Ask the Scholar

Document scope · 1 page
doc
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
1550984
label
White House - Congressional Leadership Meeting, 7/15/69 (includes minutes and Ford notes)
core
doc
dtoType
document
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
1550984
contentType
document
title
White House - Congressional Leadership Meeting, 7/15/69 (includes minutes and Ford notes)
collections
Robert T. Hartmann Papers
House of Representatives Subject Files
subjects
Antimissile missiles
Legislation
Legislative liaison
Population trends
Taxation
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
1550984
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1969-07-31
month
7
year
1969
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1969-07-01
month
7
year
1969
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
8e608f6a6152a38d
ocrText
These documents were scanned from Box 106 of the Robert T. Hartmann Papers at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP MEETING JULY 15 - 8:30 a.m. AGENDA 8:30 - 9:00 a.m. I. Discussion 9:00 - 9:30 a.m. II. Population Crisis Message / Y.N. - Come. on Population 2 Commosion on Population Drouth 2 - Anate 2 - Home - appted by Pres. Research on Family Planning H.E.W./D.E.O. Committment by Got to provide family planning" to 5 million poor fimilies no Special R rp. to Untican Continuing Communication - doing when & close relationship FORD + LIBRARY DERALD DIARY OF WHITE HOUSE LEADERSHIP MEETINGS -- 91st CONGRESS July 15, 1969 The President said that the agenda would be confined to House and Senate reports and the message on popu- lation. Dirksen commended Tower for the manner in which he had "rallied the troops" in support of ABM. Mrs. Smith said that the first key vote on ABM would likely come next week. RMN looked at the Vice President and said, "Don't leave town, Ted. He then recalled how many tie votes he was obliged to break while he was Vice President. Agnew said that he was surprised that the press has not yet asked him how he stands on the issue. Dirksen said that Russell Long has posted a deadline of July 18 for the introduction of tax reform bills by Members of the Senate 80 that the Finance Committee could put together a com- mittee print. Republicans have enough votes in Committee now to report a surtax bill separate from a reform bill. However, Long has said that the surtax bill would not move until the Committee had put a reform bill on the calendar. Harlow reported 38 Republican votes in sup- port of surtax extension. RMN said that this means we will need another 13 or 14 from the other side. For that purpose, he asked Dirksen to make a strong public state- ment to the effect that the votes are available and the surtax should be acted upon before July 31. Mayo and Burns agreed. Dirksen agreed to talk with Mansfield and make a statement. Scott said that a strong statement by Dirksen would help to stabilize the stock market. Burns explained that while a drop in stocks tends to cool the inflationary fever, there is a danger that this may go too far. Bonds are on the edge of trouble. What hurts the stock market is the uncertainty about surtax extension. Ford said that the Ways and Means Committee will report a reform bill and that it will be so tough it likely will not pass the House. RMN said that Russell Long knows that GERALD LIBRARY FORD 2 any tax reform bill is likely to affect oil depletion allowances so it could be that his strategy is to load the reform bill down so that nothing will pass. Rhodes inquired about the future of interest rates. Burns said that the interest increase has a negative impact on the stock market and that there will be no stability in interest rates until the surtax matter has been settled. Ford asked if we could expect a reduction in the prime interest rate if the tax bill passed. He never received a definitive answer. RMN then said that if the surtax is passed and other inflationary measures take hold, the economy will begin to cool down later this year, will stabilize in the early winter and in the late winter and spring begin an upswing. For the House, Ford reported a light work week with no business scheduled Wednesday during the moon shot. Next week, the House will consider four appropriations bills, including those of Interior, HEW-Labor, State- Justice. In reply to the President's question, Ford said that the House definitely will have important business on August 14, the date scheduled for the Congressional recess. The President asked Moynihan to explain the population message. Moynihan said that this is the first such message any American President has sent the Congress and involves one of the most important problems which face the nation. To illustrate, he cited statistics on world population growth. By the year 1830, the world had a population of 1 billion; by 1930, 2 billion; by 1960, 3 billion. By 1975, according to the present projection, the world population will be 4 billion; by 2000, 7 billion. Nixon interjected to say that 7/8 of the increase in population has come from areas of the world where the per capita income is less than $200 a year. Moynihan said that a concerted program could cut 2 billion off the projected increase. He spoke of cooperation with the FORD LIBRARY 3 UN Commission for Population and coordination of the work in underdeveloped countries of AID, State Depart- ment, Peace Corps, HEW and Agriculture. On the domestic scene, he sketched three major efforts: a) Commission on Population Growth and the Ameri- can Future. This Commission would be mandated to study (1) probable course of population growth and other demographic changes; (2) demands such growth will make on the public sector: (3) the nature of government organisation to accommodate population changes. b) New emphases on research and family planning; and c) Commitment for 5 years of family planning service for some 5 million women at the poverty level. RMN said that we must come to grips with the reality of the problem which the population explosion poses. He said it does little good to attempt to pour money into the problem at one end while new population drains it out the other. He cited the foreign aid program, the Alliance for Progress and even Public Law 480. The President then invited Peter Flanigan to make a report concerning his visit to the Pope. Flanigan then described the meeting and discussed what the President dalled a "communica- tion belt" which the Administration hopes to set up with the Vatican. Although the President has decided not to send a personal representative to the Vatican, Flanigan thought it best not to discuss this directly with the Pope but rather talked about Nixon's plan to send high-ranking representatives of the Administration at 60 to 90 day intervals for top level discussions. The Pope intends to reciprocate, and the visit of the Apostolic Delegate with the President last week illustrates what is planned. Flanigan felt that the Pope was much impressed with Mr. Nixon and feels that the U.S. has been richly blessed GERALD R. LIBRARY FORD 4 in order that it might be an instrument for blessing for the world at large. For that purpose, he will copperate in all appropriate ways. He expressed concern for the 1. 5 million Catholics in Vietnam and agreed that their interests would be jeopardized without support of Ameri- can programs to resolve the conflict. They also discus- sed Biafra and the Mid East. RMN interjected to announce (on a confidential basis) that the Administration would make public next week or the week following some policy decisions with respect to Biafra. Heretofore, American policy has been fashioned by the feeling that the U.S. must support the English in their support of Nigeria. The Organisation of African States also supports Nigeria. However, following a conversation with Haile Selassie, the President apparently became convinced that the time has come for the U.S. to take some initiatives. The alternative would be to sit idly by and let nature take itsscourse. The end result of such a course would be the death of all Bidfrians. Flanigan said that the Pope was much alarmed and disappointed by the reception Rocke- feller received in Latin America. He agreed to use his influence there to explain U.S. policies. The Pope at least twice said to Flanigan that he cannot support U.S. policy concerning birth control. Flanigan responded that it was impossible to get foreign aid appropriations to do the things around the world the Pope agreed should be done without earmarking some of the funds for birth control. in over-populated areas. The Pope said, "I understand that. " Taft asked what the Administration's position on this was. He recalled that the Secretary of State in testimony before the Foreign Relations Committee had announced his support for earmarking funds for population control. The President said he supported the Secretary of State. The President then in a very relaxed and serious vein under- took an analysis of changes in the subtleties and complexi- GENEL FORD 5 ties of the issues and conflicts in the international arena today as compared with those a generation ago. Among other things, he pointed out that we could no longer assume that either the military or the church will be a force for stability in any given nation but rather, particu- larly in South America, the converse is likely to be true. The President's summary was masterful and reflected both a knowledge and an insight which cannot help but inspire his listeners to a feeling of reassurance and confidence in our new Head of State. We adjourned about 10:15 a. m. RICHARD H. POFF FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE JULY 15, 1969 OFFICE OF THE WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY THE WHITE HOUSE PRESS CONFERENCE OF SENATOR EVERETT M. DIFKSEN AND CONGRESSMAN GERALD R. FORD THE ROOSEVELT ROOM AT 10:25 A.M. EDT SENATOR DIRKSEN: I am glad to see everybody is in good form this morning. We had a very long and interesting discussion. Obviously, it had to begin with this question of taxation. We spent at least an hour and a half, and maybe more, on the Senate Floor yesterday to unconfuse and to clarify and at the long end of that discussion, I am not at all sure whether it was clarified or not. Probably there will be further clarification as we go on. But there is one point that I would like to accent and if it is humanly possible, we shall have to drive for the surtax and those other things that may be necessary. I will have a series of conferences on the Hill today and then see where we go and probably have some kind of an expanded statement to make, but for the moment, I shall content myself by simply saying to the group that this is the Number One order of business and we have to get this consummated, if at all possible, before the recess begins on the 13th of August. So I am going to devote a major share of my time to that very business. CONGRESSMAN FORD: The other listed item in the GERALD FORD LIBRARY discussion this morning was a prospective message that will come up probably this week, but if not, early next week, on the population crisis. It will have two basic parts: One, there will be an emphasis on pushing more rapidly in the United Nations for a Commission on Population, and action in the United Nations in that regard, and secondly, the establishment of a Commission on Population Growth within the United States. This is a very important message. The President gives it high priority and as I said, it will probably be coming up this week or the first part of next week. SENATOR DIRKSEN: There was an allusion, of course, to the ABM debate that is presently occupying the attention of the Senate. It is problematical how long this will run and when we will get around to a vote on the first amendment that may be offered. But I can foresee that this might run for quite a considerable period and that may be the order of business for quite awhile. The position is identical with what it was before. MORE - 2 - 0 How do you propose to change the Majority Leader's mind on combining the tax reform with the surtax? SENATOR DIRKSEN: Yesterday, Peter, you may recall that he said he would call up the so-called surtax, which could be singularly or a package deal, if there was a mean- ingful reform bill on the calendar at the same time. Now we have adopted a procedure in the Senate Finance Committee under which everybody has been urged to get his amendatory reform matters in bill shape so that it can be incorporated in a committee print. That will be the predicate for the balance of the hearings. The hearings are already becoming slightly repetitious and I doubt whether they will have to run very long. I say that because in my book it is entirely possible that we can have a package deal with the surtax and possibly the investment tax credit on the calendar and also have a reform bill on the calendar. But I must say that failure to get the meaningful reform bill on the calendar can obviously not deter us from making a drive for the surtax. 2 How do you define "meaningful"? SENATOR DIRKSEN: I don't define it. You define it for me. CONGRESSMAN FORD: I might add, in reference to reform, all of you are fully cognizant of the really meaningful reform bill that is being worked on and I think will be reported by the House Committee on Ways and Means, certainly by the time we recess in August. This is going to be a strong reform bill and it conforms with the recommendations of the President and the commitments of the Chairman and the ranking Republican on that committee. So there is no violation of the good faith agreement that was made on the Floor of the House that we are going to have reform legislation in the tax field early in this next month or the following. Certainly with this commitment on FORD LIBRARY the House side there should not be any question about affirma tive action on the Senate side. SENATOR DIREKSEN: Peter, I didn't mean to be facetious. Q I thought you did. SENATOR DIRKSEN: No, let me explain. There is a Senator, for instance, who has already lobbed a bill into hopper to be put in this package, and dealing with excess profits. Actually I don't know that this is in the field of tax reform as such. There are four or five amendments sprouting around dealing with Social Security, modifying benefits, and that, in turn, requires modifying the base and modifying the tax. In my lexicon that is not exactly tax reform, so when I say meaningful, I don't quite know what they embrace in that term. It was very honestly said. MORE - 3 - Q Mr. Ford, if the House bill is not going to be ready until you go out in August, then doesn't the Senate bill have to wait on the House bill? CONGRESSMAN FORD: According to the Constitution, of course, a tax bill has to originate in the House. But I think the amendments the Senator may be talking about could be attached to the surtax bill that has some tax reform in it when it gets on the Senate Floor. That is a possibility. But under no circumstances should this problem of reform deter affirmative action, and I don't think it will in the final analysis in the enactment of the surtax legislation. SENATOR DIRKSEN: Sarah, we have one tax bill on the calendar and others in the committee. Those we can amend in any form we desire, so, of course, that can be done, and we do have considerable parlimentary latitude in that field. Q Senator, are you concerned when Congress goes into recess and Senators go back into their home States for a period, that they will run into popular opposition to the surtax, and therefore make it more difficult for you if there is a delay? SENATOR DIRKSEN: They probably will run into a better climate than we anticipate, because inflation is really getting in its licks on people, and we are beginning to hear about it in a big way. Besides, your editors are now coming out with the strongest kind of editorials that this inflation has got to be licked and it starts with this surtax. Q Did you discuss the Asian trip or how critics help Hanoi? SENATOR DIRKSEN: No, we did not. Q You said you were going to have a series of conferences today. Would you tell us who you will be meeting with? SENATOR DIRKSEN: I prefer not to, if you don't mind, because I never try consciously to telegraph a punch. & What do you think is going to happen when the GERALD LISBURY FORD vote comes on the ABM? SENATOR DIRKSEN: I am confident we are going to prevail. Q Other than the surtax, the AMB and the population control message, were there any other items taken up this morning? SENATOR DIRKSEN: Those were the items principally and there was a lot of discussion pro and con on all of them. & Senator, there has been considerable talk that a compromise might be necessary on the ABM and it is being considered in the Administration. Do you see any need for compromise to get a favorable vote? MORE - 4 - SENATOR DIRKSEN: I just say perish the thought. There is no compromise. CONGRESSMAN FORD: Certainly there is no need for a compromise on the House side. The President's program will be approved in the House and there will not be any deviation from it. As far as I understand it, the President is very firm that there will be no compromise on the program he submits. Q Senator Dirksen, do you have a count on the ABM now? SENATOR DIRKSEN: If I did, it would have to remain undisclosed. Q Can you tell us whether or not the count you have, Senator, is the father of your confidence? SENATOR DIRKSEN: I think when I said we shall prevail, you remember the old song, "We Shall Overcome," Q Did you have any disclosures about the welfare message? SENATOR DIRKSEN: No. 0 Senator Dirksen, since the vote on the ABM, whatever the figure is, is so very close, can you tell us what basically bothers those who are in disagreement with you and those who are with you? Basically what bothers them? SENATOR DIRKSEN: You know what the makeup of a Senator is when he has come here and sat at the feet of the gods and absorbed the tradition of the Senate and become familiar with his prerogatives, and when the news starts working, obviously he comes to conclusions and he develops convictions of his own. So I am on one side, somebody else is on the other, but that has been the very nature of free parlimentary government. These different points of view come together and we always hope that the best point of view will prevail. 2 Senator, would you want me to repeat my question? (Laughter.) SENATOR DIRKSEN: You repeat it for me. Q With all due respect, I was wondering truly whether you could tell us, is there any one point that GERALD FORD LIBRANT bothers those in disagreement with you on the ABM? SENATOR DIRKSEN: Well, the first point of view is that here is a request from the Commander in Chief for what we might describe as an défensive weapon. The opposition might be set down into three different categories: Those who believe that this is not the time to give it to him, those who believe that they will give him part of a package that doesn't involve the weapon, and those who are willing to give him some components, but nothing more. It is an honest point of view, but we believe when the Commander in Chief, who is the Commander in Chief, under the Constitution, of the Army and the Navy of the United States --- that is the language of the document -- makes this request, he has the prime responsibility for the security of this country, MORE - 5 - and unless you can make a good case against him, we ought to give special heed to his request, because, one, it would have to be fortified and is fortified by the National Security Council; secondly, it is fortified by the best military advice he can get; and third, it is fortified by the best scientific advice that he can get in Government. THE PRESS: Thank you, gentlemen. END (AT 10:37 A.M. EDT.) FORD is LIBRARY HOUSE ACTION, PERIOD JULY 8 THROUGH JULY 14, 1969 Tuesday, July 8, 1969 TREASURY - POST OFFICE APPROPRIATIONS The House disagreed to certain amendments of the Senate to H.R. 11582, and agreed to a conference. Conferees appointed were Representa- tives Steed, Passman, Addabbo, Cohelan, Mahon, Conte, Robison, Edwards of Alabama, and Bow. JOHN F. KENNEDY CENTER ACT RULE (OPEN) - SCHERLE OF IOWA The House adopted H.Res.447 by a division vote of 75 yeas to 47 nays, providing for one hour debate. PASSAGE By a record vote of 210 yeas to 162 nays, the House passed H.R. 11249, to amend the John F. Kennedy Center Act to authorize additional funds. RECOMMIT - SCHADEBERG OF WISCONSIN By a record vote of 162 neas to 217 nays, the House rejected a motion to recommit the bill to the Committee on Public Works. CALIFORNIA ASSISTANCE RULE (OPEN) By a voice vote the House agreed to H.Res.463, providing for one hour debate. Wednesday, July 9, 1969 SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS - H.R. 11400 By a record vote of 348 yeas to 49 nays, the House agreed to the conference report making $12.5 million appropriations for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1969, and sent the measure to the Senate for further action. FORD - 2 - CALIFORNIA ASSISTANCE Continued PASSAGE The House passed H.R.6508 by a voice vote, to provide assistance to the State of California for the reconstruction of areas damaged by recent storms, floods, landslides and high waters. Thursday, July 10, 1969 HOUSE RESTAURANT COMMITTEE The House agreed to H.Res.472 by voice vote, creating a select committee on the House Restaurant. The Speaker appointed the following as members of the committee: Representatives Kluczynski, Chairman, Steed, Cabell, Collier, and Thomson of Wisconsin. MEDICAL LIBRARY ASSISTANCE ACT RULE (OPEN) H.Res.464 was adopted by the House by voice vote, providing one hour debate. PASSAGE By a record vote of 369 yeas to 3 nays, the House passed H.R. 11702, to amend the Public Health Service Act to improve and extend the provisions relating to assistance to medical libraries and related instrumentalities. STANDARD REFERENCE DATA ACT AUTHORIZATION RULE (OPEN) The House adopted by voice vote, H.Res.446, providing one hour debate. PASSAGE By a record vote of 365 yeas to 2 nays, the House passed H.R.4284, to authorize appropriations to carry out the Standard Reference Data Act. Monday, July 14, 1969 The House passed by voice vote 8 D. C. bills. - 3 - Tuesday and Balance of Week H.R.4018 - To provide for the renewal and extention of certain selections of the Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965. (Open Rule - two hours of debate) H.R.7491 - To clarify the liability of national banks for certain taxes (Open Rule - one hour of debate) H.R.8261 - Acquisition of Control of Air Carriers (Open Rule - one hour of debate: making in order the committee substitute) BERALD R. FORD LIBRARY UPI-8 (THE TWO VIETS) --SOUTH-- SAIGON--VICE PRESIDENT NGUYEN CAO KY OF SOUTH VIETNAM SAID TODAY HIS COUNTRY SHOULD PULL OUT OF THE PEACE TALKS IN PARIS SINCE THE COMMUNISTS KEEP REJECTING ITS PROPOSALS FOR PEACE. "IT IS MY PERSONAL OPINION THAT WE SHOULD BOYCOTT THE PARIS TALKS HE TOLD NEWSMEN FOLLOWING A SPEECH TO THE NATIONAL DEFENSE COLLEGE. IN THE 33-PAGE TEXT, THE FLAMBOYANT KY SAID SOUTH VIETNAM "MUST CONTINUE TO FIGHT WITH ALL OUR STRENGTH, WITH SACRIFICE, WITH A SPIRIT OF SELF-RELIANCE AND ACCEPT THE HARDSHIPS, AND IT IS THAT WHICH WILL GIVE US HOPE OF SURVIVAL." HE CRITICIZED THE U.S. ON SEVERAL FRONTS -- DEPLORING ITS LIMITING THE BOMBING OF NORTH VIETNAM, SAYING IT STARTED GIVING SAIGON'S ARMED FORCES MODERN EQUIPMENT TOO LATE, AND ACCUSING IT OF A "SELFISH OUTLOOK" IN GIVING MONETARY AID. "AT THE PARIS TALKS, WE PUT FORWARD MANY PROPOSALS AND HOPED THEY WOULD BRING RESULTS AND HASTEN PEACE, HE SAID. "BUT AFTER MANY REJECTIONS I THINK WE HAVE NO FURTHER REASON TO MAINTAIN AND PROLONG THE PARIS TALKS. THERE IS NO OTHER WAY FOR US BUT TO CONTINUE TO FIGHT." THE VICE PRESIDENT CONDEMNED THE VIET CONG'S DENUNCIATION OF PRESIDENT NGUYEN VAN THIEU'S PROPOSAL TO LET THE GUERRILLAS HELP ARRANGE AND PARTICIPATE IN NATIONAL ELECTIONS. KY OUTLINED WHAT HE CALLED THE MISTAKES OF THE ALLIED EFFORT IN VIETNAM, ATTRIBUTING MOST OF THEM TO THE U.S. "THE FIRST MISTAKE WAS IN THE PLAN TO FIGHT AGAINST THE INFILTRATION FROM THE NORTH, " HE SAID. "THE BOMBING PROJECT WAS NOT CONSTRUCTED AND APPLIED WITH DETERMINATION. WITH LIMITED BOMBING OBJECTIVES AIR OPERATIONS WERE AIMED AT COMMUNICATIONS NETWORKS AND MILITARY INSTALLATIONS BUT CLEARLY DID NOT SUCCEED IN REDUCING INFILTRATION "THE SECOND MISTAKE IS THAT THE U.S. PAID TOO MUCH ATTENTION TO HER OWN ARMY FIGHTING IN VIETNAM AND FORGOT TO HELP MODERNIZE AND DEVELOP THE RVN (SOUTH VIETNAMESE) ASRMED FORCES, KY SAID. -0- --NORTH-- PARIS- THE NORTH VIETNAMESE DELEGATION TO THE PARIS PEACE TALKS TODAY REJECTED SOUTH VIETNAM'S PROPOSAL TO LET THE VIET CONG HELP SET UP AND PARTICIPATE IN NATIONAL ELECTIONS. THE HANOI REJECTION SAID: "THE VIETNAMESE PEOPLE VIGOROUSLY CONDEMN AND REJECT THE 'SIX FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES' ON 'FREE ELECTIONS' THAT (PRESIDENT) NGUYEN VAN THIEU HAS ADVANCED ON THE ORDER OF THE AMERICAN AGGRESSORS." THE STATEMENT SAID THE SAIGON GOCERNMENT WAS NOT LEGALLY CONSTITUTED AND THEREFORE DID NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO ORGANIZE ELECTIONS. IT SAID THERE COULD BE NO GENUINELY FREE ELECTIONS WITH MORE THAN 500,000 U.S. TROOPS IN THE COUNTRY. "THE THIEU-KY-HUONG ADMINISTRATION SET UP BY THE UNITED STATES AFTER A SEMBLANCE OF ELECTIONS IN 1966-67 IS AN ILLEGAL ADMINISTRATION IN THE PAY OF THE UNITED STATES. IT HAS NO RIGHT TO ORGANIZE ELECTIONS " THE STATEMENT SAID. "THIS CONSTITUTES THE RESPONSE (OF NORTH VIETNAM) TO THE SIX- POINT PROPOSALS OF SOUTH VIETNAMESE PRESIDENT NGUYEN VAN THIEU, THE STATEMENT SAID. 7/15-GE913A FORD GERALD LIBRARY UPI-10 SAIGON--DIPLOMATIC SOURCES SAID YESTERDAY THE NIYON ADMINISTRA- -- (VIET LULL) PERHAPS TION A CUTDOWN IN B52 BOMPER RAIDS OR AN ANNOUNCEMENT THAT MORE U.S. IS CONSIDERING A RESPONSE TO THE COMMUNISTS' BATTLE LULL TROOPS WILL BE PULLED OUT OF THE WAR. THE WHITE HOUSE THINKING IS THAT SUCH STEPS MIGHT HELP PROLONG THE FOUR-WEEK LULL AND LEAD TO A SERIES OF MUTUAL DE-ESCALATORY MOVES THAT WOULD REDUCE U.S. CASUALTIES AND CREATE A BETTER ATMOSPHERE AT THE PARIS PEACE TALKS. ACCORDING TO THESE SOURCES. BY TAKING SUCH MEASURES, THEY SAID, THE U.S. WOULD PLACE ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR BREAKING THE LULL ON THE VIET CONG AND NORTH VIETNAMESE. ANY DE-ESCALATORY MOVES BY NIXON ALSO WOULD SERVE AS AN ANSWER TO THE PRESIDENT'S CRITICIS WHO HAVE SAID HE IS NOT DOING ENOUGH TO SCALE DOWN THE WAR OR HAS NOT RESPONDED TO PREVIOUS SIGNS OF COMMUNIST DE-ESCALATION. 7/15--GE921A UP1-14 (MIYON PRESS) WASHIAGTON--TRE FREIWHEELING PRESS CONFERENCES PRESIDENT NITON PRIDES RIMBELF ON ARE GETTING RARER AND FALL SHORT OF THE NUMBER HELD BY HIS 190 DEMOCRATIC PREDECESSORS. AS ME APPROACHES SIX MONThS IN OFFICE, NIXON HAS HELD SIY NEWS CONFERENCES. IN A COMPARABLE PERIOD IN 1964, LYNDON E. JOHNSON HELD 18 PRESS CONFERENCES, ACCORDING TO WHITE HOUSE RECORDS. JOHN F. KENNEDY IN THE FIRST SIY MONTHS OF 1961 HELD 13 NEWS CONFERENCES. AT THE START OF THE NIXON ADMINISTRATION PRESIDENTIAL PRESS SECRETARY ZIEGLER SAID HIS BOSS WOULD BE MEETING WITH REPORTERS "AT REGULAR INTERVALS." HIS LAST PRESS CONFERENCE WAS HELD ON JUNE 19 AND NONE IS SCHEDULED BEFORE HE EMBARKS ON HIS ROUND-THE-WORLD TRIP JULY 22. THE PRESIDENT'S OTHER NEWS CONFERENCES WERE HELD JAN. 29: FEB. 6; FARCH 4; MARCH 14 AND APRIL 18. AS HE HAS SETTLED INTO THE WHITE HOUSE, NIYON HAS EECOME LESS AND LESS ACCESSIBLE TO REPORTERS. HE HAS ABSTAINED FROM THE JOHNSONIAN HABIT OF CALLING IN A FEW NEWSMEN TO GIVE THEM THE ORD UNGARPLED WORD -- ON OR OFF THE RECORD. 7/15--GE933A (POLLUTION) WASHINGTON- SUPPORTED BY SUCH UNLIKE GOVERNORS AS RONALD REAGAN OF CALIFORNIA AND RICHARD J. HUGHES OF NEW JERSEY, A BIPARTISAN HOUSE GROUP TODAY MOUNTED A DRIVE FOR A $1 BILLION APPROPRIATION THIS YEAR TO COMBAT WATER POLLUTION. THE CONGRESSMEN DEPLORED THE AMOUNT OF MONEY APPROPRIATED FOR FISCAL YEAR THAT ENDED JUNE 30, AND THE AMOUNT OF REQUESTED FOR THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR -- $214 MILLION IN BOTH CASES. THEY WERE IRKED BECAUSE UNDER THE CLEAN WATER ACT SETTING UP THE PROGRAM, CONGRESS COULD HAVE APPROPRIATED UP TO $ 700 MILLION LAST YEAR AND MAY PROVIDE UP TO $1 BILLION THIS YEAR TO THE STATES FOR CONSTRUCTION OF SEWAGE TREATMENT FACILITIES. PRESIDENTS NIXON AND JOHNSON CITED THE VIETNAM WAR DEMANDS IN SEEKING ONLY $214 MILLION AND $225 MILLION RESPECTIVELY. IN ORDER TO QUALIFY FOR THE FUNDS THE STATES HAVE TO ADOPT RELATIVELY TOUGH WATER QUALITY STANDARDS FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND INDUSTRIES. THE CONGRESS MEN SAID THE STATES ARE DOING THEIR SHARE BUT THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS NOT DOING ITS PART. THE EFFORT FOR "FULL FUNDING" WAS LAUNCHED BY REPS. JOHN A. BLATNIK, D-MINN., JOHN P. SAYLOR, PA., JOHN D. DINGELL, D-MICH., MICHAEL A. FEIGHAN, D-OHIO, PAUL N. MCCLOSKEY JR., R-CALIF., AND HENRY S. REUSS, D-WIS. 7/15--GE954A NEWS CONGRESSMAN GERALD R. FORD HOUSE REPUBLICAN LEADER RELEASE --FOR RELEASE AT 12 NOON-- FRIDAY, JULY 18, 1969 Statement by Rep. Gerald R. Ford, R-Mich., Republican leader, U.S. House of Reps., re: President's Message on Population Growth and Control. President Nixon's proposed Commission on Population Growth and the American Future cannot begin work too soon. President Nixon has said what has needed saying by an American chief executive for many years -- that our planning in relation to population growth has been woefully inadequate, that such planning is vital if we are to improve the quality of life in America, and that family planning service should be made readily available to all women who want it but cannot afford it. The President's Message on Population Growth is a singular document. It is the first of its kind ever sent to the Congress. It is a document which should excite much thought and careful action. The objectives outlined in the President's Message deserve the full support of the Congress and of the American people. The President has dramatically set forth the staggering immensity of the problems posed in projections of U.S. and world population growth. He has focused on the key to meeting these problems - planning. He has also called for action. I subscribe fully to the approach he has outlined. "Society," the President said, "will not be ready for this growth unless it begins its planning immediately.' I agree, and I therefore urge the Congress to implement as soon as possible legislation establishing the President's proposed Commission on Population Growth and the American Future. I would add that President Nixon is correct in observing that the work of this commission will be as much educational as investigative. Key portions of the President's Message also deal with administrative GERALD FORD VIBRARY actions which President Nixon is taking in advance of any report by the proposed commission. There is a clear and present need for the President's moves to expand and improve domestic family planning services. I subscribe whole-heartedly to the President's proposal that we establish as a national goal the providing of adequate family planning services within the next five years for all American women who want them but cannot afford them. (more) -2- However, I would also underscore my agreement with the President's pledge that "in no circumstances will the activities associated with our pursuit of this goal be allowed to infringe upon the religious convictions or personal wishes or freedom of any individual, nor will they be allowed to impair the absolute right of all individuals to have such matters of conscience respected by public authorities." I endorse at this time Health-Education-and-Welfare Secretary Finch's plans to reorganize the major family planning service activities of his department into a separate unit. This plan deserves the support of the Congress. # # # FORD is LIBRARY G74478 crys FOR RELEASE AT 12:00 NOON, EDT JULY 18, 1969 Office of the White House Press Secretary THE WHITE HOUSE TO THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES: In 1830 there were one billion people on the planet earth. By 1930 there were two billion, and by 1960 there were three billion. Today the world population is three and one-half billion persons. These statistics illustrate the dramatically increasing rate of population growth. It took many thousands of years to produce the first billion people; the next billion took a century; the third came after thirty years; the fourth will be produced in just fifteen. If this rate of population growth continues, it is likely that the earth will contain over seven billion human beings by the end of this century. Over the next thirty years, in other words, the world's population could double. And at the end of that time, each new addition of one billion persons would not come over the millenia nor over a century nor even over a decade. If present trends were to continue until the year 2000, the eighth billion would be added in only five years and each additional billion in an even shorter period. While there are a variety of opinions as to precisely how fast popu- lation will grow in the coming decades, most informed observers have a similar response to all such projections. They agree that population growth is among the most important issues we face. They agree that it can be met only if there is a great deal of advance planning. And they agree that the time for such planning is growing very short. It is for all these reasons that I address myself to the population problem in this message, first to its international dimensions and then to its domestic implications. GERALD FORD LIBRARY In the Developing Nations It is in the developing nations of the world that population is growing most rapidly today. In these areas we often find rates of natural increase higher than any which have been experienced in all of human history. With their birth rates remaining high and with death rates dropping sharply, many countries of Latin America, Asia, and Africa now grow ten times as fast as they did a century ago. At present rates, many will double and some may even triple their present populations before the year 2000. This fact is in large measure a consequence of rising health standards and economic progress throughout the world, improvements which allow more people to live longer and more of their children to survive to maturity. As a result, many already impoverished nations are struggling under a handicap of intense population increase which the industrialized nations never had to bear. Even though most of these countries have made rapid progress in total economic growth faster in percentage terms than many of the more industrialized nations their far greater rates of population growth have made development in per capita terms very slow. Their standards of living are not rising quickly, and the gap between life in the rich nations and life in the poor nations is not closing. more 2 There are some respects, in fact, in which economic development threatens to fall behind population growth, so that the quality of life actually worsens. For example, despite considerable improvements in agricultural technology and some dramatic increases in grain production. it is still difficult to feed these added people at adequate levels of nutrition. Protein malnutrition is widespread. It is estimated that every day some 10, 000 people most of them children are dying from diseases of which malnutrition has been at least a partial cause. Moreover, the physical and mental potential of millions of youngsters is not realized because of a lack of proper food. The promise for increased production and better distribution of food is great, but not great enough to counter these bleak realities. The burden of population growth is also felt in the field of social progress. In many countries, despite increases in the number of schools and teachers, there are more and more children for whom there is no schooling. Despite construction of new homes, more and more families are without adequate shelter. Unemployment and underemployment are increasing and the situation could be aggravated as more young people grow up and seek to enter the work force. Nor has development yet reached the stage where it brings with it diminished family size. Many parents in developing countries are still victimized by forces such as poverty and ignorance which make it difficult for them to exercise control over the size of their families. In sum, population growth is a world problem which no country can ignore, whether it is moved by the narrowest perception of national self-interest or the widest vision of a common humanity. International Cooperation It is our belief that the United Nations, its specialized agencies, and other international bodies should take the leadership in responding to world population growth. The United States will cooperate fully with their programs. I would note in this connection that I am most impressed by the scope and thrust of the recent report of the Panel of the United Nations Association, chaired by John D. Rockefeller III. The report stresses the need for expanded action and greater coordination, concerns which should be high on the agenda of the United Nations. In addition to working with international organizations, the United States can help by supporting efforts which are initiated by other govern GERATO FORD LIBRARY ments. Already we are doing a great deal in this field. For example, we provide assistance to countries which seek our help in reducing high birthrates provided always that the services we help to make available can be freely accepted or rejected by the individuals who receive them. Through our aid programs, we have worked to improve agricultural pro- duction and bolster economic growth in developing nations. As I pointed out in my recent message on Foreign Aid, we are making important efforts to improve these programs. In fact, I have asked the Secretary of State and the Administrator of the Agency for International Development to give population and family planning high priority for attention, personnel, research, and funding among our several aid programs. Similarly, I am asking the Secretaries of Commerce and Health, Education, and Welfare and the Directors of the Peace Corps and the United States Information Agency to give close attention to population matters as they plan their overseas operations. I also call on the Department of Agriculture and the Agency for International Development to investigate ways of adapting and extending our agricultural experience and capabilities to improve food production and distribution in developing countries. In all of these inter- national efforts, our programs should give further recognition to the more 3 important resources of private organizations and university research centers. As we increase our population and family planning efforts abroad, we also call upon other nations to enlarge their programs in this area. Prompt action in all these areas is essential. For high rates of population growth, as the report of the Panel of the United Nations Association puts it, "impair individual rights, jeopardize national goals, and threaten international stability. " In the United States For some time population growth has been seen as a problem for developing countries. Only recently has it come to be seen that pressing problems are also posed for advanced industrial countries when their populations increase at the rate that the United States, for example, must now anticipate. Food supplies may be ample in such nations, but social supplies the capacity to educate youth, to provide privacy and living space, to maintain the processes of open, democratic government may be grievously strained. In the United States our rate of population growth is not as great as that of developing nations. In this country, in fact, the growth rate has generally declined since the eighteenth century. The present growth rate of about one percent per year is still significant, however. Moreover, current statistics indicate that the fertility rate may be approaching the end of its recent decline. Several factors contribute to the yearly increase, including the large number of couples of childbearing age, the typical size of American families, and our increased longevity. We are rapidly reaching the point in this country where a family reunion, which has typically brought together children, parents, and grandparents, will instead gather family members from four generations. This is a development for which we are grateful and of which we can be proud. But we must also recognize that it will mean a far larger population if the number of children born to each set of parents remains the same. In 1917 the total number of Americans passed 100 million, after three full centuries of steady growth. In 1967 just half a century later the 200 million mark was passed. If the present rate of growth continues, the third hundred million persons will be added in roughly a thirty-year period. This means that by the year 2000, or shortly thereafter, there will be more than 300 million Americans. 183RLD FORD LIBRARY This growth will produce serious challenges for our society. I believe that many of our present social problems may be related to the fact that we have had only fifty years inwhich to accommodate the second hundred million Americans. In fact, since 1945 alone some 90 million babies have been born in this country. We have thus had to accomplish in a very few decades an adjustment to population growth which was once spread over centuries. And it now appears that we will have to provide for a third hundred million Americans in a period of just 30 years. The great majority of the next hundred million Americans will be born to families which looked forward to their birth and are prepared to love them and care for them as they grow up. The critical issue is whether social institutions will also plan for their arrival and be able to accommodate them in a humane and intelligent way. We can be sure that society will not be ready for this growth unless it begins its planning immediately. And adequate planning, in turn, requires that we ask ourselves a number of important questions. more 4 Where, for example, will the next hundred million Americans live ? If the patterns of the last few decades hold for the rest of the century, then at least three quarters of the next hundred million persons will locate in highly urbanized areas, Are our cities prepared for such an influx? The chaotic history of urban growth suggests that they are not and that many of their existing problems will be severely aggravated by a dramatic increase in numbers. Are there ways, then, of readying our cities Alternatively, can the trend toward greater concentration of population be reversed? Is it a desirable thing, for example, that half of all the counties in the United States actually lost population in the 1950's, despite the growing number of inhabitants in the country as a whole? Are there ways of fostering a better distribution of the growing population? Some have suggested that systems of satellite cities or completely new towns can accomplish this goal. The National Commission on Urban Growth has recently produced a stimulating report on this matter, one which recommends the creation of 100 new communities averaging 100, 000 people each, and ten new communities averaging at least one million persons. But the total number of people who would be accommodated if even this bold plan were implemented is only twenty million a mere one-fifth of the expected thirty-year increase. If we were to accommodate the full 100 million persons in new communities, we would have to build a new city of 250, 000 persons each month from now until the end of the century. That means constructing a city the size of Tulsa, Dayton, or Jersey City every thirty days for over thirty years. Clearly, the problem is enormous, and we must examine the alternative solutions very carefully. Other questions also confront us. How, for example, will we house the next hundred million Americans? Already economical and attractive housing is in very short supply. New architectural forms, construction techniques, and financing strategies must be aggressively pioneered if we are to provide the needed dwellings. What of our natural resources and the quality of our environment? Pure air and water are fundamental to life itself. Parks, recreational facilities, and an attractive countryside are essential to our emotional well-being. Plant and animal and mineral resources are also vital. A growing population will increase the demand for such resources. But in many cases their supply will not be increased and may even be endangered. The ecological system upon which we now depend may seriously deteriorate if our efforts to conserve and enhance the environment do not match the growth of the population. GERALD FORD LIBRARY How will we educate and employ such a large number of people? Will our transportation systems move them about as quickly and economically as necessary? How will we provide adequate health care when our population reaches 300 million? Will our political structures have to be reordered, too, when our society grows to such proportions? Many of our institutions are already under tremendous strain as they try to respond to the demands of 1969. Will they be swamped by a growing flood of people in the next thirty years? How easily can they be replaced or altered? Finally we must ask: how can we better assist American families so that they will have no more children than they wish to have In my first message to Congress on domestic affairs, I called for a national commitment to provide a healthful and stimulating environment for all children during their first five years of life. One of the ways in which we can promote that goal is to provide assistance for more parents in effectively planning their families. We know that involuntary childbearing often results in poor physical and emotional health for all members of the family. It is one of the factors which contribute to our distressingly high infant mortality rate, the unacceptable level of malnutrition, and the disappointing performance of some children in our schools. Unwanted or untimely childbearing is one of several forces which are driving many families into poverty or keeping them in that condition. Its threat helps to produce the dangerous incidence of illegal abortion. And finally, of course, it needlessly adds to the burdens more 5 placed on all our resources by increasing population. None of the questions I have raised here is new. But all of these questions must now be asked and answered with a new sense of urgency. The answers cannot be given by government alone, nor can government alone turn the answers into programs and policies. I believe, however, that the Federal Government does have a special responsibility for defining these problems and for stimulating thoughtful responses. Perhaps the most dangerous element in the present situation is the fact that so few people are examining these questions from the viewpoint of the whole society. Perceptive businessmen project the demand for their products many years into the future by studying population trends, Other private institutions develop sophisticated planning mechanisms which allow them to account for rapidly changing conditions. In the govern- mental sphere, however, there is virtually no machinery through which we can develop a detailed understanding of demographic changes and bring that understanding to bear on public policy. The federal government makes only a minimal effort in this area. The efforts of state and local govern- ments are also inadequate. Most importantly, the planning which does take place at some levels is poorly understood at others and is often based on unexamined assumptions. In short, the questions I have posed in this message too often go unasked, and when they are asked, they seldom are adequately answered. COMMISSION ON POPULATION GROWTH AND THE AMERICAN FUTURE It is for all these reasons that I today propose the creation by Congress of a Commission on Population Growth and the American Future. The Congress should give the Commission responsibility for inquiry and recommendations in three specific areas. First, the probable course of population growth, internal migration and related demographic developments between now and the year 2000. As much as possible, these projections should be made by regions, states, and metropolitan areas. Because there is an element of uncertainty in such projections, various alternative possibilities should be plotted. FORD It is of special importance to note that, beginning in August of 1970 LIBRARY population data by county will become available from the decennial census, which will have been taken in April of that year. By April 1971, computer summaries of first-count data will be available by census tract and an important range of information on income, occupations, education, household composition, and other vital considerations will also be in hand. The Federal government can make better use of such demographic informa- tion than it has done in the past, and state governments and other political subdivisions can also use such data to better advantage. The Commission on Population Growth and the American Future will be an appropriate instrument for this important initiative. Second, the resources in the public sector of the economy that will be required to deal with the anticipated growth in population. The single greatest failure of foresight at all levels of government over the past generation has been in areas connected with expanding popula- tion. Government and legislatures have frequently failed to appreciate the demands which continued population growth would impose on the public sector. more 6 These demands are myriad: they will range from pre-school classrooms to post-doctoral fellowships; from public works which carry water over thousands of miles to highways which carry people and products from region to region; from vest pocket parks in crowded cities to forest pre- serves and quiet lakes in the countryside. Perhaps especially, such demands will assert themselves in forms that affect the quality of life. The time is at hand for a serious assessment of such needs. Third, ways in which population growth may affect the activities of Federal, state and local government. In some respects, population growth affects everything that American government does. Yet only occasionally do our governmental units pay sufficient attention to population growth in their own planning. Only occa- sionally do they consider the serious implications of demographic trends for their present and future activities. Yet some of the necessary information is at hand and can be made available to all levels of government. Much of the rest will be obtained by the Commission. For such information to be of greatest use, however, it should also be interpreted and analyzed and its implications should be made more evident. It is particularly in this connection that the work of the Commission on Population Growth and the American Future will be as much educational as investigative. The American public and its governing units are not as alert as they should be to these growing challenges. A responsible but insistent voice of reason and foresight is needed. The Commission can provide that voice in the years immediately before us. The membership of the Commission should include two members from each house of the Congress, together with knowledgeable men and women who are broadly representative of our society. The majority should be citizens who have demonstrated a capacity to deal with important questions of public policy. The membership should also include specialists in the biological, social, and environmental sciences, in theology and law, in the arts and in engineering. The Commission should be empowered to create advisory panels to consider subdivisions of its broad subject area and to invite experts and leaders from all parts of the world to join these panels in their deliberations. The Commission should be provided with an adequate staff and budget, under the supervision of an executive director of exceptional experience and understanding. In order that the Commission will have time to utilize the initial data which results from the 1970 census, I ask that it be established for a period of two years. An interim report to the President and Congress should be required at the end of the first year. GERALD FORD LIBRARY Other Government Activities I would take this opportunity to mention a number of additional govern- ment activities dealing with population growth which need not await the report of the Commission. First, increased research is essential. It is clear, for example, that we need additional research on birth control methods of all types and the soci- ology of population growth. Utilizing its Center for Population Research, the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare should take the lead in developing, with other federal agencies, an expanded research effort, one which is carefully related to those of private organizations, university research centers, international organizations, and other countries. more 7 Second, we need more trained people to work in population and family planning programs, both in this country and abroad. I am therefore asking the Secretaries of State, Labor, Health, Education, and Welfare, and Interior along with the Administrator of the Agency for International Development and the Director of the Office of Economic Opportunity to participate in a comprehensive survey of our efforts to attract people to such programs and to train them properly. The same group in consultation with appropriate state, local, and private officials should develop recommendations for improvements in this area. I am asking the Assistant to the President for Urban Affairs to coordinate this project. Third, the effects of population growth on our environment and on the world's food supply call for careful attention and immediate action. I am therefore asking the Environmental Quality Council to give careful attention to these matters in its deliberations. I am also asking the Secretaries of Interior, Agriculture, and Health, Education, and Welfare to give the highest priority to research into new techniques and to other proposals that can help safeguard the environment and increase the world's supply of food. Fourth, it is clear that the domestic family planning services supported by the Federal Government should be expanded and better integrated. Both the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare and the Office of Economic Opportunity are now involved in this important work, yet their combined efforts are not adequate to provide information and services to all who want them. In particular, most of an estimated five million low income women of childbearing age in this country do not now have adequate access to family planning assistance, even though their wishes concerning family size are usually the same as those of parents of higher income groups. It is my view that no American woman should be denied access to family planning assistance because of her economic condition. I believe, therefore, that we should establish as a national goal the provision of adequate family planning services within the next five years to all those who want them but cannot afford them. This we have the capacity to do. Clearly, in no circumstances will the activities associated with our pursuit of this goal be allowed to infringe upon the religious convictions or personal wishes and freedom of any individual, nor will they be allowed to impair the absolute right of all individuals to have such matters of conscience respected by public authorities. In order to achieve this national goal, we will have to increase the amount we are spending on population and family planning. But success in this endeavor will not result from higher expenditures alone. Because the life circumstances and family planning wishes of those who receive services vary considerably, an effective program must be more flexible in its design than are many present efforts. In addition, programs should be better coordinated and more effectively administered. Under current legislation, a compre- hensive State or local project must assemble a patchwork of funds from many different sources a time-consuming and confusing process. More- FORD over, under existing legislation, requests for funds for family planning services must often compete with requests for other deserving health endeavors. GERALD LIBRARY But these problems can be overcome. The Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare -- whose Department is responsible for the largest part of our domestic family planning services -- has developed plans to reorganize the major family planning service activities of this agency. A separate unit for these services will be established within the Health Services and Mental Health Administration. The Secretary will send to Congress in the near future legislation which will help the Department implement this important program by providing broader and more precise legislative authority and a clearer source of financial support. more 8 The Office of Economic Opportunity can also contribute to progress in this area by strengthening its innovative programs and pilot projects in the delivery of family planning services to the needy. The existing network of O. E.O. supported community groups should also be used more extensively to provide family planning assistance and information. I am asking the Director of the Office of Economic Opportunity to determine the ways in which his Agency can best structure and extend its programs in order to help achieve our national goal in the coming years. As they develop their own plans, the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare and the Director of the Office of Economic Opportunity should also determine the most effective means of coordinating all our domestic family planning programs and should include in their deliberations representatives of the other agencies that share in this important work. It is my intention that such planning should also involve state and local governments and private agencies, for it is clear that the increased activity of the Federal government in this area must be matched by a sizeable increase in effort at other levels. It would be unrealistic for the Federal Government alone to shoulder the entire burden, but this Administration does accept a clear responsibility to provide essential leadership. *** For the Future One of the most serious challenges to human destiny in the last third of this century will be the growth of the population. Whether man's response to that challenge will be a cause for pride or for despair in the year 2000 will depend very much on what we do today. If we now begin our work in an appropriate manner, and if we continue to devote a considerable amount of attention and energy to this problem, then mankind will be able to surmount this challenge as it has surmounted so many during the long march of civilization. When future generations evaluate the record of our time, one of the most important factors in their judgment will be the way in which we re- sponded to population growth. Let us act in such a way that those who come after us -- even as they lift their eyes beyond earth's bounds -- can do so with pride in the planet on which they live, with gratitude to those who lived on it in the past, and with continuing confidence in its future. RICHARD NIXON THE WHITE HOUSE, July 18, 1969. # # # # GERALD FORD LIBRART