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.
Source Description
This file contains:
"Communist Control" - Remarks by Richard Nixon, Manhattan Beach Rally, June 1, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 2 pages. [Other Document], 6/1/1962
"Law Enforcement" - Statement by Richard M. Nixon, Los Angeles, May 25, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 3 pages. [Other Document], 5/25/1962
"California's Crime Rate" - Remarks by Richard Nixon, Santa Ana, California, June 1, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 1 page. [Other Document], 6/1/1962
"Broad Experience as Asset" - Remarks by Richard M. Nixon, Alameda, California, May 23, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 1 page. [Other Document], 5/23/1962
"Quality of Brown Appointments" - Remarks by Richard M. Nixon, Berkeley, May 23, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 1 page. [Other Document], 5/23/1962
"Government Reorganization" - Richard Nixon before Commonwealth Club, San Francisco, California, May 18, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 5 pages. [Other Document], 5/18/1962
"California Agriculture" - Richard M. Nixon, Los Angeles, California, May 23, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 3 pages. [Other Document], 5/23/1962
"Welfare Statement" - By Richard M. Nixon, Los Angeles, California, May 29, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 2 pages. [Other Document], 5/29/1962
"Brown's Incapacity to Lead" - Statement by Richard Nixon, Los Angeles, California, June 4, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 3 pages. [Other Document], 6/4/1962
"Brown and Left-Wing Activities" - Remarks of Richard Nixon, Chula Vista Rally, May 26, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 2 pages. [Other Document], 5/26/1962
"The CDC and Brown" - Remarks of Richard M. Nixon, at California Republican Assembly Meeting, El Segundo, June 23, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 2 pages. [Other Document], 6/23/1962
"Equal Opportunity" - Remarks by Richard. Nixon, Republican Community Center, Los Angeles, California, June 1, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 1 page. [Other Document], 6/1/1962
Squaw Valley remarks by Richard Nixon, before the Sunset Young Republicans, Los Angeles, California, May 2, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 1 page. [Other Document], 5/2/1962
"Agricultural Exports," remarks by Richard Nixon, Visalia, California, May 30, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 1 page. [Other Document], 5/30/1962
"New Industry," Richard Nixon, Southern California Retail Grocers Association, Long Beach, May 17, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 1 page. [Other Document], 5/17/1962
From the San Francisco Examiner, by Jack Lotto, April 23, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 2 pages. [Other Document], 4/23/1962
"Francis Amendment," remarks by Richard Nixon, before the Junior Barristers of Los Angeles, May 3, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 1 page. [Other Document], 5/3/1962
"Education," Excerpts from Remarks of Richard Nixon, before the California Teachers Association, Ambassador Hotel, Los Angeles, Saturday, April 28, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 3 pages. [Other Document], 4/28/1962
"The Power of Government," Excerpt of remarks by Richard M. Nixon, 31st Annual Youth Banquet, Pasadena Junior Chamber of Commerce, April 24, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 2 pages. [Other Document], 4/28/1962
Text of Water Policy Speech by Richard M. Nixon, Irrigation Districts Association, Sheraton-Palace Hotel, San Francisco, 12 p.m., April 26, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 6 pages. [Other Document], 4/26/1962
Typed newspaper article: Hoped for Presidency for Self; "Comedown Arrives for 'Pat' Nixon", N.Y. Herald Tribune by Warren Rogers, Jr.; for the Speakers' Manual. 3 pages. [Newspaper], 7/11/1960
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
26128149
label
WHSF: Returned, 64-13
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
26128149
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
WHSF: Returned, 64-13
description
This file contains:
"Communist Control" - Remarks by Richard Nixon, Manhattan Beach Rally, June 1, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 2 pages. [Other Document], 6/1/1962
"Law Enforcement" - Statement by Richard M. Nixon, Los Angeles, May 25, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 3 pages. [Other Document], 5/25/1962
"California's Crime Rate" - Remarks by Richard Nixon, Santa Ana, California, June 1, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 1 page. [Other Document], 6/1/1962
"Broad Experience as Asset" - Remarks by Richard M. Nixon, Alameda, California, May 23, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 1 page. [Other Document], 5/23/1962
"Quality of Brown Appointments" - Remarks by Richard M. Nixon, Berkeley, May 23, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 1 page. [Other Document], 5/23/1962
"Government Reorganization" - Richard Nixon before Commonwealth Club, San Francisco, California, May 18, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 5 pages. [Other Document], 5/18/1962
"California Agriculture" - Richard M. Nixon, Los Angeles, California, May 23, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 3 pages. [Other Document], 5/23/1962
"Welfare Statement" - By Richard M. Nixon, Los Angeles, California, May 29, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 2 pages. [Other Document], 5/29/1962
"Brown's Incapacity to Lead" - Statement by Richard Nixon, Los Angeles, California, June 4, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 3 pages. [Other Document], 6/4/1962
"Brown and Left-Wing Activities" - Remarks of Richard Nixon, Chula Vista Rally, May 26, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 2 pages. [Other Document], 5/26/1962
"The CDC and Brown" - Remarks of Richard M. Nixon, at California Republican Assembly Meeting, El Segundo, June 23, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 2 pages. [Other Document], 6/23/1962
"Equal Opportunity" - Remarks by Richard. Nixon, Republican Community Center, Los Angeles, California, June 1, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 1 page. [Other Document], 6/1/1962
Squaw Valley remarks by Richard Nixon, before the Sunset Young Republicans, Los Angeles, California, May 2, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 1 page. [Other Document], 5/2/1962
"Agricultural Exports," remarks by Richard Nixon, Visalia, California, May 30, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 1 page. [Other Document], 5/30/1962
"New Industry," Richard Nixon, Southern California Retail Grocers Association, Long Beach, May 17, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 1 page. [Other Document], 5/17/1962
From the San Francisco Examiner, by Jack Lotto, April 23, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 2 pages. [Other Document], 4/23/1962
"Francis Amendment," remarks by Richard Nixon, before the Junior Barristers of Los Angeles, May 3, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 1 page. [Other Document], 5/3/1962
"Education," Excerpts from Remarks of Richard Nixon, before the California Teachers Association, Ambassador Hotel, Los Angeles, Saturday, April 28, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 3 pages. [Other Document], 4/28/1962
"The Power of Government," Excerpt of remarks by Richard M. Nixon, 31st Annual Youth Banquet, Pasadena Junior Chamber of Commerce, April 24, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 2 pages. [Other Document], 4/28/1962
Text of Water Policy Speech by Richard M. Nixon, Irrigation Districts Association, Sheraton-Palace Hotel, San Francisco, 12 p.m., April 26, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 6 pages. [Other Document], 4/26/1962
Typed newspaper article: Hoped for Presidency for Self; "Comedown Arrives for 'Pat' Nixon", N.Y. Herald Tribune by Warren Rogers, Jr.; for the Speakers' Manual. 3 pages. [Newspaper], 7/11/1960
citationUrl
collections
Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection
Returned White House Special Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
26128149
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
9796df1e06c0ab83
ocrText
Richard Nixon Presidential Library
White House Special Files Collection
Folder List
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
Document Type
Document Description
64
13
06/01/1962
Other Document
"Communist Control" - Remarks by Richard
Nixon, Manhattan Beach Rally, June 1,
1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 2 pages.
64
13
05/25/1962
Other Document
"Law Enforcement" - Statement by Richard
M. Nixon, Los Angeles, May 25, 1962; for
the Speakers' Manual. 3 pages.
64
13
06/01/1962
Other Document
"California's Crime Rate" - Remarks by
Richard Nixon, Santa Ana, California, June
1, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 1 page.
64
13
05/23/1962
Other Document
"Broad Experience as Asset" - Remarks by
Richard M. Nixon, Alameda, California, May
23, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 1 page.
64
13
05/23/1962
Other Document
"Quality of Brown Appointments" - Remarks
by Richard M. Nixon, Berkeley, May 23,
1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 1 page.
64
13
05/18/1962
Other Document
"Government Reorganization" - Richard
Nixon before Commonwealth Club, San
Francisco, California, May 18, 1962; for the
Speakers' Manual. 5 pages.
Monday, October 01, 2007
Page 1 of 4
Box Number Folder Number Document Date
Document Type
Document Description
64
13
05/23/1962
Other Document
"California Agriculture" - Richard M. Nixon,
Los Angeles, California, May 23, 1962; for
the Speakers' Manual. 3 pages.
64
13
05/29/1962
Other Document
"Welfare Statement" - By Richard M. Nixon,
Los Angeles, California, May 29, 1962; for
the Speakers' Manual. 2 pages.
64
13
06/04/1962
Other Document
"Brown's Incapacity to Lead" - Statement by
Richard Nixon, Los Angeles, California,
June 4, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 3
pages.
64
13
05/26/1962
Other Document
"Brown and Left-Wing Activities" - Remarks
of Richard Nixon, Chula Vista Rally, May
26, 1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 2 pages.
64
13
06/23/1962
Other Document
"The CDC and Brown" - Remarks of Richard
M. Nixon, at California Republican
Assembly Meeting, El Segundo, June 23,
1962; for the Speakers' Manual. 2 pages.
64
13
06/01/1962
Other Document
"Equal Opportunity" - Remarks by Richard.
Nixon, Republican Community Center, Los
Angeles, California, June 1, 1962; for the
Speakers' Manual. 1 page.
64
13
05/02/1962
Other Document
Squaw Valley remarks by Richard Nixon,
before the Sunset Young Republicans, Los
Angeles, California, May 2, 1962; for the
Speakers' Manual. 1 page.
Monday, October 01, 2007
Page 2 of 4
Box Number Folder Number Document Date
Document Type
Document Description
64
13
05/30/1962
Other Document
"Agricultural Exports," remarks by Richard
Nixon, Visalia, California, May 30, 1962; for
the Speakers' Manual. 1 page.
64
13
05/17/1962
Other Document
"New Industry," Richard Nixon, Southern
California Retail Grocers Association, Long
Beach, May 17, 1962; for the Speakers'
Manual. 1 page.
64
13
04/23/1962
Other Document
From the San Francisco Examiner, by Jack
Lotto, April 23, 1962; for the Speakers'
Manual. 2 pages.
64
13
05/03/1962
Other Document
"Francis Amendment," remarks by Richard
Nixon, before the Junior Barristers of Los
Angeles, May 3, 1962; for the Speakers'
Manual. 1 page.
64
13
04/28/1962
Other Document
"Education," Excerpts from Remarks of
Richard Nixon, before the California
Teachers Association, Ambassador Hotel,
Los Angeles, Saturday, April 28, 1962; for
the Speakers' Manual. 3 pages.
64
13
04/28/1962
Other Document
"The Power of Government," Excerpt of
remarks by Richard M. Nixon, 31st Annual
Youth Banquet, Pasadena Junior Chamber of
Commerce, April 24, 1962; for the Speakers'
Manual. 2 pages.
64
13
04/26/1962
Other Document
Text of Water Policy Speech by Richard M.
Nixon, Irrigation Districts Association,
Sheraton-Palace Hotel, San Francisco, 12
p.m., April 26, 1962; for the Speakers'
Manual. 6 pages.
Monday, October 01, 2007
Page 3 of 4
Box Number Folder Number Document Date
Document Type
Document Description
64
13
07/11/1960
Newspaper
Typed newspaper article: Hoped for
Presidency for Self; "Comedown Arrives for
'Pat' Nixon", N.Y. Herald Tribune by Warren
Rogers, Jr.; for the Speakers' Manual. 3
pages.
Monday, October 01, 2007
Page 4 of 4
COMMUNIST CONTROL
REMARKS- BY RICHARD NIXON
MANHATTAN BEACH RALLY
JUNE 1, 1962
I want California to have a Communist control program that will
set an example to the nation.
This is why I have repeatedly asked Governor Brown to repudiate
the soft under-belly of his party -- the California Democratic
Council.
I have asked Brown to show some backbone, stand up and be counted
on these three actions.
1. The letter from 43 of Brown's top party leaders urging can-
cellation of the House Un-American Activities Committee hearings
in Los Angeles.
2. The resolutions of the California Young Democrats against
state loyalty oaths and against the House Un-American Activities
Committee.
3. Eight resolutions of the left-wing C.D.C. -- including eventual
admission of Red China into the U.N., repeal of the loyalty oath,
abolition of the House Committee on Un-American Activities, presi-
dential review for Soviet spy Morton Sobell, and reduction of U.S.
military expenditures.
Yet Brown remains silent. He has apparently mortgaged himself to
this far left fringe in return for past, present and future support.
Brown, in chameleon fashion, would like to be all colors -- red,
white and blue -- as political expediency dictates. But unfor-
tunately for him, his tacit support of the left-wing C.D.C. puts
him squarely out of step with the National Democratic Administra-
tion, the majority of Democrats in Congress, and the sentiment
of millions of California Democrats.
In distinct contrast to Brown's silence, I have proposed a four-
point action program to combat the Communist menace in California.
As Governor, I will:
1. Propose top-priority legislation to deny the use of tax-supported
institutions for speeches by any individual who refuses to comply
with Federal and State subversive control laws or refuses to
testify before Grand Juries or legislative committees investigating
subversive activities.
- 2 -
2. I will stress hard-hitting enforcement of laws now on the
books, including loyalty oaths.
3. I will activate, on a statewide basis, educational programs
on the tactics and strategy of communism for both school children
and adults.
4. I will emphasize the teaching of teachers and the use of
authoritative textbooks for maximum effectiveness in anti-
communist education.
The alternatives before the people of California on this issue are
strikingly clear. There is Brown's do-nothing attitude. Or
there is the opportunity to develop an effective anti-communist
program that will make our state the leader in the nation.
LAW ENFORCEMENT
STATEMENT BY RICHARD M. NIXON
LOS ANGELES
MAY 25, 1962
The Governor's office is the weakest link in the law-enforcement
chain in California.
Our State has the best local law-enforcement officials in the
country. Yet they operate with one hand tied behind their backs
because the Governor fails to give them decisive leadership and
good strong backing.
The whole law-enforcement climate is affected by the quality of the
man in the room at the top. When, as on the Chessman case, the
Governor publicly wrings his hands, sheds copious tears and takes
one step forward for each two to the rear, this attitude is felt
throughout the State and duly recorded on the underworld seismograph
And the quake reaches tidal proportions when the Governor also
opposes a responsible anti-crime program in the Legislature.
In 1959 and 1961, at least 15 measures were supported by the
California District Attorneys Association, the California Peace
Officers Association and the State Sheriffs Association. The
adoption of this program would have brought stronger criminal
penalties and more effective narcotics control.
Where did Brown stand? He bottled up legislation to protect the
identity of informers, who are essential in narcotics cases; he
torpedoed efforts to reasonably define our search and seizure
laws. In short, the Governor's office lobbied against the law-
enforcement program and killed it.
On the insidious narcozics problem, this is Brown's record: 1959 --
Brown refuses to recognize a problem and does nothing; 1960 --
Despite a petition signed by nearly 1,000,000 citizens, Brown again
ignores the need for better narcotics-control legislation; 1961 --
three days after the State Assembly passes an anti-narcotics
program, Brown finally gets on the bandwagon. Now, the Governor
claims the credit for legislative action!
In 1962, effective lav-enforcement legislation again ran smack
into a Brown roadblock. The Governor was asked to put the ques-
tion of local-state jurisdiction on vice laws before the special
session of the Legislature. The Carol Lane decision had ruled
that softer state lav superseded stronger local laws. The Legis-
lature could have taken immediate action to clarify jurisdictions
and put strong local laws back into effect. Under the California
Constitution, the Governor was the only man who could have brought
this vital issue before the Legislature. The Governor refused
to act.
-2-
This, then, is the law-enforcement climate in California today.
This is the kind of support that the Governor's office is giving
our dedicated state, county and local law-enforcement officials.
Today's serious crime wave in some of our major cities is indica-
tive of the Governor's attitude on the problems of law-enforcement
-- Brown gives lip service, not muscle. But only an ostrich with
its head in the sand could fail to see the shocking picture that
now faces every Californian:
1. From 1954 through 1960, California's population increased by
27 percent; our state's rate of major crime increased 90 percent.
2. In one year, 1960, there were more major crimes committed in
California than in New York, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania combined
-- three states which together have double the population of
California.
3. Out-of-state crime czars now have a firm foothold in California,
according to statements by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, by
the United States Commissioner of Narcotics, by the Joint Judiciary
Committee on the Administration of Justice, by the Rackets Sub-
committee in the State Assembly and by United States Congressional
investigation committees.
4. Our prisons are overcrowded and our prison officials are over-
burdened. In the last three years -- in close-security facilities
-- there have been 40 cases of riots, murders and escapes.
Those are the facts which our Governor has smugly brushed aside or
denied.
I believe we must have an immediate six-point action program to
replace current complacency from the Governor's office, to provide
the tools for effective local law-enforcement, and to make maximum
use of our state's first-rate authorities on crime control and crime
prevention.
1. We must have a Governor who will give strong, decisive leader-
ship. The Governor, by word and deed, influences the whole law-
enforcement climate in the state. California cannot afford a
Governor who will hear no evil and see no evil. Crime must be
recognized, rooted out, and made to pay the ultimate penalty when
necessary.
2. We must have a Governor, who will encourage and support our
conscientious local law-enforcement officials. The Governor,
instead of raising obstacles, should present a realistic legis-
lative program after consultation with the law-enforcement assoc-
iations. Such a program should include the ultimate penalty as a
possible sentence for big-time dope peddlers, as well as immediate
action to overcome the adverse effects of the Carol Lane decision.
-3-
3. We must have a Governor who will not be influenced by the
California Democratic Council. The CDC proposes to set up local
citizens boards to investigate "mistreatment" of defendants at the
hands of law-enforcement officials, rather than relying on our
courts and removing obstacles in the path of sound law-enforcement.
4. We must have a Governor who will switch gears from neutral to
high on the necessary expansion of prison facilities. And we must
have a Governor who will take steps to eliminate the causes of
prison riots.
5. We must have a Governor who will immediately set up a top-level
state crime commission to coordinate the fight for a safer Calif-
ornia.
We must make better use of our expert criminologists, penologists,
local and county law officers in our fight to get the necessary
laws, and to give every professional assistance available in our
state.
6. We must have a governor who will give meaningful encouragement
to our voluntary agencies, church groups, and boys clubs in their
programs of crime prevention.
These are the actions that will assure the safety of the citizens
of California. These are the actions that will close the leader-
ship gap in the Governor's office. And these are the actions that
will make our state a model to the nation in crime prevention and
crime control.
CALIFORNIA'S CRIME RATE
REMARKS BY RICHARD NIXON
SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA
JUNE 1, 1962
In the time it took us to eat our lunch today, 15 felonies were
committed in California.
There are 700 felonies -- or one every two minutes -- committed
daily in our State, according to the most recent statistics.
Equally shocking: There is a young person arrested every 2.8
minutes somewhere in California -- 500 juvenile arrests daily.
And our crime climate is deteriorating, not improving. California
leads the nation in total offenses -- with nearly twice as many as
New York. Ahd there is little hope for improvement until our
first-rate local law-enforcement authorities receive the proper
support and encouragement from the State:government.
No Californian should be satisfied with our present record.
There are many actions that State government can immediately under-
take to reverse this insidious trend. This is not a partisan issue.
Democrats and Republicans must join together to make California the
first state in crime prevention.
Our dedicated local law-enforcement officials, who are the best in
the country, must have responsible legislation to back them up.
We must have realistic search and seizure laws that protect consti-
tutional rights without tying the hands of law-enforcement officers.
There must be legislation to give more protection to informants in
narcotics cases, where this is the only feasible way to secure arrests
There must be legislation providing for the ultimate penalty for big-
time dope peddlers, who cynically corrupt our young people.
But the fight against crime cannot and should not be waged solely by
government. There is a great deal that can be done by voluntary
organizations, church groups, and service clubs. Law-enforcement is
government business, but crime prevention should be everybody's
business. The strength of America has always been our private ini-
tiative. It was not government that made America great--it was free
enterprise, individual responsibility and private group action.
We must now harness this great force and this great strength in
voluntary programs of education and recreation to halt juvenile de-
linquency and prevent crime. These are programs for a better Calif-
ornia tomorrow. Our young people deserve the chance we can give
them to lead full and productive lives.
BROAD EXPERIENCE AN ASSET
REMARKS BY RICHARD M. NIXON
ALAMEDA, CALIFORNIA
MAY 23, 1962.
Brown is attempting to impose a hillbilly outlook on our State by
trying to convince the voters that my national and international
experience is a liability for service as Governor.
Because Brown has no first-hand knowledge of the nation and the
world, he may think it isn't important to California But Calif-
ornians know that what goes on beyond our borders has a very
direct effect on the State's welfare and economic progress.
One of the State's most pressing problems is agricultural export.
There is a real danger that, without strong leadership from the
Governor, California commodities could be put on the auction
block under the new international trade agreements program. In
this important area, would the State rather have a Governor who is
an international novice or someone with broad knowledge of what
happens at world bargaining tables?
Another of the many areas of national and international affairs
that has a major impact on California is the serious and deadly
traffic in narcotics from Mexico. Does Brown really believe
that my 14 years of service as Congressman, Senator and Vice
President will be a liability?
I believe the voters want a Governor who has the broad background
to stand up for California and fight the State's case in national
and international arenas.
Brown's form of isolationism would lead to sealing off the
borders of our State to new ideas, new industry, and new oppor-
tunities. But Californians have been fence-busters from way
back. We're not going to buy a two-bit approach to the world,
the nation, and the state. This November we're going to close
the leadership gap in state government.
QUALITY OF BROWN APPOINTMENTS
REMARKS OF RICHARD M. NIXON
BERKELEY
MAY 23, 1962
I believe that California deserves quality-in-government. Mis-
placed persons, second-rate administrators, and political hacks
have no place in the operation of our State.
California has a great higher education system. It deserves the
very finest men on the State Board of Regents--men who can devote
all the time necessary to assuring continued quality in our Univer-
sity system. We cannot afford to have a member of the Board who
lives 3,000 miles away from California in Washington, D.C.
Water is one of the most pressing needs in our State. Historically
our water program has been above politics. In the past, quality
has always transcended partisanship. We cannot afford to turn
the water program over to a man of proven inefficiency in the
foreign aid program.
Agriculture is our State's leading industry. Quality is an absolute
must in picking a State Director of Agriculture. We cannot afford
to play a game of political musical chairs with this position.
California deserves better than the sort of man who vas kicked
out of Washington for his part in the Billie Sol Estes scandal.
We cannot afford to have a newspaperman, without financial exper-
ience, as our State Director of Finance.
Yet when I cite these examples of where California can and must do
better, I am charged with "a smokescreen." Well, I say where
there's so much smoke, somebody ought to get fired.
We cannot allow the State song to be changed to "out Where the
Waste Begins." And I pledge to return above-partisan quality
to government in California.
Californians deserve no less.
GOVERNMENT REORGANIZATION
RICHARD NIXON
BEFORE COMMONWEALTH CLUB
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA
MAY 18, 1962
Last November, New York -- a state that will soon be second to
California in population -- repealed a clause in its Constitution
that declared all land grants given by the King of England to be
"null and void" after October 14, 1775.
In Michigan, as a result of the 1959 debacle that brought the
state to the brink of bankruptcy, 144 delegates are presently
convened in what is called "the con con" -- or Constitutional
Convention.
Tennessee has recently reorganized its government to eliminate
six boards and commissions. Hawaii streamlined its state admin-
istration in 1961 and abolished 323 jobs.
All across the nation people are concerned about the reorganization
of their state governments and their state constitutions.
I think there is a basic reason for this attitude. Americans are
worried about the trend toward "Let Washington Do It." And part of
the reason for this trend is that our state governments -- bogged
down in archaic restrictions and outmoded systems of management --
have simply created such a void in servicing the people that the
federal government has often been forced to move in.
Now that the pendulum of government has swung so far toward Wash-
ington, Americans see the very serious dangers involved. We all
recognize that Washington cannot know a state's needs as well
as those at home. Washington brings a 50-state impersonal solution
to a problem, not an individually tailored program for California
or Michigan or New York.
Yet this is not the most damaging result of the trend toward
Washington. Much more fundamental is the way it warps our basic
fabric of government -- the Constitutional principle of Federalism,
which is so essential to the preservation of freedom. It is not
only the "local touch" that we have lost along the route to Wash-
ington, but something far more important -- self-reliance.
And so now America says, "It's time for a change." It's time to
streamline state government. It's time to bring to it the vast
experience we have gained in business, universities and civic
groups. It's time to resume the responsibility for our states'
welfare and our states' future. The answer to more government
from Washington is better government in California.
The growth of California government has resembled Jack's magic
beanstalk. By the end of World War I, there were already more than
-2-
100 independent offices, boards and commissions. The standard
operating procedure whenever a new problem of a special interest
arose was simply to add another box on the organizational chart.
This process clouded lines of authority, slowed down decision
making and skyrocketed the cost of government.
By 1961, the governmental atom had been split so many times that
if the Governor were to spend just one day annually reviewing the
work of each state body, he would barely have time to make the
rounds in a year -- for there were 360 boards, commissions and
agencies in the State government.
Recognizing the seriousness of this situation, the Governor sub-
mitted a reorganization plan, which was passed in a slightly
different form by the legislature. The Governor's solution was to
create a "Super Cabinet" of $25,000-a-year administrators. The
Legislative Analyst, A. Alan Post, estimated that this would cost
the State in excess of $250,000, without considering the additional
technical staff needs or related operating expenses.
The Governor's plan failed to do away with a single agency of State
government. On the contrary, it added another layer on top of
the existing bureaucracy. Under the new plan, the super-admin-
istrators have no power to effect any changes in their departments.
They cannot consolidate a single agency. They cannot abolish a
single board. They cannot eliminate a single job. Lacking this
authority, it is plain to see that the super-administrators cannot
effect any economies in our State government -- either in budgeting
or in programming.
In fact, what has happened is that the super-administrators have
direct access to the Governor, but no operating authority; while
their subordinates have operating authority, but limited direct
access. The end-result of the 1961 reorganization has been addi-
tional problems of diffused authority, inadequate coordination,
and poor communications.
The tragedy of this is that the need for revitalized government is
greater in California than in any other State in the Union. Calif-
ornia, which grows at the rate of 1,600 persons each day, cannot
stand pat. We must create 20,000 new jobs each month just to tread
water. And Californians do not intend to tread water. We want to
be more than the biggest; we want to be the best.
As the first state in population we want to lead the nation in the'
quality of our state government. If we are to do this I believe
we must immediately undertake a ten-point program to give California
a more efficient, less costly and more responsive State government.
1. Our Constitution must be revised. It now meanders for 245 pages.
It takes another 60 pages just for the index. It not only contains
256 amendments and over 75,000 words, but it's the only Constitution
with an Article IV-Section 25, - Section 25-1/2, - Section 25-5/8,
Section 25-3/4. In short, it is a case of verbosity on a rampage.
- 3 -
This might be merely ludicrous if it were not that the words
interfere with the deeds. By freezing into our basic governing
document all the solutions to past problems, we are putting a
straitjacket on our ability to solve future problems.
2. We must streamline the swarm of State commissions, State
bureaus, State agencies, and State departments. It is not enough
to put a shiny tin weathervane on top of an old barn. We must
replace the rotten rafters and sagging floor boards. There must
be a statesmanlike reorganization of our executive branch of
government to give the people of California more and better ser-
vices for their tax-dollars. We cannot afford the wasteful dup-
lication of having four separate agencies keep personnel records
on any given state employee, and seven separate state agencies
collect taxes.
3. We must get rid of the super-administrators, the unnecessary
and expensive State-paid press agents, and all other surplus
baggage that has accumulated in our government. Governments
exist to perform needed services, not provide needless jobs.
4. We must make maximum use of our career employees, as well as
our elected officials. To this end, I believe the Lieutenant
Governor should conduct year-round investigations into the oper-
ation of government agencies and make recommendations for cost
cutting and efficiency to the Governor.
5. We must reapportion the State Senate so as to give an adequate
legislative voice to the metropolitan centers of the State, while
still maintaining the majority representation from primarily
rural areas.
6. We must have continuous two-year sessions of the State legis-
lature. The Constitutional requirement to hold budget-only
sessions in even numbered years has caused an erosion of legis-
lative responsibility. The Governor, forced to call "special
sessions" during budget years, now has total control over these
legislative agenda. In these special sessions, the Governor is
the only one who can determine what is an "emergency." In the
past we have seen such "emergency" matters as legislation concern-
ing cooking in hotel bedrooms!
Continuous two-year sessions will also permit long-range, in-depth
committee investigations, with no fear of two year delays on
issues of major importance.
7. We must unfreeze the two-thirds of the State budget that is
not subject to legislative review or control. In the State's
current $2.9 billion budget, only a little over $900 million
was subjected to legislative scrutiny. We cannot have true
fiscal responsibility until these mandatory appropriations and
earmarked funds are exposed to the legislative searchlight.
-4-
8. We must initiate a "California Crusade for New Business
Investment." Our business leaders and public officials must
forcefully take our case to the country.
We must adopt tax and other fiscal policies that will help us
attract new industry. We must reverse the trend that now sees
some out-of-state industries passing over California in the
search for new plant sites.
9. We must also have better coordination of those state and
private activities that will make California's industrial and
agricultural products competitive in foreign markets. I have
personally seen the world-wide industrialization that now threatens
California products abroad. This 20th Century Industrial Revol-
ution is a great challenge to California. We must respond by
making our products household words in places that were once
only exotic names on a map.
10. The Department of Finance should be relieved of its petty
responsibilities for such things as janitorial and grass-cutting
services in order effectively to concentrate on planning for the
overall growth of the State. Each State function cannot be per-
formed in a vacuum. The decision as to where to put a freeway
determines more than the future traffic flow; it determines
future area congestion, which in turn determines future costs of
doing business in California, which in turn determines the
future economic health of our State. We must prevent highway
planners or housing planners from starting a chain reaction
without taking into account the ultimate link. It is time
for the State Government to look at the forest as well as the trees.
The leadership for this kind of forward-looking planning must come
from the Governor and his top associates in the State administration
Besides these ten proposals, during the past month I have made other
recommendations in the specific context of improving government
activities in water development, education, and dealing with
Communist activities in California. In the months ahead, I shall
point out other organizational changes that can give California
more effective programs in public welfare, agriculture, transpor-
tation, and other vital areas of State concern.
However, I want to make it clear that as important and necessary as
I believe these changes to be, they are not a cure-all for Calif-
ornia's problems. Changing the structure of government does not
automatically change the substance of government. It is like
setting up the best possible organization to produce and sell a
product. Without the organization, there is little likelihood of
successfully making a profit. But if the product does not fulfill
consumer needs, even the best production force and sales team will
not make the product a success in the long run.
-5-
By the same token, even the most streamlined operation will not
guarantee success if the organization lacks decisive leadership,
imagination, and drive.
Therefore, the success of our State, just as the success of a
business, depends on three factors: responsible and forceful
leadership; superior products -- in this case, programs that
adequately meet the needs of a dynamic, growing State; and sound
organization designed to keep costs down and production up.
This is not just the job of our elected public officials. As
citizens, we do not fulfill our responsibilities to ourselves
and our State by casting a ballot and then standing pat until the
next election. California's destiny will only be fulfilled by
progressive partnership of the private and public sectors of our
State. I know that we can harness the energy of our citizens
and our government to make California not only the biggest but
also the best. Together we can make California a model of cost-
conscious government with a conscience.
CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURE
RICHARD M. NIXON
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA
MAY 23, 1962
The Brown Administration's record in agriculture favors one commod-
ity -- the political plum. I propose to replace this bitter fruit
with an eight-point action program that will benefit both the
California farmer and consumer.
California's agriculture and its allied industries add $12
billion annually to our State's total economic product. For
every hundred workers on the farm, there are 263 others who are
directly dependent upon agriculture. This means that every fourth
work e in California is directly dependent upon agriculture.
Clearly what happens to farming is of concern to every Californian.
Agriculture is California's number one industry and we all have
a major stake in its prosperity and growth.
1. To restore the farmer's confidence in his government, I will
replace Brown's political appointees with men of quality and
experience who are thoroughly versed in the complex problems of
our state's agriculture.
Brown has made three consecutive politically-inspired partisan
appointments to the key position of Director of Agriculture.
First there was William Warne, a man who had spent the previous
decade out of the country and who had not been near California
farm problems since the mid-30's. Brown later allowed William
Warne to try to kidnap the State Department of Agriculture and bury
it in his bureaucratic maze, even though the Legislature had
specifically directed otherwise. It was only the united and
spontaneous opposition of all farm groups across the State that
blocked this self-serving move.
Next came James Ralph, a newcomer to California, who was fired by
the National Administration for being involved in the Billy Sol
Estes scandal.
And now there is Charles Paul, another newcomer, who was picked
for purely political purposes over the heads of better qualified
career men and farm leaders.
2. I will support a Federal minimum wage for agriculture and will
oppose a California minimum wage law for farm workers. Such a Cal-
ifornia statute would only serve to put California agriculture in
a position where it could not possibly compete with states that are
currently paying far less for farm labor.
3. I will work to see that supplemental supplies of foreign labor
are available when there is a shortage of qualified domestic farm
labor. There are times at the peak of harvest when foreign labor
is necessary to gather in its crops. Brown has given the silent
-2-
treatment to the need for such supplemental labor, even at times
when the need for such assistance has been certified to by members
of his own cabinet.
Brown and members of his staff have joined with such persons as
former U.S. Assistant Secretary of Labor, Jerry Holleman, in adding
restrictions to the use of supplemental labor. Holleman is another
man who was caught with his palm greased by Billy Sol Estes.
There are many fine farm organizations in our State that have worked
diligently to insure themselves of an adequate supply of domestic
labor. I will encourage these voluntary farm groups in their activ-
ities in setting up referral offices and in their efforts to use
domestic labor to the fullest extent.
4. I will use my experience in international affairs to find
ways to increase our farm exports. California's agriculture is
based on special crops. Only about 1-1/2% of our farm income is
from Federal subsidies. There is a very real danger that these
unsubsidized crops, with little political weight on the national
scales, could be put on the auction block under the new internat-
ional trade agreements program. Brown has no experience in inter-
national negotiations. Moreover, he is under pressure from his
party in Washington. His typical response has again been to
call do-nothing meetings. We need a governor who will stand up
and fight for California's products. I will use my knowledge
of the international bargaining table to see that the foreign
market for our commodities is not traded away by State Department
negotiators.
5. I will oppose all Federal attempts to impose the 160-acre
limitation on State financed water projects. The 160-acre limita-
tion was originally designed to assure equitable distribution of
Federally-owned and Federally-reclaimed land. To use it as a
political instrument for expropriation is nothing but a cynical
scheme. Brown has talked out of both sides of his mouth on the
160-acre limitation, while his left-wing California Democratic
Council has handed out the party line to support this outmoded
concept.
6. I will see that the voices of all commodity groups are fully and
equally heard. California is the greatest agricultural producing
state in the nation. This wealth-creating power stems from more
than 200 crops, many of which comprise the bulk of United States
production. Cotton growers, dairymen, stockmen, fruit and vegetable
farmers--all must be able to present their distinct and special
problems to a Governor who will not play favorites.
7. One of my first acts as Governor will be to work towards re-
storing the State Board of Agriculture to its former outstanding
-3-
position in the nation. Now it is composed of eight members of
Brown's political party and one traditionally academic appoint-
ment. For some time a tacit requirement for appointment to this
Board was membership in the California Democratic Farmers Congress,
a James Ralph partisan innovation.
8. Finally, I will replace indecisions with the strong leader-
ship our State so desperately needs in all agricultural areas.
WELFARE STATEMENT
BY RICHARD M. NIXON
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA
MAY 29, 1962
Governor Brown's contribution to welfare programs in California
has been loose administration, excessive red tape, and unproduc-
tive cost increases.
Before Brown came to office, California had developed a liberal and
humane record in welfare matters. Since Brown has been in office,
this is the record:
1. Costs have skyrocketed. State funds for welfare programs have
risen over 25% in the last two years, while our population has
gone up only 7.5%.
2. Laxity and red tape have caused two national magazines to
single out California's Aid to Needy Children and Unemployment
Insurance program as grim examples of slipshod and self-defeating
administration.
3. Brown's Administration has allowed unscrupulous individuals
to take advantage of the humanitarian aims of the welfare programs.
The investigation of an unmarried mother of three children in
San Jose is a case in point. She had received more than $20,000
in welfare payments, although she lived in a $31,000 home, had a
$1,000 mink coat, a $3,200 automobile, $1,000 of French provincial
furniture, and the services of a gardener.
4. Brown's State Board of Social Welfare has contributed to the
breaking-up of homes by ruling that the reason for the absence of
the father is immaterial in Aid to Needy Children cases. This has
caused parents to separate solely to get public assistance. In one
case where a father earned $242 a month, his family received $364
monthly in public assistance once he had left his wife.
5. Brown's answer to these problems is more staff at county expense
Yet our dedicated caseworkers are already so snowed-under with
form-filling, memo-writing, and a five-foot shelf of regulations
that they literally do not have time for casework. This immersion
in a sea of papers is also responsible for the enormous and costly
staff turnover -- now 25-33% a year.
We must take immediate action to eliminate these roadblocks that
obscure the laudable aims of our welfare programs. People become
aged, illnesses are crippling, children are neglected, families
are deserted, unemployment increases. We must be concerned for
those who are handicapped, either by physical, social or economic
forces over which they have little control.
We must get more service for less money from our social welfare
programs. We deserve a better deal as taxpayers. And those on
public assistance deserve a better deal as human beings.
-2-
Therefore, I propose a five-point action program of welfare reform.
1. We must immediately replace the segmented and costly approach to
social welfare problems with inter-departmental coordination.
For example, unemployment, under-employment and racial discrimin-
ation are all sources of the dependency problem. There must be a
closer tie between the Department of Employment and the Welfare
Department. Some employment office representatives should work in
Welfare Department offices, Adult education facilities and ser-
vices should be brought into this program to increase employment
skills.
2. We must clear away the underbrush of regulations so that
caseworkers and administrators will be able to concentrate on
the families needing assistance, rather than being forced to
give most of their attention to an endless stream of petty details.
3. We must have greater local control and local autonomy to meet
local conditions. State and county relations are currently at a
low point. Instead of teamwork, there is suspicion and mistrust.
Instead of leadership, there is dictation and duplication from the
State to the counties in which the programs must be carried out.
4. We must restore the concept of personal responsibility. We
must refocus our attention on helping people to help themselves,
rather than just doling out money. The welfare programs must be
more than a method of transferring funds. Prevention and re-
habilitation must be the basis of all programs.
5. A concentrated effort must be made to re-unite ANC families.
And where reconciliation of families is not possible, more effort
should be made to obtain support payments from the absent father.
Some counties are doing a good job in this area, but the Brown
Administration has frowned on these efforts as "punitive."
These actions will assure that our tax dollars are spent in the
most constructive and waste-free manner, And these actions will
assure that no scandal or administrative snafu will threaten our
future ability to help the honest and unfortunate people who are
relying on our assistance.
BROWN'S INCAPACITY TO LEAD
STATEMENT BY RICHARD NIXON
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA
JUNE 4, 1962
Governor Brown has been a costly embarrassment to the people of
California. Here are ten situations where Brown has consistently
displayed his incapacity to give effective leadership.
1. Brown has embarrassed Californians by showing an appalling lack
of knowledge of government and its operations.
--He claims not to have known that the 27-year Squaw Valley contract
was given to his crony William Newsom during his Administration.
--He did not know that the State Constitution prohibits retroactive
pay raises to State employees.
--He did not even know that his own salary as Governor had been
raised by $4,100 until the press called it to his attention.
2. Brown has embarrassed Californians by displaying a Hamlet-like
compulsion to duck difficult decisions.
--His indecision turned the Chessman case into an international
incident.
--His indecision delayed effective narcotics legislation until the
State Legislature forced his hand.
--His latest indecision on refusing to repudiate the extreme left-
wing positions of the California Democratic Council has clouded his
ability to represent all the people of California.
3. Brown has embarrassed Californians by his compulsion to put his
foot in his mouth.
--To the Communist-supported "Women Striking for Peace," Brown said,
"I hope your message rings around the world."
4. Brown has embarrassed Californians by substituting file-and-
forget reports for immediate action.
--He created a commission to study metropolitan problems, such as
smog and transportation -- then he ignored the recommendations.
--He created a group to study consolidation of Bay Area bridges,
airports and port facilities -- then ignored the recommendations.
--He called for reports on water, State printing, State planning,
reapportionment, fallout shelters, and Squaw Valley -- all these
reports have been involved in unsolved mysteries.
-2-
5. Brown has embarrassed Californians by his inability to keep good
men in State government.
--Robert McCarthy, who ran the Department of Motor Vehicles with
great efficiency, resigned with this blast at Brown: "It has be-
come increasingly hard to work for a spineless administration that
lacks both courage and principles."
--When the Chairman of the Veteran Board, Arthur McCardle, resigned,
he added, "I have nothing but absolute disgust and repulsion for the
lies, deceit and treachery coming out of Sacramento."
6. Brown has embarrassed Californians by loading the State payroll
with his relatives.
--One of Brown's sons-in-law is assistant to the State Director of
Corrections. Salary; $10,860.
--Another of Brown's sons-in-law is a deputy attorney general.
Salary: $7,728.
--Brown's sister-in-law is on his staff. Salary: $10,380.
--Brown's brother is a State inheritance tax appraiser. Fees for
part-time work in one year: $7,640.
7. Brown has embarrassed Californians by playing blind partisan
politics.
--His record of appointments shows that Brown has picked 1109 Demo-
crats and 325 Republicans.
--He has lobbied for and has passed new election laws designed to
buck up his political machine.
--He has supported the most flagrant political juggling of legis-
lative boundaries in the history of California.
8. Brown has embarrassed Californians by courting Jimmy Hoffa support
--Brown appointed Dutch Woxberg, a former chief Hoffa aide, to a top
State position.
--Brown has enthusiastically accepted the endorsement of the Hoffa-
controlled Teamster bosses in California.
9. Brown has embarrassed Californians by refusing to repudiate the
extreme left-wing positions of those close to him.
--He has refused to repudiate the letter from 43 of his top party
leaders urging cancellation of the House Un-American Activities
Committee hearings in Los Angeles.
-3-
--He has refused to repudiate the Young Democrats' resolutions in
opposition to loyalty oaths and the House Committee on Un-American
Activities.
--He has refused to repudiate eight left-wing resolutions of the CDC
--including eventual admission of Red China into the U.N., presi-
dential review for convicted Soviet spy Morton Sobell, and reduction
of U. S. military expenditures.
10. Brown has embarrassed Californians by standing pat at a time
when it is imperative that our state move forward.
--He stands pat with the worst record of highway fatalities in the
nation.
--He stands pat with the worst record of major crimes in the nation,
despite the great efforts of our dedicated local law-enforcement
officials.
--He stands pat with the fourth worst teacher-pupil ratio of any
State in the nation.
--He stands pat with the highest total State and local tax collection
per capita in the nation.
BROWN AND LEFT-WING ACTIVITIES
REMARKS OF RICHARD NIXON
CHULA VISTA RALLY
MAY 26, 1962
Governor Brown applies a cynical double-standard to his actions. He
is quick to call on others to repudiate right-wing extremsits, while
he firmly refuses to repudiate the left-wing extremists of the
California Democratic Council.
This group endorsed and in effect selected Brown in 1958. Brown is
their man again this year. Brown owes it to the voters to stop
stalling and give a frank reply to this question: Does he approve
these eight on-the-record positions of the CDC?
--"The eventual admission of Communist China" into the United Nations.
--Repeal of State and Federal loyalty oaths.
--Abolition of the House Committee on Un-American Activities.
--Presidential review of the conviction of Soviet spy Morton Sobell
"to secure ultimate justice."
--Reduction of U.S. "expenditures on both missile and conventional
forces."
--Repeal of the Landrum-Griffin anti-racketeering act.
--U.S. foreign aid to countries regardless of their forms of govern-
ment.
--Investigation of local police by citizen boards for alleged "mis-
treatment' of defendants (rather than relying on our courts and
removing obstacles to law-enforcement) .
These are a cross-section of the California Democratic Council's bug-
eyed proposals that will weaken our state and nation. Surely Brown
has an opinion on these well-known issues. My position is unequivocal
I'm firmly against every one of these CDC proposals.
This is not all that Brown sidesteps. On April 22, 43 members of the
Los Angeles County Democratic Committee, officials of the CDC and
President of Democratic Clubs wrote Democratic National Chai rman
John Bailey urging him "in the interests of insuring a Democratic
victory" to use his "influence to seek cancellation of the scheduled
hearings of the House Un-American Activities Committee in Los Angeles.
These letter-writers felt that House Un-American Activities Committee
hearings "can be only harmful to the cause" of the Democratic Party
in California.
This view can hardly be shared by millions of rank-and-file Demo-
crats who want to expose and stamp out the Communist menace in
California. This view can hardly be shared by the majority of
the Congressional Committee, who are elected Democrats.
Yet Brown again remains silent. He has not publicly supported
his party leaders' contention that the House Un-American Activities
Committee hearings could be harmful to his party. He has not
publicly repudiated the letter and its strange contention.
-2-
Why has Brown consistently declined to repudiate this dangerous
brand of political quackery? I have made my position absolutely
clear on both the radical right and the radical left. Californians
are still waiting to hear from Brown on where he stands.
I am not alone in asking Brown to stand up and be counted. The
President of the University Young Democrats at Berkeley has just
sent Brown an "open letter" stating, "In short, Governor Brown,
I'm asking you to fire your speech-writers, get some new ones
and tell them to put some guts into your speeches."
Brown and his ghostwriters certainly owe this to the people of
California.
THE CDC AND BROWN
REMARKS OF RICHARD M. NIXON
AT CALIFORNIA REPUBLICAN ASSEMBLY MEETING
EL SEGUNDO
JUNE 23, 1962
The primary election results spell only bad news for Mr. Brown.
More than 16 percent of the Democrats who voted preferred three
unknowns to Brown, and an estimated 5 to 7 percent wrote in the
names of Republican candidates on their Democratic ballots. With
such a protest vote among Democrats of over 20 percent, it's little
wonder that Brown declared he was "going down to victory."
******
Whether or not Mr. Brown ever makes up his mind about engaging in
free and open TV debates during the forthcoming campaign, it is
time for him to get off the fence and either accept or reject the
left-wing extremist support of the California Democratic Council.
He should stop stalling and tell the voters of California his posi-
tion on these six on-the-record resolutions of the CDC.
Repeal of state and federal loyalty oaths.
Abolition of the House Committee on Un-American Activities.
"Eventual admission of Communist China" into the United Nations.
Reduction of U.S. "expenditures on both missile and conventional
forces."
Repeal of the Landrum-Griffin anti-racketeering law.
Investigation of local police by citizen boards for alleged "mis-
treatment" of defendants (rather than relying on our courts and
our local police commissions).
This is simply a cross-section of proposals adopted by CDC conven-
tions after Brown called the CDC "his strong right arm" in 1959.
Every one of them would gravely weaken our state and nation in some
vital area of public affairs.
Yet Brown accepts the support and the endorsement of the CDC. He
can't have it both ways: either he accepts this support, and these
extremist views along with it, or he must openly and unequivocally
repudiate it.
As recently as May 27, I publicly challenged Brown for a straight
answer, which the voters of this state surely deserve. The silence
-2-
has been deafening. My own position, on the other hand, is
absolutely clear and I re-state it now: I am firmly against
everytone of these CDC proposals.
Every voter, every thoughtful citizen of both parties, deserve an
answer. Between now and November, I intend to keep reminding
Brown of that fact -- and of the further fact that one sure mark
of leadership is the courage and willingness to take stands on
major issues of public policy.
EQUAL OPPORTUNITY
REMARKS BY RICHARD NIXON
REPUBLICAN COMMUNITY CENTER
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA
JUNE 1, 1962
A few months ago I read a letter to the editor in one of our
local papers that expressed in simple, direct language one of the
most serious problems of our time -- one that hits our Negro
citizens with particular hardship and that is all too often
neither understood nor fully appreciated by the community as a whole.
The letter read:
"I am a high school student and my question is, will there be any
jobs available when my fellow students and I are ready to go job
hunting?
"I ask this because I have been watching friends and relatives go
practically out of their minds because they can't find work.
"One man in particular has not worked steady for two years. He
supplies vegetables and fruits for his family from that spoiled and
left at Twelfth and San Pedro Streets. He is an American 27 years
old. He is a baker by trade, yet qualifies for other jobs."
The letter was signed by a student from Roosevelt High School.
This student was, of course, expressing more than dismay at the
cruelty of blind discrimination -- he was also expressing real con-
cern for his future and wondering whether there was any hope in this
situation.
It is little wonder that we see the formation of organizations such
as the Black Muslims -- a group that has turned its back on hope
and retreated to violence and racism as a solution. But neither
violence nor hate, whether directed at the Negro or white can pro-
duce the changes we know must come and will come. These changes
must be based on cooperation and personal opportunities for promo-
tion. We cannot have progress if we are going to encourage class
and racial distinctions. We cannot achieve progress and opportunity
for all through purely legalistic approaches. A more positive
approach is necessary. That is why, as Governor, I will use the
moral and persuasive powers of my office to bring employers to-
gether for voluntary action in the field of equal job opportunities,
and opportunities for promotion.
This approach will give the high school student, who wrote the
newspaper, and others like him, the opportunities to lead full,
useful and happy lives.
SQUAW VALLEY
REMARKS BY RICHARD NIXON
BEFORE THE SUNSET YOUNG REPUBLICANS
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA
MAY 2, 1962
The shenanigans at Squaw Valley are still unexplained by the Brown
Administration. The Governor's flimsy defense has not cleared the
air. It has only raised more questions.
Why didn't Brown cancel his crony's contract after the Newsom outfit
was found guilty of serving liquor to minors? This is a major vio-
lation. Does the Governor condone such conduct?
Why didn't the Governor cancel his crony's contract after the Newsom
outfit was cited for more than 30 concession violations? These vio-
lations include uncleanliness, poor maintenance, unauthorized ad-
vertising, infractions of housing regulations, violation of fire
codes and unauthorized removal of equipment. Does the Governor
condone such conduct?
Why has the Governor allowed this situation to fester for 21 months
without an audit of his crony's books? Rather than answer these
questions, Brown makes these three points:
1. He says: "Some of the material is entirely new to me."
This is a sorry comment from the man responsible for the entire oper-
ation of our state government. As a lawyer, Brown should know the
old adage, "ignorance of the law is no excuse." As a governor, he
should know that you can't slide off your constitutional responsi-
bility on underlings.
2. Brown says that he awaits a subordinate's report on the situation.
Californians have come to recognize this tune as "Variations on a
Theme by Brown.' The theme is, "stall for time--people may forget."
The people won't forget. They want answers -- now!
3. Brown says that he's sure that his crony Newsom would be willing
to sell out for $210,000.
Why WOULDN'T Newsom accept $210,000 for stock that cost him nothing?
The time has come to stop waiting for reports, to stop waiting for
action. It is time for the Governor to cancel this shabby contract.
Remember; Standing pat is no substitute for moving forward, and
government-by-crony is no substitute for good government.
Let's close the "leadership gap" in Sacramento.
AGRICULTURAL EXPORTS
REMARKS BY RICHARD NIXON
VISALIA, CALIFORNIA
MAY 30, 1962
California needs a Governor who will stand up and fight for our
State's agricultural and industrial exports.
We are now the number one exporter in the nation. In 1960, our
exports totaled nearly $1.8 billion, of which almost half a billion
dollars came from farm products. This means that 10% of all U.S.
farm exports come from California.
Today our farm and factory products are threatened from all sides.
From abroad, we face the stiffest competition in history. While
from Washington, D.C., there is the very real danger that State
Department negotiators could put our specialty crops on the auction
block under the new international trade agreements program.
I am sure that everyone in Tulare County has seen the new statistics
that show county farm income on the decline for the second straight
year. Farm income is down over $11 million. The year before the
drop was almost $8 million. Nearly every product has been affected
-- alfalfa hay, Valencia oranges, turkeys, cotton, cattle, table
grapes, emperor grapes and Muscats.
This trend must be reversed. I have already proposed an eight-
point action program to aid California farming. High up on my
list of priorities is action to increase farm exports. This is
an area in which my long experience in international affairs can
pay big dividends for all the people of our State.
But of equal importance, we must return quality administration to
the State's handling of agriculture. We must end the Brown
tradition of appointing political hacks to the key position of
Director of Agriculture. And we must restore the State Board
of Agriculture to its former outstanding position in the nation.
This I pledge to do as your Governor.
NEW INDUSTRY
RICHARD NIXON
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RETAIL GROCERS ASSOCIATION
LONG BEACH
MAY 17, 1962
Over the years, the people of California have demonstrated a re-
markable capacity for breaking ground in a great variety of fields
-- in aircraft design and production, in architecture and building,
in electronics and other areas of science, in agriculture, in
finance, in fabrics and clothing, in the energy industries, and in
many other areas of economic growth.
Many of these activities started as small businesses. They have
grown, prospered, and created opportunities for employment and
investment. This is because Californians have been eager to do
original thinking, to do things that have never been done before,
and to devise better ways of doing old things.
Unfortunately, now it is true that thoughtful people are having
doubts that this great record can be continued. These doubts are
based, not on any question of the capacity of the people, but on
the widespread belief that there is now an unfavorable business
climate in California.
Already, we have heard the President of Cannon Electric say that his
firm's next expansion will be in the Midwest. The treasurer of
another California-based company -- which built its latest plant in
Nebraska -- was equally blunt: "We can't compete if we keep our
operations here." A third executive also has said that his company
has "made its last expansion in California."
We must immediately reverse this trend and again inspire confidence
in the economic growth of California. We can do this by holding
the line against the spiral of record-breaking budgets and increased
taxes. We can do this by correcting the unsound fiscal policies
of the State; by wiping out frills and extravagance; by cutting
red tape and excess paper-work, and by streamlining and reorganizing
government operations.
But equally important, we can inspire a new wave of business con-
fidence by doing a better job in State government, rather than
running to Washington to get the job done.
FROM THE SAN FRANCISCO EXAMINER
BY JACK LOTTO
APRIL 23, 1962
REDS 'BURY' NIXON
The Communists "buried" former Vice President Richard M. Nixon
this week.
At the same time, the Reds blew to life the long-dead Alger Hiss case.
They indicated they are going to push the Hiss espionage-perjury
case as a campaign issue to turn a Nixon slip into a fatal political
plunge.
And, the Communists jubilantly trumpeted that they expect Nixon to
be killed politically in his campaign for the governorship of
California,
The official Communist Party mouthpiece, "The Worker," told the
comrades confidently:
"It is not unlikely that we can safely forget about Nixon after
next November. "
Nixon has been an archenemy of the Reds for nearly 15 years, since,
as a freshman member of the House Un-American Activities Committee,
he spark-plugged the investigation of Hiss.
The former State Department official was convicted of perjury in
1950, and given a five year prison term for denying he gave secret
Government documents to a Red spy ring.
Nixon, inadvertently, provided the ammunition for the new all-out
attack in his just-published book, "My Six Crises. " He erred when
he said the FBI found the typewriter which helped convict Hiss.
The mistake was jumped on by Hiss as supporting his contention of
a "frame-up."
During Hiss' two trials, the FBI swore it never had possession of
the machine. The defense found the old, battered typewriter and
introduced it into evidence.
The Government then proved the incriminating documents were typed
on it. Later, the defense claimed the typewriter was a Government
"plant."
Allegations of "fraud by typewriter" were rejected by all the
courts, up to the U.S. Supreme Court, in appeals for a new trial.
Said The Worker":
"Richard Nixon made the mistake of putting his lies in a book.
His lies about Alger Hiss, the Cuban invasion are down in black
Page 2.
and white where opponents can pick them apart. And it may drive
the final nails in the coffin in his political career.
"We 11 begin with the lies about Hiss, which will haunt Nixon
through the months of his gubernatorial campaign Nixon lied
about the most important evidence in the (Hiss) case
An
innocent man was convicted. Nixon's lie cannot be brushed
off as a mere 'researcher's mistake. 111
In view of the Communist statements and claims, this formal
announcement by U.S. Attorney-General Robert Kennedy should be
kept in mind:
"The claims made by Mr. Hiss and on his behalf regarding factual
matters in connection with his conviction cannot be substantiated.
All the pertinent files and records in the case have been reviewed
carefully. This review confirmed that the FBI never had possession
of the disputed typewriter."
FRANCIS AMENDMENT
REMARKS BY RICHARD NIXON
BEFORE THE
JUNIOR BARRISTERS OF LOS ANGELES
MAY 3, 1962
No one concerned with the security of our State and Nation can quarrel with the aims
of the Francis Amendment, which is designed to combat the communist menace in
California.
Governor Brown says this is "a very, very bad bill. He says, "I am against it in every
way. I emphatically disagree with Brown. There is an urgent need for a more effective
program to combat communism in California. Our State cannot stand pat on the commu-
nist threat. And we cannot tolerate a State Administration that substitutes smugness for
action.
Unfortunately, there appears to be a fatal Constitutional flaw in the Francis Amendment.
Because of loose drafting in Section 3, which allows a wide assortment of groups and
individuals to designate subversives, the Amendment may inadvertently give the commu-
nists a constitutional escape hatch.
For 14 years in Washington -- as Congressman, Senator, and Vice President -- I dealt
with communist-control legislation, and I know that the communists ferret out a legal
loophole with the cunning of a rat after cheese. I was one of the sponsors of the Federal
Subversive Activities Control Act of 1950 and I saw how communist tactics hog-tied this
in the courts for ten long years. If the communists could do this to a carefully constructed
law, which was finally held constitutional by the Supreme Court in 1961, it is easy to see
what a field-day they would have in attacking a piece of legislation with the potential defects
of the Francis Amendment.
This is why I regret that I can neither sign or support the Francis Amendment in its
present form.
My alternative in vigorously pursuing the fight against communism in California is this:
At the next session of the Legislature, I will present a first priority anti-communist
program. Among its provisions: it will deny the use of tax-supported institutions for
speeches by any individual who refuses to comply with Federal and State subversive con-
trol laws or refuses to testify before Grand Juries or legislative committees investigating
subversive activities; it will stress hard-hitting enforcement of laws now on the books,
including loyalty oaths; it will activate on a statewide basis educational programs on the
tactics and strategy of communism on the school and adult levels; it will emphasize the
teaching of teachers and the use of authoritative text-books to do this job.
On this issue -- fighting communism in California -- as on all issues, I aim to close the
"leadership gap" in Sacramento. Under the next Administration, California will not stand
pat; we shall move forward in solving our state's problems. In so doing we shall set an
example for other states to follow.
EDUCATION
EXCERPTS FROM REMARKS OF
RICHARD NIXON
BEFORE THE
CALIFORNIA TEACHERS ASSOCIATION
AND THE
NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION
AMBASSADOR HOTEL, LOS ANGELES
SATURDAY, APRIL 28, 1962
Between the eighth and twelfth grades one out of every four pupils
drops out of school and goes out into the labor market unprepared
and short-changed on his education. In terms of unemployment,
juvenile delinquency and the state's welfare programs, this is
'social dynamite.' It cannot and it should not be glossed over.
So long as we have our over-crowded classrooms and our high rate
of student drop-outs, we cannot say California has the kind of
education system which the first state in the nation deserves.
*
*
*
We must remember that a majority of our children do not go on to
colleges and universities. We must recognize more adequately the
needs of students who want vocational training. Our California
junior colleges are coming into the forefront in filling
specialized educational needs. They also are expected to take in
some 50,000 additional students who otherwise would attend private
and public colleges and universities. For this task, the junior
colleges have been promised greater state aid -- a commitment
which has been substantially unfulfilled to date. It is essential
that we fully emphasize their importance and their high standing
in the educational community.
*
*
*
Our education headaches are not about to be finally resolved. The
crest of children to be educated is yet to be reached. The total
public school enrollment is 3,825,000 -- double that of 1950 and
as great as the state's entire population a few short years ago.
By 1970 the number will jump to five million. We cannot limit our
perspective to the decade ahead. We must build a philosophy of
education that will serve as a sturdy framework for our educational
giant for many years to come.
*
*
*
We educate American children for a different purpose and to a
different end than the communists. We should not push the panic
button with each new communist achievement. We are educating
free citizens to live in a free society. We don't, at about the
tenth grade, test our children and send the rejects off to the
factory or to the mines in Siberia. There is no American equivalent
to Siberia to swallow up all but the brightest students. We
educate children to earn their livings in a free and competitive
society. We also educate them to be well-rounded people. Further,
we have a responsibility to our children which goes far beyond the
needs of a communist society. We are educating our future voters
and leaders and opinion makers.
EDUCATION
EXCERPTS FROM REMARKS OF
RICHARD NIXON
BEFORE THE
CALIFORNIA TEACHERS ASSOCIATION
AND THE
NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION
AMBASSADOR HOTEL, LOS ANGELES
SATURDAY, APRIL 28, 1962
California is near the bottom of the list among the 50 states in
numbers of students for each teacher in our elementary and
secondary public schools. With the exception of six other states,
California has the most crowded classrooms in the nation. Because
of such overcrowding, more than 90,000 students attend half-day,
split sessions.
The solution lies in increasing the number of teachers in
California and using our school buildings to greater purpose, so
that we can arrive at an improved pupil-teacher ratio. This
would in itself improve the working conditions of our teachers.
Beyond this, teachers should be relieved of non-teaching duties
insofar as possible.
*
*
*
The recommendations of our teachers should be given the highest
priority in any assessment of our education needs and any
assessment of where our money should be spent.
*
*
*
We must make sure that the state receives the maximum educational
benefit from every dollar it spends for educational purposes.
There is a drastic need for a thorough-going review of our present
method of distributing state aid toward the end of increased
equity and effectiveness -- not only for the children but for the
taxpayer.
EDUCATION
EXCERPTS FROM REMARKS OF
RICHARD NIXON
BEFORE THE
CALIFORNIA TEACHERS ASSOCIATION
AND THE
NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION
AMBASSADOR HOTEL, LOS ANGELES
SATURDAY, APRIL 28, 1962
There is no doubt that we need more classrooms. For this reason,
I urge support for the two state bond issues proposed for the con-
struction of new school, college and university buildings. These
include the $200 million bond issue for state construction. More
than 80 percent of this capital outlay bond issue will go for con-
struction at the University of California and the state colleges.
Properly drawn, local school bond issues also deserve support.
Our general policy should be to pay our bills as we go along.
But in our present fiscal situation created by higher spending
throughout our state government, schools that will be used many
years into the future must be financed on a time-payment plan.
As in buying a car, we would rather pay cash, but when we cannot
afford it, we are forced to finance our purchases, even if it
costs us more.
It is inconsistent and wrong to oppose federal aid to education,
and then vote against the local and state bond issues or other
funds needed to support a top-quality, locally-controlled
school system. There is in the final analysis only one effective
answer to the pressures for vastly increased federal aid and the
threat of federal control. Our states and local school districts,
and all responsible citizens, must assume the burden of respon-
sibility for adequate support. The most effective way to avoid
dictation on education from Washington is to do a better job of
meeting the needs of education at home.
THE POWER OF GOVERNMENT
EXCERPT OF REMARKS BY
RICHARD M. NIXON
31ST ANNUAL YOUTH BANQUET
PASADENA JUNIOR CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
APRIL 24, 1962
The impact of the federal government on every aspect of the
American economy is direct and immediate, and it runs deep. The
amount it spends and the rate of spending, the bite and distri-
bution of taxes, federal deficits and surpluses all set the frame-
work for personal spending and saving and for basic decisions by
private management.
There could be no more dramatic demonstration of this fact than
last week's controversy over the price of steel. Without getting
into the merits of the situation from this distance, the longrun
lesson still is clear. The federal government has a near-controll-
ing voice in wage-price decisions, and it has the power to back up
its views in no uncertain terms.
There is a parallel lesson for every one of America's towns and
cities and states. By its command over powerful media of public
communication and over the public purse-strings, the federal
government is also in position to move into areas of public
policy traditionally reserved to our states and local communities.
The events of last week thus raise with unmistakeable clarity the
overriding issue of the Federal government's impact not only on
economic decisions but also on the far broader area of local
and private autonomy. The controversy over steel prices, and
the way in which that controversy was settled, sharpens the basic
question of self-government in America -- and certainly not least
in California, the bellwether of growth and progress among all
the fifty states,
It does no good to deplore encroachments on local liberties or to
view with alarm the future of our freedom as private citizens.
The only answer that will make any real difference in the longrun
is effective action -- the actual record of performance chalked up
by our cities and states and by private and voluntary groups and
organizations. If they do the jobs the American people want done
and provide necessary public services, then the opening wedge for
federal encroachment will be blocked off.
Effective action means, first of all, vigorous and creative local
and state government. And this, in turn, depends on top-quality
candidates for all offices at every level, It means candidates,
and public officials, who have the skill and experience and drive
to speak up and stand up for state and local autonomy and not
cave in whenever the federal government offers tempting handouts.
In no areas of public concern is such local initiative more vital
than education and urban development, close as these are to our
day-to-day way of life and to the development of tomorrow's
citizens.
Page 2.
Effective action means, also, leadership by private business and
private organizations in many fields and professions. To the
extent, for example, that our free medical profession moves for-
ward in the development of private and voluntary health plans,
just to that extent can we hope to avoid irresistible pressures
for a compulsory federally-controlled system--with all its con-
sequences for the quality of medical care in this nation.
Effective action means, finally, an intensive campaign of public
information and education. The blunt fact is -- as Commerce
Secretary Hodges pointed out in his speech at Los Angeles last
week -- that most of the American people are utterly uninformed
about the nature of a free economy, about its operating procedures,
and about the central role of fair profits in such a system.
Fewer than 5 per cent of our adult citizens have ever had so much
as a one-year high school course in economics. And in a recent
poll of college students, 60 per cent thought that profits were,
in general, a bad thing. The dramatic significance of such mis-
information can be seen in the confused public reaction to the
steel controversy. It can be seen in the curious notion that a
10 cent an hour increase in "fringe benefits" is automatically
non-inflationary -- that it does not, like a regular and open
wage increase, raise industry costs at the same time and by the
same amount.
America's competitive economy -- and America's freedom -- cannot
afford this sort of basic misinformation.
These are all forms of action in which Chambers and Junior
Chambers of Commerce can and must undertake roles of special
responsibility. As local business and professional leaders,
Chamber members know the facts. They recognize the dangers.
And they are in position to take effective counteraction. Their
longtime record in philanthropy and public service is a dis-
tinguished case-in-point. For the future, this record must be
tremendously multiplied -- if the concept of self-government is
to have more than historic interest in the annals of a free
society.
Text of Water Policy Speech
by RICHARD M. NIXON
Irrigation Districts Association
Sheraton-Palace Hotel, San Francisco
12 p.m., April 26, 1962
One of the greatest challenges to the dynamic growth of California is
that of water development. Potentially, there is enough water to meet all our
needs. Our job is to redistribute it - fairly and equitably.
The history of water development in California is a long one. The credit
belongs to no one man. Since the beginning of this century we have been develop-
ing water. We will continue to do so imaginatively and creatively.
The East Bay Municipal Water District, the Hetch-Hetchy system, the Owens
River Aqueduct, the Metropolitan Water District, the Central Valley Project, the
Imperial Irrigation District and the Coachella Valley County Water District all
deserve mention as do many others. As a result of these programs we have some
of the richest farmland in the world and the resources for a burgeoning popula-
tion.
The state entered the water development picture in 1947 when the Legis-
lature authorized a comprehensive study of all water resources, and from that
study evolved the California Water Plan in 1957. The first step of the Plan
that will eventually encompass many water programs was to be the Feather River
Project.
Californians approved the financing of the Project in good faith. We
must keep faith with them. It is only fair to tell the people of California
that the $1 3/4 billion price tag never will cover the costs of the program.
This was known at the time but nobody wanted the responsibility of putting a
$2 billion bond issue on the ballot. So the situation was conveniently com-
promised. The truth of the matter is that no one can honestly say what the
Feather River Project will cost, and we must face that fact.
Like the Feather River financing approach, the entire program has been
a bipartisan achievement. Until recently water has been non-political, and
properly SO. It is much too vital for party credits. Although he was a Re-
publican, Harvey Banks, former Director of Water Resources, served in two ad-
ministrations. He handled the assignment as a non-political one.
Indeed, those were the days -- before politics began to poison the
water situation -- when the present Governor could truthfully declare:
"When I walked in as Governor of this State there were great
pressures back and forth as to whether I should retain Harvey
Banks as the head of the Department of Water Resources. But
I had worked with him as Attorney General and I knew there
wasn't a better water engineer in this State, and the water
program of California as it moves ahead will be a monument
to Harvey Banks. "
-2-
We know, of course, what happened. The Governor lost the services of
Harvey Banks, the man whom he praised for taking the Feather River Project to
the voters so successfully. Until then, water was free from politics. I am
determined to return it to that freedom.
Water also needs freedom from federal meddling. California's water
developments prove that self-government at the local level is the best govern-
ment. This is basic to my philosophy. Water projects already built are the
best possible evidence of the effectiveness of local self-government. The
vast irrigation works built by the irrigation districts, the municipal sys-
tems constructed by public agencies of one kind or another, and the works of
private utilities all testify to the resourcefulness and achievement of local
units. The job of the state should be to encourage this kind of achievement,
not displace it with larger government. This philosophy should be basic to
the state as well as to the federal government.
The function of the state is to guide and encourage local communities
to help themselves. There is considerable criticism that local units are not
getting the help they need. This can be cured only by a direct and able Di-
rector of Water Resources who has the confidence of his staff and the people
in the communities which his department serves.
What is needed is not more layers of government -- but fewer. Getting
rid of the present Governor's super-cabinet will be one of my first acts. Re-
placing the present water director with a man of Harvey Banks' calibre will
be next.
At all costs, the counties of origin of the water must be protected.
Present population distribution does not necessarily reflect the population
of the future. There is enough water available, if properly harnessed, to
serve all the people of the state. In the meantime, we must not make the
same mistake in philosophy that the federal government makes when it tries
to lay claim to all California water. We believe in the water rights of the
counties of origin and of the original users. But unless our resistance to
federal encroachment is extraordinarily vigorous, the question of protecting
the rights of the counties of origin may well be merely academic.
In my opinion, as far as the Feather River Project is concerned, too
much power has been vested in the Administrative branch of state government.
The plan would be sounder if it contained more inherent checks than the Gov-
ernor's vague promises to deal fairly with all sections of the state. Under
the super-agency program of the present Administration, the Governor has vir-
tual life and death power over the units of the Feather River Project and at
the same time he has delegated that authority to an appointee who is not ac-
countable to the people. The super-agency only dilutes the responsibility
of putting the water program into effect. Besides these serious drawbacks,
it adds a considerable burden of unnecessary expense.
Now let us examine federal participation. I favor it only to the
extent necessary on legitimate grounds. Flood control is an example. Cali-
fornia must seek and obtain its share of federal money for that. The same is
true of federal projects which made water available to users who agreed to
abide by federal restrictions.
-3-
But California should not enter into federal agreements which compel
our people to adopt wholly artificial rules limiting their right to use state
water. The 160-acre limitation does not satisfy our present farm economy.
When Governor Brown went so far as to threaten higher water rates on farm
holdings of more than 160 acres he showed a total disregard for the agricul-
tural facts of life. The farmers who grow peaches, pears and other fruit
crops could survive with 160 acres of irrigated land, but cattle ranchers,
some row-crop growers and grain farmers would go broke. I am against the
160-acre limitation at all times and in all places where state water devel-
opment is concerned. It is not suited to California. We should not accept
it as a part of any agreement with the federal government. The fact that the
Brown Administration implicitly recognized it in state contracts with water
users reflects a gratuitous compromise of principles. The use of 160-acre or
any acreage limitation on privately owned land is a step toward socialized
agriculture -- with the manifesto being written in Washington.
There is still another aspect of speaking up for California. We should
spare no effort in defending our water against claims of the federal government.
The tempo of these claims has been growing steadily. So far, Congress has
failed to enact the necessary laws to protect the states against these encroach-
ments. In the Santa Margarita watershed, some 6,000 people have been hailed
into court by the United States to hear the government claim that it had a
"superior" right to the water supply of that river. This litigation has gone
on for more than 10 years. It has been annoying, disheartening and expensive
to the people. We should use every means to settle or end this litigation. If
the federal government wishes to exert special claims to our water supply, it
must pay for it, and not attempt to take that supply under the guise of sover-
eign rights. The Santa Margarita battleground stands as a prime example of
the vigilance we must always exercise to resist the ungrounded assertion of
alledged federal rights over ours on our own water.
More recently, the United States told the city of Fresno that it did
not intend to follow the laws of California and that by reason of putting a dam
across the San Joaquin River there simply was no more water available for people
downstream. In making this claim, the U. S. Attorney General disclaimed any
responsibility for what the Secretary of the Interior had done before, and con-
cluded that when the United States acquired the territory of California from
Mexico in 1848, the United States became the owner of all lands and all rights
to use water within the territory.
These are only two instances of the broad claims being made by the
United States. We must take the battle of preserving California's waters into
the Congress and courts of the United States.
Let us look now at power development. We must not use a water project
as a means of getting the state into the power business through the back door.
On the Feather River Project, California will need more power than it can pro-
duce, and the private and local utility systems are ready, able and more than
willing to provide the margin to pump the water over the mountains. In return,
these same systems have agreed to purchase all the power which the state can
produce along the power drops of the aqueduct and from Oroville Dam. Inciden-
tally, I do not believe that dam can be built without the sale of the power at
a fair market price as originally agreed. This is important to the final pric-
ing of the water.
-4-
At the outset, the present Administration announced its policy to nego-
tiate with the existing utility systems for the extra power needed to operate
the aqueducts. Since the new Director of Water Resources has taken over, there
has been an ominous change entirely in keeping with his past experience and
performance which I have discussed at some length during this campaign.
The Power Committee, which was used by the former director to consult
on all matters pertaining to power requirements, distribution, sale and ex-
change, has been strangely inactive. I will reactivate the Power Committee.
There is talk of the possibility of constructing a nuclear plant to generate
power needed for pumping. The amount of money available to build the water
project will not be sufficient to do that job, too. There is no money avail-
able to build an atomic plant and it is not needed.
Now let us turn to the problem of prices. Some areas of this State
are experiencing difficulty in contracting with the state for Feather River
water. The problem arises because each area contracting with the state must
repay that portion of the capital cost of the entire project which is charged
to the area on the basis of proportionate use of the facilities. Some of the
thirstiest areas are agricultural. They have modest valuations and some of
them feel they cannot raise the necessary payments either through taxes or
water charges to fulfill their obligations.
There are several possible approaches to the problem:
The first is to charge as much of the entire project to the general
taxpayer of the state as is justified. For example, fish and wildlife, rec-
reation, flood control, are some of the benefits which will come to the state
as a whole. They should not be charged against the water user. The Legisla-
ture should be encouraged to find as many of these statewide beneficiaries as
possible and to the extent that others benefit, the cost of the facilities
should be reduced insofar as the direct water user is concerned.
In addition to bond proceeds, the state will be using money from the
California Water Fund to pay for the Feather River Project. That fund is made
up of moneys that come to the State of California through its oil, gas and
mineral reserves. As the matter now stands the water users must repay all
capital costs with interest. This includes interest on the California Water
Fund, even though there is no requirement that the state itself pay interest
on that money. Consideration should be given to the possibility of waiving
that interest. It would help the rural areas, but it would also benefit the
metropolitan areas because the reduced interest charge would apply to all con-
tracting agencies.
The contract with the state is flexible insofar as postponing payments
is concerned. Inasmuch as the land to which this water is delivered will in-
crease in value, the principal payments of each contracting agency should be
delayed long enough to permit the increased value to be reflected. This will
delay the day of payment, not excuse it.
Each area must be encouraged to search broadly and deeply its own
financial resources. There is an understandable tendency to throw the expense
-5-
of a project to somebody else, particularly to the state. But the local area
must act boldly and imaginatively in its own behalf, and extend itself fully
in order to contract for water from the state project.
If the estimates for California's growth hold up, and we have every
reason to think they will be exceeded, the demands on our water supply will
require increasingly imaginative planning.
Just as the Feather River Project and other units in the California
Water Plan were planned by past administrations almost 20 years ago, so it is
up to us to lay out a resourceful plan for the generations to come. Here are
some of the things we should be doing now for the sake of our people, and farms
and industries of tomorrow:
We should be working now at full throttle to develop the financial
means for implementing the next stage of the California Water Plan. That means
that the great seasonal surplus waters of the Northwest, the Mad, Eel, Trinity
and others, must be diverted into the Sacramento River and through the Delta
for distribution into other parts of the state. Our experience with the Feath-
er River Project indicates that finance is the key to water development. We
must give our immediate attention to that task.
All water resources development must be envisioned with a view to their
incidental use for flood control, fish, wildlife and recreation. There is an
ever-growing demand on our recreational facilities with the growing numbers
of people coming to our state. Imaginative planning can accommodate, at least
to some extent, the wholesome outdoor recreation of our people. The costs of
these programs must be borne by the people generally, not by water users
specifically.
Waste disposal is equally as important as water supply. In some ways
it is even more important because one community's disposal may be another
community's supply. As our communities grow, problems of water quality be-
come even more important. Many of our ground water basins are the basic
sources of supply for million of people. These basins must be kept pure so
that their function may be continued. Salt water intrusion must be stopped.
This program requires intimate cooperation and coordination between the in-
numerable local agencies charged with this responsibility, as well as the
state agencies that are designated to oversee the area-wide problem.
The imminent threat of water pollution is not only local. It is
statewide, and even national. The federal government is moving into the
picture in a big way. California, if it is to manage its own water supply
and disposal system, must give priority attention to the business of water
quality and disposal. It is a problem readily overlooked or shoved into the
background because the far reaching consequences of pollution and contamina-
tion cannot always be seen immediately. I would propose legislation that
will bring water quality control into the forefront as one of our most pres-
sing problems.
We should not dismiss the possibilities for the future in the con-
version of sea water. The blunt truth of the matter is that we may well need
-6-
both the water from the California Water Plan and converted saline water. De-
salting research should be encouraged in every way possible. This must go on
at the same time as we are developing our fresh water supplies. In the case
of sea water, we have a supply that is inexhaustible. Another thought to keep
in mind is the amount of brackish water that has invaded our underground water
tables. That, too, will eventually have to be converted. Saline water con-
version research must be pressed forward with honest diligence not as a sub-
stitute for the California Water Plan but as a very necessary adjunct. Here,
too, I find myself in substantial disagreement with the philosophy of the
present Director of Water Resources. He was willing to see the small research
appropriation for desalination of water go down the drain in this year's
budget.
Whole civilizations have been buried under the dust of parched lands.
New ones rise up where there is water. This is California -- rising as the
giant among the 50 states.
California's population will pass the 20 million mark by 1970.
This is why our water must be harnessed to the fullest possible ex-
tent. This is why we must learn to tap the ocean economically and sift the
work of our scientists and the ideas of our dreamers for new breakthroughs.
This is why we need top leaders in state government -- leaders who will keep
politics out of water.
###
Hoped for Presidency for Self
N.Y. Herald Tribune
July 11, 1960
COMEDOWN ARRIVES FOR 'PAT' BROWN
by Warren Rogers Jr.
LOS ANGELES, July 10--Like Wonderland's Alice trying to decide which
side of the mushroom to eat--left to grow bigger, right to grow
smaller--California's Pat Brown finally had to make up his mind
today.
Gov. Brown's moment of truth came at the California caucus. Fit-
tingly, perhaps, the setting was pure Hollywood--the lush, plush
Hollywood-Knickerbocker Hotel, where even the smoke-filled rooms
seem to have been designed for a Cecil B. DeMille Biblical epic.
Downtown, in the more prosaic hostelries like the Biltmore and May-
flower, amid all the pre-convention hoopla, the man they were all
talking about was Edmund G. (Pat) Brown. Will he or won't he?
Little old ladies from Pasadena, would-be starlets vying in bathing
suits for the title "Miss Democratic Convention 1960, the fat man
running and shouting through the lobby with a big button in his
lapel saying "Relax," the tough old political realists and the awe-
struck first-timers--they all were ready, at the drop of a hat in
the ring, to ask or answer the question: Will he or won't he? Will
he release California's eighty-one votes, or won't he?
DECISIONS COME HARD
Decisions come hard for Pat Brown. It is not that he can't make up
his mind. He can and does, often. He is rather like Mark Twain on
the question of smoking. Mark Twain said he saw nothing hard in
trying to quit smoking--he had done it many times. Pat Brown makes
up his mind many times, and unmakes it just as often.
His latest decision on the Democratic Presidential nomination came,
apparently, a few hours before the California caucus. He told
reporters he had informed Sen. John F. Kennedy of Massachusetts
whom he will support and "he (Kennedy) was pleased.
Did this mean, the newsmen asked, that the Governor was supporting
Sen. Kennedy? Gov. Brown chuckled and replied, "You will have to
draw your own assumptions." How many of California's eighty-one
votes would Sen. Kennedy get? That, as far as the Governor was
concerned, would have to remain a mystery for the time being.
Pat Brown is squirming in the spotlight once again because as
California goes, so might go the rest of the convention. For a man
to whom affability is almost a fetish, the burden is very heavy. He
knows it is impossible to choose among friends and have all of them
keep on loving you as they did before.
2.
Dut choose he did. He came out for Sen. Kennedy.
BACKING AND FILLING
For months, Gov. Brown had been backing and filling. One day he
seemed to be for Sen. Kennedy, the next for Adlai E. Stevenson.
For awhile he was for himself, but that bubble burst as the poli-
tical winds reached gale force in the spring.
Even now, the great psychological moment may have passed. The
number of votes he is said to control appears to be diminishing as
the pre-convention days tick off. Yet, as late as last night some
of his advisers planted this bug in the Governor's attentive ear:
"Look, Pat, the cameras will all be on you when they call the roll
at the convention. California is alphabetically number five on
the roll. Here's what you do:
"When California is called, you get up and ask to make a statement.
As a Governor, you will be granted your request. Then you walk
down the aisle very slowly and, to heighten the suspense, halfway
to the rostrum you bend down and carefully tie your shoe laces.
"Up on the stand, with everybody watching, you dramatically announce
that California wants to lead the way and cast its vote for Kennedy.
You 11 be a hero! You'll be Secretary of State. Attorney General
anything you want in the Kennedy administration.
EYED WHITE HOUSE
That is a pretty heady prospect for any professional politician. But
it is a come down for Pat Brown. Only last fall his eye was on the
White House. Then he lowered his sights to the Vice-Presidency.
Now he is beginning to wonder whether he can hold onto what he's got.
In November, Gov. Brown was thinking so seriously of the Presidency
that his friends put out a brochure comparing him favorably with
New York Governor Rockefeller, himself then enjoying a Republican
Presidential boom.
The Brown partisans used phrases like fresh faces high potency
personality decisive and strong governors" and summed it all up
this way:
"The Governors of New York and California would seem to be increas-
ingly noteworthy counterpoints to each other and the rest of the
national scene in the months ahead. "
Gov. Brown has never decided to take himself out of contention for
the Democratic Presidential nomination. Like a Topsy in reverse,
his prospect just kept shrinking. His popularity really took a
beating in the much-publicized and controversial affair of the
execution in May of Caryl Chessman.
3.
SHOCKED BY OPPOSITION
An index to the way things stand, came in California's June 7
Presidential primary. Gov. Brown drew 1,354,031 votes. But,
to his great horror, the political unknown who opposed him--
George H. McLain, whose chief claim to attention was his ad-
vocacy of pensions--got a staggering total of 646,387.
And so, Pat Brown went to his moment of truth at the Hollywood-
Knickerbocker, with about as much enthusiasm as a nearsighted
bull-fighter approaching a particularly tough toro, Will he or
won't he?
He did. It remains to be seen now whether, having now nibbled off
one side of the mushroom, his political stature will grow taller
or shorter.