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
1550540
label
Ford - Broadcasts, 1966-68
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
1550540
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Ford - Broadcasts, 1966-68
citationUrl
collections
Robert T. Hartmann Papers
House of Representatives Subject Files
subjects
Republican National Committee (U.S.)
Presidential campaign, 1968
Congressional elections
Unidentified flying objects
Vietnam War, 1961-1975
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
1550540
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1968-07-31
month
7
year
1968
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1966-03-01
month
3
year
1966
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
8f0742c57deba423
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box 52, folder "Ford - Broadcasts, 1966-68" of the
Robert T. Hartmann Papers 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. Robert T. Hartmann 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United States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives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.
CBS NEWS
Mills
2020 M Street
Washington, D.C. 20036
FACE THE NATION
as broadcast over the
CBS Television Network
and the
CBS Radio Network
Sunday, March 27, 1966 - - 12:30 - 1:00 PM EST
GUEST: THE HONORABLE GERALD R. FORD (Michigan)
Republican Leader of the
House of Representatives
NEWS CORRESPONDENTS: Martin Agronsky
CBS News
Robert Novak
Columnist, New York Herald Tribune Syndicate
David Schoumacher
CBS News
PRODUCERS: Ellen Wadley
Prentiss Childs
DIRECTOR: Robert Vitarelli
FORD i LIBRARY GERALD
2
MR. AGRONSKY: Congressman Ford, did former Vice-President
Nixon speak for the Republican Party yesterday when he called
for bombing military targets in the port of Haiphong?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I do not think he spoke for the
Republican Coordinating Committee, which is the group of
Republican leaders that was put together about a year ago for the
purpose of coordinating our policies on the domestic front and
on international politics.
This is a view that an individual can have. I think
it would be said to be his, not the party as a whole, at the
present time.
ANNOUNCER: Live, from CBS, Washington, FACE THE NATION,
a spontaneous and unrehearsed news interview with the
Republican leader of the House, Representative Gerald Ford
of Michigan. Representative Ford will be questioned by CBS
News Correspondent David Schoumacher; Robert Novak, Columnist
for the New York Herald Tribune Syndicate. CBS News
Correspondent Martin Agronsky will lead the questioning.
We shall resume the interview with Congressman Ford in
just a moment.
MR. AGRONSKY: Congressman Ford, if Mr. Nixon's call
for the bombing of military targets in the port of Haiphong
does not agree with the opinion of the Republican Coordinating
Committee, does it reflect your personal opinion?
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
3
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, Martin, at this particular
time, with the President committing 220,000 to 235,000 military
personnel to Vietnam, it seems to me that these delicate
military decisions should be made by the elected Commander
in Chief of the United States, Lyndon B. Johnson, based on the
recommendations of the Joint Chiefs of staff the people
who are experienced, who are knowledgeable. I think these
technical decisions of a militarynature rest with the President
of the United States. And I think we should stand forthrightly
for a policy of strength against Communist aggression. But
the execution, the implementation on a day to day basis in a
military way is the responsibility of the President of the
United States.
MR. NOVAK: Well, Congressman Ford, the Republican
Congressional Committee News Letter, which is due out
tomorrow, gets rather deeply into the day to day execution of
Vietnam policy, and it suggests that "The American serviceman
is fighting a war with one hand tied behind his back", due
to the policies of the Administration. Isn't this the view of
the House Republican leadership?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I would say that this is not an
illustration of where we are telling the President that he
FORD is LIBRARY GERALD
ought to do one particular thing or another militarily.
We are saying that the Administration is not using the
full potential of our military forces, our Army, Navy and Air Force.
4
I have heard that quotation actually in the White House
itself, where discussions were held, where the indication was
given that particularly during the pause of the bombing, that
our military forces were in effect fighting a war, a very
serious one, with one of their hands tied behind them.
I repeat again that the technical military decisions,
how we use our air power, our sea power, these are decisions
that must be made by the elected Commander in Chief, a man who
was elected in November 1964.
We as Republicans can call for a policy of strength, a
posture of determination. But these day to day executions,
implementations of policy, must t be made by the President with
the help and assistance of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
MR. SCHOUMACHER: Congressman Ford, not too many months
ago Republicans were saying that Vietnam was going to be an
issue. Then they apparently decided to hedge their bet a
little bit and we heard it was going to be Vietnam and
inflation, and yesterday Mr. Nixon said it is going to be
inflation, the only issue.
Is there much difference in the Party on just how to
FORD is 010830 LIBRARY
talk about Vietnam?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Dave, I don't think we ever said -
at least the leadership never said, that Vietnam would be the major
policy issue.
As a matter of fact, Senator Dirksen and myself have
5
repeatedly urged all Republicans to not make Vietnam a political
issue. The consequences are too great and the crisis is too
serious for us, from the point of view of the national interest,
to make this a political issue.
MR. SCHOUMACHER: But, Mr. Ford, don't you have to make it
a political issue? If you have to pick up votes, you have an
obligation to talk about it.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Dave, I don't think we should. I
don't think we have an obligation to.
I might add as a postscipt some of the President's
Democrats in the Senate are the ones who are making it a political
issue. Senator Wayne Morse is making it a very serious political
issue, and others in the Senate in the President's own Democratic
Party, are the ones who are making all the charges, all the
allegations.
I suspect with these kind of charges made against the
President by Senator Morse and others, the American people, not
the Republicans, will make Vietnam a political issue in 1966.
MR. AGRONSKY: Do you think the Democrats should not be
doing this?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: No - I think, Martin, that they
have a right to speak I think they have an obligation, if their
conscience tells them to talk about it in the Senate.
But, on the other hand, I do look with some disgust and,
I think, dismay at the kind of demonstrations that took place FORD
GERALD LIBRARY
6
yesterday in many of our major cities in this country. I
believe that these kind of attempts to discredit our policy, to
display a lack of unity among the American people, could have
the effect of prolonging the war, undermining the morale of
our American troops, and in effect leading the enemy to a
miscalculation as to the power and the unity of the American
people.
MR. SCHOUMACHER: If the Republican Party, though, expects
to pick up votes on the basis of disenchantment with the
President's policy in Vietnam - don't you have a responsibility
to tell them this is what the Republicans think about Vietnam,
what should be done about Vietnam, so that when they do express
that disenchantment in the polling place, they know what they are
voting for?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Yes, Dave, I think we have to point
out what our position is. And the position today is that we
support a policy of a posture of determination against
Communist aggression and terror in Vietnam.
But I add very quickly that we are not in a position in
the Republican Party, in the legislative branch, to make
military decisions. And these decisions have to be made by
the Commander in Chief.
MR. AGRONSKY: Congressman Ford, some critics of the
FORD & LIBRARY BERALD
Republican Party have indicated that you are not fulfilling
the role of the loyal opposition in promoting debate; that you
7
are leaving that task to the Democrats.
In January of 1950, Senator Arthur Vandenberg, of your
State, the late Senator -
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: From my home town.
MR. AGRONSKY: From your home town - wrote in a letter to
a constituent that every foreign policy must be totally
debated, and the loyal opposition is under special obligation
to see this occurs.
Do you feel you are fulfilling the function of the loyal
opposition as Senator Vandenberg says?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Yes, I think we are, Martin, because
in effect we are debating those Democrats in the House and the
Senate who want to withdraw, the Democrats who want to turn
tail and run.
As a matter of fact, we in the Republican Party today are
more effectively helping the Chief Executive, the Commander
in Chief, by telling him "We stand with you as long as you are
willing to face up to Communist terror and aggression".
We, as Republicans, are debating the weak-kneed Democrats
who want to turn tail and run and duck the responsibility of the
leadership of the free world on the part of the United States.
MR. AGRONSKY: Which ones want to turn tail and run?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, there are those who in effect
have said we ought to go back and abandon all of Southeast
Asia and come back to Pearl Harbor. This is what some people
GERALD
LIBRARY
8
have said.
MR. AGRONSKY: I don't know of any who said that. What
responsible Democrats have said that?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, hasn't Senator Wayne Morse
said that we ought to withdraw, we ought to end the war? What
he means under the theory of those such as Secretary Rusk, who
as I understand it believes in the dominoe theory - means
that in a relatively short period of time you are going to
end up defending Pearl Harbor, and that is not a very good
prospect.
MR. NOVAK: Mr. Ford, I did not quite understand your
answer to my question.
Do you feel that - do you personally feel that we are
fighting the war in Vietnam with an arm behind our back, or
is that just political propaganda by the Congressional Campaign
Committee?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: When you look at all the military
power that the United States has, in the Air Force, in the Navy,
and in the Army, and when you realize that we are not fully
utilizing that military power, and when you understand that
we have 220,000, 235,000 American military personnel fighting a
war in Vietnam today, and probably 300,000 in a few months, and
you see that they are not getting the full support of all of
this military power that we have, the argument can be made -
MR. NOVAK: But do you make it?
FORD & LIBRARY GENALD
9
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: as that the soldiers, sailors and
airmen out there are fighting with one hand tied behind them.
MR. NOVAK: But do you make the argument, Mr. Ford?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I think there is a great deal of
credence to the argument. But just how you use this power on a
day to day basis, the power that we are not using, I think is
the responsibility of the Commander in Chief, President Lyndon B.
Johnson.
MR. NOVAK: On that position of the power, you and the
other Republican leaders, and Mr. Nixon last night, repeatedly
have advised against getting into a land war on the Asian
continent. Now, what does a land war consist of - 200,000
troops, 300,000? Do you think we are in a land war now?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: When you get up to 235,000, 300,000
or 400,000, and there are plans and programs in the Pentagon
today to increase our commitment to those figures, I believe
we are getting to the point where we are fighting a rather
large-scale ground war in Southeast Asia.
I think it is well to point out that at the height of the
Korean War, where we had our greatest military commitment in
that conflict, there were only 325,000 U.S. military personnel
stationed in South Korea.
It seems to me that very shortly President Johnson will have
committed almost that number.
MR. NOVAK: And you are opposed to that?
FORD is AENALD LIBRARY
10
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: And I think when we get to that
figure without using more of our military power in the air
and on that sea, that we are getting ourselves into a very bad
military situation.
MR. NOVAK: Are you opposed to that?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Yes, I would be.
MR. AGRONSKY: You are opposed to it. You would have a
ceiling, then, on the American commitment in Vietnam.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I would not have a ceiling as to Cores
MR. AGRONSKY: What do you mean, then?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I think you have got to have a
limitation on your commitment in ground forces unless and
until we have more fully utilized our air and sea power. And
we are not doing that today.
MR. AGRONSKY: Don't you regard that as a significant
military criticism, that you said you were reluctant to make?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: No, because what you really intended,
I think, was to indicate that we believe that we should bomb
Haiphong, that we should do other specific military targeting.
MR. AGRONSKY: No. We are talking about something else now.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, if you are talking in the
broad sense -
MR. AGRONSKY: We are talking about a ceiling on American
commitment in Vietnam. Are you for it or not?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I believe there should be a manpower
LIBRARY GERALD RD
11
ceiling on our ground forces, unless and until we have more
fully utilized our military power in the air and on the sea.
MR. NOVAK: In other words, Mr. Ford, you are saying we should
use the air power more than we are using it, but you would not
say exactly how.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Yes, I think that is a fair analysis
of it.
MR. AGRONSKY: Don't you regard that as a military
proposal, an interference with the President, who is the
Commander in Chief, and you said before we should not criticize.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: No, I don't think this is a military
recommendation in the sense of what the Joint Chiefs do on a
day to day basis, as far as the President is concerned.
MR. AGRONSKY: It seems about asmilitary as you could
get, to put a ceiling on how many troops you would put in there
and say that we should not put any more in unless we do thus and
so in a military way.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, let me say this. There are a
great many Americans, Martin, who are very unhappy with the way
in which the conflict is being run in Vietnam today. Many
Americans who support the policy of meeting the challenge of
Communist aggression are saying that unless we do more with the
power we have, we either ought to do it or get out. And I
believe that the American people, and all of the polls support
this, indicate that the President as Commander in Chief ought
GERALE FORD LIBRAST
12
follow this course of action before committing another 100,000
U.S. military personnel to Vietnam.
MR. AGRONSKY: Do you agree with those people who feel we
ought to do this or get out?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I would not go quite that far. I
would not be quite that categorical. But I can assure you this
is the attitude of a great many Americans in this country today.
MR. SCHOUMACHER: Mr. Ford, what about flying saucers?
you have had some in Michigan in the past week. Do you really
believe in flying saucers? You called for a Congressional
investigation.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Dave, we have had several incidents
in Michigan in the last week, incidents that many reliable,
good citizens felt were suffi ient to justify some action by
our government, and not the kind of flippant answer that was
given by the Air Force where they passed it off as swamp gas.
In addition there are other incidents that have happened
from time to time, reportings by people who basically, I think,
are fully sincere and who are honest.
It seems to me that this mystery that has been around the
country with all of these various sightings does require that
the Congress take a good look at it; bring up these witnesses
from the Air Force and the National Aeronautics and Space
Agency, have them interrogated by members of a House or Senate
FOR
Committee, let them put their records on the line, and Let the
GERAL, LIBRARY
13
people who have allegedly seen these unidentified flying objects
come and testify.
I think the American people would be more assured that
there were or were not if such a public hearing was held.
MR. NOVAK: Congressman Ford, how many seats do you think
the Republican Party can pick up in the South this year?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: In the South?
MR. NOVAK: In the South.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I think we will pick up, oh, from
five to six. But I am more encouraged, Bob, by the possibilities
of picking up seats elsewhere in the United States. As a total
I would say our prospects at the moment appear good, to pick up
between 40 and 50.
MR. NOVAK: On the questionof the South, how do you feel
about the segregationists in the Republican Party in the South?
For example, Congressman Jim Martin in Alabama has just announced
for Governor. Would you go down and campaign for him, or for
Senator Strom Thurmond in South Carolina, seeking re-election?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Let me say this. The segregationists
in the Republican Party are minimal compared to those that
have been in the past in the Democratic Party in the South.
The record is crystal clear that the Democratic Party in the
past and I think at the present time in the South is totally
dominated by extreme segregationists.
Governor Wallace - now he is running his wife. I am
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
14
sure she shares, according to him, his views on matters involving
segregation.
It seems to me that the Republican Party in the South has
made a very good effort to broaden its base, to raise issues
other than segregation between the Democrats in the South and
the Republicans in the South.
MR. NOVAK: Would you campaign for an out-and-out
segregationist, like Stram Thurmond or Jim Martin?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I don't think you can categorize
these people as outright segregationists. I think this is an
unfair accusation. And I believe -
MR. SCHOUMACHER: Is it unfair to call Strom Thurmond a
segregationist?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Let me talk about Jim Martin,
because he serves with me in the House fRepresentative. I
know that Jim Martin and the other Republicans from the State
of Alabama worked very closely with me and others in the House
to develop a voting rights bill that even today, Dave, I think
it a better bill than the law that we have on the statute books.
These men worked very effectively and honestly to come up with a
voting rights bill that would be applicable in every one of the
fifty states. And any man or any group of men, such as Jim
Martin and the others, who take this approach, in no way, no
way, are the kind of segregationists that you are implying.
MR. NOVAK: There are different kinds of segregationists?
GERALD
LIBRARY
15
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, there are all kinds of
liberals, there are all kinds of radicals.
MR. NOVAK: so you would campaign for them.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: If they follow the basic principles
of the Republican Party, and if they are willing to adhere to,
as we have, the philosophy of the Republican Party as I know it ----
I think the burden is on them -I would campaign for a
Republican in Alabama or any other state of the Union.
MR. AGRONSKY: Would regard all of the Republican candidates
in the South as men for whom you could campaign no matter what
their position is on segregation?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, Martin, we hope to have a full
slate of candidates in all of the Southern states. I don't know
them all, so I cannot categorically answer that question. But
let me turn the coin over, if I may.
MR. AGRONSKY: Yes.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I go and campaign in some of our
large metropolitan areas for more or less liberal Republican
candidates, candidates who are more liberal than I. Should
I be criticized for doing that any more than I should be
critidzed for doing it in the South?
What I am trying to say is the Republican Party has to
elect more Republicans, and in some areas of the country liberal
Republicans will be elected, and in some areas of the country
conservative Republicans will be elected.
FORD is GERALD LIBRARY
16
MR. NOVAK: Do you equite the liberal Republicans with
the segregationists, then?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I don't understand the question.
MR. NOVAK: You are putting the liberal Republicans and
the segregationists in the same basket.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, as long as the liberal
Republican and the conservative Republican believe in the basic
principles of the Republican Party, I believe they are Republicans,
and I think we ought to dect Republicans - period.
MR. AGRONSKY: Will you hold on for a second, Congressman.
We will follow up in a minute. There aremany more things
we would like to ask you.
We will resume the questioning in a moment.
MR. AGRONSKY: Congressman Ford, yesterday the
Republican Party in South Carolina held a convention. It was
lily white, not a single Negro was there. Do you approve of
that, sir?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I think the best answer to that,
Martin, is that last fall I was invited to speak to a Republican
luncheon in Natchez, Mississippi, and unfortunately that luncheon
in effect excluded any Negro participation. I had to cancel out,
and I think my decision was right.
I have appeared at luncheons and dinners on behalf of the
Republican Party in many Southern states where there were
GERALD
$
17
segregated Republican audiences.
I certainly believe that the Republican Party ought to include
in the South, as well as in the North, individuals from all
segments of our society, whites as well as Negroes, as long
as they believe in the philosophy of the Republican Party.
And where there is a deliberate exclusion of one segment of
our society, then I think the Republican Party ought to take a
hard look at whether they should participate.
MR. AGRONSKY: What's wrong in South Carolina?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: From what I know about it, I do not
know whether they specifically excluded them. But if they did,
if they precluded Negroes from participation, Negroes who
wanted to participate, then I think they made a mistake.
MR. SCHOUMACHER: Mr. Ford, the other day you said that you
did not play to be minority leader forever, that you hope to
become majority leader or step down. Have you set a date for
your retirement, or do you plan to become majority leader pretty
soon?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I:think the prospects, Dave, are
getting better and better for the Republicans to make significant
gains in the House of Representatives. At the moment I do not
think the prospects are such that we can look forward to a majority
in the House. But public opinion today is rapidly swinging away
from the Johnson-Humphrey Administration, and there is greater
FOR
and greater Republican support throughout the country. And
LIBRARY
18
the Administration's credibility erodes in the next few months
as it has in the last few months, there is a distinct possibility
the Republicans will gain control in the House.
I happen to think we are laying a good groundwork, we
are getting good candidates, we are better organized, we are more
unified, and the Democrats are losing credibility, they are
disorganized, and I think the American people are getting
sympathetic to the kind of a program and the candidates we are
dffering.
MR. SCHOUMACHER: You said once there you were going to pick
up 30 votes, and then it became 40 votes, and now it is almost
50 votes. What is happening? We don't see any evidence of it.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, let me tell you the evidence is
pretty clear if you just look at the various opinion polls
throughout the country. The President and the Democratic
Administration has lost 3 to 3.5 percent nationwide. The
Republicans have gained a corresponding amount of public support.
And as this pendulum swings away from the Johnson-Humphrey
Administration to the Republicans, it automatically means
FORDO & LIBRARY GESALD
that we are going to pick up more and more seats in the House
and in the Senate.
MR. SCHOUMACHER: Is it Vietnam that is making it swing?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I have not analyzed just what the
issue is, except that on the domestic scene the Administration's
failure to do anything about the increase in the cost of living,
19
the Administration's failure to recognize the dangers of
inflation and the distinct probability and possibility
if the inflation gets worse we are going to have a recession
is the one thing that on the domestic scene very much worries
the American people.
MR. AGRONSKY: Gentlemen, I am very sorry, but our time
is up. Thank you, Congressman Ford, for being here to FACE
THE NATION.
FORD : GERALD LIBRARY
Hord- Broadcast
The National Broadcasting Company Presents
MEET THE PRESS
America's Press Conference of the Air
Produced by LAWRENCE E. SPIVAK
Guest: REP. GERALD R. FORD
House Minority Leader
: FORD
REP. MELVIN R. LAIRD
Chairman, House Republican Conference
VOLUME 11
JANUARY 8, 1967
NUMBER 2
Merkle Press Inc.
Printers and Periodical Publishers
Division of Publishers Co. Inc.
Boa 2111, Washington, D. C. 20019
10 cents per copy
Panel:
ROSCOE DRUMMOND, Publishers Newspaper
Syndicate
DOUGLAS KIKER, NBC News
NEIL MacNEIL, Time Magazine
ALAN OTTEN, Wall Street Journal
MEET THE PRESS
ггэяч
WEEL
MR. BOGGS: The Republican gain of 47 seats in the November
Moderator:
NEIL BOGGS, NBC News
elections has focused special attention on the House of Represen-
tatives of the 90th Congress, which meets on Tuesday. Our guests
today on MEET THE PRESS are the Republican leaders of the
House, Congressman Gerald R. Ford of Michigan, Minority
Leader, and Congressman Melvin R. Laird of Wisconsin, Chair-
man of the House Republican Conference.
We will have the first questions now from Douglas Kiker of
NBC News.
MR. KIKER: Gentlemen, it is obvious that the big issue in
Congress is going to be Vietnam-the war itself, the cost in men
and money, what we have done wrong in the past, what we should
be doing in the future. Other than criticizing the Administra-
tion's Vietnam policy, do the Republicans have a party policy
on Vietnam, and what is it? I will ask you first, Mr. Ford.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: First, let me say that the new
Congress ought to insist that the President and the Secretary
of Defense and the Secretary of State come up to the Congress
and tell us what their plans are, to clarify what they have done
in the past and what they intend to do in the future. We have
just seen that the Administration is embarking on a major mili-
tary operation in the Mekong Delta. As far as I know this was
never told to the American people or to the Congress in the last
Permission is hereby granted to news media and
two years as a prospective operation, and before we can tell the
magazines to reproduce in whole or in part. Credit
American people what we think ought to be done, we have got
to NBC's MEET THE PRESS will be appreciated.
to know from the President and his advisers what they have in
mind.
REPRESENTATIVE LAIRD: I think the loyal opposition does
have this role to fulfill in this 90th Congress, to see that the Ad-
1
ministration comes before the American people, setting forth
ing at this point with the government, the Federal Government,
what our short-term aims and long-term objectives are in South-
running short on funds?
east Asia, whether it is for a negotiated settlement, military
REPRESENTATIVE LAIRD: Presently in the 1967 fiscal year
victory, or whether the Manila communique, taken with Am-
budget and in the 1968 budget, which will soon be before the
bassador Goldberg's statement at the U.N. that we would with-
Congress, there will be over $15 billion in grant-in-aid programs,
draw our troops if the North Vietnamese forces would withdraw
some 267 different programs in the grant-in-aid area, each with
to the north, whether this outstanding offer is still very much
an application having to come to Washington to be approved by
in evidence. All of these questions have to be answered before
some bureau here in Washington, and then the grant of money
the minority party, the loyal opposition, can offer meaningful
goes to the local school district or the local municipality or the
alternatives to the present policy. I agree completely with our
state. I have advocated tax sharing as a substitute to these vari-
leader, Jerry Ford, that this information must be supplied not
ous programs. It seems to me that there are better ways to do
only to the Congress, but to the American people.
things for Americans than the way of the Great Planned Society,
MR. KIKER: Mr. Ford, there are those who say that the Re-
which is specific grants for speciflc purposes, all approved here
publicans are being very quiet about Vietnam these days,
at our nation's capital. I believe that we can have faith in our
because they don't know exactly what the national mood is, that
local communities, in our local school boards and in our state
you are waiting to see what events and what the national mood
government. The problem that we have in local communities and
will determine and thereby determine your policy. Is that the
states is not the fact that they do not have the means and the
case?
know-how to solve these problems, but they don't have the
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I believe that the American
resources to tackle these problems in health, education and
people agree that the United States must meet forthrightly the
welfare.
challenge of Communist aggression in South Vietnam, in South-
Mr. MacNEIL: Would this cut the actual cost of these grant-
east Asia, in Berlin or any place else, and the Republicans feel
in-aid programs?
this is a cornerstone of the American foreign policy. Actually,
REPRESENTATIVE LAIRD: Yes, I think it would.
I think there is the feeling-and I agree with it-that this is
MR. MacNEIL: How?
truly a confrontation between the United States, the free world
REPRESENTATIVE LAIRD: It would make better use of
on the one hand and the Soviet Union and the Communist bloc
the dollars, because SO much of the money now is spent at the
as a whole on the other and that we have to tailor our military,
administrative level. All of the funds collected by the Federal
our diplomatic programs in this context. When we do, then I
Government could be used to solve the problems at the local and
think the Republicans will be in a position to come up with con-
state level in the area of health, education and welfare.
structive alternatives.
I know that this program, perhaps the whole program, can't
MR. KIKER: Let me ask you this: Last week Senator Dirksen
be considered by the 90th Congress because the Democrats do
said he believes the Republican Party would support President
control this Congress by a better than three to two majority,
Johnson if the President decided to stop bombing North Vietnam
but I hope that as programs come up, of a grant-in-aid approach,
for a while to see what would happen. Do you agree? What would
that we can substitute our means, showing that there is a better
the party's position be on this?
way to solve these problems by letting local governments, school
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: This is a major, major decision,
boards and state government have a greater role to play. I would
and I would hesitate to assume the responsibility of saying today
hope if we get into the overall program we could put an effective
that we would perhaps put in jeopardy the lives of almost 400,-
date on, of, say, 1968 or 1969, on the overall program, and then
000 American military personnel by saying that we will do this
the states and the local communities could gear up to handle
without any assurance whatsoever that the Communists on the
revenue-sharing in an effective manner.
other side were going to reciprocate.
MR. MacNEIL: As I understand, your idea, one of them is
MR. MacNEIL: Mr. Laird, you have been a rather strenuous
to give this money without strings to the state and local govern-
advocate, particularly in recent days, of tax sharing, sharing
ments. How, in that circumstance, would you prevent this from
federal taxes with the state. Your colleague, Mr. Ford, has sug-
becoming a substantial tax windfall for the states? How would
gested that any increase in taxes now would trigger further in-
you prevent the states, for example, from cutting their own
flation-possibly a recession; excuse me, not inflation, but a
sales taxes?
recession.
REPRESENTATIVE LAIRD: I think you will find that right
At the same time we are confronted with an ever-growing
now the aid programs that are being used have not had the
national deficit. How do you reconcile your advocacy of tax shar-
effect of preventing the states from raising their own taxes. The
2
3
states and local communities need more money. We have basic,
be a bipartisan select committee of perhaps nine members, and
major problems in the field of health, education and welfare, and
they would give Mr. Powell, an opportunity to present his side
they are not being solved by our cities and our states because
of the case before his newly elected members, his prospective
our cities and states do not have the resources. They have been
colleagues. At our caucus the Republicans will examine all of the
taken over by the central government here in Washington, D. C.
alternatives, and we will take a firm but fair position to pro-
They are handed out under priorities set by federal adminis-
tect
trators and not by the state and local officials, who are elected
MR. OTTEN: Under the plan that you outlined he would take
to handle these problems.
his seat in the meantime, or would he be denied his seat until this
MR. MacNEIL: May I ask you one more question in this
committee had had its hearings?
field: You are advocating local administration for these pro-
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: One of the possibilities is that
grams. Your party, the Republican party, yourself, and your
Mr. Powell would stand aside, not be sworn in. He would not be
leadership, have opposed many of these grant-in-aid programs as
permitted to collect his pay or compensation. He would have no
they have come along. Does this now indicate your desire to have
right to vote; he would not be on any committee. This is one
these functions performed by the states, a change in your
possibility. You can have variations of that. This is something
attitude?
I think that would have to be decided by the author of the par-
REPRESENTATIVE LAIRD: No change at all because the
ticular resolution or the amendment to the resolution that might
administrations of all of these programs were set up with a sep-
well be offered by the Democratic majority leader.
arate bureau, some 275 separate bureaus here in Washington,
It seems to me that, having a special committee, bipartisan in
establishing the priorities and telling the local communities and
nature, holding hearings to investigate the allegations that have
the states what to do in all of these programs. The problems of
been made by a number of people, would be the right thing to do
the Watts area in California are different from the problems of
for the Congress for the protection of the legislative branch and
the Harlem area of New York. The problems of Milwaukee are
different from the problems of Columbus, Ohio, and one solution
equitable as far as Mr. Powell is concerned.
dictated from Washington is not the best solution. I think that
MR. OTTEN: One of the local papers this morning said that
we are tired of having second-best solutions dictated from Wash-
many, many Congressmen had done what Mr. Powell has done
ington. We want the best solution and that can come about
and that his mistake was doing it more openly and flagrantly.
through state and local administration.
Would you agree with that analysis?
MR. OTTEN: Mr. Ford, what specific action do you think the
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I know those charges have been
House should take about Adam Clayton Powell? Should it deny
made, and that is why, Mr. Otten, I suggested that the Congress
him his seat, deny him his Committee Chairmanship, or what?
has the responsibility in the House of Representatives, particu-
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: First, let me say that the Repub-
larly in this case, in light of the allegations that have been made,
licans in the House will take a firm and fair attitude in the con-
to take a long look at the overall operations of Committee Chair-
troversy concerning the seating of Adam Clayton Powell. We
men, of Committees themselves, of Members as a whole, and if
as Republicans feel that the reputation and the image of the
we have done wrong in the past, then we ought to be the first
House and the legislative branch could well be at stake in this
to admit it and take corrective action overall, so that we are not
issue. Of course, the problem of whether or not Mr. Powell should
picking on any one individual.
continue as Chairman of the House Committee on Education and
MR. DRUMMOND: Mr. Laird, in this approach toward Rep-
Labor is primarily, or almost exclusively, the responsibility of
resentative Powell that has just been described, do you think that
the Democrats in the House, and they will take their action in
the Republicans are likely to suffer reprisals at the hands of
their caucus tomorrow. But we in the Republican Party feel that
Negro voters?
the whole image of the organization of the House, perhaps the
REPRESENTATIVE LAIRD: I do not believe that this is a
ethics of the House, the procedures of the House, may well be
civil rights question that is before the Congress at this time. It
at stake in this issue which will come before the House on Tues-
isn't a question of whether Mr. Powell is a Negro or whether
day, January 10. I can assure you that the Republicans will not
he is not a Negro. That question should not be involved. It is a
fail in their responsibility. One of the things that probably would
question of the ethics and the morality within the House of Rep-
be firm but fair would be to have a select or special committee
resentatives, and unless we are willing to face up to this issue
established to determine what has taken place, what Mr. Powell
now, we will be in a very serious situation in the future, because
has or has not done that would qualify him or disqualify him
there are many people in this United States that will look at all
from taking his seat in the House of Representatives. This would
members of Congress as doing something wrong. There may be
4
5
a very small percentage of the members, less than three percent,
way in this 90th Congress, and we will be preparing ourselves
that violate the rules of the House and the precedents of the
to go before the American people in 1968 with a constructive
House-and I believe smaller than that-but there is no reason
program of progress.
to allow one or two individuals to cloud the issue of the whole
MR. KIKER: Mr. Laird, nobody quite knows yet what the
House of Representatives, because this will destroy the repre-
President is going to say in his State of the Union address. We
sentatives, because this will destroy the representative govern-
have heard predictions that he is going to ask for both guns and
ment in the end and I think would be a very bad mistake for
butter, for guns and no butter, and for guns and just a little bit
America and for our republic. That is why this is a question that
of butter.
must be faced up to by this first session of the 90th Congress and
What do you think he will ask for and what do you think the
faced up to squarely.
Republicans will answer?
MR. DRUMMOND: I would like to change the subject a little
REPRESENTATIVE LAIRD: I think that he will have to ask
bit and ask you whether you feel that the ability of the Repub-
for a considerable appropriation for the Department of Defense,
lican Party to elect a President in '68 will be significantly or
and this will be the overriding issue in his overall State of the
perhaps decisively determined by what the Republicans do in
Union Message and in the programs of this Congress.
Congress during the next two years?
This last year the Administration underestimated, was not
MR. LAIRD: I do. I feel that the image and the work of the
candid with the American people about the defense expenditures
minority party of the House of Representatives, the Republi-
of this country. Those of us in the minority, in our minority
cans, if we can establish a positive record in this first and second
reports predicted the expenditures would be $68 billion in fiscal
session of the 90th Congress, we will go a long way towards elect-
year 1967. Yet the budget was submitted at about a $58 billion
ing a Republican President in 1968. This is most important, and
figure. It will even have to be a higher figure in this year's
that is the reason we have had so much activity lately. Jerry
budget. So the President is going to have to keep in mind that
Ford-under his leadership we have had meetings with out-
we will have revenues perhaps in 1968 of perhaps $118 billion,
standing economists, military policy leaders, foreign policy lead-
and the expenditures which he will outline will be close to $138
ers. We have had our meetings with the new members this last
billion, a deficit of some $22 billion, without the use of any gim-
week, so that we can be prepared to do that kind of job in this
micks. This is going to have the effect of making the Congress
90th Congress. The action this year in politics will be in the
go slow on many programs, and it is going to have the effect of
House of Representatives. This is the place the action will be.
requiring the minority party to do what we can to reduce un-
MR. DRUMMOND: Let me raise this related question: In the
necessary domestic expenditures in this period of war.
early years of F.D.R. the Republicans did create an image, or at
MR. KIKER: You have often said in the past that the Ad-
least acquired it, whether justly or not, of being obstructionists
ministration hid the true cost of the war in Vietnam. Now, are
to nearly all of the economic and social reforms of the New Deal.
you predicting that the Administration will try to do this again
And in 1948, Mr. Truman, whether completely validly or not,
this year?
was able to campaign on the theme of a "do-nothing" 80th
REPRESENTATIVE LAIRD: If the Administration comes up
Congress.
with an expenditure for the Department of Defense of $70 bil-
How are you going to avoid, with such a newly-divided House,
lion, it will be hiding the costs of the Department of Defense
creating a do-nothing 90th Congress?
because, in order for the Department of Defense to face up to
REPRESENTATIVE LAIRD: We are still outnumbered by
the costs of the Vietnamese War and our other costs in Southeast
a ratio of three to two in this country.
Asia, and also to be in a position where it meets the challenge
MR. DRUMMOND: But not on crucial votes.
of the ever-increasing offensive and defensive strategic capability
REPRESENTATIVE LAIRD: I believe we have a problem of
that the Soviet Union is moving forward on, an expenditure rate
communications. If we improve our communications to show that
of at least 75 to 77 billion dollars is necessary in fiscal year 1968.
we have suggestions as to how better to do things for Americans,
The Administration can come into the Congress and say, "Well,
we can do the job. I disagree with the majority leader of the
we only need $70 billion in this area," knowing full well that they
United States Senate that we should stop, look and listen in the
can come back early in the next session of Congress for this
90th Congress. I think this is not the time to stop. Perhaps we
money. But they will be less than candid with the American
should look and listen, but we should not stop in this 90th Con-
people and will be misleading the people if they do this once
gress, and we are going to come forward with constructive alter-
again.
native proposals in each of the various areas of public policy so
During the last two budgets they have done it. I believe that
that you will see that the Republicans are moving in a positive
this has been one of the greatest mistakes and has had a greater
6
7
-done greater harm than anything else to the economy of this
I personally cannot support the commitment of additional man-
country.
power to that area of the world. I believe that this has to be
MR. MacNEIL: Mr. Ford, the last election was interpreted
cleared up first. With this outstanding offer on the part of the
by many as a mandate for the House Republicans. In the previous
United States, I think that we are making a mistake with escalat-
Congress you people described that Congress as one of the worst.
ing the war in this area.
I'd like to know whether you plan to repeal or basically alter any
This is a matter that only the President of the United States
of that "worst" legislation, for example, the Medicare Bill?
can clear up. I hope that he does in the very near future.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: In the last Congress the Repub-
MR. DRUMMOND: Mr. Ford, as one who served as a member
licans, as you well know, recognized that there were problems
of the Warren Commission, what is your reaction to the disclos-
domestically that had to be solved. We felt there were better
ures and other material which has emerged from the Manchester
ways for the Republicans to do this job than the way that the
book on the assassination?
Administration proposed. For example, we had an alternative, a
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: The Warren Commission took
constructive one in my judgment, for the handling of the prob-
the position that President Johnson, acted properly at the time
lems of the aged-hopsital care, medical care. We had other alter-
of that tragedy. He had a responsibility to assume the office of
natives. We had a better voting rights bill, for example, than, I
the Presidency. This was important not only to the United
think, that which came from the White House. I still think it
States, but the free world. I think it is very regrettable that the
should be on the books. It would be better legislation than the
"dirty linen" in the Democratic party, or among some of its lead-
one we are operating under at the present time.
ers, is being exposed at this particular crucial time in America's
MR. MacNEIL: Will you be pushing for any substantial
history.
changes in existing law adopted by the 89th Congress-schools,
MR. BOGGS: Thank you for being with us today on MEET
for example?
THE PRESS.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Yes, I think what we will try
to do is to take a look at what is on the statute books, and even
though we are in the minority still, we will try to redirect some
of these programs. We will try to tighten them up. We think that
they can do a better job with less money if they are redirected
and tightened up.
MR. MacNEIL: Isn't the House now a conservative body?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I think the Republicans, the 187
of us, compared to 248 Democrats-the Republicans are a mod-
erate, highly unanimous group of Representatives, and we are
not going to clobber things. We are not going to stop the progress
of America; we are going to try to redirect it and do it in a more
effective and, I think, less expensive way.
MR. BOGGS: Gentlemen, we have two minutes remaining.
MR. OTTEN: Making allowance for what you said earlier
about the Administration outlining its plans on Vietnam, Mr.
Laird, how do you feel right now? Do you feel that there is a
need for a larger U.S. effort of bombing more targets and more
ground troops?
REPRESENTATIVE LAIRD: I personally do not believe you
can justify-under the present terms with the outstanding offer
in the United Nations and in the Manila communique that we
will withdraw our forces in the south as soon as the North Viet-
namese withdraw their forces to the north-we, in effect, if that
offer is picked up, will be turning over South Vietnam to the
Communists.
We will be right back where we were 18 months ago, and if
the Administration continues to have those offers outstanding,
8
9
The Proceedings of
MEET THE PRESS
as broadcast nationwide by the National Broadcasting Com-
pany, Inc., are printed and made available to the public to
further interest in impartial discussions of questions affect-
ing the public welfare. Transcripts may be obtained by send-
ing a stamped, self-addressed envelope and ten cents for each
copy to:
Merkle Press Inc. Box 2111, Washington, D. C. 20013
(Division Publishers Co., Inc.)
MEET THE PRESS is telecast every
Sunday over the NBC Television Net-
work. This program originated from
the NBC Studios in Washington, D. C.
Television Broadcast 1:00 P.M. EST
Radio Broadcast 6:30 P.M. EST
17 17
SCRIPT TAPED FOR REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE, JUNE 29, 1967
NO
I CAN
SEE
LOGIC IN FURTHER DELAYING THE
CRUCIAL DECISION TO GET GOING ON AN ANTI-BALLISTIC MISSILE
DEFENSE WHILE THE UNITED STATES ATTEMPTS TO GET AGREEMENT
WITH THE SOVIET UNION. PREMIER KOSYGIN THREW COLD WATER ON
ANY ABM MORATORIUM AT HIS U.N. NEWS CONFERENCE JUNE 25.
PRESIDENT JOHNSON HAS NOT REVEALED ANY PROGRESS ON THIS
SUBJECT DURING THEIR PRIVATE TALKS AT HOLLY BUSH.
WHAT IS PERFECTLY CLEAR IS THAT U.S. RELUCTANCE TO MOVE
FORWARD ON ABM DEFENSE HAS IN NO WAY SLOWED THE SOVIET PROGRAM,
DEFENSIVELY OR OFFENSIVELY. NOR HAS IT IMPAIRED THE THERMO-
NUCLEAR PROGRESS OF RED CHINA, WHICH NOW HAS ITS OWN H-BOMB.
TIME, UNLIKE MONEY, CANNOT BE RECOVERED. WASTING TIME
IS A FAR MORE SERIOUS MATTER THAN WASTING FUNDS. ARGUMENTS
ABOUT THE COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF ABM DEFENSE WHICH MR.
MCNAMARA HAS MADE FOR YEARS AND YEARS, BACKED BY THE
BERALD FORD LIDHARY
-2-
PRESIDENT, MUST NOW GIVE WAY TO THE UNANIMOUS OPINION OF THE
JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF AND THE COGNIZANT COMMITTEES OF CONGRESS.
THE UNITED STATES CANNOT RISK RUNNING SECOND IN ANY ASPECT
OF THIS GRIM GAME.
IF ANY PRACTICAL STEP COULD SAVE 100 MILLION AMERICAN
ONE
ONE THOUSAND
LIVES -- OR
MILLION OR
-- HOW MUCH IS TOO MUCH TO SPEND
ON IT? YET, WHAT WE LACK NOW IS NOT THE MONEY BUT THE DECISION
TO "GET GOING!" FUNDS HAVE BEEN PROVIDED BY CONGRESS.
I
CALL UPON PRESIDENT JOHNSON TO ACT WITHOUT ANY MORE DELAY.
-END-
FORD i LIBRARY GENALD
PLEASE CREDIT ANY QUOTES OR EXCERPTS FROM THIS ABC RADIO AND
TELEVISION PROGRAM TO "ABC's ISSUES AND ANSWERS."
ISSUES AND ANSWERS
SUNDAY, AUGUST 27, 1967
GUEST:
REPRESENTATIVE GERALD R. FORD (R.Mich)
INTERVIEWED BY:
Joseph C. Harsch, ABC Commentator
and
Bob Clark, ABC Capitol Hill Correspondent
00000
FORD is LIBRARY
MR. CLARK: Mr. Ford, in arguing against extensive
bombing escalation this week, Secretary McNamara seemed to be
talking directly to you, making almost a point-by-point re-
buttal of the speech you made in the House a couple of weeks
ago, calling for expansion of the bombing.
Has the Secretary convinced you, as he tried to convince
Congress, that more bombing will not bring North Vietnam to the
peace table?
MR. FORD: I don't think Secretary McNamara has convinced
me or many members who are knowledgeable in the United States
Senate, both Democratic or Republican, that his policies are
2
1
right. As a matter of fact, Secretary McNamara, in my
2
judgment, has completely distorted the arguments that I and
3
others in the Congress and many military leaders have made.
4
I think Mr. McNamara is fabricating an argument as a straw
5
man. As a matter of fact, Secretary McNamara has distorted
6
our viewpoint by saying that we want to substitute more meaning-
7
ful bombing in the North for a greater number of men in the
8
South. As a matter of fact, we have never said that. We have
9
said simply that if you are going to increase the military
10
commitment in the South, in all honesty we should hit more
11
meaningful targets in the North. And they have not done that
12
up until very recently, and I can't tell at the moment whether
13
they are really now on a course of action which will mean more
14
meaningful targeting in the North.
15
MR. CLARK: You said in your speech just about two weeks
16
ago that only three out of ten significant military targets
17
had been struck by American air power. This would be far
18
out of line with the figures that Mr. McNamara gave to the
19
Senate Preparedness Committee.
20
MR. FORD: Well, Mr. McNamara throws in a tremendous number
21
of targets that are not really significant military targets.
22
He did mention the fact that there were 425 significant mili-
23
tary targets, and I agree with that. But up until mid-July or
24
thereabouts, less than half of those targets were authorized
25
for being hit and only 30 per cent had been hit.
FORDS is LIBRARY OERALD
3
1
Now, perhaps there has been some change for the better and
2
I strongly hope this is the case because if we are to commit
3
more U. S. military personnel in the South on the ground,
4
fighting against the Viet Cong, and the North Vietnamese, we
5
ought to increase our bombing against significant military
6
targets.
7
Now, I want to emphasize this: We are not advocating
8
the dropping of one more ton cf bombs. We simply say that if
9
you are going to send our pilots and our planes in North
10
Vietnam to hit targets, the bombs should be dropped against
11
significant military targets, not against lines of communica-
12
tions, individual trucks, or in some cases, as some pilots
13
have alleged, dropping the bombs in the sea.
14
MR. HARSCH: Well, what is your definition of a signifi-
15
cant military target? Give us an example of what you are talk-
16
ing about.
17
MR. FORD: Well, the targeting, of course, as it should be
18
is determined by the Joint Chiefs of Staff and their experts.
19
Now, for example, command and control posts of the enemy.
20
None of those have been authorized as targets. As a matter
21
of fact, the hydroelectric power facilities in the North have
22
never been authorized as a significant military target, even
23
though they are on the targeting list.
24
Now, the McNamara policy has resulted in our air power
25
hitting the so-called thermal power plants, but the
FORD is LIBRARY GERALD
4
1
hydroelectric power plants which, at least in this country,
2
are not in civilian centers, have been off the authorized
3
limits.
4
The targeting list that I think Secretary McNamara refers
5
to, and the one that I know about, excludes a number of
6
other targets, such as some of the more highly sophisticated
7
and, most important, airfields.
8
MR. HARSCH: Would you advocate the bombing of the harbor
9
of Haiphong?
10
MR. FORD: I don't think the harbor of Haiphong has to be
11
bombed. I think there are other military means by which the
12
flow of military equipment can be stopped in the harbor of
13
Haiphong without bombing.
14
MR. HARSCH: Congressman, the most important thing probably
15
that Mr. McNamara said was that the need for maintaining North
16
Vietnam and Viet Cong military operations in the South, in the
17
battlefields against us, is less than one hundred tons a day
18
of non-food supplies. Most of the food they get in the area
19
anyway.
20
His principal argument seems to be, as I understand it,
21
that nothing we could do in the way of bombing can possibly
22
put down the flow to that limit, that it is not really having
23
any effect on the battlefield.
24
What is your answer to that contention? Because, if
he FORD is
25
right, then increasing the bombing as you advocate is
5
1
meaningless, isn't it?
2
MR. FORD: Yes. If Mr. McNamara's argument is right,
3
then I think our whole program in Vietnam is wrong. We haven
4
made any progress following the McNamara premise. In this
5
instance I tend to agree with Senator Symington that, if the
6
McNamara premise is going to be continued, then we might as
7
well get out as quickly as we can, as best we can.
8
But, let me answer the point that you make, Mr. Harsch:
In the last two and a half years that we have been bombing in
10
the North, there has been a growing flow of military hardware
11
through North Vietnam by rail from the Soviet Union and perhaps
12
from the Red Chinese, and in addition there has been a
13
continuous flow of military supplies of various kinds into the
14
port of Haiphong.
15
Now, these rail lines in the North and the harbor of
16
Haiphong and elsewhere, these really have been off limits.
17
Now, if we had bombed in the North against these signifi-
18
cant military targets in the past two and a half years, the
19
military capability of the Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese
20
would be considerably less.
21
The record shows that in the last two and a half years
22
the sophisticated, powerful weapons that the North Vietnamese
23
and the Viet Cong have, have come down through these supply
24
lines, from Russia, and perhaps from Red China.
25
Now, if we had been hitting these meaningful militar
BENALE FORD LIBRARY
6
1
targets in the last two and a half years, there would be less
2
casualties among Americans in South Vietnam.
3
MR. HARSCH: You are disagreeing then, aren't you, with
4
the basic McNamara thesis?
5
MR. FORD: I certainly do. I happen to agree with a
6
number of military people who I think are experienced and
7
knowledgeable, and I think the American people disagree very
8
strongly with Secretary McNamara's policies. I think the
9
American people believe we must succeed, and to do that we have
10
got to have a coordinated military plan that includes military
11
forces in South Vietnam, and a meaningful targeting program in
12
North Vietnam.
13
MR. CLARK: Mr. Ford, let us get your reaction to this
14
quote by Secretary McNamara if we may, and this was also before
15
the Senate Preparedness Committee. He said, "The enemy opera-
16
tions cannot be stopped by air bombardment short of the virtual
17
annihilation of North Vietnam and its people."
18
Now, you are not calling for the annihilation of North
19
Vietnam, are you?
20
MR. FORD: I certainly am not and I am not advocating
21
under any circumstances the use of nuclear weapons. I say take
22
the targeting program that has been outlined, the 425 targets
23
that are significant in a military sense, and utilize our air
24
power against those targets, and they do not include hitti
25
the civilian population.
FORDO & LIBRARY BERALD
7
mml 1
MR. CLARK: Of course you and Mr. McNamara just don't
2
seem to be using the same figures at all, and he also
3
told the Preparedness Committee that air strikes have now been
4
authorized against 302 of the 359what you would call
5
significant targets, targets authorized by the Joint
6
Chiefs. This would be 85 percent INVOICE strikes have been
7
authorized against 85 percent. Now this would seem to
8
conflict rather strongly with your figure that only three
9
out of 10 significant targets are being bombed.
10
MR. FORD: Well, in my speech which was made several
11
weeks ago, based on information that was perhaps ten days or
12
two weeks old, showed that about 50 percent of the 425 targets
13
had been authorized, and only 30 percent of the total
14
actually, had been hit.
15
Now in the interim we have had about a month taking
16
place. I hope and trust that the new figures Secretary
17
McNamara is using are figures that we can count on. I don't
18
know, as of today. There must have been a change if the
19
figures he is using today are accurate, but less than
20
a month ago they were not.
********
21
FORD is QERALD LIBRARY
22
(Announcement)
23
MR. HARSCH: Congressman Ford, one of the most interesting
24
- we have been over this - that Mr. McNamara said, was that
25
they only need 100 tons a day to keep up the war against us in
8
2
1
the South. You disagree, you say, with his premise in most
2
respect, but would you agree with this, that if that
3
appraisal is correct, then it would follow that the increased
4
bombing of the North is never going to seriously deprive
5
the enemy forces in the South, on the battlefield, of
6
the capacity to injure us as they are, and therefore that the
7
principal effect of continuing the bombing or raising it
8
would merely mean the loss of more American planes and pilots?
9
MR. FORD: Mr. Harsch, I would accept the 100 tons a day,
10
the figure Mr. McNamara uses, but that is on the premise
11
that the Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese are not going
12
to get additional sophisticated powerful weapons as they
13
have in the last two and a half years, from the Soviet
14
Union and Red China.
15
Now, I can't believe that the Soviet Union
16
and Red China are going to stop helping in assisting the
North Vietnamese. When you import these highly sophisticated,
17
18
very important powerful weapons, such as strategic - I mean
19
surface-to-air missiles, the heavy mortars, the heavy
20
artillery - I am sure if those were continued to be brought
from the North and through the ports that the tonnage would
21
22
be more than 100 tons a day.
MR. HARSCH: Well, do you expect by increasing the
23
bombing to cut down significantly the amount of that
24
sophisticated weaponry that goes into action?
FORD is LIBRARY GERALD
25
9
3
1
MR. FORD: I certainly do, and I suspect, but I don't
2
know, that some of the more recent, within the last
3
week or so, air attacks in the North against rail lines may --
4
and I underline "may" - be aimed at stopping the flow of
5
these heavy weapons into North Vietnam for utilization
6
against our troops in South Vietnam.
7
MR. HARSCH: Do you think that it is still possible to
8
bomb Hanoi to a conference table?
9
MR. FORD: I believe that a well-coordinated military
10
effort which includes the utilization of our manpower on the
11
ground in the South, and air and sea power, including the
12
bombing of more meaningful targets, will be very helpful
13
and very significant in getting Hanoi to the bargaining table.
14
MR. CLARK: You said earlier this month, Mr. Ford,
that not one more American soldier should be sent to fight
15
in Vietnam until what you called "secret restraints" on
16
bombing are lifted. Now since then we have bombed within ten
17
miles or so of the Chinese border. Are you now ready to
18
support sending those additional 45,000 troops to Vietnam?
19
MR. FORD: If the 425 significant military targets,
20
the figure that Mr. McNamara uses, are hit by our air power,
21
then I believe we are carrying out a coordinated military
22
plan, and if that is the case -- and I hope it is -- then
23
GERALD LIBRARY FORD
I can justify increasing our military effort in the South.
24
MR. CLARK: Well, are you saying we would have to bomb
25
10
4
1
all 425 of these targets before you would support an
2
increase in ground forces?
3
MR. FORD: I think you have to hit practically all of
4
them, and some of these targets -
5
MR. CLARK: Of course he has it up to 85 percent now by
6
his figures, authorized for bombing.
7
MR. FORD: Authorized. We haven't hit 85 percent. He has
8
simply authorized them. Now targets change. They are not
9
static. There may be some more added. After all, this is
10
an evolutionary process that is done day by day, and if
11
the military experts say there should be more than
12
425 significant military targets, then I think we ought to move
13
in that direction, because that shows them we have a
14
coordinated military effort. Under Mr. McNamara's
15
program, all he has done is widen the war in the South by
16
sending, in the last two and a half years, from 16,000
17
U.S. military personnel in Vietnam, to 525,000. He has
18
escalated or widened the war in the South without significantly
19
changing our military effort against the North.
20
MR. HARSCH: Mr. Ford, your argument with Mr. McNamara
21
is really over the meaning of a coordinated military program.
22.
You say you want a coordinated program. He says he has a
23
coordinated program, that his is refined to the point where
you are only bombing where you get a useful reward, that if
24
you increase the bombing on some of these other targets
25
GERALD ROGORD
11
1
are talking about you are merely wasting lives.
2
Well, now, how do we judge which is the better coordinator?
3
He says his is. You say you prefer the other.
4
MR. FORD: Well, I am relying on a plan that was submitted
5
to Mr. McNamara by top military leaders who are experienced
6
and are knowledgeable and I think their program is preferable
to his. Now Mr. McNamara is a great advocate of cost
7
effectiveness. Now, if you bomb against insignificant
8
military targets -- trails, against individual trucks -- I
9
don't think the return on the use of the aircraft and the pilot
10
and the bomb is very good. But if you use the same planes
11
and the same pilots against significant military targets,
12
your cost effectiveness goes up. I don't understand why
13
Mr. McNamara doesn't use his own formula in trying to
14
designate which targets we ought to hit.
15
MR. HARSCH: But his purpose is to keep weapons from the
16
h ands of the people who are shooting at our boys in the South.
17
MR. FORD: Yes, but he is not using our equipment and
18
our pilots in the most effective way. That is the difference.
19
MR. CLARK: There are some signs, Mr. Ford, that the
20
Administration is preparing to order another bombing pause in
21
North Vietnam after the elections, and General Thieu, who
22
is the favored candidate to be the new President of Vietnam,
23
says he would favor this. How would you feel about another
24
bombing pause?
25
BERALA FORD LIBRARY
12
1
MR. FORD: I wouldn't be in favor of a unilateral total
2
bombing pause after the election. I feel if you are going
3
to initiate a bombing pause program, the preferable way
4
to do it is the plan suggested several weeks ago by
5
Congressman Brad Morse, a Republican, and others, which would
6
call for a step-by-step bombing pause. In other words,
7
the United States would stop bombing in the North above, I
8
trink, the 21st Parallel, and do that for 30 days and if
9
the Borth Vietnamese and the Viet Cong reciprocated in some
10
way, then we would move down one more parallel. This
11
would, I think, give them and us an opportunity to show our
12
good faith.
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
FORD : LIBRARY GERALD
13
1
MR. CLARK: Do you think the team of American observers
2
appointed by the President to go to Vietnam is going to help
3
assure fair elections?
4
MR. FORD: May I say I disagree with both Senator Robert
5
Kennedy and the President. I think it is unfortunate that
6
Senator Kennedy has prejudged the elections already. At least
7
they ought to have a chance to try democracy --
8
MR. CLARK: Senator Kennedy, of course, has said they are
9
going to be a fraud.
10
MR. FORD: Well, I think he is wrong in pre-judging an
11
election before it is held. And, secondly, I disagree with the
12
President because when we send over 20 or so observers for a
13
limited period of time I don't see how they can honestly find
14
out what takes place in a country that is as large as my
15
state of Michigan. And furthermore, by sending this group over
16
I believe the President, in effect, is Americanizing an elec-
17
tion, and this is the last thing we want to do. This is their
18
election, not our election.
19
Now, I would add a postscript to that. I would like to
20
say that they are having elections in South Vietnam. To my
21
knowledge they have never had an election in North Vietnam.
22
They have no democracy in North Vietnam. Here is an effort at
23
democracy.
24
And may I say in addition, some places in this country
25
we always haven't had clean elections.
GERATO FORD LIBRAN
2
14
1
MR. HARSCH: Congressman, if you had your way, would there
2
have been no Republicans on that team that the President sent
3
out there?
4
MR. FORD: No. When the President asks someone to do a
5
job there is an obligation; whether it is a President from
6
your party or a President from another party. I am simply
7
saying that the whole concept, I think, was wrong. It could
8
very easily create the wrong impression, both in Vietnam and
9
world-wide.
10
MR. CLARK: The President's call for a ten per cent sur-
11
tax is tied directly to the cost of those additional 45,000
12
troops that he plans to send to South Vietnam. Have you made
13
up your mind yet whether or not you are going to support this
14
tax increase?
15
MR. FORD: Well, President Johnson, by tying the 45,000
16
additional military personnel to a tax increase, I think, is
17
going about it in the wrong way because he says that this tax
18
increase that he is recommending, if it is approved, will
19
bring in about $7 billion. Well, it doesn't cost $7 billion to
20
send 45,000 more U. S. military personnel to Vietnam.
21
The President really ties in his tax increase to the $29
22
billion deficit that will occur in this fiscal year.
23
Now, if the deficit was the only problem and a tax increase
24
was the only answer, of course, I would be for it. But the
25
facts are, the deficit is not the only problem we have.
FORDS & LIBRARY SERALD
3
15
1
increase could hit the economy at the wrong time, which is
2
still somewhat soft and somewhat uncertain. A tax increase
3
might actually, under these circumstances, bring in less
4
revenue and the tax increase is not the only answer. A
5
reduction in expenditures is a better one.
6
MR. CLARK: Those 187 Republicans you command in the House
7
may well be the balance of power in decidingwhether or not
8
there is going to be a tax increase this year.
9
Are you implying that you are going to advise them against:
10
voting for a tax increase?
11
MR. FORD: I don't think president Johnson or his
12
advisors have made a case for a tax increase at the present
13
time.
14
MR. CLARK: As of today you would not vote for a tax
15
increase?
16
MR. FORD: I would not vote for a tax increase based on the
17
justification or attempted justification made by the President
18
and his advisors.
19
MR. HARSCH: Congressman Ford, Governor Romney of your
20
home state of Michigan has said that in his opinion the country
21
is going to have to get a Republican President in order to find
22
a way out of the war.
23
Do you agree with him that it might be easier for a
24
Republican President to end the war than for a Democratic
25
President?
FORD & GERALD LIBRAR
16
1
MR. FORD: Yes, for a number of reasons, Mr. Harsch.
2
President Johnson ---- and I must assume he has made every
3
possible effort ------- seems to run into a blank wall at every
4
attempt to achieve any negotiations whatsoever. I don't under--
5
stand why the enemy refuses to make an effort to sit down at
6
the negotating table, but according to the President, himself,
7
he can't find any Communist or North Vietnamese to do so.
8
It seems to me that a Republican president who comes in,
9
not with the handicaps of the past, would be freer to try and
10
find an avenue, to find a way to the bargaining table.
11
MR. HARSCH: Would you be able to support comfortably and
12
happily what would be called a Republican peace candidate as
13
opposed to a war candidate?
14
MR. FORD: Mr. Harsch, I believe all Republicans, whether
15
they exactly agree with me or otherwise, will be a candidate
16
aimed at trying to find peace in Vietnam. Now, we may differ
17
a little bit on our techniques, but our candidate and our plat-
18
form will be set forth on the basis that we by one means or
19
another, with a coordinated plan, will be better able to
20
achieve peace than the present administration.
FORD IBRARY &
21
MR. CLARK: Let me quote this recent comment by Governor
22
Romney to you in this general direction and see whether you
23
agree with it. He says there has been an increasing trend in
24
public reaction toward Vietnam in the last couple of months in
25
the direction that the idea of the war was a mistake and some
17
1
way ought to be found to end it without focusing on military
2
escalation.
3
Do you agree with this?
4
MR. FORD: I am sure that the American people are becom-
5
ing frustrated and most unhappy about the conduct of the war in
6
Vietnam.
7
I feel this is so because the policies of Secretary
8
McNamara and the President have not produced results.
9
We must, as a country, because of our commitments, be-
10
cause of our own national security, succeed in Vietnam. I
11
feel that we have got to do a better job in the pacification
12
program. It has fallen flat on its face in the last two and a
13
half years. Our overall military program, as we have discussed
14
earlier, has not been as well coordinated and as effective as
15
it should be, and there has been political instability in
16
Vietnam.
17
In my judgment, if we attack the problem in Vietnam on the
18
three fronts more effectively than the present Administration,
19
the country, our nation, can succeed in this conflict.
20
MR. HARSCH: What Republican candidate next year would have
21
the best chance of defeating Lyndon Johnson?
22
MR. FORD: Well, Mr. Harsch, I think we have a whole
& FORD LIBRARY
10
23
stable of able candidates who will be good opponents to President
24
Johnson and I am convinced any one of a group can defeat him
and, in addition, may I say I hope the war is over, because we
25
18
1
can still win in '68.
2
MR. CLARK: Mr. Ford, thank you for being our guest on
3
ISSUES AND ANSWERS.
4
5
-
6
7
B
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
GERALD
FORD LIBRAR is r
The National Broadcasting Company Presents
GH
MEET THE PRESS
America's Press Conference of the Air
Produced by LAWRENCE E. SPIVAK
Guest: REPRESENTATIVE GERALD R. FORD
Permanent Chairman, Republican Convention
VOLUME 12
SUNDAY, JULY 28, 1968
NUMBER 30
Merkle Press Inc.
Printers and Periodical Publishers
Division of Publishers Co. Inc.
Box 2111, Washington, D. C. 20013
BERRED FORD NEBRANKI
10 cents per copy
Panel:
NEIL MACNEIL, Time Magazine
DAVID KRASLOW, Los Angeles Times
ROSCOE DRUMMOND, Publishers-Hall Syndicate
PAUL DUKE, NBC News
MEET THE PRESS
MR. SPIVAK: Our guest today on MEET THE PRESS is the
Moderator: LAWRENCE E. SPIVAK
Permanent Chairman of the Republican National Convention,
Congressman Gerald R. Ford of Michigan, Republican leader of
the House of Representatives.
We will have the first questions now from Paul Duke of NBC
News.
MR. DUKE: Congressman Ford, Richard Nixon's managers
are predicting victory on the first ballot at Miami Beach, but the
other day you said that you thought the candidates might not
be chosen until the second or third ballot. Are you saying that
Mr. Nixon does not have the nomination locked up?
MR. FORD: Although Dick Nixon certainly is the frontrunner,
I don't think Dick Nixon at this point has the nomination locked
up. I think there are some developments in the last several weeks
that indicate that we will have a second or third ballot, and I
wouldn't rule out, really, the possibility of a fifth or sixth ballot.
MR. DUKE: What are those developments?
MR. FORD: I think in the first place the Governors who are
favorite sons seem to be solidifying their situation so that they
will control, perhaps even after the first ballot, their delegations.
Secondly, it seems to me that Ronald Reagan has made some
Permission is hereby granted to news media and
progress in picking up delegates from various parts of the
magazines to reproduce in whole or in part. Credit
country.
to NBC's MEET THE PRESS will be appreciated.
And, thirdly, I think Governor Rockefeller's campaign-radio,
television and in the newspapers-has had an impact in perhaps
slowing down the acquisition of delegates by Dick Nixon and in
some respects gaining delegates for himself.
1
MR. FORD: I don't think that is a fair accusation-and you
MR. DUKE: Do you feel that Governor Rockefeller now has a
didn't mean it as an accusation, but it has been alleged that we
real chance to get the nomination?
don't have a broad enough base, that we tend to represent a
MR. FORD: In 1968-this is the year of surprises in the presi-
segment of the American society. Actually I feel that the pro-
dential sweepstakes, and I wouldn't rule out anything, and cer-
grams we have tried to put forth in the House of Representatives
tainly-Governor Rockefeller, with the campaign that he has
and in the Senate, with the help of the 26 Republican Governors,
conducted for the last month, has certainly, I think, had an im-
have laid the groundwork for a broad-based Republican program
pact and a favorable impression in many areas that would cer-
in 1968, and therefore that allegation will not be pertinent in
tainly help his chances at the convention.
this—I think-Presidential year.
MR. DUKE: If the Republicans should take control of the
MR. KRASLOW: The party in 1964 lost virtually the entire
House of Representatives this fall, then you would be elected
Negro vote. What progress do you think the Republican Party
Speaker. Wouldn't the chances of the Republicans taking control
has made since then to recapture this vote?
be greater if Governor Rockefeller led the ticket? Wouldn't he
MR. FORD: The Republican Party in the House of Repre-
pull in more candidates at the congressional level?
sentatives, on the Civil Rights legislation that was approved this
MR. FORD: He would in certain areas of the country, prob-
year and that which was approved in 1965 or 1966, did very well
ably, for example in the New England areas, beginning with
and, of course, the Senate under the leadership of Everett Dirk-
Pennsylvania and going north and east. On the other hand, his
sen also did very well. Our voting record on civil rights is good.
candidacy, if he were the Republican nominee, might very well
Therefore, I think we can make a legitimate appeal that we will
be harmful in our efforts to elect more Republicans in some of
be responsible and responsive to the civil rights issues in the
the Southern states.
future.
On the other hand, you could argue that Ronald Reagan would
MR. DRUMMOND: Congressman Ford, I'd like to ask you a
be more helpful in the South and in the West than Governor
question based on the possibility that the choice of the next
Rockefeller. Dick Nixon probably would have the broadest impact
President may have to be made by the House. If that happens,
of not hurting or helping. It would be more of a neutral impact,
would you think it desirable to try to find a way to insure the
although in 1960 when he ran he was helpful in helping us to
election as President of the candidate who has the highest pop-
gain seats in that election.
ular vote?
(Announcement)
MR. FORD: That suggestion has been made in several differ-
MR. KRASLOW: Congressman Ford, the American people
ent forms in recent weeks. I think it, first, points up the absolute
have rejected Republican Presidential candidates for 28 of the
need and necessity for Congress to move forward on constitu-
last 36 years. The only exception was General Eisenhower, a hero
tional reform for the direct election of the President in 1972.
figure, who was not even a party regular before his election. How
Secondly, it raises the problem of whether or not we should
do you explain this?
tinker with the constitutional process by a devious way, and
that's what many people are seeking to do, to get around the
MR. FORD: I think unfortunately the Republicans have had
constitutional responsibility that the elected members of the
a tendency to divide themselves. We have very bitter contests—
House have. Thirdly, it raises the question whether, by trying
or we have in the past, and then when our conventions are over
to get around the constitutional process, we wouldn't be making,
we haven't reconciled our differences.
for example, Mr. Wallace, a martyr, and thereby getting him an
The Democrats on the other hand can have bitter feuds and
opportunity to get more votes rather than fewer.
then seem to get together after a convention and stand behind
their candidate. The Republicans, I hope and trust, learned that
MR. DRUMMOND: Why would it be devious or why would it
after 1964 we must unify after the convention, and if we pick a
be getting around the Constitution for a majority of the Repub-
good candidate-and I am positive we will-I think we will
licans and Democrats to commit themselves in advance as to
remedy this situation in 1968.
how they would vote? Wouldn't they be discharging their re-
sponsibility under a compact to bring about the popular election
MR. KRASLOW: Do you think there is any basic flaw in the
of a President, which you say is desirable?
party, failing to appeal to the broad American consensus?
3
2
MR. FORD: If you will look at the Constitution, it says the
MR. FORD: I certainly hope that Mr. Castro doesn't try to
elected members of the House of Representatives meeting before
interrupt the Republican Convention by having somebody hijack
January 20th shall pick the President if the Electoral College
a plane or a plane with a few of our people on it. I wouldn't put
doesn't have enough votes, or a majority of the votes for a can-
it past him, however. Maybe the mere fact that we are discussing
didate for the presidency. It says the members of the House
it on the program today may give him an idea, if he didn't
"shall" vote. If a member of the House, prior to the election, signs
already have it.
a compact that he will do something regardless-not indicate
that he will exercise his independent judgment after the election
MR. SPIVAK: May I ask you a question, Mr. Ford? You seem
-I think you are circumventing, trying to get around a consti-
to think that the convention is going beyond the first ballot and
tutional responsibility, which I think is a very serious thing to do.
possibly even to the fourth ballot. If that happens, in view of the
Nixon claims that he is going to win on the first ballot-at least
MR. MacNEIL: Mr. Ford, as Chairman of the Republican
his people claim that-isn't he going to be in serious trouble?
Convention, you are in charge of the convention itself, of keeping
it orderly and maintaining law and order. I'd like to know your
MR. FORD: I am sure Dick Nixon would like to win on the first
judgment on what chances there are of violent demonstrations
ballot. Anybody who is in the lead likes to get the ball game over
involving the convention in Miami Beach?
as quickly as possible but, on the other hand, I know that Dick
Nixon has very solid delegate strength that will not, in large
MR. FORD: I am going to do my very utmost to try and main-
tain law and order in the convention, and I am sure that Ray
measure, erode just overnight. It may take some expert general-
ship on the part of Dick's managers down there to make sure
Bliss has taken extraordinary precautions—
that, after the first ballot there isn't this erosion. I know the
MR. MacNEIL: Could you suggest what those are?
people who are managing Dick's campaign on the floor, and I am
sure they have taken these precautions.
MR. FORD: -to make certain that the demonstrators, if there
are any, will not interrupt the orderly proceedings of the con-
MR. DUKE: Mr. Ford, all the same, if the convention does go
vention inside the convention hall.
beyond two or three ballots, as you suggest, is there some possi-
I can't give you the details, except I do know that Ray Bliss,
bility then that the convention might turn to a dark horse;
with the cooperation of the state and local law enforcement of-
someone, say, like John Lindsay of New York?
ficers in the State of Florida and at Miami Beach, have taken
extraordinary precautions to be sure that the delegates operate in
MR. FORD: If you go beyond a fourth, fifth or sixth ballot,
a proper atmosphere without being threatened by outside agi-
then I don't see how anybody could forecast with any definiteness
what might happen. John Lindsay, in the last week or so, has
tators.
gotten some exposure. There has been some effort, I understand,
MR. MacNEIL: May I ask how closely you and the rest of the
made on his behalf, sort of a campaign organization working for
officials at the convention are working with the local police and
him under these circumstances.
whether from those local police you get any intelligence at this
point of planned demonstrations that might end in violence?
MR. DUKE: For the presidential nomination?
MR. FORD: That is what I understand.
MR. FORD: At this point I have not had that personal contact
with the local law enforcement officials, but I am sure that Ray
MR. KRASLOW: Congressman, just yesterday you said in a
Bliss and our sergeant-at-arms have already had these contacts
speech that "the Republican Party must demonstrate that we
and have laid specific plans. When I get down to the convention
have positive solutions to the problems of Vietnam." What sort
about a week from now, I certainly will be in contact with Mr.
of solutions do you have in mind?
Bliss and the proper authorities in Florida.
MR. FORD: Let me point out, first, I am fearful that the Ad-
MR. MacNEIL: May I ask one final question in this area,
ministration is letting the situation in the minds of the Amer-
and that is on the hijacking of airplanes to Cuba. Are there any
ican people drift. The American people are confused by the am-
security measures that have been taken there, in fear of losing
biguity of the Administration's efforts in Paris, by the ambiguity
either a candidate, or, in fact, a delegation?
of our military efforts in Vietnam. The American people, I think,
4
5
would like the President to come up and tell them just what our
aims and objectives are, militarily and in the way of negotiations.
Republican Party who are also stimulating this group to partici-
From the point of view of the Republicans, I think that we in
pate for the first time in a more vigorous way in the political
our platform ought to be more specific than the White House
arena. I think John Lindsay, for example, did just that when he
has been recently. I think we ought to say that we should push
ran for Mayor in the City of New York. I think that some of the
and press at Paris for a peaceful solution, but at the same time
Rockefeller support seems to fall in this category.
we should let the enemy know that we are not going to let them
MR. DRUMMOND: Mr. Ford, does it occur to you at all that
go on indefinitely at the same time having 540,000 Americans
both parties are exhibiting a shortage of fresh political leader-
fighting this war on a day-to-day basis with some limitations
and some restrictions on them.
ship, and if so, would you think that we might all be better off if
both parties offered the voters some new faces?
MR. KRASLOW: A year ago you made a major policy speech
MR. FORD: I think it is a little academic at this stage-
in which you accused the Administration of pulling its punches,
particularly in bombing targets in North Vietnam. Have you
MR. DRUMMOND: Too late, you mean?
changed your mind about that?
MR. FORD: -because in the Democratic Party I think it is a
MR. FORD: I felt very definitely then, Mr. Kraslow, that the
foregone conclusion that Hubert Humphrey is going to be the
Administration at that time was pulling its punches and was
nominee. The kingmakers have decided it, and despite the valiant
putting our forces in jeopardy in South Vietnam. They subse-
and I think very brave efforts of Gene McCarthy, they aren't
quently changed that policy, and I think it brought about some
going to let him be the nominee. And I think on our side we are
very beneficial results and may well have led to the negotiations
going to have an open convention, and although at the moment
which are taking place in Paris at the present time.
Dick Nixon is in the lead, there is no final decision made yet-as
I think there is in the case of the Democratic Party.
MR. KRASLOW: Senator Javits, a senior Republican, has now
called for a total halt in the bombing of North Vietnam as a
MR. MacNEIL: Mr. Ford, I'd like to get back to the Vietnam
means possibly of breaking the stalemate in Paris.
war. Since the Paris peace talks began, most of the hawks, I
How do you personally feel about this?
think including yourself, have had your voices muted on this as
an issue. I am just wondering, with those talks under way, is
MR. FORD: I have reservations about it.
Vietnam really a viable political issue?
I think it would be militarily unwise as long as President Johnson
has 540,000 U.S. military personnel fighting the war in South
MR. FORD: The American people in this campaign will make
Vietnam.
it an issue, even though I suspect that the major candidates will
MR. KRASLOW: You would not then do it?
not discuss it in the traditional sense of a political issue. The
American people I feel will realize that the escalation of the war,
MR. FORD: I would not.
manpowerwise and otherwise, came during the Johnson-Hum-
phrey Administration, and they will turn, in my judgment, to the
MR. DRUMMOND: Congressman Ford, there is a great deal
political party that offers an alternative to the Johnson-Hum-
of talk, publicity and headlines over the phrase "the new politics"
phrey record in this regard.
versus the old politics. I would like to ask whether you feel that
there are significant political forces coming to the surface of the
MR. MacNEIL: Isn't this in a way like being against sin, being
United States or whether this term "new politics" is a phrase
against the war? Can you come up with a viable alternative?
only?
MR. FORD: I think that you can. I think the enemy will be
MR. FORD: I think it is a combination of both. Certainly the
impressed by the kind of candidates that are nominated, and they
McCarthy supporters are the younger generation in the main,
will reflect in the negotiations, some of the views that are ex-
and I think it is a nice phrase to use to describe what they are
pressed by the candidates.
trying to do. It is an effort outside of the traditional political es-
tablishment of both the Democratic and Republican Party.
MR. MacNEIL: Will it be possible to do this through your
On the other hand, I think there are some candidates in the
party platform? Senator Dirksen is Chairman of that Committee,
and he is, of course, a very close and intimate friend of the Presi-
6
7
dent. I gather a good number of you Republicans are suspicious
and the fact that they didn't have them I think led to the seizure.
of just what the Vietnam plank will be. Is it possible to do it
I am glad to report that they have now revised those contingency
through the platform?
plans, so I don't think such an incident would happen again.
Once the ship was seized, because there weren't adequate con-
MR. FORD: I think the platform can contain some construc-
tingency plans, our options are limited. Therefore, at the present
tive proposals in the area-for the solution of the war in Vietnam.
time I think you have got to maximize your diplomatic effort, and
MR. SPIVAK: Mr. Ford, accusations are being made that the
I hope the Administration is doing just that.
Republican Party in several states has discriminated against Ne-
MR. DRUMMOND: Mr. Ford, you, of course, know better
groes in the make-up of convention delegates. What do you think
than I do that the Republicans have only won Congress two
ought to be done about that?
times out of 16 since 1932. What I would like to ask is, in the
MR. FORD: I have read that accusation. I don't think it is ac-,
light of the current Gallup Poll, which shows the voters are 58
curate. I know in the New York delegation there is a good repre-
per cent for a Democratic House, how do you expect to pick up
sentation among Negroes at the Republican Convention in Miami.
enough seats to get control of the House?
MR. SPIVAK: I am talking about Florida and Louisiana, for
MR. FORD: We had much the same poll results in July of
example.
1966, and the Republicans made a net gain of 47 in that election.
With conditions in the country and the conditions overseas de-
MR. FORD: I must confess I haven't checked the list out, so
teriorating, I think we can get more than 218 in this election.
I am not certain, but in most of the states where I am familiar,
there is good Negro representation in the delegations.
MR. MacNEIL: Would you accept the vice-presidential nomi-
MR. SPIVAK: Gentlemen, we have about three minutes.
nation, and has it been offered to you?
MR. DUKE: Mr. Ford, there was trouble in your home city of
MR. FORD: I would not accept it. It has not been offered to
Grand Rapids last night. Last year you voted against money for
me. I think my career, for what it may be, is in the House of
the Model Cities program to clean up some of the ghetto areas,
Representatives, and the Republicans have a wonderful stable
even though your home city of Grand Rapids was an applicant
of fine potential vice-presidential candidates, all of whom I could
for a Model Cities grant. Doesn't this indicate a lack of concern
support.
on your part about big city problems?
MR. SPIVAK: Would you name one quickly? Two?
MR. FORD: Not at all. Last year we were faced with the criti-
cal fiscal crisis that developed in the Congress's having to pass
MR. FORD: I think you have Chuck Percy; you have got my
President Johnson's tax increase, and at that time we were try-
own Governor, George Romney; you have got John Lindsay; you
ing to avoid the need and necessity for a tax increase as proposed
have got Governor Shafer. We have a wonderful group.
by President Johnson. In order to prevent that tax increase, we
MR. SPIVAK: On that note, we must end. I am sorry to in-
had to make certain reductions in many, many programs. I might
terrupt, but our time is up. Thank you, Congressman Ford, for
say now that we have passed the tax increase, I have voted for
the housing bill, which included some expansion of the Model
being with us today on MEET THE PRESS.
Cities program and the Rent Supplement program.
MR. KRASLOW: Congressman, you and some other Republi-
can leaders have been quite critical of the Administration's
handling of the Pueblo affair. What is it that you would have
done that the Administration hasn't done in the past six months
to free these men?
MR. FORD: The Johnson-Humphrey administration, in my
judgment, was derelict in its duty in not having adequate pre-
liminary contingency plans to prevent the seizure of the Pueblo,
8
9
The Proceedings of
MEET THE PRESS
as broadcast nationwide by the National Broadcasting Com-
pany, Inc., are printed and made available to the public to
further interest in impartial discussions of questions affect-
ing the public welfare. Transcripts may be obtained by send-
ing a stamped, self-addressed envelope and ten cents for each
copy to:
Merkle Press Inc. Box 2111, Washington, D. C. 20013
(Division Publishers Co., Inc.)
MEET THE PRESS is telecast every
Sunday over the NBC Television Net-
work. This program originated from
the NBC Studios in Washington, D. C.
Television Broadcast 12:30-1:30 P.M. EDT
Radio Broadcast 6:05-7:00 P.M. EDT
17 17