What the nation needs at this time is leadership that
will not jump from one economic panic button to another. We
need a consistent, responsible, non-partisan plan for
protecting the economy from further shocks.
We need an energy policy that will keep the prices of
oil and natural gas at reasonable levels until the economy
can absorb increases.
We need a food policy that gives farmers a guarantee of
reasonable incomes and consumers a guarantee of reasonable
prices. A crop failure in Russia should not be permitted to
disturb that balance.
We need a wage-price council which will make life
miserable for any big corporation that raises prices without
very good reason volanation and
will do so in the name of the President of the United
States.
We need an anti-trust policy that will move immediately
to prevent powerful firms from gaining too much control over
both markets and capital, not spend years in court arguing
cases after it is too late.
Federal deficits are not the cause of the inflation we
have experienced in the last two years, but they can be, and
we must be concerned about the possibility, as the economy
recovers its health.
Beyond that, wasteful government spending, inefficient
and ineffective programs, are burdens taxpayers ought not to
be asked to carry. More than that, they rob us of the
ssewe
resources we need to solve high priority national needs.
Moreover, their very existence undermines that public con-
fidence in government which is essential and so sadly
lacking.
(15)
Congress has enacted a new budget process to remedy
this now-chronic national financial crisis.
Our job is to decide on a ceiling on spending and a
floor under taxes for each year.
In doing so we also set an economic policy for the
country and ration the dollars in the budget according to
our actual national needs.
Our goal is to balance the budget as soon as the
economy permits.
We have imposed a tough spending ceiling on the federal
government this year.
We will impose a similar spending ceiling next year and
every year.
We have held the federal deficit to the lowest possible
level consistent with reducing unemployment.
In fact, we have held the federal deficit 25 billion
dollars below the Secretary of the Treasury's estimate of
last spring.
We are Lea-using the budget reform process tordetormine
whore the Faderal collar be most useruriy spent
And we are using the process to determine the economic
impact of tax and regulatory policies.
Finally, we'll use all of this information to put
spending priorities more in line with real needs, and to
weed out programs which cost too much or produce too little.
Last year we reduced the President's requests for
defense and foreign military aid to levels we thought were
closer to our real defense needs and purposes.
We have used part of the money we saved to increase
jobs, health care and social security.
We rejected at least $10 to $15 billion in other
requests to hold down the deficit.
the
But the new budget reform process is just one step in a
broader effort we must undertake.
We need a second spending reform to make sure the
federal money we spend is effectively used.
All related federal programs should cre up for review
and reneval every four years.
We should question the most basic assumptions about
every program.
Any programs not doing the job or duplicating better-
run programs should be eliminated.
By the end of every four years, all programs should be
reviewed in this process.
The only program excepted from this review should be
the Social Security program which is, after ie the
an insurance system.
We have learned that we can't solve our problems by
simply throwing federal dollars at them. In the past seven
years, the federal government has provided more than coven Four
billion dollars to improve local law enforcement. President
Ford is now proposing we spend seven billion more. During
the same seven years crime has increased 55 percent.
Yet we also know that we can't solve priority problems
like pollution or provide a national defense without a
substantial commitment of tax dollars. so we must pursue
the hard, detailed job of evaluating federal spending in
each and every area of the budget. We must buy only what we
need. And at the lowest sound cost.
I was disappointed that the President made no proposals
in his state of the Union message to improve government
efficiency -- to bring new businesslike methods into the
bureaucracy.
Under our system of government, the President is the
Chief Executive.
Efficiency in the general government is his respon-
sibility.
But what steps has he taken to improve efficiency and
reduce costs in the Executive Branch?
Why does it cost the government twice as much as a
private insurance company to process medical claims?
Why does the government take months to get the first
check out to a widow entitled to a federal pension?
Why does the Social Security Administration take a year
or more to process a citizen's claim for disability com-
pensation?
Why can't defense contractors be made to deliver their
goods at the agreed-upon price without cost overruns? Have
you ever heard of a Defense Department employee being fired
for permitting a cost overrun paid for with our tax dollars?
Through the new Congressional budget reform process,
Congress has laid the groundwork. for a more efficient
government at tax savings to our citizens.
I hope President Ford will join us in that effort.
I do not believe most Americans want their government
dismantled.
We can't very well fire the mailmen, discharge our
armed forces, or lay off the people who run the computers
that print our Social Security checks.
But we can expect maximum efficiency and performance in
office by everyone who draws a federal salary.
We have talked about the economy -- about jobs and in}
flation, and some of the steps an effective government might
take to move us out of this recession.
This will bie the issue between Congress and the White
House in the months ahead. I believe Congress is prepared
to do more and move faster toward aconomic recovery than th
President appears to be ... and with your support, I think
Congress can brevail.
We have talked about efficiency in government --- making
your tax dollars count. Your message about stopping the
waste of tax dollars has gotten through to the Congress.
the foreign policy we pursue.
Much of the world today is watching with amazement as a
Congress of the United States examines U.S. intelligence
operations overseas. I know many of you must have asked
yourselves, as I have, whether it is necessary to hang out
the dirty linen -- to talk about assassination attempts, to
admist what the whole world knows about both us and them-
selves, that nations spy.
Yes, it is necessary. How else is the American public
are
to get hold of its foreign policy again? How can we guaran-
tee interventions in other countries are an appropriate
expression of deliberate U.S. policy, nd not the making of
some faceless bureaucrat? Sure, it is inconvenient to
conduct foreign policy in the open, and, certainly there
will always be need for intelligence work and for secrecy
with the bounds of established policy.
But a Republic gets its strength from the consent of
the government and from a consensus on shared objectives.
It gets only weakness and disappointment from secrecy and
surprise.
So let us seek a foreign policy we can talk about in
public and agree to in advance.
that the American people had long since recognized was wrong
a hopeless.
Vietnam was a bitter disappointment.
But it also offered us some positive lessons: U.S.
interests are not served by military intervention everywhere
in the world where we see instability. And the U.S. can
conduct a responsible policy toward its potential adver-
saries and toward its allies and can pursue its interests
after Vietnam -- better, if anything, than before.
Yet just last month, we discovered that the President
has involved our nation in a major way in yet another faroff
land: in Angola, where our nation's interests and those of
the free world are far from clear.
The Senate voted against any further expenditures for
Angola.
As in Vietnam, we find ourselves deeply committed
without prior notice or consultation with our people in a
country where U.S. interests could not possibly be served at
any price.
A free people deserve to be informed and to consent to
LIBRARY GERALD R. FORD
The new budget process proves that. I hope the Administration
has gotten the message too, and that we can move forward
toward a new standard of service in the federal government
now.
Let us now ask ourselves about America's place in the
world.
your
What is our definition of national security? ... pro-
tecting our shores from attack? '... standing by our allies
in Western Europe and Asia? ... protecting our vital economic
interests?
... playing a leadership role in moving the world
away from the arms race? ... I would agree.
We must also ask what is the most dangerous foreign
policy problem we face today? I think, once again, it is a
gulf of doubt and mistrust between us and our government.
That gulf has widened since the tragic collapse of
Vietnam.
It was less than a year ago that we saw films of South
Vietnames soldiers pushing women and children away from
evacuation planes in Danang ... saw Americans being air-
lifted from the roof of the American Embassy in Saigon to
Navy ships in the China sea. Until that end, this Administrati
was pleading for another $720 million to spend on a cause
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
Let us defend our real interests --- leave no doubt of
it. But where our interest is not directly or clearly in-
volved, let our adversaries learn, as we did in Vietnam, the
expensive lesson of the limits of their power.
Let us be neither patsy nor bully for the other nations
of the world.
Let us pursue a lessening of tensions with the Soviet
union and China, wherever it is consistent with our own
interests.
Let us extend a helping hand to the two-thirds of the
people of the world who have so little. And let us do so
with the confidence of a truly great people. We do not need
to always win all our debates with every nation in the
world.
Let our greatness be, not that we always win, but that
-- as God gives us the power to see it -- we are always
Thoright.
In his State of the Union message -- and in the budget
he sent us today -- the President has made some serious
proposals for reduction in federal expenditures and changes
GERALD LIBRARY P. FORD
in our national priorities.
The President's program includes a number of ideas to
simply shift the cost of federal programs from the federal
government to the states and the cities. We must frankly be
sceptical of such proposals that simply raise state and
local taxes. But I believe Congress must evaluate the
5
President's proposals with an open mind.
Where they are simply gimmicks or mistakes, they should
be rejected.
Where they need amendment, they should be shaped to
meet America's actual needs.
Where they make sense, they should be adopted.
We must not fear change.
Just as we cannot go back to the old days, we must be
ready to change old ways to meet new needs and present
realities.
I do not believe we face any problem we cannot solve.
Our problems are Phan menmade, and men and women can find
their solutions.
We need the will to try.
The state of the Union is as strong as the bond between
us.
So let us make a pledge to one another tonight.
Assert your right to share control of our national
destiny. Decide now that you are going to vote in the
Presidential and Congressional state and local elections
this fall, and keep that commitment.
But put the politicians who seek your vote in those
elections to a stringent test.
Are they men of their word?
If they promise more government benefits and services,
do they also say how much they will cost?
If they say they are going to reduce the size of
government, do they tell you which services you are going to
go without and how much that will save?
Do they offer specific proposals or simply slogans?
The Congress which meets in this building is your
Congress if you participate in its election and supervision.
Together, we are the Union.
And I find the state of that Union very strong indeed.
Ju
THE WHITE HOUSE
JAN 23 1976
WASHINGTON
January 23, 1976
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
MAX L. FRIEDERSDORF m.f.
SUBJECT:
Muskie Speech
John Anderson issued the attached statement cricicizing
the Muskie speech.
FORD is LIBRARY QERALD
HOUSE
NEWS
REPUBLICAN
CONFERENCE
1618 LONGWORTH HOUSE OFFICE: BUILDING, WASHINGTON, D.C. 20515
202/225-5107
JOHN B. ANDERSON, M.C. (ILL.)
CHAIRMAN
MICHAEL F. MACLEOD
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
THURSDAY, JAN. 22, 1976
STATEMENT OF CONGRESSMAN JOHN B. ANDERSON ON MUSKIE COUNTER STATE OF THE UNION
Mr. Speaker, since I have already publicly commented on President Ford's State
of the Union message, I think in the interest of fairness I should give equal time
to Senator Muskie's counter message of last evening. The Democratic spokesman opened
by observing that the State of the Union is not what the President or the Democrats
say it is, but rather the condition in which we find ourselves. After criticizing
the Administration for not doing enough to stimulate economic recovery and put people
back to work, the Senator concluded by proclaiming that the State of the Union is
"very strong indeed."
After correctly pinpointing public dissatisfáction with government spending
and programs, the Senator proposed that the answer was more government spending and
programs to solve all our Nation's problems. While the Democrats have faulted the
President's message for being short on specifics and new programs, they have countered
with promises of all manner of new programs, but curRously lacking in specifics.
Despite the Senator's concession that increased Federal spending for such programs
could further fuel inflation, he failed to indicate the costs of the Democratic
proposals and whether they just might prove to be inflationary. Instead, the Senator
suggested that we have nothing to fear 80 long as we have a congressional budget process
to keep track of the mounting costs and label the sum total a spending ceiling.
Moreover, our fears of excessive government spending could be allayed if only we ran
the government in a more businesslike manner. Never mind that our experience with
government efficiency might suggest that some things could better be done by other
sectors.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, it struck me that the Democratic spokesman was
speaking out of both sides of his mouth while biting his tongue in the hope that
nobody would catch the glaring contradictions. Put another way, in attempting to
span both the Wallace and McGovern wings of the Democratic Party, the message executed
a perfect spread-eagle and fell flat on its beak.
-30-