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
1550978
label
White House - Congressional Leadership Meeting, 5/27/69 (includes minutes)
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
1550978
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
White House - Congressional Leadership Meeting, 5/27/69 (includes minutes)
citationUrl
collections
Robert T. Hartmann Papers
House of Representatives Subject Files
subjects
U.S. Postal Service. 7/1/1971-
Agriculture
Legislation
Legislative liaison
Postal matters
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
1550978
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1969-05-31
month
5
year
1969
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1969-05-01
month
5
year
1969
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
4d0b01f153ce5d0b
ocrText
These documents were scanned from Box 106 of the Robert T. Hartmann Papers at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP MEETING
May 27 - 8:30 a.m.
AGENDA
8:30 - 9:30 a.m.
I. Foreign Aid Legislation
FORD i LIBRARY GERALD
DIARY OF WHITE HOUSE LEADERSHIP
MEETINGS -- 91st CONGRESS
May 27, 1969
The President arrived at 8:35 a. m. and announced
that foreign aid legislation had been removed from
the agenda because Chairman Morgan was offended
when the Department beiefed Republicans and not
Democratic members of the Foreign Affairs Commit-
tee. The subject will be discussed in the bipartisan
leadership meeting this afternoon.
Ford reported action on the amendment to the Agri-
culture Appropriations Bill offered by Conte, fixing a
ceiling on production payments to individual farmers
at $20,000. The amendment carried on a teller vote,
112 to 110. A motion to recommit with a similar
instruction last year carried by a vote of 230 to 170.
A roll call on the Conte amendment would probably
carry by a larger margin this year. The plan is to
avoid a roll call if possible. Young agreed it would be
difficult for the conferees to eliminate the amendment
if it was a record vote in the House. Ford said that
the lesson in this experience is that a farm bill must
be act ed upon this year and that it should contain no
such payments as those to which this ceiling applies.
Hardin said that the Department is "not terribly upset."
Philosophically, there should be a limitation, and the
vote on the amendment will help to convince farmers to
support the new bill the Administration will propose.
The Conte amendment is bad because it would increase
rather than decrease the total cost of the program.
About 6, 000 of the 10, 000 farmers who receive payments
in excess of the proposed limit are cotton farmers. If
the limit is imposed, it would trigger the so-called "snap-
back" program, which applies to cotton farmers onlyl
This program would require the government to buy cotton
and resell it. The cost would be $160 million more than
FORD i LIBRARY QERALD
2
the present expenditures for cotton. Arends agreed
that some bill must be acted upon before Congress
adjourns this year. Hardin said that cotton is in deep
trouble for two reasons: first, because there is a B
surplus of cotton in the world market, and second,
because synthetics are replacing a large part of the
traditional market. Acreage restrictions will be only
a temporary solution. The long range solution includes
greater research to perfect better uses of cotton and
cotton products. Rhodes said that the present cotton
program has been designed to keep small Southern
cotton farmers in Business. The big cotton farmers
in Arizona formerly accepted that rationale and criti-
cized the program but have long since become accustomed
to the subsidies and tend now to resist changes in the
program. Young said that it should be remembered
that whatever drives small farmers off the farm compounds
problems in the cities. RMN inquired if would be fair
to say that the Administration favors the principle of a
payments limitation. Hardin answered with a question,
"Do you want to go that far?" Young counseled caution.
Dirksen is opposed to the ceiling because he considers it
class legislation against the big farmer. "The tail goes
with the hide. " Programs should apply to all or apply to
none. He stressed the increasing problem of the domestic
textile manufacturers and the cotton producers posed by
increased textile imports. Arends reminded that any
ceiling which forces farmers out of the program will affect
only the big farmer, and the bigger the farmer, the more
he will produce when forced from the program; and this
complicates the surplus problem and increases the expense
of the surplus problem. Hardin disclosed his plans to
conduct late afternoon seminars to which he would intite
Members of the Congressional Committees. The purpose
would be to see if a consensus could be reached from which
a new farm program could be drafted. Tentatively, the
Secretary expects that any new program will involve a long
term land retirement device. He expressed the hope that
GERALD FORD VIBRART
3
some bill could be presented to Congress following the
Labor Day recess. Young suggested that the Depart-
ment come to the Hill rather than the other way around.
RMN agreed. Hardin asked for some guidance in
answering the question frequently put to him, viz, how
can you justify reclamation projects which bring new
land into production at the same time you are continuing
a program retiring land from production. Rhodes said
that more and more reclamation is being used to improve
water supply for urban areas rather than for agricultural
irrigation. Allott called attention to an amendment
adopted several years ago which provides no land bene-
fitted under a reclamation project can be planted to crops
which are in surplus supply. RMN said that when Secre-
tary Hardin finishes his term, there may still be a farm
problem, but the problem would not be the Secretary of
Agriculture. Hardin said that the new program which he
will present will mean more income for farmers and still
afford housewives the best bargain in their household
budget. It will envision an increase in the share of the
budget spent for groceries from 17c to 19c. Taft reminded
the Secretary to stay in touch with the Task Force on Agri-
culture, shaired by Langen. He also said that he would
probably vote for the Conte amendment principally because
he cannot convince the prople the new Administration will
have a new farm program substantially different from the
subsidy-oriented program of prior Democratic Admini-
strations. Hardin replied that the idea would be to retire
the land that is causing the surplus problem and than give
farmers a freer hand to compete on the remaining acreage.
Anderson suggested that the Secretary attend meetings of farm
organizations on the farm rather than on the campus.
RMN invited Dirksen to raise any question of current concern
in the Senate. Dirksen referred to a comment made "by a
distinguished young Republican Senator" criticizing the attack
on "Hamburger Hill" as "senseless and irresponsible." He
then read a dissertation by a Roman scholar critical of the
AFORC LIBRARY
4
layman who undertakes to advise the professional military
officer how to conduct every phase of every military opera-
tion.
RMN said that the Post Office Department reorganization
message would come to the House today and that Bount
would be introduced to the press following this meeting to
explain the essentials.
Scott suggested Dirksen might want to explain the action
that took place in the SenateSShbcommittee on Constitutional
Amendments concerning Electoral College reform. Dirksen
said that Cook had offered a motion to report S.J. Res 1
(direct vote); Ervin offered a substitute (proportional plan),
which failed 8 to 3; Dirksen offered a substitute (district
plan), which carried 6 to 5. As amended, the bill was
reported without recommendation from the Subcommittee
to the Full Committee 9 to 0.
RMN expressed his appreciation for the statements of
support which members of the leadership had made concern-
ing the Chief Justice appointment. He said that he would not
submit a name to fill the other vacancy untilsafter the Senate
had acted on the Chief Justice nomination. Dirksen said that
hearings were shheduled to begin June 3. Again, RMN
invited those present who were interested in nominating
candidates for the Supreme Court to communicate with the
Attorney General in order that the President may be able
to "operate at arm's length and make the best possible
decision. He said that he did not feel himself limited to
the Federal courts and mentioned several other sources,
including the state courts, the academic community and
the Bar at large. However, he did express reservation about
an appointment from the Bar, which he feels might raise
some possibility of charges of conflict of interest. He does not
intend to appoint anyone who disagrees with the philosophy that
the Constitution should be strictly construed.
RICHARD H. POFF
HOUSE ACTION, PERIOD MAY 20 THROUGH MAY 26, 1969
Wednesday, May 21, 1969
SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS
By a record vote of 347 yeas to 40 nays, the House passed H.R. 11400
making supplemental appropriations of $3.8 billion for the fiscal
year ending June 30, 1969.
Previously, the House adopted by roll call vote of 322 yeas to
53 nays, (Ryan, New York) H.Res.414, waiving points of order
against title IV of H.R. 11400.
Prior to passage, the House considered the following amendments:
SCHERLE AMENDMENT - By a record vote of 329 yeas to 61 nays
adopted am amendment requiring universities applying for
Federal interest subsidies for construction projects to
certify that they are complying with the antidisorder mea-
sures passed in the Higher Education Act.
RYAN (NEW YORK) AMENDMENT - Rejected by a division vote of 25
yeas to 140 nays, the amendment to delete title I from the
Bill authorizing $1.2 billion for military operations in South-
east Asia.
ECKHARDT AMENDMENT - To delete from title I the procurement
section, rejected by a division vote of 23 yeas to 134 nays.
GROSS AMENDMENT - Defeated by voice vote to delete appropri-
ation for the National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities.
HALL AMENDMENT - Defeated by teller vote of 49 yeas to 165 nays,
an amendment to eliminate the pay raise for House Members for
the balance of fiscal year 1969.
COHELAN AMENDMENT - Defeated by voice vote to eliminate title IV
limitation on fiscal year 1970 budget outlays.
VANIK AMENDMENT - Rejected by teller vote of 38 yeas to 165 nays,
to reduce limitation on fiscal year 1970 budget outlays for
the Department of Defense.
Prior to passage, the House rejected by voice vote the Cederberg
recommit motion.
FURD LIBRARY
- 2 -
Monday, May 26, 1969
AGRICULTURE AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT
General debate on H.R.11612 was fixed at three hours. The Bill
authorizes $6.617 billion appropriation for fiscal year 1970.
The House accepted the Poage Amendment, transferring $120 million
of the funds within the Bill to the school lunch program.
The Conte Amendment, limiting payments to an individual to
$20,000, was adopted by teller vote of 112 yeas to 100 nays.
Tuesday, May 27, 1969
Continued consideration of H.R.11612.
Program Ahead
H.R.11582 - Treasury Department - Post Office Department Appropriations
Act, FY 1970. The Rules Committee granted a rule waiving points of
order against section 502.
H.R.4204 - To amend the War Claims Act of 1948 to include prisoners of
war captured during the Vietnam conflict.
STATEMENT ABOUT THE PRESIDENT'S
POSTAL REFORM MESSAGE
For the 1970s Instead of the 1790s
Nobody is happy with the Post Office as it exists today. The
people it serves are unhappy with their service. Taxpayers are un-
happy with the costs. Postal workers are unhappy about their work-
ing conditions. And those who are responsible for the system, in
Congress and in the executive branch, are unhappy about the entire
situation. Something must be done, the country is saying, with
virtual unanimity. The President's message on postal reform tells
us just what can be done and I hope and trust that we will now proceed
to do it.
Essentially, the President proposes that the present Post Office
Department be replaced by a government corporation, with its own
governing board, the power to issue bonds for financing improve-
ments, a system of collective bargaining with employees, and regular
reports to facilitate Congressional oversight. He thus endorses a
concept that has broad support from almost everyone who has made
a close study of the system in recent years. Former Postmaster
General O'Brien suggested such reforms two years ago. The Presi-
dent's Commission on postal reform did likewise. President Johnson
supported a plan of this sort and now the Republican Administration
has come up with specific means of establishing it. This is clearly
GERALD LISBERT
2
not a partisan initiative. This is not the brainchild of a single man
or group. This is a bipartisan suggestion with broad support across
the country and the reason for that support is that it is so clearly in
the interest of all Americans.
As the President has said, there is no Republican way and no
Democratic way to deliver the mails. But there is an efficient way
and an inefficient way. Right now we are following the inefficient
method. This Presidential proposal can put us back on the efficient
track.
Our present postal system was designed for the 1790's. The
President's system is designed for the 1970's. It is never easy for
a political leader to take an advanced position of this sort. All the
forces of the status quo rise to confront him; all those who are fearful
of any change cling tenaciously to the present.
Clearly, the President does not take a step of this magnitude
to win wide political favor. He takes such a step because he believes
it is the right thing to do. Most of the past reforms of which Ameri-
cans are most proud have resulted from precisely this kind of boldness,
a readiness to look to the future and to act as it demands. May the
farsightedness of Congress now match that of the President.
####
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
STATEMENT ABOUT THE PRESIDENT'S
POSTAL REFORM MESSAGE
An Idea Whose Time Has Come
"There is nothing more powerful than an idea whose time has
come. 11 If Victor Hugo is right, then indeed, the time has come for
a reorganization of the postal system. For too long the American
people have felt frustrated by increasing rates and decreasing service.
For too long American postal workers have felt frustrated by outmoded
conditions and second-class bargaining rights.
President Nixon has proposed to Congress the creation of an in-
dependent Postal Service wholly owned by the Federal Government.
This Postal Service will become a self-supporting system and propo-
sals for postage increases will be heard by expert rate commissioners
just as in other public utilities.
In this new Postal Service, employees will have for the first time
true collective bargaining. With the statutory right to negotiate
directly with management over wages and working conditions, the
postal worker will finally take his rightful place beside the worker in
private industry.
With these reforms we can give the mail user faster service, the
taxpayer better return for his revenue dollars and the postal worker
opportunity for greater and more satisfying contributions.
GERELD FORD CIERANT
#####
FOR RELEASE AT 12 NOON, EDST
May 27, 1969
Office of the White House Press Secretary
THE WHITE HOUSE
TO THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES:
Total reform of the nation's postal system is absolutely essential.
The American people want dependable, reasonably priced mail service,
and postal employees want the kind of advantages enjoyed by workers in
other major industries. Neither goal can be achieved within the postal
system we have today.
The Post Office is not keeping pace with the needs of our expanding
population or the rightful aspirations of our postal workers.
Encumbered by obsolete facilities, inadequate capital, and outdated
operation practices, the Post Office Department is failing the mail user
in terms of service, failing the taxpayer in terms of cost, and failing the
postal worker in terms of truly rewarding employment. It is time for
change.
Two years ago, Lawrence F. O'Brien, then Postmaster General,
recognized that the Post Office was in "a race with catastrophe, and made
the bold proposal that the postal system be converted into a government-
owned corporation. As a result of Mr. O'Brien's recommendations, a
Presidential Commission was established to make a searching study of our
postal system. After considering all the alternatives, the Commission
likewise recommended a government corporation. Last January, President
Johnson endorsed that recommendation in his State of the Union message.
One of my first actions as President was to direct Postmaster General
Winton M. Blount to review that proposal and others. He has made his own
first-hand study of the problems besetting the postal service, and after a
careful analysis has reported to me that only a complete reorganization of
the postal system can avert the steady deterioration of this vital public
service.
I am convinced that such a reorganization is essential. The arguments
are overwhelming and the support is bipartisan. Postal Reform is not a
partisan political issue, it is an urgent national requirement.
GERRALO FORD LIBRARY
CAREER OPPORTUNITIES AND WORKING CONDITIONS
For many years the postal worker walked a dead-end street. Promotions
all too often were earned by the right political connections rather than by
merit. This Administration has taken steps to eliminate political patronage
in the selection of postal employees; but there is more much more that
must be done.
Postal employees must be given a work environment comparable to that
found in the finest American enterprises. Today, particularly in our larger
cities, postal workers labor in crowded, dismal, old fashioned buildings that
are little short of disgraceful. Health services, employee facilities, training
programs and other benefits enjoyed by the worker in private industry and in
other Federal agencies are, all too often, unavailable to the postal worker.
In an age when machines do the heavy work for private companies, the postal
worker still shoulders, literally, the burden of the nation's mail. That mail
fills more than a billion sacks a year; and the men and women who move those
sacks need help.
more
-2-
Postal employees must have a voice in determining their conditions
of employment. They must be given a stake in the quality of the service
the Department provides the public; they must be given a reason for pride
in themselves and in the job they do. The time for action is now.
HIGHER DEFICITS AND INCREASING RATES
During all but seventeen years since 1838, when deficit financing became
a way of life for the Post Office, the postal system has cost more than it has
earned.
In this fiscal year, the Department will drain over a billion dollars from
the national treasury to cover the deficit incurred in operating the Post Office.
Over the last decade, the tax money used to shore up the postal system has
amounted to more than eight billion dollars. Almost twice that amount will
be diverted from the Treasury in the next ten years if the practices of the past
are continued. We must not let that happen.
The money to meet these huge postal deficits comes directly out of the
taxpayer's pocket regardless of how much he uses the mails. It is bad
business, bad government, and bad politics to pour this kind of tax money
into an inefficient postal service. Every taxpayer in the United States -- as
well as every user of the mails has an important stake in seeing that the
Federal Government institutes the kind of reform that is needed to give the
nation a modern and well managed postal system. Without such a system
Congress will either have to raise postage rates far above any level presently
contemplated, or the taxpayers will have to shoulder the burden of paying
postal deficits the like of which they have never seen before.
Neither alternative is acceptable. The nation simply cannot afford the
cost of maintaining an inefficient postal system. The will of the Congress
and the will of the people is clear. They want fast, dependable and low-
cost mail service. They want an end to the continuing cycle of higher deficits
and increasing rates.
QUALITY POSTAL SERVICE
The Post Office is a business that provides a vital service which its
customers, like the customers of a private business, purchase directly.
A well managed business provides dependable service; but complaints about
the quality of postal service under existing procedures are widespread.
While most mail ultimately arrives at its destination, there is no assurance
that important mail will arrive on time; and late mail whether a birthday
card or a proxy statement is often no better than lost mail.
Delays and breakdowns constantly threaten the mails. A complete
breakdown in service did in fact occur in 1966 in one of our largest cities,
causing severe economic damage and personal hardship. Similar break-
downs could occur at any time in many of our major post offices. A major
modernization program is essential to insure against catastrophe in the
Post Office.
A modern postal service will not mean fewer postal workers. Mail
LIBRARY GERALD P. FORD
volume tied as it is to economic activity is growing at such a rate
that there will be no cutback in postal jobs even with the most dramatic
gains in postal efficiency. Without a modernized postal system, however,
more than a quarter of a million new postal workers will be needed in the
next decade simply to move the growing mountain of mail. The savings that
can be realized by holding employment near present levels can and should
mean more pay and increased benefits for the three quarters of a million
men and women who will continue to work in the postal service.
more
-3-
OPPORTUNITY THROUGH REFORM
While the work of the Post Office is that of a business enterprise, its
organization is that of a political department. Traditionally it has been
run as a Cabinet agency of the United States Government one in which
politics has been as important as efficient mail delivery. Under the present
system, those responsible for managing the postal service do not have the
authority that the managers of any enterprise must have over prices, wages,
location of facilities, transportation and procurement activities and personnel
policy.
Changes in our society have resulted in changes in the function of the
Post Office Department. The postal system must be given a non-political
management structure consistent with the job the postal system has to per-
form as a supplier of vital services to the public. Times change, and now is
the time for change in the postal system.
I am, therefore, sending to the Congress reform legislation entitled the
Postal Service Act of 1969.
POSTAL SERVICE ACT OF 1969
The reform that I propose represents a basic and sweeping change in
direction; the ills of the postal service cannot be cured by partial reform.
The Postal Service Act of 1969 provides for:
removal of the Post Office from the Cabinet
creation of an independent Postal Service wholly owned by the
Federal Government
new and extensive collective bargaining rights for postal employees
bond financing for major improvements
a fair and orderly procedure for changing postage rates, subject
to Congressional review
regular reports to Congress to facilitate Congressional oversight
of the postal system
a self-supporting postal system.
The new government-owned corporation will be known as the United State:
Postal Service. It will be administered by a nine-member board of directors
selected without regard to political affiliation. Seven members of the board,
including the chairman, will be appointed by the President with the advice and
consent of the Senate. These seven members will select a full-time chief
executive officer, who will join with the seven others to select a second full-
time executive who will also serve on the board.
FURD
Employees will retain their Civil Service annuity rights, veterans
preference, and other benefits.
The Postal Service is unique in character. Therefore, there will be for
the first time in history, true collective bargaining in the postal system.
Postal employees in every part of the United States will be given a statutory
right to negotiate directly with management over wages and working condition:
more
-4-
A fair and impartial mechanism with provision for binding arbitration --
will be established to resolve negotiating impasses and disputes arising
under labor agreements.
For the first time, local management will have the authority to work
with employees to improve local conditions. A modernization fund adequate
to the needs of the service will be available. The postal worker will finally
take his rightful place beside the worker in private industry.
The Postal Service will become entirely self-supporting, except for
such subsidies as Congress may wish to provide for specific public service
groups. The Postal Service, like the Tennessee Valley Authority and
similar public authorities, will be able to issue bonds as a means of raising
funds needed for expansion and modernization of postal facilities and other
purposes.
Proposals for changes in classes of mail or postage rates will be heard
by expert rate commissioners, who will be completely independent of
operating management. The Board of the Postal Service will review deter-
minations made by the Rate Commissioners on rate and classification
questions, and the Presidentially appointed members of the board will be
empowered to modify such determinations if they consider it in the public
interest to do so,
Congress will have express authority to veto decisions on rate and
classification questions.
The activities of the Postal Service will be subject to Congressional
oversight, and the Act provides for regular reports to Congress. The
Postal Service and the rules by which it opert Les can, of course, be changed
by law at any time.
TOWARD POSTAL EXCELLENCE
Removing the postal system from politics and the Post Office
Department from the Cabinet is a sweeping reform.
Traditions die hard and traditional institutions are difficult to abandon.
But tradition is no substitute for performance, and if our postal system is
to meet the expanding needs of the 1970s, we must act now.
Legislation, by itself, will not move the mail. This must be done by
the three-quarters of a million dedicated men and women who today wear
the uniform of the postal service. They must be given the right tools
financial, managerial and technological -- to do the job. The legislation
I propose today will provide those tools.
There is no Democratic or Republican way of delivering the mail.
There is only the right way.
This legislation will let the postal service do its job the right way, and
I strongly recommend that it be promptly considered and promptly enacted.
RICHARD NIXON
BERALD FORD LIBRARY
THE WHITE HOUSE,
May 27, 1969.
# # # #
NEWS
CONGRESSMAN
GERALD R. FORD
HOUSE REPUBLICAN LEADER
RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
May 27, 1969
Remarks by Rep. Gerald R. Ford, R-Mich., Republican Leader, U.S. House of Reps.
on the floor of the House, Tuesday, May 27, 1969.
Mr. Speaker: It is often true that what we need the most for our own
well-being we assiduously avoid. There is little question in my mind that com-
plete re-direction of our postal system is, as President Nixon today has told us,
"absolutely essential."
There is also little question in my mind that if the sweeping reforms
proposed by the President are to become reality, it will only be because postal
employes finally recognize that the proposed new United States Postal Service is
in their own self-interest.
Mr. Speaker, the American people want a thorough-going change in the
operations of the Post Office Department. They want improved, efficient, fast
mail delivery. The taxpayers want postal reform. They are sick of subsidizing
the Post Office Department to the tune of nearly a billion dollars a year. I
don't think anyone will have to sell the President's proposed new Postal Service
to the people.
But the President and all others who recognize the imperative need for
putting delivery of the mail on a business basis will have to do a selling job on
postal employes and the Congress.
Mr. Speaker, I believe the proposed creation of a government corporation to
run the United States Postal Service is an idea whose time has come. This is not
a partisan political issue. Former Postmaster General Lawrence O'Brien strongly
supports the new concept for an improved mail service.
Its time has come because all of the facts show postal reform to be in the
enlightened self-interest of all of the American people, including our 750,000
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
postal employes.
Regrettably I understand that representatives of postal employes have vowed
to fight the proposal for a Postal Service Corporation down to the last mail bag.
It is my guess that their views will change when they see what it will mean in
terms of their own self-interest.
Whatever the significance for other federal employes, the fact remains that
postal workers under the President's reform plan will be able to engage in true
collective bargaining for the first time. In addition, the plan calls for binding
arbitration of stalemated disputes.
As President Nixon expressed it, "The postal worker will finally take his
rightful place beside the worker in private industry."
Mr. Speaker, the Congress must take every vestige of politics out of our
postal system. Postal reform deserves the support of every member of Congress,
regardless of party.
# # #
CONGRESSMAN
NEWS
GERALD R. FORD
HOUSE REPUBLICAN LEADER
RELEASE
--FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE-
May 27, 1969
Remarks by Rep. Gerald R. Ford, R-Mich., Republican Leader, U.S. House of Reps.
on the floor of the House, Tuesday, May 27, 1969.
Mr. Speaker: It is often true that what we need the most for our own
well-being we assiduously avoid. There is little question in my mind that com-
plete re-direction of our postal system is, as President Nixon today has told us,
"absolutely essential."
There is also little question in my mind that if the sweeping reforms
proposed by the President are to become reality, it will only be because postal
employes finally recognize that the proposed new United States Postal Service is
in their own self-interest.
Mr. Speaker, the American people want a thorough-going change in the
operations of the Post Office Department. They want improved, efficient, fast
mail delivery. The taxpayers want postal reform. They are sick of subsidizing
the Post Office Department to the tune of nearly a billion dollars a year. I
don't think anyone will have to sell the President's proposed new Postal Service
to the people.
LIBRARY GERALD FORD
But the President and all others who recognize the imperative need for
putting delivery of the mail on a business basis will have to do a selling job on
postal employes and the Congress.
Mr. Speaker, I believe the proposed creation of a government corporation to
run the United States Postal Service is an idea whose time has come. This is not
a partisan political issue. Former Postmaster General Lawrence O'Brien strongly
supports the new concept for an improved mail service.
Its time has come because all of the facts show postal reform to be in the
enlightened self-interest of all of the American people, including our 750,000
postal employes.
Regrettably I understand that representatives of postal employes have vowed
to fight the proposal for a Postal Service Corporation down to the last mail bag.
It is my guess that their views will change when they see what it will mean in
terms of their own self-interest.
Whatever the significance for other federal employes, the fact remains that
postal workers under the President's reform plan will be able to engage in true
collective bargaining for the first time. In addition, the plan calls for binding
arbitration of stalemated disputes.
As President Nixon expressed it, "The postal worker will finally take his
rightful place beside the worker in private industry."
Mr. Speaker, the Congress must take every vestige of politics out of our
postal system. Postal reform deserves the support of every member of Congress,
regardless of party.
# # #
CONGRESSMAN
NEWS
GERALD R. FORD
HOUSE REPUBLICAN LEADER
RELEASE
-FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE--
May 27, 1969
Remarks by Rep. Gerald R. Ford, R-Mich., Republican Leader, U.S. House of Reps.
on the floor of the House, Tuesday, May 27, 1969.
Mr. Speaker: It is often true that what we need the most for our own
well-being we assiduously avoid. There is little question in my mind that com-
plete re-direction of our postal system is, as President Nixon today has told us,
"absolutely essential."
There is also little question in my mind that if the sweeping reforms
proposed by the President are to become reality, it will only be because postal
employes finally recognize that the proposed new United States Postal Service is
in their own self-interest.
Mr. Speaker, the American people want a thorough-going change in the
operations of the Post Office Department. They want improved, efficient, fast
mail delivery. The taxpayers want postal reform. They are sick of subsidizing
the Post Office Department to the tune of nearly a billion dollars a year. I
don't think anyone will have to sell the President's proposed new Postal Service
to the people.
But the President and all others who recognize the imperative need for
putting delivery of the mail on a business basis will have to do a selling job on
postal employes and the Congress.
Mr. Speaker, I believe the proposed creation of a government corporation to
run the United States Postal Service is an idea whose time has come. This is not
a partisan political issue. Former Postmaster General Lawrence O'Brien strongly
supports the new concept for an improved mail service.
Its time has come because all of the facts show postal reform to be in the
enlightened self-interest of all of the American people, including our 750,000
postal employes.
Regrettably I understand that representatives of postal employes have vowed
to fight the proposal for a Postal Service Corporation down to the last mail bag.
It is my guess that their views will change when they see what it will mean in
terms of their own self-interest.
Whatever the significance for other federal employes, the fact remains that
postal workers under the President's reform plan will be able to engage in true
collective bargaining for the first time. In addition, the plan calls for binding
arbitration of stalemated disputes.
As President Nixon expressed it, "The postal worker will finally take his
rightful place beside the worker in private industry."
Mr. Speaker, the Congress must take every vestige of politics out of our
postal system. Postal reform deserves the support of every member of Congress,
regardless of party.
###