Ask the Scholar

{
    "localId": "7337961",
    "label": "Question and Answer Session by the President [Press Conference]",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/7337961"
}

{
    "id": "7337961",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/7337961",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "Question and Answer Session by the President [Press Conference]",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/7337961",
    "collections": [
        "White House Press Releases (Ford Administration)",
        "Press Releases"
    ],
    "subjects": [
        "Press conferences"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/61/3379/7337961/content/library/document/0248/whpr19750204-004.pdf",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/61/3379/7337961/content/library/document/0248/whpr19750204-004.pdf",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/61/3379/7337961/content/library/document/0248/whpr19750204-004.pdf",
    "imageCount": 1,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/7337961",
    "naId": 7337961,
    "levelOfDescription": "item",
    "productionDates": [
        {
            "day": 4,
            "logicalDate": "1975-02-04",
            "month": 2,
            "year": 1975
        }
    ],
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}

{
    "seq": 1,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "document",
    "url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/61/3379/7337961/content/library/document/0248/whpr19750204-004.pdf",
    "mediaId": "ebb32ee3c39f6d5b",
    "ocrText": "Digitized from Box 7 of the White House Press Releases at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library\nFOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE\nFEBRUARY 4, 1975\nOFFICE OF THE WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY\n(Atlanta, Georgia)\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nQUESTION AND ANSWER SESSION\nBY THE PRESIDENT\nHYATT REGENCY HOTEL\nPHOENIX ROOM\n2:35 P.M. EST\nTHE PRESIDENT: Please sit down.\nIt is a privilege and a pleasure to be in\nAtlanta. I have enjoyed the stay, and looking\nforward to this press conference.\nMr. Cutts of the Atlanta paper.\nQUESTION: In the last 24 hours you have\nspoken at length about domestic concerns. I would like\nto ask you what options you will have to help maintain\na non-Communist government in Vietnam if the Congress\ndoes not go along with your supplemental appropriation\nrequest as well as this fiscal year 1976 request for\nVietnam?\nTHE PRESIDENT: If the Congress does not\nrespond to the requested additional military assistance\nfor the current fiscal year in an amount which the\nCongress last year previously authorized, it will\ncertainly complicate the military situation from the\npoint of view of the South Vietnamese.\nThe South Vietnamese on their own, with our\nfinancial assistance, our military aid, have done very\nwell, but the Congress did not fully fund the requested\nmilitary assistance that was requested. I believe that\nif the Congress funds the additional money, that I have\nproposed for this fiscal year and continues the money\nthat I have recommended for next fiscal year, the\nSouth Vietnamese can and will be able to :defend\nthemselves against the aggressors from the North.\nQUESTION: The question is, if the Congress\nfails to do that, what options will you have then?\nMORE\nPage 2\nTHE PRESIDENT: I do not think that the time\nfor me to answer that question is at the present. In\nthe first place, I believe the Congress will fund the\nmoney that I have requested and, if they do, then I\nhave no need to look at any other options because\nthey will be capable of defending themselves.\nThe good judgment of the Congress will fund\nthe South Vietnamese, will defend themselves, and I\ndo not think there will be any other needed options.\nQUESTION: Mr. President, when you were a\nCongressman and called for the impeachment of Justice\nDouglas, did you have access or were you slipped any\nsecret FBI data?\nTHE PRESIDENT: I do not know what the source\nwas of information that was given to me, but I was\ngiven information by a high-ranking official of the\nDepartment of Justice. I do not know what the source\nof that information was.\nQUESTION: Was it Attorney General Mitchell,\nthen Attorney General Mitchell?\nTHE PRESIDENT: It was not the Attorney\nGeneral John Mitchell.\nQUESTION: Was it FBI Director J. Edgar\nHoover?\nTHE PRESIDENT: It was not.\nTwo times and you are out, Helen. (Laughter)\nQUESTION: Mr. President, we had a story\nthat Senator Howard Baker from up here in Tennessee is\nseriously considering seeking the Republican nomination\nin view of a late poll which gives you a rating of\n60 percent negative with the American people.\nIn view of your findings, sir, what is your\nfeeling about any chance or any opportunity you\nwill seek a full term as President?\nTHE PRESIDENT: I have indicated that it is\nmy intention to be a candidate in 1976 and, of course,\nin our system, anybody can if they so desire, qualify\nto be a candidate in any primary. I can only indicate\nwhat my intention might be, and I pass no judgment\non what anybody else might do.\nMORE\nPage 3\nQUESTION: Do you think the economic situation,\nthough, that you will be able to lick it, of course,\nincreasing your chances?\nTHE PRESIDENT: I believe that the economic\nsituation in 1976 will be an improving economic picture.\nIt won't perhaps be as good as we would like it, but\nI believe that unemployment will be going down and\nemployment will be going up, and we will be doing a\nconsiderable amount better in the battle against\ninflation than we did in the last 12 months.\nSo, with the optimism that I think will come\nfrom more employment, less unemployment, and a better\nbattle against inflation, I think the economic circum-\nstances will be good enough to justify at least my\nseeking re-election.\nQUESTION: Mr. President, when you left\nVladivostok in November, we were led to understand that\nGeneral Secretary Brezhnev would be in Washington in\nMay or June. The 'time is running short, a lot has\nhappened in American-Soviet relations since then.\nDo you still look forward to welcoming Mr.\nBrezhnev just three or four months from now.\nTHE PRESIDENT: Mr. Cormier, I look forward\nto having the General Secretary in the United States\nin the summer of 1975. The negotiations which we\nconcluded in Vladivostok are moving along in the nego-\ntiations that are necessary to put the final draft,\nThese negotiations are taking place in Geneva.\nI see no reason why we cannot reconcile any\nof the relatively minor differences. The basic agreement\nis still in effect, and I am confident that we can\nwelcome the General Secretary to the United States in\nthe summer of 1976, and I look forward to it.\nMORE\nPage 4\nQUESTION: Mr. President, I am Alva Haywood,\nPresident of Georgia Press Association.\nYour program for the solution of the problems of\nenergy and the economic situation is submitted to Congress\nas a package, and you are asking Congress to approve this\nas a package. The concern, sir is that Congress will lift\nout points of your program, substitute points of their\nprogram and leave some areas lacking. Would you comment\non the possibilities of such a situation?\nTHE PRESIDENT: It is true, as you have stated,\nthat I submitted to the Congress a comprehensive plan, or\nprogram, to solve our energy problem. As a matter of fact,\nthe bill that we sent to the Congress is about 196 pages,\nand that did not include the tax proposals because a President\ndoes not submit in writing tax proposals. He submits the\nideas, and it did not include the proposal I am submitting\nfor the strip mining bill of 1975. But this is a compre-\nhensive interrelated program to solve our energy problem by\nreducing consumption and stimulating additional production.\nThe Congress, I hope, will consider it as a\npackage. Now, if they do not agree with the package, I\nthink the Congress has an obligation to come up with their\npackage. I do not believe they can pick and choose with\npress release answers. They have to have something solid.\nNow, if they want to change, in a minor way, a part\nof my package, I will understand it, but they cannot come\nup with a part of an answer because the problem is altogether\ntoo broad and sweeping, and it affects us in industry, in\nour homes, in our driving, et cetera. I just hope the\nCongress understands the need for a comprehensive plan and will\nact accordingly.\nQUESTION: Mr. President, recently in Washington,\nthe big city mayors expressed concern over the high unemploy-\nment rate, particularly in the cities where it runs, as you\nknow, much ahead of the national unemployment rate. Considering\nthat your budget message predicts that we may have high-\nunemployment for up to another year to 18 months, have your\nadvisers given you any forecast on the possible effect in\nterms of the concern of the mayors, which was a return to\nurban violence, the possible effect of continued high unemploy-\nment for such a prolonged period of time?\nTHE PRESIDENT: I did notice the request of the\nmayors for an additional $15 billion over and above what I\nhave recommended in helping the cities through general\nrevenue sharing, through the community development program,\nthrough the emergency unemployment program. I believe that\nthe combination of recommendations I have made in those,\nand those I have mentioned and some others, will meet the\nproblems in our major metropolitan cities, and I do not\nbelieve that we should go beyond those in meeting the\nparticular problems in those communities.\nMORE\nPage 5\nQUESTION: With your austerity program, will they\nbe able to get that $15 billion they requested?\nTHE PRESIDENT: I must respectfully disagree with\nthe way you labeled my program as an \"austerity program.\"\nIt is not an austerity program, when you submit a budget for\n$349 billion, $36 billion more than the budget for the\ncurrent fiscal year and a budget that provides for $15\nbillion more in income transfer payments, so it is not an\nausterity budget. It is a very expensive budget. Because\nwe have good programs to help the unemployed, to train those\npeople who are unemployed, to help people on Social Security\nand other retirement programs, I do not believe we need the\nextra $15 billion recommended by the various mayors.\nQUESTION: Mr. President, Ron Wilson, Georgia Network.\nWould you comment, please, on Senator Jackson's\nassessment of the 94th Congress? He said \"it could possibly\nbe the most dangerous in history in terms of the willingness\non the part of some Congressmen to relax our defense posture.\"\nTHE PRESIDENT: I had not seen Senator Jackson's\ndescription of the potentials of the 94 th Congress. I hope\nthat that description is not an accurate one, and I am\ngoing to wait and see whether they do take the kind of action\nthat might destroy our military capability. I usually agree\nwith Senator Jackson on national defense appropriations,\npolicies, et cetera. If this Congress does slash, without\nrhyme or reason, the military budget that I have submitted,\nit could jeopardize our national security. I think it is\npremature to say they will. I certainly hope they don't.\nBut I can say, without any hesitation, that I will vigorously\noppose any attempt to slash without rhyme or reason, our\nmilitary strength as represented in the budget that I have\nsubmitted.\nMORE\nPage 6\nQUESTION: Mr. President, some people believe\nthat your economic advisers -- particularly Mr. Green-\nspan and Secretary Simon -- would like to have this\nrecession get somewhat deeper so that it will take a\nbigger bite out of inflation. Is that a correct\nassessment?\nTHE PRESIDENT: I have spent a good many\nhours with Alan Greenspan, as we went over the\nvarious options in our economic and energy program.\nI can say most strongly that Alan Greenspan does not\nwant us to have more adverse economic conditions than\nwe have today.\nHe has joined with me in supporting the\nprogram that I submitted, a $16 billion dollar tax\nreduction or rebate, and he has also joined with me in\nrecommending a $17 billion curtailment of certain\nFederal budgetary expenses.\nIt seems to me that this is a well-balanced\nprogram. It is not aimed at trying to make our\neconomic circumstances worse. It is aimed at trying to\nbalance our economy, so that we recover from the\nrecession as quickly as possible and, at the same time,\navoid the potential dangers of a rekindling of double-\ndigit inflation.\nI think the Congress is cognizant of the\nproblem. I hope the Congress acts responsibly, and I am\nan optimist enough to believe that they will.\nQUESTION: If that is the case, Mr. President,\nwhy is it that the deficits you proposed for fiscal\n1975 and fiscal 1976 amount to only a little more\nthan 2 percent of the Gross National Product in 1975,\nand a little over 3 percent of the Gross National Product\nin 1976?\nHow can you turn around a trillion and one\nhalf dollar economy with net stimulants that are that\nsmall?\nTHE PRESIDENT: I looked at a chart the other\nday that shows the deficits in our Federal Government\nfor the last ten or 15 years and the deficit that we\nwill have in 1976 is higher as a percentage of GNP\nthan any deficit in the last ten or 15 years, as I\nrecollect.\nThe deficit in 1975, which is $35 billion,\nis among the top ranking deficits as a percentage\nof GNP, so two of those back to back, in my opinion,\nare potentially dangerous from the point of view of\nrekindling inflation, and they are sufficiently\nstimulative to, I think, take us out of the current\nrecession.\nMORE\nPage 7\nQUESTION: I am Sally Lofton, Southeast News-\npapers. Forty million dollars, which have been\nintended for highway construction in Georgia, was\nincluded in the Highway Trust Funde impounded by\nPresident Nixon, and I was wondering if you plan to\nrelease any of these funds?\nTHE PRESIDENT: Last evening I met with a\nnumber of the Governors from the Southern and South-\neastern States. They did raise that question, urging\nthat I release some of the deferrals or rescissions\nin the Highway Trust Fund. I mean deferrals, not\nrescissions.\nI have promised them that I will take a look\nat their recommendation. Some of them said their\nStates were ready to go. They could let bids within\n30 days and get construction underway very quickly.\nI will talk to the Federal Highway Commissioner,\nformer Governor Tiemannof Nebraska, and will let the\nGovernors know whether we think this is something that\nought to be done promptly.\nQUESTION: Was Governor Busbee one of the ones\nwho said he was ready to go?\nTHE PRESIDENT: As I recall, he and several\nothers, including Governor Askew of Florida.\nQUESTION: Mr. President, Bob Schieffer. I\nwould like to follew up on Helen's question. You\ntold us the two officials who did not give you that\ninformation. Would you tell us who did, and beyond\nthat, can you tell us what sort of information it was\nand beyond that, what did you do with it?\nTHE PRESIDENT: The information that was given\nto me was to a substantial degree included in the\nspeech that I made on the floor of the House, which is\na printed document and has been widely distributed.\nThe information was given to me by Mr. Will Wilson,\nwho was then one of the Assistant Attorney Generals.\nQUESTION: Mr. President, I am Bobby Branch,\nand I publish a country newspaper in Perry, Georgia.\nTHE PRESIDENT: Do we have segregation here\nbetween the Washington press corps and the local\npress corps? (Laughter)\nQUESTION: Yes, sir. In view of the recent\nArab oil interest investments in America, and even\nhere in Georgia -- the State government is actively\nseeking Arab investments -- I was wondering what your\nopinion was on the trends in this direction.\nMORE\nPage 8\nTHE PRESIDENT: There have been some recent\nnews stories to the effect that the Iranian government,\nfor example, wanted to invest in Pan Am. They were\nthinking of buying six TWA jets that were not being\nused, and there is a story about one of the Arab\ncountries buying a substantial interest in one of our\nlargest banks in the State of Michigan.\nThe Department of State, the National Security\nCouncil, are looking into this question. It is a\nmatter, I think, that will require our best analysis\nand probably a final decision by myself. But we are\nnot in the position where I can give you a categorical\nanswer at this point.\nQUESTION: Mr. President, I would like to\nreturn, if I could please, sir, to your answer to a\nquestion which was asked a little earlier in which\nyou expressed optimism that the economy would improve\nnext year over its present situation and that\nwould help your chances for re-election.\nBy your own statistics, sir, unemployment\nwill be 7.9 percent next year, and that is\nhigher than it is now. The Gross National Product\nwill drop, I believe, 3.3 percent now, which would be a\nbigger drop than last year, and we will continue to have\ndouble-digit inflation.\nWith that grim economic outlook, sir, on\nwhat do you base your hope for re-election inasmuch as\nyour own statistics make the outlook worse next\nyear than it presently is?\nTHE PRESIDENT: Let's trace the history of\ninflation from December 1973 to December 1974. The cost\nof living went up 12.2 percent. From December 1974\nto December 1975 we expect the cost of living to go\nup 9 percent. Between December of 1975 to December\nof 1976 we expect the cost of living to go up 7\npercent, so that is a very significant improvement, and\nit is not double-digit inflation.\nIt is almost cutting in half the inflation\nthat we had from December 1973 to December of 1974.\nFrom the point of view of unemployment, it is true\nthat we expect in 1975 unemployment to peak, I think, at\n8.4 or 8.5 percent.\nMORE\nPage 9\nWe do expect, however, by the second and\nthird quarter of 1975 to have a switch that will be\non the plus side. It will be a switch that will\nprobably mean a 5 percent increase in the GNP. It\nwill undoubtedly mean an increase of about two million\nin those employed.\nSo, the trend will be good, with higher\nemployment and improvement in the Gross National\nProduct and a slight downtrend in unemployment\nfigures. They will get better the further we go into\n1976, so I am not as pessimistic as you appear to be\nand I am not as pessimistic when you look at the\ntrends, not the averages, as some of the computer read-\nouts tend to lead you to believe.\nQUESTION: Mr. President, Peter Bannon\nwith WAGA Television, Atlanta. We are told the\nconfidence of the businessman and the consumer is\nessential to economic recovery. Two questions, sir.\nFirst, what is your estimation of this\nconfidence, and second, is there a possibility that\nas a lot of people who have not been badly hurt by\nyour economic program become increasingly bored with\nthis talk of economic uncertainty, is there a possibility\nof a spontaneous recovery of confidence, regardless\nof what is done in Washington.\nTHE PRESIDENT: I happen to subscribe to the\nidea that the actions of the American people are often\ntimes infinitely more important than what the Congress\nor the President do in Washington, D.C. If we get a\nrestoration of public confidence, which has been\nfalling rapidly and has been a major contributing\nfactor to our economic problems, if we get a restoration\nof that -- and there is some evidence that that is\ntaking place -- then in my judgment we will get a\nfaster recovery than what some of the experts are\nforecasting.\nThere has been in the last several weeks a\nvery interesting development, and the changes in our\neconomy in the last two or three months have shown\ncertain sudden actions that most people did not\nforecast nor anticipate.\nWe have had a tremendous inventory sell-out,\nmuch more rapid than anybody forecast. This means\nthat in a relatively short period of time -- much more\nquickly than anyone expected a couple of months ago --\nthat as you bottom out and you get a reasonable balance\nbetween inventory and production, that the recovery\nwill come more quickly than some of the experts have\nIsrecasted or anticipated.\nThis development, plus what I think is a\nrestoration of public confidence, gives to me the\nfeeling that we are going to do better at the end of\nthis year than what some of the experts are saying.\nMORE\nPage 10\nQUESTION: Could you suggest a guideline, or some-\nthing we can look for in the next few months that might,\nas a guidepost, help restore this confidence?\nAny specific objective in the next couple of months that\nwould relate to the American people and their confidence\nin whether or not to spend their dollars?\nTHE PRESIDENT: The unusual and, I think, success-\nful marketing techniques shown by the automotive industry\nin the last month and the announcement that some of the\nappliance manufacturers are going to use the same marketing\ntechniques -- good, old American free enterprise -- I think this\napproach will have a very good stimulant, not only to\nthe facts of the economy, but to public confidence. So,\nif they keep up this good, hard marketing practice, in\nmy judgment, that is the best guideline that I can think\nof.\nQUESTION: Mr. President, I am Dennis Farney, with\nthe Wall Street Journal.\nThe House Ways and Means Committee has rejected your\ntax rebate formula in favor of one that would provide more\nhelp to low and middle income people. At the same time,\nthe Committee seems inclined to perhaps continue some of its\ntax cuts indefinitely, instead of ending them after one\nyear as you have proposed. Could you live with these\nchanges?\nTHE PRESIDENT: Well, of course, the House\nCommittee on Ways and Means has only taken tentative action.\nTheir procedure is to make tentative decisions and then\ngo back in the final analysis and either agree with or\nchange what they have made as they have gone along. This\nis only the first of four major steps, maybe five. The\nHouse has to approve it. The Senate Committee on Finance\nhas to act -- the Senate and then in conference. So, I\nthink it is premature for me to make any categorical\njudgment as to whether I would accept what the tentative\nagreements are in a House Committee on Ways and Means.\nI think I had better wait and pass judgment on what looks\nlike might be the final version.\nMORE\nPage 11\nQUESTION: Mr. President, John Pruitt,\nWSB television. You have called for relaxing of pollution\ncontrols because of the energy crisis and some have\naccused you of abandoning the environmental movement.\nI would like to know what you think is\ngoing to happen to the environmental movement and\nthe strides that have been made in the past few years\nas a result of your proposals?\nTHE PRESIDENT: I do not think that I have\nrecommended any major shift away from our environmental\ngoals. Let me take one that I am very familiar with.\nUnder existing law, within the next two\nyears the automobile manufacturers would have to go to\na substantially higher emission standard and the\nautomobile manufacturers are testifying right now that\nif they are forced to go to that very, very high\nstandard, there will be an added cost to every automobile\nthat is produced and there will be no improvement and\nprobably a decrease in the efficiency of automobiles,\nwhich means that cars sold in the next three or four\nyears will guzzle more gasoline, not less gasoline.\nWith the effort that I think is reasonable,\nwe can increase automobile efficiency by 40 percent\nand still achieve an increase in environmental emission\nstandards, and here is what I have recommended: That\nthe Congress change the law to improve the environ-\nmental emission standards from the present law to\nthe California standards, and in return for that change\nof the law, the automotive manufacturers. have. agreed\nwith me in writing to increase automotive efficiency\n40 percent in the next five years, which means we will\nget 40 percent more miles per gallon and still have a\nhigher emission standard than we have today in our\nautomobiles that are sold throughout the country.\nIn the case of the Clean Air Act, that would\npermit the utilities that are now using oil to go\nto coal. We have asked for eome postponement. We\nhave not abandoned the goal, but in order to cut down\nour importation of foreign oil, we have asked the\nCongress and the head of EPA, Russell Train, has agreed\nthat this is a reasonable request.\nI think under the crisis we face, a short\nstretch out is understandable and desirable in\nthis area, so I have not abandoned any improvement\nin our clean air efforts.\nMORE\nPage 12\nI have simply, in the one case, moved up\nto the California standards, and in the other\nstretched out the situation to some extent. This,\nin my opinion, is a realistic approach, a proper\nbalancing of environemntal needs and energy demands.\nI can assure you that in our judgment it is\na reasonable position and it is wholly agreed to by\nMr. Train, the head of the Environmental Protection\nAgency.\nQUESTION: Mr. President, Philip\nNew York Times. Sir, your economic policy apparently\nwould allow a high rate of unemployment for years to\ncome in order to prevent a new round of inflation. Sir,\nisn't there some approach you could take other than\nthis that would avoid this human suffering?\nTHE PRESIDENT: The proposal that I have\nsubmitted to the Congress provides for a very\nsubstantial stimulant to get us out of the current\nrecession. I hope the Congress will act quickly, and\nthe quicker the better. That will be the best demon-\nstration of what the President and the Congress can\ndo to turn the direction of our economy from a recession\nto an improvement.\nIt is my judgment that any additional stimulant\nat this time could lead to the kind of inflation that\nwe fought so hard to overcome for the last 12 months.\nIf we were to substantially increase -- I emphasize\nsubstantially increase -- the deficit of $52 billion,\nit could provide a tremendous stimulant, but what would\nthat do?\nIt would probably dry up our financial\nmarkets, with Uncle Sam going in to borrow $60 to\n$70 billion dollars in 12 months, plus $30-some million\nin this fiscal year.\nIt would probably force interest rates high\nagain instead of the trend we are on now with lower\ninterest rates. It undoubtedly, with high interest\nrates, hard to get credit and higher and higher\ninflation, would start us right down the road we have\njust avoided, and I think multiply, not help\nour present economic circumstances.\nQUESTION: Sir, to follow up, some economists\nand some Democrats have proposed --\nTHE PRESIDENT: I am glad you say Democrats\nare not economists, or vice versa. (Laughter)\nMORE\nPage 13\nQUESTION: Sir, there is a proposal that a\nlarger degree of stimulation combined with wage and price\ncontrols would solve the problem of the recession, while\npreventing another round of inflation. Do you, sir, re-\ngard wage and price controls as worse than an 8 percent unemploy-\nment rate for the next two years?\nTHE PRESIDENT: I don't think, when you are faced\nwith the kind of adverse economic circumstances we have\ntoday, a recession which we are trying to get out of, that\nwage and price control medicine is the answer to the\neconomic problem, and I believe that the stimulant I have\nproposed with the tax reduction, with the responsible\nexpenditure limitations, is a very fine line that will\npermit us to get out of recession and avoid double-digit\ninflation. And, to put on top of this kind of an economy\nwage and price controls would be the worst kind of medicine\nthat I can foresee.\nQUESTION: Mr. President, I am Selby McCash,\nwith Macon Telegraph and News.\nThe Georgia General Assembly is in session at\nthe moment, and many State legislatures are. What advice\ncould you give the State law makers to augment and supple-\nment your programs on economy and energy? Quite simply, is\nthere anything these gentlemen on the State level can do?\nTHE PRESIDENT: I believe that State legislatures\nhave an obligation, such as we have in the Federal Government,t\ntry and handle.\" their fiscal affairs in a responsible way.\nI do not think the State legislatures or municipal govern-\nments should act irresponsibly and then come to the Federal\nGovernment for more funds over and above what has been\nrecommended in the budget that I have submitted to the\nCongress.\nIf they have financial problems, I think they\nhave to face up to them. I believe that they will have to\ntighten their belts in some cases on the expenditure side\nand they may have to increase taxes as Governor Carey of\nNew York has proposed. But, anyhow, they should not act\nirresponsibly and then come to the Federal Government and\nexpect us, under our circumstances, to bail them out.\nQUESTION: Mr. President, you have asked the country\nto sacrifice to help us out in this time of trouble, but\nyour own budget shows that the Executive Office of the\nPresident has outlays of 65 percent more in fiscal year\n1975 over fiscal year 1974. Furthermore, we look at the\nkind of habits in the Administration -- not many days ago,\nSecretary Kissinger had a speech in Los Angeles, and to\nmake one speech, he takes two planes, two very, large\nplanes and spends tens of thousands of dollars of the\ntaxpayers' money. Don't you think it is time for the White\nHouse to tighten its belt and other members of the\nAdministration to do the same thing?\nMORE\nPage 14\nTHE PRESIDENT: I can assure you, since I\ntook over, that we have thoroughly looked into the\npersonnel of the White House and if my memory is\ncorrect, we have cut back about 10 percent in\npersonnel. The increases that have come -- again, if\nmy memory is correct -- is that the White House is now\nbeing charged rent by GSA just as GSA charges every\nother Federal department for Federally owned office\nbuildings that are occupied by a department.\nThere has been an increase in compensation\nfor Federal employees, which I happen to oppose, and\nasked to be deferred. So, when you add up the items\nthat I have indicated, plus the 10 percent reduction\nin personnel, at least as far as we are concerned, it\nis my judgment that we have been cutting back rather\nthan adding to.\nIn the case of Secretary Kissinger, Secretary\nKissinger is a very important person in this government\nat this time, and it would be tragic if anything\nhappened to him as a result of not taking necessary\nprecautions.\nI, for one, do not want any lack of precaution\nto result in anything that would hurt, in my opinion,\nthe carrying out of our foreign policy, which is a\nsuccess.\nI happen to think the protection of his\nlife, which is important to the foreign policy of.\nthis country, is worth the expenditure that\nyou indicated.\nQUESTION: As a follow-up, Mr. President,\nyou say you have to pay rent now on the White House.\nWhat happens if you cannot pay your bills? Do they\nthrow you out?\nTHE PRESIDENT: You ask Mr. Sampson. I\nthink they will take it out of our appropriations\nbill. (Laughter)\nTHE PRESS: Thank you, Mr. President.\nEND\n(AT 3:10 P.M. EST)"
}