Ask the Scholar

Document scope · 1 page
doc
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory. For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.

Source Description

This file contains: From Ronald H. Walker to Chapin RE: trips of the vice president. 3 pgs. [Subject: Domestic Policy] [Memo], 9/23/1972

Scholar Source Context

Document identity
localId
26144428
label
WHSF: Contested, 2-53
core
doc
dtoType
document
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
26144428
contentType
document
title
WHSF: Contested, 2-53
description
This file contains: From Ronald H. Walker to Chapin RE: trips of the vice president. 3 pgs. [Subject: Domestic Policy] [Memo], 9/23/1972
collections
Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection
Contested Materials Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
26144428
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
5439a3c7722f9dbb
ocrText
Richard Nixon Presidential Library Contested Materials Collection Folder List Box Number Folder Number Document Date No Date Subject Document Type Document Description 2 53 9/23/1972 Domestic Policy Memo From Ronald H. Walker to Chapin RE: trips of the vice president. 3 pgs. Friday, March 05, 2010 Page 1 of 1 THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON September 23, 1972 4:45 p.m. MEMORANDUM FOR: MR. DWIGHT L. CHAPIN FROM: RONALD H. WALKER SUBJECT: VICE PRESIDENT'S TRIPS, SEPTEMBER 19 - 22, 1972 As you know some of our Presidential advancemen participated in the Vice President's trips this past week to Minneapolis, Minnesota; Nashville, Tennessee; Chattanooga, Tennessee; Winston-Salem, North Carolina; and Roanoke, Virginia. In the view of the advance- men, the trips were very successful for the Vice President. He drew good crowds and was received enthusiastically and warmly. Our advancemen sent us trip reports on each of the stops, outlining their reactions to being part of the Vice Presidential advance. Below are the advancemen's critique of the stops: 1. Minneapolis, Minnesota - The Secret Service totally controlled the advance and dictated the format and scheduling. The advance was generally informal and casual. The Vice Presidential advancemen did not seem to realize the significance of all the detailed work involved in an advance. The general attitude was "things will happen. " For example, the Vice Presidential seal to be used for the day's event was completely overlooked, therefore, was not available for the event. The advance was very unorganized. The lead advanceman did not set up organization chairmen for each event. There was little or no pre-planning. There was little or no contact with locals, therefore, little cooperation. The advancemen tried to do everything themselves rather than organizing the locals to help them. -2- There was little or no control over the press traveling with the Vice President as well as the local press. The press was all over the Vice President when he was working the crowds. The biggest problem, however, with regard to crowd raising and press was that the advanceman was not authorized to publish the crowd situation for the Vice President in the local media until the morning of the event. The authorization finally came from the Vice President's Press Secretary after being held up for at least two days because of "security reasons. " Therefore, there was very little local coverage prior to the event. The Staff Advance Team, in the eyes of our advanceman, did not know how to use radios. They did not carry them at all times and this led to difficulty in locating people and wasted much time. Our advanceman felt that the Vice President's Secret Service detail as well as the Vice President's advanceman were very aloof and our man did not feel that he was being kept informed of the details of the trip. With all these difficulties, the trip was extremely successful and the Vice President had an excellent crowd in Minneapolis. 2. Nashville, Tennessee - In our advanceman's overall summariza- tion, Nashville was a "fair" to "good" stop under extremely difficult circumstances. The rally site was the Grand Ole Opry which has a seating capacity of 2, 500. The hall was 85% filled with an overflow crowd outside. The reason for the people outside rather than inside was because the site agent refused to let any more people in. The Vice President's lead advanceman failed to recognize that his key contact (local) from the Committee to Re-Elect the President was very weak which hurt the advance considerably. 3. Chattanooga, Tennessee - In Chattanooga the Vice President's advance team was extremely capable and for the most part, did a fine job. There were no significant weaknesses or problems. 4. Winston-Salem, North Carolina - The event in Winston-Salem was an outdoor rally held at noon in the downtown area. The event drew approximately 5, 000 with a hand full of demonstrators. The demonstrators did not disrupt the Vice President's speech. The crowd was enthusiastic and received him very warmly. -3- The advance team had very few problems prior to the event and there was good cooperation between our advanceman (Tom Hart), the Vice Presidential advanceman, USSS and the local and state organizations. The Secret Service seems to make a point of affixing the title "Political Advanceman" to the Vice Presidential advancemen on trips. The one problem was that the Vice President's staff traveling with him were completely unaware of the events that were to transpire in Winston-Salem. The problem seems to be that the Vice President's lead advanceman and the traveling staff were not talking. The biggest problem in this regard was the handling of the press. In the opinion of our advanceman, the press aide did not know what was to happen in Winston-Salem. 5. Roanoke, Virginia - In general terms, Roanoke advance went fairly smooth. The event, an indoor rally at the Coliseum, drew a good crowd but did not fill the hall. There were some demonstrators but they were well to the rear and did not in any way disrupt the event. Our advanceman received good cooperation from the Vice President's advance team. In summary, there are too many staff and USSS around the Vice President in a crowd situation. Also, and most importantly, the coordination between the Staff Advanceman and the people moving the press is totally unsatisfactory. They have to talk to one another in order to insure everyone knows what is happening.