Ask the Scholar

Page 1 of 1

I can add historical knowledge about this page.

Page image

OCR

Richard Nixon Presidential Library
Contested Materials Collection
Folder List
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
16
1
2/7/1972
Campaign
Other Document
Action Paper RE: Campaign Strategy. 1 pg.
16
1
1/28/1972
Campaign
Memo
From: Gordon Strachan To: H.R. Haldeman
RE: Polls to Key People. 4 pgs.
16
1
2/7/1972
Campaign
Memo
From: Gordon Strachan To: Larry Higby RE:
Trial Heat Analysis. 1 pg.
16
1
2/3/1972
Campaign
Memo
From: Thomas W. Benham To: H.R.
Haldeman RE: Trial Heats-Shifts in Voter
Preference by Demographics (January 1972
versus November 1971 versus June 1971). 9
pgs.
Monday, February 07, 2011
Page 1 of 4
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
16
1
12/29/1971
Campaign
Memo
From: Gordon Strachan To: H.R. Haldeman
RE: Assigning one man the responsibility of
harnessing the incumbency for political
purposes. 1 pg.
16
1
12/31/1971
Campaign
Memo
From: H.R. Haldeman To: Fred Malek RE:
Political Review for Incumbency. Page of
notes attached along with three copies. 5 pgs.
16
1
2/4/1972
Campaign
Memo
From: Gordon Strachan To: Larry Higby RE:
William Timmons' convention proposal. 1 pg.
16
1
2/4/1972
Campaign
Memo
From: Gordon Strachan To: William
Timmons RE: Young People on T.V.
Convention. 1 pg.
16
1
12/29/1971
Campaign
Memo
From: Gordon Strachan To: Charles W.
Colson RE: Spokesman Resources. 1 pg.
Monday, February 07, 2011
Page 2 of 4
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
16
1
1/6/1972
Campaign
Memo
From: Robert M. Teeter To: H. R. Haldeman
RE: Catholic Vote. 4 pgs.
16
1
1/6/1972
Campaign
Memo
From: Robert M. Teeter To: H. R.
Haldeman RE: The Environment. 4 pgs.
16
1
1/7/1971
Campaign
Memo
From: Gordon Strachan To: Larry Higby RE:
Ehrlichman's campaign memo. 1 pg.
16
1
11/6/1971
Campaign
Memo
From: John D. Ehrlichman To: H.R.
Haldeman RE: Re-Election Campaign. 9 pgs.
16
1
1/19/1972
Campaign
Memo
From: Gordon Strachan To: H. R. Haldeman
RE: Request for analysis of the Ethnic vote.
1 pg.
Monday, February 07, 2011
Page 3 of 4
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
16
1
1/3/1972
Campaign
Memo
From: W. Richard Howard To: Bart Porter
RE: Warning against repeating past mistakes
involving the ethnic problem. 1 pg.
16
1
12/31/1971
Campaign
Memo
From: Michael Balzano To: Charles W.
Colson RE: The Ethinic Vote in the 1972
Election.
5 pgs.
16
1
9/6/1971
Campaign
Other Document
President Nixon's Labor Day Address. 20
pgs.
Monday, February 07, 2011
Page 4 of 4
ACTION PAPER . CAMPAIGN STRATEGY
In general strategy planning, we've got to consider more appearances
in the country to counteract the adverse media. In other words, the
President's personal campaigning may be indispensable to combat
the slanted coverage that we are going to be getting from the media.
We should look carefully at the idea of moving out into the country.
The President, as of now, veers away from the concept of serenely
scaring above the battle. He does feel, however, that he must at all
costs, maintain a strong, calm, serene attitude.
There is a lot of validity to the Connally theory of uncertainty but the
problem is how to deal with it.
One flaw in our approach may be that when we advance new programs,
that is saying, in effect, that things are in had shape. It therefore plays
into the opponent's hands. It's like the doctor with a pill for every ill.
It's a bad way to treat a patient over the long haul.
It's clear that going into the country is good for the people regarding
the uncertainty questions so we've got to do a lot of it.
HRH :pm
2/7/72
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Date:
2/7
TO:
LARRY HIGBY
FROM:
GORDON STRACHAN
This is Benham's best effort at trial
heat analysis - it doesn't contain
some vital key because Benham says,
"I wish there was some subtle analysis
to be made but I don't know what the
hell it would be. "
I
Opinion Research Corporation
NORTH HARRISON STREET, PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY 08540
telephone: 609/924-5900
CHICAGO
LONDON
LOS ANGELES
NEW YORK
SAN FRANCISCO
WASHINGTON, D.C.
THOMAS W. BENHAM
President
MEMORANDUM
February 3, 1972
TO:
H. R. Haldeman
FROM:
Thomas W. Benham
SUBJECT:
Trial Heats -- Shifts in Voter Preference by Demographics
(January 1972 versus November 1971 versus June 1971)
Over the past six months, President Nixon has made substantial gains
among various population subgroups in trial elections against Humphrey,
Kennedy and Muskie. These gains in most subgroups carry over to the
three-way races which include Wallace. The improvement is not a
function of any one group becoming more favorable while the rest stay
the same. It tends to be scattered across many subgroups. Most changes
occur between November 1971 and January 1972 and virtually no (statis-
tically significant) changes for any candidate are noted between June
1971 and November 1971.
President Nixon's gains from November 1971 to January 1972 are fairly
consistent regardless of who the Democratic candidate is. This is also
true for the three-way races. There tends to be a corresponding decrease
for the Democratic candidates among the groups where President Nixon
gains. The Democratic candidates make no substantial gains. Shown on
the following page are the population subgroups in which President Nixon
gains in the period November 1971 to January 1972.
--2
Population Subgroups Showing
Trial Heat Gains for President Nixon,
November 1971 to January 1972
Nixon vs
Nixon vs
Humphrey Muskie Kennedy
Humphrey
Muskie
Kennedy
Wallace
Wallace Wallace
Total Public
X*
X*
X
X*
X*
Men
X
X*
X
X*
21-29 years
X
30-49 years
X
X
X*
X
X
X
High school graduates
X*
X
Some college
X*
X*
X*
X*
X*
X*
Union families
X
X
Nonunion families
X*
X*
Whites
X*
X*
X
X*
X*
X
Catholics
X
X
X
$5,000-$15,000
X
X
X
X
X
X
Registered
X
X
X*
X
Republicans
X*
X*
Conservatives
X
Independents
X*
Liberals
X
X
Nonvoters in 1968
X*
X*
X*
X
X
X
East
X
X
X
Midwest
X*
Disapprove of Job as
President
X*
X*
Approve of Job as
President
X
Approve of Handling
of Vietnam
X
X
X
X
X
Disapprove of Handling
of Economy
X
X
X
X = Statistically significant gain
* = January also higher than June
--3
Nixon vs. Humphrey
President Nixon gains more against Humphrey than any other candidate and
in most of the subgroups where gains are noted for President Nixon cor-
responding losses occur for Humphrey. Most gains for President Nixon
occur from the November 1971 survey to the January 1972 survey; a few
occur from June 1971 to January 1972. No changes occur between June and
November.
No real pattern is apparent in the subgroups in which President Nixon
gains. There are, in fact, many diverse elements, making it difficult
to identify the cause or causes of this upsurge.
When Wallace enters the Nixon-Humphrey race, almost all the gains noted
in the two-way race are repeated both in the period November 1971 to
January 1972 and the period June 1971 to January 1972.
Nixon vs. Muskie
In the trial election against Muskie, President Nixon gains over the
period November 1971 to January 1972. These gains are very similar to
the gains noted in the Nixon-Humphrey race. Losses are noted in far
fewer subgroups for Muskie, however, than for Humphrey. Again, the
entry of Wallace into the race has little impact on President Nixon's
gains.
Nixon vs. Kennedy
President Nixon gains among fewer subgroups against Kennedy than against
the other Democratic candidates. But the groups where President Nixon
does gain tend to be the same as in the other races. As in the previous
races, however, most of President Nixon's gains occur between November
1971 and January 1972. Most gains for President Nixon in the two-way
race carry-over to the three-way race.
NIXON VS. MUSKIE
January 1972 vs. November 1971
Nixon
Muskie
Gains
Losses
Gains
Losses
Total Public
Some college*
Men
$5,000-$15,000*
30-49 years
East*
High school graduates
Midwest*
Some college
Nonunion families
Whites
$5,000-$15,000
Registered voters
Liberals
Nonvoters in 1968
East
Midwest
Disapprove of Nixon's
Handling Job as
President
Approve of Nixon's
Handling of Vietnam
Disapprove of Nixon's
Handling of Economy
January 1972 vs. June 1971
Total Public
Men*
Men
High school
18-20 years
graduate*
High school graduate
Some college*
Some college
Independents*
Nonunion families
Nonvoters in '68*
Whites
East
Will register
Disapproved of
Independents
Nixon's Handling
Nonvoters in 1968
Job as President*
Midwest
Disapprove of Nixon's
Handling Job as
President
November 1971 vs. June 1971
NO CHANGES
NO CHANGES
*
Areas where President Nixon has gained
NIXON VS. MUSKIE VS. WALLACE
January 1972 vs. November 1971
Nixon
Muskie
Wallace
Gains
Losses
Gains
Losses
Gains
Losses
Total Public#
Some college*
Disapprove
of Nixon's
Men#
Handling of
30-49 years#
Economy*
High school graduates#
Some college#
Nonunion families#
Whites#
Catholics
$5,000-$15,000#
Registered voters#
Liberals#
Nonvoters in '68#
East#
Approve of Nixon's
Handling of Vietnam#
Disapprove of Nixon's
Handling of Economy#
January 1972 vs. June 1971
Total Public#
Some college*
Men#
Democrats
Some college#
East
Nonunion fámilies#
Whites#
Independents#
Midwest#
November 1971 vs. June 1971
NO CHANGES
NO CHANGES
NO CHANGES
#
Gains also noted in 2-way race
*
Areas where President Nixon has gained
NIXON VS. KENNEDY
January 1972 vs. November 1971
Nixon
Kennedy
Gains
Losses
Gains
Losses
Total Public
Nonwhites
Nonwhites
21-29 years
30-49 years
Over $15,000
$5,000-$15,000*
Some college
Nonvoters in 1968*
Whites
Approve of Nixon's
$5,000-$15,000
Handling Job as
Republicans
President*
Nonvoters in 1968
Approve of Nixon's
Handling Job as
President
Approve of Nixon's
Handling of Vietnam
January 1972 vs. June 1971
30-49 years
Nonunion families
Republicans
Nonvoters in '68
Midwest
X
Some college*
Some college
Nonvoters in '68*
November 1971 vs. June 1971
NO CHANGES
NO CHANGES
*
Areas where President Nixon has gained
NIXON VS. KENNEDY VS. WALLACE
January 1972 vs. November 1971
Nixon
Kennedy
Wallace
Gains
Losses
Gains
Losses
Gains
Losses
30-49 years#
Over $15,000
Protestants
Some college#
Republicans#
Voted for Nixon
X
$5,000-
Whites#
$15,000
$5,000-$15,000#
in 1968#
January 1972 vs. June 1971
Some college#
Some college*
Nonunion families#
Nonvoters in
Protestants
1968
Republicans#
Midwest#
November 1971 vs. June 1971
Over $15,000
#
Gains also noted in 2-way race
*
Areas where President Nixon has gained
NIXON VS. HUMPHREY
January 1972 vs. November 1971
Nixon
Humphrey
Gains
Losses
Gains
Losses
Total Public
21-29 years of age*
30-49*
Men
Some college*
21-29 years
Union families*
30-49 years
Whites*
Some college
$5,000-$15,000*
Union families
Independents
Whites
Conservatives*
Catholics
Nonvoters in 1968*
$5,000-$15,000 income
Midwest
Registered voters
Approve of Nixon's
Independents
Handling of Economy
Conservatives
Nonvoters in 1968
Disapprove of Nixon's
Handling of Job as
President
Approve of Nixon's
Handling of Vietnam
No opinion of Nixon's
Handling of Economy
January 1972 vs. June 1971
Total Public
21-29 years
Some college
Some college*
Whites
Independents*
Independents
Nonvoters in 1968*
Nonvoters in 1968
Midwest*
Midwest
Disapprove of Nixon's
Handling of Job as
President
November 1971 vs. June 1971
NO CHANGE
NO CHANGE
*
Areas where President Nixon has gained
NIXON VS. HUMPHREY VS. WALLACE
January 1972 vs. November 1971
Nixon
Humphrey
Wallace
Gains
Losses
Gains
Losses
Gains
Losses
Total Public#
21-29 years
Disapprove
Men#
Some college*
of Nixon's
30-49 years#
$5,000-$15,000*
Handling of
Some college#
Independents
Economy
Union families#
Nonvoters in
Whites#
'68*
Catholics#
Midwest
$5,000-$15,000#
Approve of
Registered voters#
Nixon's
Voted for Nixon in '68
Handling of
Nonvoters in '68#
Economy
East
Approve of Nixon's
Handling of Vietnam#
Disapprove of Nixon's
Handling of Economy
January 1972 vs. June 1971
Total Public#
21-29 years
Some college#
High school
Nonunion families
graduate
Whites#
Some college*
Registered voters
Independents*
Independents#
Nonvoters in
Midwest#
1968
November 1971 vs. June 1971
NO CHANGE
NO CHANGE
NO CHANGE
#
Gain also noted in 2-way race
*
Areas where President Nixon has gained
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Date: Dec. 29, 1971
TO:
H.R. HALDEMAN
FROM:
GORDON STRACHAN
On Sears' political memorandum you
indicated agreement with the idea
of assigning one man the responsi-
bility of harnessing the incumbency
for political purposes.
Higby and I believe Malek should
be the one man responsible.
A memorandum for your signature
is attached.
DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
E.O. 12006, Section 6-102
By CMP NARS, Date 8-17-81
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
CONFIDENTIAL/EYES ONLY
December 31, 1971
MEMORANDUM FOR:
FRED MALEK
FROM:
H.R. HALDEMAN
SUBJECT:
Political Review of Incumbency
The most important function you can perform before November 7,
1972 is to assume personal responsibility for harnessing the
powers of the incumbency for political purposes. In addition
to an analysis of the budget to determine how and where federal
monies are being spent, you should consider all pending and
proposed programs, policies and legislation from a purely
political standpoint.
There is a real need for such an operation since Congressional
liaison, liaison with special interests and the present political
liaison all must concern themselves with day to day problems
and are not broad enough to get control over the full range of
problems necessary to achieve the desired result. Also, such
a function should not be left to a group decision since any
actions which are taken as a result of analyzing government
actions and policy from a standpoint of politics must be quite
secret and quite swift. The analysis should be conducted in
great detail and this can only be accomplished by one person
with a small staff being entrusted with full responsibility.
It is extremely important that this function be centralized in
one place. It is too much to expect that Cabinet Secretaries and
other governmental officials can possibly divorce themselves
from the objective good or bad of a problem or decision and
provide a purely political assessment. Also, there are too
many demands on their time to allow them to follow through on
all the political considerations which they should.
As programs and policies are analyzed, short memos should be
submitted for decision. The flexibility in OMB in terms of
where money is actually spent should also be submitted for
discussion.
Other projects with which you are involved, such as grantsmanship,
White House Staff reorganization for the Campaign, and one man
responsibility for certain issues, fold into this new assignment.
However, this political review and use of the incumbency should
receive your careful direct attention.
Twise
more
I
POLITICAL REVIEW FUNCTION
It is essential that someone start functioning
immediately to harness the powers of office for poli-
tical purposes. Such a person should have no other
responsibilities between now and the election. Essen-
tially, such a person should (1) analyze the budget to
see how Federal monies are being spent and where and
(2) analyze all pending and proposed programs, policies
and legislation from a purely political standpoint.
There is a real need for such an operation since
Congressional liaison, liaison with special interests
and the present political liaison all must concern them-
selves with day to day problems and are not broad enough
to get control over the full range of problems necessary
to achieve the desired result. Also, such a function
should not be left to a group decision since any actions
which are taken as a result of analyzing government
actions and policy from a standpoint of politics must be
quite secret and quite swift. The analysis should be
conducted in great detail and this can only be accomplished
by one person with a small staff being entrusted with full
responsibility.
It is extremely important that this function be
centralized in one place. It is too much to expect that
Cabinet Secretaries and other governmental officials can
possibly divorce themselves from the objective good or bad
of a problem or decision and provide a purely political
assessment. Also, there are too many demands on their time
to allow them to follow through on all the political con-
siderations which they should.
As programs and policies are analyzed, short memos
should be passed to the President so that he may decide
problems with the benefit of a full disclosure of their
political ramifications. The flexibility in OMB in terms O:
where money is actually spent should also be brought to the
President's attention in similar fashion. This should all
Chron
DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
E.O. 12006, Section 8-17-87 6-102
By
Omp
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
CONFIDENTIAL/EYES ONLY
December 31, 1971
MEMORANDUM FOR:
FRED MALEK
FROM:
H.R. HALDEMAN
SUBJECT:
Political Review of Incumbenc
The most important function you can perform before November 7,
1972 is to assume personal responsibility for harnessing the
powers of the incumbency for political purposes. In addition
to an analysis of the budget to determine how and where federal
monies are being spent, you should consider all pending and
proposed programs, policies and legislation from a purely
political standpoint.
There is a real need for such an operation since Congressional
liaison, liaison with special interests and the present political
liaison all must concern themselves with day to day problems
and are not broad enough to get control over the full range of
problems necessary to achieve the desired result. Also, such
a function should not be left to a group decision since any
actions which are taken as a result of analyzing government
actions and policy from a standpoint of politics must be quite
secret and quite swift. The analysis should be conducted in
great detail and this can only be accomplished by one person
with a small staff being entrusted with full responsibility.
It is extremely important that this function be centralized in
one place. It is too much to expect that Cabinet Secretaries and
other governmental officials can possibly divorce themselves
from the objective good or bad of a problem or decision and
provide a purely political assessment. Also, there are too
many demands on their time to allow them to follow through on
all the political considerations which they should.
As programs and policies are analyzed, short memos should be
submitted for decision. The flexibility in OMB in terms of
where money is actually spent should also be submitted for
discussion.
Other projects with which you are involved, such as grantsmanship,
White House Staff reorganization for the Campaign, and one man
responsibility for certain issues, fold into this new assignment.
However, this political review and use of the incumbency should
receive your careful direct attention.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
CONFIDENTIAL/EYES ONLY
December 31, 1971
MEMORANDUM FOR:
FRED MALEK
FROM:
H.R. HALDEMAN
SUBJECT:
Political Review of Incumbency
The most important function you can perform before November 7,
1972 is to assume personal responsibility for harnessing the
powers of the incumbency for political purposes. In addition
to an analysis of the budget to determine how and where federal
monies are being spent, you should consider all pending and
proposed programs, policies and legislation from a purely
political standpoint.
There is a real need for such an operation since Congressional
liaison, liaison with special interests and the present political
liaison all must concern themselves with day to day problems
and are not broad enough to get control over the full range of
problems necessary to achieve the desired result. Also, such
a function should not be left to a group decision since any
actions which are taken as a result of analyzing government
actions and policy from a standpoint of politics must be quite
secret and quite swift. The analysis should be conducted in
great detail and this can only be accomplished by one person
with a small staff being entrusted with full responsibility.
It is extremely important that this function be centralized in
one place. It is too much to expect that Cabinet Secretaries and
other governmental officials can possibly divorce themselves
from the objective good or bad of a problem or decision and
provide a purely political assessment. Also, there are too
many demands on their time to allow them to follow through on
all the political considerations which they should.
As programs and policies are analyzed, short memos should be
submitted for decision. The flexibility in OMB in terms of
where money is actually spent should also be submitted for
discussion.
Other projects with which you are involved, such as grantsmanship,
White House Staff reorganization for the Campaign, and one man
responsibility for certain issues, fold into this new assignment.
However, this political review and use of the incumbency should
receive your careful direct attention.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
CONFIDENTIAL/EYES ONLY
December 31, 1971
MEMORANDUM FOR:
FRED MALEK
FROM:
H.R. HALDEMAN
SUBJECT:
Political Review of Incumbency
The most important function you can perform before November 7,
1972 is to assume personal responsibility for harnessing the
powers of the incumbency for political purposes. In addition
to an analysis of the budget to determine how and where federal
monies are being spent, you should consider all pending and
proposed programs, policies and legislation from a purely
political standpoint.
There is a real need for such an operation since Congressional
liaison, liaison with special interests and the present political
liaison all must concern themselves with day to day problems
and are not broad enough to get control over the full range of
problems necessary to achieve the desired result. Also, such
a function should not be left to a group decision since any
actions which are taken as a result of analyzing government
actions and policy from a standpoint of politics must be quite
secret and quite swift. The analysis should be conducted in
great detail and this can only be accomplished by one person
with a small staff being entrusted with full responsibility.
It is extremely important that this function be centralized in
one place. It is too much to expect that Cabinet Secretaries and
other governmental officials can possibly divorce themselves
from the objective good or bad of a problem or decision and
provide a purely political assessment. Also, there are too
many demands on their time to allow them to follow through on
all the political considerations which they should.
As programs and policies are analyzed, short memos should be
submitted for decision. The flexibility in OMB in terms of
where money is actually spent should also be submitted for
discussion.
Other projects with which you are involved, such as grantsmanship,
White House Staff reorganization for the Campaign, and one man
responsibility for certain issues, fold into this new assignment.
However, this political review and use of the incumbency should
receive your careful direct attention.
JANUARY 28, 1972
ADMINISTRATIVELY CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR:
H.R. HALDEMAN
FROM:
GORDON STRACHAN
SUBJECT:
Polls To Key People
Thi
action memo suggests that segments of good, positive polls, get
quietly to Connally, Rogers, and SO forth. To implement this request
the following system could be established:
Harris Polls - - Colson's office currently receives Harris Polls approximately
one week before theyare released to the public. Only you and Colson receive
copies currently. Colson should now begin send copies of all Harris Polls to
Connally, Rogers, the Attorney General, Kissinger, and Ehrlichman.
Colson periodically talks with Lou Harris about long term trends. Colson
summarizes his conversations in memoranda for you. As these arrive, you
should make the decision as to whether these memoranda should be
distributed to the above liste group it is fairly common knowledge among the
White House Staff that Colson has a special relationship with Harris, so
there would seem to be no problem disclosing the Colson/Harris relationship
to the group abov list.
Gallup Polls - - Harry Dent and I receive the Gallup releases usually the day
before the information becomes public. Occasionally, Dwight Chapin or I
page 2
can get advance information on Presidential Popularity from John Davies,
but it is usually SO close to the release date that it makes little sense to send
of chapen or Strachanmemorand
copies to the group.
Counsellor Rumsfield has been asked to establish a relationship with
George Gallup, Jr. Rumsfield had lunch with Gallup in December but
will neither respond to our requests for information from Gallup nor report to
anyone but you should he obtain any information. The result is that
no important information is acquired from Gallup before it becomes public.
Tetter Polls The Campaign surveys are beginning to arrive "eyes only"
for you and the Attorney General. Most of the issue information should be
macleavaluble to
used "A the above group. The popularity and trial heat results probably should
not be given to them. I suggest that as you read the Teeter reports you make
These exerpts would be
the paragraphs that could be excerpted. sent to the group over your
signature.
ORC Polls
Only the President, you, Higby and work on these
polls with ORC. However, some of the questions are occasionally released to the
Staff and public. Rather than a general rule of releasing all this information
to the group, I suggest that Higby and I mark certain questions as candidates
to be sent to the group, whether other questions will be released to the public
or not. You can approve the suggestions and the material will be sent over
your signature. This will begin with today's poll.
On January 25, I started sending the Attorney General copies of the Harris
and Gollup releases.
Page 3
Recommendation
That the described information be distributed to Connally, Rogers, the
Attorney General, Kissinger and Erhlichman over your signature.
AGREE
DISAGREE
COMMENT
ACTION MEMO
We need to work up a plan to make sure that segments of good,
positive polls, get quietly to Connally, Rogers, and so forth.
This would be both our polls and others, Gallup's, etc. It ought
to go to a few of the key people that are involved with the President
in general, long-range planning and so on.
HRH:
1/20/72
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Date:
2/4
TO:
LARRY HIGBY
FROM:
GORDON STRACHAN
Timmons' convention proposal must
still be in with Bob.
To get this T.V. aspect moving I
suggest the attached memorandum.
Any problems?
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
February 4, 1972
ADMINISTRATIVELY CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR:
MR. TIMMONS
FROM:
GORDON STRACHAN
G
SUBJECT:
Young People on
T.V. at Convention
Bob read your proposal on the uses of T.V. at the RNC
Convention. One of the aspects which particularly
concerns him is how we plan on being sure that on
all the T.V. shots plenty of young people are seen
rather than the old delegates.
Harry Flemming has been working on the delegate
selection process in the states. He has received
some rather specific instructions from the Attorney
General as to the large number of young people who
will serve as delegates.
Bob asked that you, Flemming, and members of your
Convention T.V. task force prepare a brief plan as
to how T.V. will concentrate on young rather than
old delegates.
CC: Harry Flemming
Administratively Confidential
December 29, 1971
MEMORANDUM FOR:
MR. CHARLES W. COLSON
FROM:
GORDON STRACHAN
SUBJECT:
Spokesman Resources
Bob Haldeman decided on September 22 that there should be monthly
"progress reports and evaluations of appearances by political
surrogates". The first report for the month of November is
attached. It is too long to be useful, too much of what others
are doing, and too frequently a description of failure.
Chapin and I believe that three changes should be made to
obtain a more effective program and to give Mr. Haldeman and
the Attorney General a better understanding of what is really
happening.
First, the Spokesman Resources operation at 1701 (Bart Porter
and Curt Herge) should concentrate their efforts on
no more than seven top flight individuals. They should
receive premier assistance with speech material from
Colson's office, TV and radio advice, and personal political
briefings by Harry Flemming. As the word gets around that
certain speakers are getting excellent treatment others
that should be used will go to 1701 for similar treatment.
In addition to Goldwater, Brock, Scott, Taft, Dole, Romney,
and Butz could be the basic seven.
Second, spot checks should be made to determine how the
rest of the spokesmen are doing, so that the pressure is
maintained.
Third, John Scali has not followed up on his presentation
at the November 5 Cabinet meeting. Bob Haldeman sent him a
memorandum November 9 praising his performance and directing
him to meet individually in three or four weeks to be sure the
Cabinet Officers have begun implementing his message.
A check with Scali indicates that he has spoken with Rogers
and Laird ("nonpolitical") and Connally and Volpe (who
don't need Scali's advice).
Chapin, Higby, and I think it would be helpful if you would
look over this report, consider it in light of Pat O'Donnell's
operation, and suggest what might be done to improve the quality
of our entire Spokesman Resources operation. Could you please
give us your comments at your convenience?
GS:lm
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
DETERMINED TO BE AN
January 6, 1972
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
MEMORANDUM
E.O. 12065, Section 6-102
By Emp
Date 8-17-81
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR H.R. HALDEMAN
FROM ROBERT M. TEETER
SUBJECT: CATHOLIC VOTE
This memorandum is in reply to your request for my thoughts on the
Catholic vote.
While I think we should reserve any hard conclusions until our first
wave of polling is completed in February, a few trends have emerged
from studies we have done in the past, which I think allow us to make
some tentative decisions. It is, however, a very difficult political
issue because much of the evidence is conflicting. There are clearly
cases in which Governors have helped themselves markedly by making
overtures directly to the Catholic vote and other instances where
other Governors in other states have either failed to help themselves
or hurt themselves at the polls by attempting to appeal directly to
Catholics.
All available data does, however, indicate that there has been a defi-
nite break in the traditional Democratic voting behavior of Catholics
in suburban and, to a lesser extent urban areas. Catholics, in and
around metropolitan areas, particularly in the north are clearly be-
coming more independent politically and splitting their ticket at an
increasing rate. This trend is not apparent to any significant degree,
however, in rural areas, the border states, or the south.
This trend appears to be primarily a result of Catholics becoming more
upward mobile in the society and assuming increasingly middle class
values, thereby, changing their political attitudes and voting behavior.
Some of the reasons for this shift, in addition to the fact that many
Catholics have improved their socio-economic status are that many urban
Catholics have strong ethnic backgrounds and have remained in somewhat
closed ethnic communities in the large cities until recently but have
tended to leave these ethnic communities in the second or third genera-
tion as they moved up on the socio-economic scale. At this point, many
of their ties to their ethnic group, including their traditional politi-
cal attitudes and voting behavior, weakened.
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
MEMORANDUM
A second reason for the increasing political independence of Catholics
is the erosion of the hitherto strong Catholic dogma, particularly
among younger Catholic families. These two points - upward mobility
and the diminishing importance of Catholicism per se - contribute to
the increasing importance of newly attained social class and economic
status in voting behavior.
At this same time, there may also be a group of Catholics who have
retained their strong religious beliefs and who feel the Democratic
party has moved away from them as it has become more liberal and their
life-style has been threatened. These people have been primarily
Democrats in the past but have always been basically conservative and
held the traditional American values which many Democrats now appear
to repudiate. This group tends to be lower end educationally and
economically and also a group that has disliked Republicans fairly
intensely for a long time. There was (in 1968) and is today some
definite Wallace support among this group. Many of these voters now
feel strongly cross pressured politically because their philosophical
beliefs tend to push them more towards voting Republican but they have
grown up disliking Republicans and formed fairly strong Democratic
voting patterns. In my judgement, this group will be much harder for
the President to attract than will the middle class upper end Catholics
who have moved to the suburbs.
While the data indicates that socio-economic status rather than religion
are generally the most important determinants of voting behavior, the
issue of aid to parochial schools is clearly one where Catholics vote
primarily on the basis of their religion and one which appears to cut
across most socio-economic lines. It is important to understand, however,
that even though religion determines voting behavior, on this issue most
Catholics see it strictly as an economic rather than religious ideological
issue. The opposition to aid to parochial schools among non-Catholics
however, is based largely on philosophical or ideological grounds. Poli-
tically, it clearly becomes a question of whether the President can pick
up more Catholics than he will lose non-Catholics by proposing some type
of aid to parochial schools.
Based on the data I have available, I think the President's appeal to this
group of voters should be aimed at them as a social class rather than
Catholics for two reasons. First, I think there is a strong possibility
that he might lose more non-Catholics than he would pick up Catholics, by
proposing some type of federal aid to parochial schools. This may be par-
ticularly true in several of the Border and Southern States that are
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
MEMORANDUM
important to us and where there is some definite anti-Catholic sentiment.
Moreover, in many of the states with large Catholic populations where
such a proposal would clearly help them or states that we have very little
chance of carrying anyway, such as, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecti-
cut and Michigan. The second reason is that there is a high probability
that the President's opponent will be a Catholic and the preliminary re-
turns on our first wave polls that Illinois, Wisconsin, Kentucky show
Muskie having a very strong appeal to Catholics which I doubt could be
loosened even if the President proposed some type of federal aid to paro-
chial schools and Senator Muskie opposed it. While Kennedy's appeal to
Catholics is somewhat less than Muskie's, particularly in Illinois, it
is substantial in Wisconsin and Kentucky and it would probably not be
changed on the issue of aid to parochial schools.
Summing up, I simply think that the potential payoff of such a position
against either Muskie or Kennedy would be small in that risk of a net
loss with non-Catholics is too great. The Catholics who are most avail-
able to the President are those who will vote on issues not related to
their Catholicism and whose main concern is with insuring their security
in their new social environment, which makes them most interested in the
economic issues of inflation and unemployment. They are those who have
or are just realizing the American dream and want desperately to protect
their newfound status.
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
MEMORANDUM
TOTAL VOTE
Nixon Muskie Wallace Nixon Humphrey Wallace Nixon Kennedy Wallace
ILLINOIS
100%
Total
45.8
39.5
5.8
45.2
36.2
6.5
44.6
48.9
6.1
Roman Catholic 21.1
73.7
--
43.1
37.1
7.3
44.4
40.5
7.3
Tot. Undecided 8.9
12.1
10.4
KENTUCKY
100%
Total
47.0
31.0
11.0
46.0
30.0
10.0
43.0
35.0
9.0
Roman Catholic
25.0
60.0
5.0
29.0
52.0
6.0
29.0
53.0
8.0
Tot. Undecided 12.0
14.0
13.0
WISCONSIN
100%
Total
38.8
48.3
6.5
43.8
42.0
7.8
38.9
50.1
5.1
Roman Catholic
29.0
58.0
6.6
36.3
49.8
8.5
28.7
62.5
5.0
Tot. Undecided
6.5
6.5
5.9
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
MEMORANDUM
January 6, 1972
DETERMINED TO BE AM
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
E.O. 12065, Section 6-102
CONFIDENTIAL
Emp NARS, Date 8-17-81
MEMORANDUM FOR H. R. HALDEMAN
FROM ROBERT M. TEETER
SUBJECT: THE ENVIRONMENT
This memorandum is based on survey data we have collected in state-
wide polls primarily in the midwest and east during the past several
years, on a national study done on the environment by Harris about
a year ago for the Public Broadcast Laboratory For Environmental
Quality, and the Harris Domestic Council poll.
Several conclusions can be drawn from this data.
First and most important is that the environment has, along with
consumerism, become the fourth major national issue complex and
will continue to be an important issue indefinitely.
Since the 1930's there have been three basic-national issue com-
plexes: The war/peace issue, which is, of course, currently
centered on Vietnam; the domestic peace issue, which has been
oriented to racial problems and civil rights for the past twenty-
five years, and the money issue which at various points in time
may be oriented to inflation, cost of living, taxes or unemploy-
ment.
During the past 20 or 30 years, each of these issues has tended
to rise and fall through time and rarely have all three of them
been acute public concerns at the same time. Occasionally the data
will indicate that one of these is of concern to a large number of
people, but that it is being held down to some degree by another
issue which is of more acute concern at that time. This has
frequently been true in the past decade when Vietnam was perceived
as the single most important problem in the country, but at the
same time people were seriously concerned about domestic unrest,
crime, and inflation.
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
MEMORANDUM
Nineteen sixty-eight was in many ways a unique year, because during
the campaign period, the public was acutely concerned and unhappy
over the status of all three of these problem areas. They were
frustrated over the handling of the war, frightened over the in-
creasing domestic unrest and civil disorders, and personally feeling
the effects of spiraling inflation.
During the 1960's several specific environmental and consumer issues
such as: traffic and highway safety, thalidomide, meat inspection,
land use, safety of birth control pills, truth in packaging, wild-
life preservation, mercury, DDT, etc. rose and fell. At their high
point these issues would get up to a total rating of 20-25% but con-
cern always fell off after the publicity which caused the original
jump subsided. Concern over several of these issues was climaxed by
books such as: Nader's Unsafe at Any Speed and Rachel Carson's Silent
Spring. I think that many of these specific issues have now bound
together to form a permanent fourth major national issue complex which
we now call the environment/ecology issue, which is in a broader
sense a quality of life issue. Almost all of the individual environ-
ment and consumer issues have the common characteristic of dealing
with the individual's problems of living in a complex urban society
in which he is dependent on a multitude of institutions of which he
has little or no knowledge and virtually no control. This means
that the individual doesn't know whether or not there is mercury in
his fish, whether his vegetables have been sprayed with a harmful
pesticide or whether the air he breathes is killing him, and even if
he did, he's powerless to do anything about it. It is also some-
thing that people see examples of every day and is psychologically
frightening to them because it is something over which they have
no control but yet it directly affects their personal health and well
being and that of their children.
Two other factors which will probably also help keep the environment
an important issue are that it is an easy and attractive issue for
the media to cover and an even more attractive one for politicians
because it has virtually no negative side.
**
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
MEMORANDUM
Therefore, I think that as Vietnam subsides as an issue and the
economy gets back on the upswing, there is a good chance that the
environmental set of issues will increase considerably as an
important national issue. This is particularly true if we continue
to get by without any major national racial disturbances. There
are several states where it has already been the first or second
most important state issue in the past several months. Also, it
is a very important issue to the younger generation.
The second conclusion is that it can be a very useful issue for
the President in this campaign for several reasons.
First, a large majority of the electorate is concerned about it
and virtually no one is against it. In most of the data I have
studied every significant voting behavior group and demographic
group is in favor of vigorous governmental action to improve the
environment. It is truly a non-partisan and non-ideological
issue. Some of the most ardent environmentalists come from both
the left and right ends of the ideological spectrum. Regardless
of the type of trade-off question that is asked, a large majority
say they are willing to make the sacrifice whether it is higher
taxes, higher prices or a loss of jobs. (This is also the finding
of the Domestic Council poll.) In our current wave of polls we
asked whether the economy or the environment should take precedence
if a choice had to be made, and the environment is chosen by over a
two-to-one margin in all those states where we have preliminary
data-Wisconsin, Kentucky, and New Hampshire. Moreover, a
majority of voters clearly do not believe that this choice has to
be made.
Secondly, the groups who are most concerned with this issue and
whose voting behavior appears to be most influenced by it, are
groups who are important to us and who we may be able to attract
on this issue but not on any other. These are the very young
voters (18-24) with whom the environment is always the first or
second most important issue, and the younger ticket-splitters
(25-40) who are largely white, suburban middle class, and who
are slightly more affluent than the average voter. I think there
is a segment of both of these groups who may well vote primarily
on this issue. In the large mid-western and eastern states such
as Illinois, Ohio, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey, this
ticket-splitting group has been crucial for Republicans in past
elections and appear to be the key for the President in those
states in 1972.
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
MEMORANDUM
Thirdly, neither party nor any of the candidates really has a hold
on the environmental issue yet. The President is rated as handling
it fairly well in most of the states we have studied and Muskie,
try as he might, simply is not perceived as a champion of the environ-
ment.
Lastly, I think this issue may provide an opportunity to show the
President as one who is very concerned about the health and wel-
fare of individual citizens, as opposed to one who is generally
concerned with hard-to-understand issues such as: business, the
military, foreign affairs, and the international money problem.
In conclusion, I do not think the environment will be one of the
primary issues in the campaign, but I do think it will be an important
secondary issue and that a small but significant number of people
may vote on. Even if this group is only 2 or 3% they could be
critical to us in close states and I see no risk in appealing to
them. While I realize that the President must act responsibly,
there is no risk in terms of losing votes with strong environmental
position.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
January 7, 1971
TO:
LARRY HIGBY
FROM:
GORDON STRACHAN
This is Ehrlichman's campaign
memo. The material on the
Catholic vote and the environment
appear on pages 5 and 6.
I gave Teeter instructions by
telephone to protect against any
direct quotation. Teeter, of
course, does not know the source
of the conflict in opinion on
these issues.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
November 6, 1971
MEMORANDUM FOR
BOB HALDEMAN
RE:
REELECTION CAMPAIGN
The tone or theme:
In spite of all the talk about this being an age of one-term
Presidents, I believe it is very hard for the American people
to turn out a sitting President. Therefore, obviously, the
tone or theme of the campaign must be keyed to the fact that
the President is the President, that he has done a professional
and competent job, that he has made significant accomplishments
and that there is, therefore, no reason to change.
I think people tend to vote against a candidate perhaps more
frequently than they vote for him; and certainly a Presidential
race always weighs a candidate against his opponent. An incumbent
President has an obvious advantage and President Nixon has a very
clear advantago in view of his international initiatives on the question
of "compared to what?"
At the same time, the President is the national father figure, the
exemplar, the leader, and the nation's champion against other
nations. This is what the American people believe a President is
and they want him to act out these parts. They want him to evidence
compassion for the poor, even though individually they may say
and do things showing callous disregard for the poor. It is alright
for Mr. Voter to be indifferent to the poor but it is not alright, in
his cyes and mine, for his President to be indifferent to the poor. In
fact, I suspect he gets a certain amount of psychic relieve from the
knowledge that his President is being concerned about the less fortunate
even at the time that he himself is not.
-2-
father
I think it is indispensable for the President to act out these
leader
roles in the course of the next year, with feeling and sincerity,
complex
to fulfill these expectations. To the extent that he does not we
will find vague discontents and negative reactions expressed as
maring
"the President has no compassion, he doesn't care, he is cold
changen
and indifferent, he has no thought for the little people, he only
cares about big business, etc. "
Since this is role-acting, let's approach it as such. The President
has a natural antipathy for doing the phony, the unnatural and the
not-felt. But WE are now not talking about making him comfortable
in what he is doing; we are talking about getting him reelected and,
in looking at that project coldly, there are some things that are
going to have to be done to do the job properly that he may not totally
like. But I am sure he and we would like the alternative oven less.
Because I think the alternative is to give exposure to an Achilles
hecl to which the President may be attacked mercilessly and effectively
with unknown results,
And like a tennis game, as long as you can return the ball without
mistake evory time it doesn't really matter how hard you hit it.
You keep playing for the other fc How's mistake. We occupy the
high ground now since the President is the incumbent and all he
has to do is 80 on being the incumbent. The other fellow has to
figure out how 1.0 take the high ground. Therefore, we should avoid
giving him handholds, avoid making mistakes, avoid acting rashly
or without calculation or conteniplation (e.g., the re-run of the
Phoenix speech). and close as many of the doors as possible through
which the enemy might enter.
In short, I would like to soe the President put in situations which would
act out his compassion, his fairness, his true concern for his inferiors,
his leadership, etc. It does almost no good at all for those of us who
know him well to tell about these things. One acting-out session will
be worth ten thousand interviews with White House staffers or members
of the Cabinet.
But he doesn't good coverage or Credit when he
Does as Them unders thes fillers up - child
they Juneraly foil to do.
-3-
The President's part in the campaign
We had a good session with the Cabinet yesterday in the
President's absence, and we told them all the things that they
had to do in order to get the President reelected. But I
suspect you know, and I strongly feel, that in the last analysis
it isn't going to make much difference what the Cabinet says or
docs. The President himself is going to have to co much more
than he is inclined to do, much more than he would want to do
and probably much more than his responsibilities in fact permit
him safely to do. But nevertheless I think he will have to do them.
Television and Radio
I know there is a concern that the President is over-exposing himself
on television. And yet the singular criticism which I hear as I go
That's what and
around the country talking the issues to people is that the President
is not talking to them about the issues. The Cabinet is talking to thom,
the staff is talking to them, Bob Dole is talking to them but they want
the President to talk to them. They want fireside chats. Over and over
they lator was will
again I receive the suggestion that the President sit down and talk to
the country about the issues of the time on 0 periodic basis. 60 that
they may count regularly on hearing from him not just at times of
crisis but under circumstances that will permit them to pull their
chairs up to the television and listen to him explain to them about the
problems of our aged, health problems, the problems of our youth
and our cities in jerms which they can understand and react to.
They since about care.
We have discussed the fireside chat format in the past and I gathor
that the ten o'clock meeting or the five o'clock meeting 01 the Saturday
morning group or somebody doesn't think it's a very good idea. All
1 know is that there is considerable consumer demand out there in the
field for this kind of thing. Everyon The # good idea ? -
excess
As a variation on this, let me suggest that we think about this hunger
or market demand in terms of regions. As Ed Harper pointed out to
us in his analysis, the issue of support to parochial schools is a hot
issue in limited arcas. The issue of the problems of the aged is almost
completely confined to 8 or 9 states. The farm problem is obviously
localized. Perhaps there in a regional approach to this fireside chat
idea that would prevent the President from becoming over-exposed
nationwide and would avoid whatever disadvantages are inherent in such
over-cxposurc. at problem is that thempare not wally that
regionalized - and it p just as much
work 10 doce regional chatasa national
one
-4-
Something like this would have to be started before campaigning
begins in earnest and I know the equal time problem exists, but &
I also know there is a very strong pull for this among people who
are thinking about the Presidency and about the nation's problems.
who
constitute
1110
71%
Personal Appearances
Zeleshate
Aside from the fact that it prevents the press from writing that the
President is ducking the people, I don't know that there's a great
deal of advantage in personal appearances during the campaign
We've always been very big for rallies, crowd shots, motorcades
and balloons but I really seriously question whether they are in my
appea
way important for an incumbent President It may be that we need
some bandwagon psychology but I wouldn't think so. There are
obvious tolerance maximums in terms of the use of television, but
I think those limitations are perhaps limitations on campaigning
generally then, since I think the idea of the President getting out
and whistle stopping or stumping the nation IS doubtful,
New Hampshire
I think I would stay completely away from Now Hampshire under the
circumstances. McCloskey may do better than anyone thinks at this
time simply because he is effective up close and can be expected to
make substantial inroads in the meager population of that state by
an intensive hand-shaking and coffee hour campaign. I would think
it's safer simply to take the position that New Hampshire has little or
no significance in terms of the Republican nomination. It happens
to be the first primary but somebody had to be first and it doesn't
stand for anything. We might even play up McCloskey's obvious
advantage in being able to devote unlimited time to hand-shaking in
New Hampshire while the President is busy saving the world.
Mc Closkey's absentee record might be emphasized and our chairman
up there might make the point that it's more important for the President
to be hard at work in the White House than up in New Hampshire trying
to tilt for delegates with some unknown Congressman. If we write it
off now, we don't have to apologize for any results later,
assuming we can bring it off.
-5-
give this new
Trips into the Country
to Teeper r
I would subscribe to John Whitakor's proposal for more
dei of copy
far oriented as he trips in degree and fewer but I think rallion. he has 1 don't the think right idea. I would He go form quite Derbation as
to make the point that most of these issues are regional in haracter
and we can pretty well localize our attack on an issue with some
intelligent analysis. But he is cortainly right that trips should be
taken to discuss problems.
bad inca cause Carrito offer
Running ao an out
up Civiling effort
I think John Connally is right that the President has to run as an out,
against the status ano, rather than as a defender of the status quo.
There are simply too many unfulfilled proposals, too many unsolved
problems, too many unsatisfied needs and wants as demonstrated by
the Harris poll. People don't like the way the country is going and
the only way to respond to that discontent is LO run against the conditions
which they identify. You have to advocate change under such
hard good
circumstances, rathor than to run on a platform of accomplishment,
If it's skillfully done, the President can attack his Senator opponent on
the ground that he, the member of Congress, is the defender of the
status quo since the Congress wouldn't change things even though the
President wanted them to. The Senator perpetuated pollution, he
perpetuated poverty, he perpetuated the conditions in the cities which
might have been solved by revenue sharing, etc.
The Catholic Vote
We are operating under a set of assumptions about the Catholic vote
need a
that I suspect are totally invalid. You have seen Roy Morey's
neednue This.
preliminary analysis and Pat Buchanan's seat-of-the-pants emotional
response. I took the position with Buchanan that Morey had made the
prima facio caso and It was up to Buchanan to sustain his burden of
proof and I am afraid Pat has not done so. He has told us with great
fervor what he, Buchanan, believes but he has no answers for the
to
statistics and polls which indicate the contrary. Because a strongly
pro-Catholic position on some issues costs us votes (as shown by
?
the polls) in the border states and the South, and we are relying on
those areas as part of our base of support, we had better be very
sure of the validity of our assumptions on this subject before we
go much farther.
-6-
The Environment
A somewhat kindred subject is that of the electoral effect of the
onvironmental issue. There is an instinctive distrust of this
issue by the President. Yet the polls tell us very clearly that it
is a highly important issue and everything that we can develop on
an objective basis tells us over and over again that it is motivajing
and significant. If I read the Harris poll correctly (and it would
scem inescapable to inc on the basis of this poll) people don't want
"balance" between the environment and the economy. We know that
balance is right, makes good sonse from the standpoint of the future
of the country, has to be an important consideration in the things we
do around here, but it will turn off the environmentally oriented voter.
And here we are talking about broadening our base. It's the young,
the wemen, the middle bracket wage carner who is concerned about
Palato
pollution in overwhelming numbers.
Now, whether we like it or not, and whether the President agrees
emotionally with the evidence or m t, I think we have to be roalistic
about this issue and begin to act more politically about it.
On both these points, what I wish to argue is that We are making
emotional responses to these two issues. Rather, we have to be
cold, calculating and thoroughly political in our analysis of the
issues and how to treat them.
Labor
I'm of two minds on this issue and I don't quite know what to suggest.
We need to know a lot more about the situation than we do. We would
like to think that we can make inroads into the labor vote; we would
like to think we can even pick up some labor leaders at the margin wh O
will help us. But we are under heavy attack by our friends at the
moment for being soft on labor, for having sold out to labor on Phase II,
for having tolorated wage increases and strikes to the serious damage
of business and the nation and, in effect, for being "dupes" who have
been taken into camp by labor, largely on a bluff.
-7-
In a minute I am going to mention credibility. We are telling
people not to worry about the China trip and the Russia trip
because the President is tough, ho's able to handle them, he
won't be taken in by them and they can't bluff him. It is being
argued that our labor record makes these assertions incredible.
The President or the politician?
To be reelected the President must attract the support of people
who are not party Republicans. The campaign must be inclusive
rather than exclusive, It must bring to him people who are attracted
by that extra ingredient rather than by the forms r Senator from
California. In other words, everyone knows that the President is
a consummate politician and frequently does things for political
reasons. They often assign political reasons to things done for non-
political reasons. There's a sort of rebuttable presumption that
everything the President does is done for political roasons.
My thesis is that he will attract additional support if his campaign is
Key
essentially Presidential and not political. The closerwe get to election
day the harder it will be not to be political; not to say and do the purely
political thing, to drop the Presidential mantle and wade into the fray
at the level of the lowest common denominator. Yet I think that
the strategy can be that of the front runner which was so successfully
employed in the weeks just before the 1968 convention.
Credibility
In thinking about vulnerability, this has to be an avenue that we should
be concerned about. McCloskey is already playing this tune in New
Hampshire, to what effect I don't know. I think many people want to
believe that their government officials are trying to pull a fast ono,
trying to slide one by them, trying to get away with something, etc.
I think each time Chuck Colson is caught at one of his escapades or
the Defense Department is nailod on a North Vietnamese pipeline
exhibit or we attempt to excuse some indefensible mistake by a
subordinate we losc some people that we otherwise could have won.
There's no doubt that we're going to be attacked as dishonest and
incredible and 1 think we have to loan over backward to avoid
creating grounds or even the appearance of grounds for these attacks.
-8-
I think the Bureau of Labor Statistics effort, while right, is going
to cost us in the long run on this score. We're going to have the
same trouble in punishing or firing those guilty of leaking.
Suppression of the truth comes under the general heading of
incredibility. This is a problem we're going to have to deal with
on an almost daily basis, making the best judgment calls we
can but always keeping in mind the overall problem.
Perhaps under this general heading comes the Justice Department
and some of its activities lately.
The Law and Order Issue
The nationwide crime statistics for the las to three years have not
been very good. On the other hand, Washington, D. C. 's record
has been excellent, given all the problems of this place. In truth,
the difference is that we have poured an unbelieveable amount of
money into law enforcement in the District and it is governed by a
dictatorship rather than an elected Mayor and City Council. We've
been able to do a lot of things in the management of the city
government that the electorate would never have stood for if they
had had any say in it. And it's gotten results.
I'm not sure how this issue can be handled in the coming campaign.
I suppose one approach would be to point with pride at the city we
have responsibility for and say that big city Democrat Mayors could
do the same thing if they were as good as we are. And we can say
that we've been trying to send more money to the cities in the form
of revenue sharing but the Congress wouldn't let us. But all in all
it is not a good national record and we're going to be on the defensive
in this area and we'd better start laying some plans right now for
meeting the political onslaught. There is no sign that the statistics
are going to get any better in the coming year.
Drugs - key concern, key opportunity
no headway.
-9-
Rights
There is going to be a major political offensive against us in
the civil rights area and we will have a separate report coming
to the President within a couple of weeks as to the dimension
of this problem and the directions that the attacks probably will
take.
This memorandum started out to be general and ended up being
specific on certain issues. Going back to the general, I think
that the President should "declare peace" at the start of his campaign,
say that the Vietnam war is at an end as he promised it would bc,
that the country is emerging into an era of peace and prosperity
and that we have come through the dark night (please, not nightmare)
with the President's firm hand on the helm. Many, many problems
remain to be solved but now we're in a position to attack them with
the same leadership, vision and courage that has been displayed in
bringing us through the problems of war and recession.
To carn a generation of peace many international problems are yet
to be tackled and it's a very bad time to be thinking about changing
Administrations, particularly when such a good start has been made
by the incumbent President.
We don't try and defend the domestic status quo; we urge that it be
changed and we run against the failures of the Congress (the Democratic
nominee almost surely coming from that body).
I apologize for the rambling nature of the memorandum but we 'll try
and organize this subject matter better for you in succeeding notes.
John John D. Ehrlichman
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Date: Jan. 19
TO:
H.R. HALDEMAN
FROM:
GORDON STRACHAN
Colson asked Mike Balzano to
prepare this analysis of the Ethnic
vote. It is substantially
different than the Hallett
memorandum you read two weeks
ago.
Balzano is Colson's candidate for
the Ethnic post on the Campaign.
Reach
January 3, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR BART PORTER
The attached is additional thinking from Michael
Balzano that arrived this weekend.
There is strong thinking over here that it is
very important that we not repeat our mistakes
of 1968. The ethnic problem requires considerable
amount of creative thinking and we are very
impressed with Balzano.
W. Richard Howard
CC: Mr. Bell
bcc: Mr. Strachan
December 31, 1971
Mr. Charles W. Colson
Special Counsel to the President
The White House Office
Washington, D. C.
Dear Mr. Colson:
Enclosed are the papers you requested. As you know,
these few pages contain three and a half years of thinking
about this problem.
You will probably have a host of questions concerning
details: T am prepared to discuss or support that which I
have written in greater depth.
I hope that in distilling the essence of my theory, or
in greatly oversimplifying the mechanism, I have not so
diluted its meaning that it appears valueless. But distilled
or not, this theory can be operationalized, and I know it can
be done in time to win this election.
Sincerely,
mike Balzens
Michael Balzano
MPB:dw
Enclosures
December 31, 1971
MEMORANDUM TO THE PRESIDENT
From: Michael Balzano
Subject: The Ethnic Vote in the 1972 Election
The following pages contain a discussion of a theory
for capturing the support of ethnic Americans from all levels
of the economic and social spectrum. My theory, and the plan
of action I am advocating in the paper, rests on the following
assumptions:
(1) That the Democrats have turned on their traditional
ethnic supporters and are advancing the cause of racial
minorities over and above the interests of the ethnics.
(2) That because of the enunciated policies of the Democratic
leadership, the ethnics who have traditionally supported
the Democratic Party have become alienated from that Party.
(3) That the ethnic Americans from all levels of the economic
and social spectrum are more in tune. philosophically, with
the Republican Party than they are with the Democratic
Party.
(4) That in the elections of 1968 and 1970 many ethnics voted
for the Republican candidates, or for George Wallace, out
of outrage and out of a white backlash. Today, however,
the "perceived" problems in the economy may frighten these
ethnics into supporting the Democrats.
(5) That the Republicans have used a level of approach which
focused on lower income, first generation ethnics. This
level of appeal may not be, and probably is not, sophis-
ticated enough to attract middle income, second and third
generation ethnics. Middle income and better educated
ethnics can be insulted and "turned off" by a well-meaning
staff of campaign strategists which is culturally off
balance (that is, weighted down with 11 professional ethnics"
who speak to ethnics as though "they just got off the
boat").
2
THE THEORY
(1) A technique can be developed by which the President,
through a series of carefully worded and strategically coordi-
nated speeches, can capture the highly diffuse array of ethnic
groups and weld them into a permanent ideological Republican
coalition. To accomplish this the domestic speeches of the
President must be constructed SO as to deliver a consistent
pattern of symbolically laden messages to selected members of
every audience.
(2) The message of each speech must be constructed so
that it contains verbal symbols capable of uniting ethnics
from different educational, occupational and age levels, by
the conscious and unconscious common denominators which connect
them. To do so the symbols must convey and generate a common
identity by association. The messages must carefully avoid
flashing symbols which produce a negative identification. For
example, "Mafia" is an odious term to honest, middle class
Italians.
(3) Most importantly, the selected verbal symbols must
convey ideas which establich categories of symbolic exclusive-
ness, i.e. symbols which idaologically unify some people and,
by definition. exclude others. For example, the symbol "Black
is beautiful" cannot stand for Itelians. Poles or Germans. It
unites blacks and. by definition, i) encludes all non-blacks.
It is at once unifying and mutually exclusive.
The concept of symbolic exclusiveness is the key to the
entire success of our mission. Inherent in the concept of
symbolic exclusiveness is a calculated but carefully contrived
form of polarization. One form of this ideological polariza-
tion. for example. can be seen as arising out of a controversy
as to whether cr not the traditionally accepted formula for
upward economic and social mobility i.e. individual initiative
and merit, should be replaced by something else. More precisely,
should all Americans be judged equally and success be earned,
or should a vociferous but minuscule minority (whatever their
race) change the formula to suit themselves?
In theory, the object of the speeches, then, is twofold:
First, to unite ethnics around the Republican Party on
the basis of self-interest;
Second, to identify the opposition party as the party in
favor of sacrificing the majority of Americans (the hard working
lower and middle class and the entire tradition of individual
success based on self-reliance) to appease a racial minority.
THE PROBLEMS
(1) How can the President convince traditionally Democratic
ethnic Americans that on social issues they have more in common
with the Republican Party and that it would be in their interest
to become Republicans?
(2) How can the President tell ethnic members of the lower
and lower middle classes that the Democrats are yielding to
the demands of non-white. minorities at the expense of those at
the lower end of the economic and social ladder, that for "working
class' (hard working) people in general to support the Democratic
Party is to be displaced on the social ladder by a new Democratic
philosophy of "reverse discrimination?"
(3) How can the President bring about an ideological
political realignment without having the essence of his argument
easily identified, thus exposing him to the charge of polarization?
(4) Rather than to focus its appeal toward ethnic immigrants
from predominantly lower income levels, how can the President
broaden the hase of his ethnic support to encompass ethnics with
widely differing occupational, educational, and income levels?
(5) Given the array of ethnic representation in the
hierarchy of our economic and social spectrum, how can the
President focus his appeal on the members of one stratum with-
out offending or alienating the ethnic counterparts in other
strata? For example, praising Italians by exhalting spaghetti
and meat balls or calling Mexican-Amoricans "Chicanos" can
offend middle class Italians and Mexican-Americans.
(6) Once the President has selected a plan involving a
verbal appeal to the ethnic voter, given the reality of a
hostile news media, how can he get the media to convey his
message without distorting it?
THE ANSWER
The President must be able to speak to the people of the
nation at large and have in his speech a hidden message,
hidden to all but those for whom the message was intended
(in this case, ethnic Americans who traditionally vote
Democratic). The message must attract these ethnic Democrats
to the Republican Party by effectively communicating the idea
that the Democrats have abandoned "hard working people" and
that the interest of these people is now championed by the
Republicans. Finally, the mescage must be DO disguised that
the news media will not be able to identify it, let alone
distort it.
3
This technique would be employed in a three-pronged over-
all strategy:
(1)
in the general domestic addresses of the President;
(2)
in contrived situational and occasional speeches
delivered by the President;
(3) in speeches delivered by selected high level per-
sonalities in the Administration and/or national
celebrities.
These speeches would be conducted under the auspices of the
campaign organization.
The overall purpose of this approach would be to provide
a carefully contrived symbolic continuity between the domestic
speeches of the President. It would also provide this same
symbolic continuity in a host of other planned speeches which,
when added to the domestic addresses, would form a unified
campaign tactic exclusively articulated through the office
of the President.
If the technique is properly employed. the news media will
unknowingly carry the political ball for the President.
THE THEORY DEMONSTRATED
AND OPERATIONALIZED: THE MECHANISM
The Theory Demonstrated
A Major Presidential Address: The Labor Day Speech
The next three pages are xerox copies of the text of the
Labor Day address of 1971.
PRESIDENT NIXON'S LABOR DAY ADDRESS
September 6, 1971
1.
On this Labor Day, 1971, I call upon all Americans to dedicate
ourselves to a goal we have rarely been able to achieve in the
past 40 years a new prosperity without war and without in-
flation.
2.
A nation starting out in quest of a great goal, like a young worker
starting out on his career, does not always get what it wants;
rather, a nation gets what it deserves.
What must we do, as a nation, to deserve a generation of peace?
What must we be, as a people, to deserve and to achieve
the new prosperity?
4.
I would like you to join me in exploring one of the basic elements
that gives character to a people and which will make it possible
for the American people to earn a generation of prosperity in
peace.
Central to that character is the compétitive spirit. That is the
inner drive that for two centuries has made the American working-
man unique in the world and has enabled him to make this land the
citadel of individual freedom and opportunity.
6.
The competitive spirit goes by many names. Most simply and
directly, it is called "the work ethic. 11
y
As the name implies, the work ethic holds that labor is good in
itself; that as man or woman at work not only makes a contribution
to his fellow man, but becomes a better person by virtue of the
act of working.
8.
That work ethic is ingrained in the American character. That is
why most of us consider it immoral to be lazy or slothful -- even
if a person is well off enough not to have to work or deliberately
avoids work by going on welfare.
9.
That work ethic is why Americans are considered an industrious,
purposeful people, and why a poor nation of three million people,
over a course of two centuries, lifted itself into the position of
the most powerful and respected leader of the free world today.
10
Recently we have seen that work ethic come under attack. We
hear voices saying that it is immoral or materialistic to strive for
an ever-higher standard of living, We are told that the desire to
get ahead must be curbed, because it will leave others behind.
We are told that it doesn't matter whether America continues to be
number one in the world economically and that we should resign
ourselves to being number two or number three or even number
four. /We see some members of disadvantaged groups being told to
take the welfare road rather than the road of hard work, self-
reliance and self-respect.
It is not surprising that so many hard working Americans are
wondering: What's happening to the work ethic in America today?
What's happening to the willingness for self-sacrifice that enabled
us to build a great nation, to the moral code that made self-reliance
a part of the American character, to the competitive spirit that
made it possible for us to lead the world?
12
One answer to those questions was given in the response of the
American people to the new economic policy I announced last month.
I called then for some degree of sacrifice, some inconvenience and
13
some belt-tightening, some temporary restrictions on our economic
freedom - - in order to create new jobs, to stop the rise in the cost
of living, and to protect the American dollar.
14
The overwhelming response to that call is a new justification for
every American's faith in himself and faith in his country.
or course, there have been complaints; there have been counter-
15
suggestions; there have been criticisms by special interest groups.
16
But the most heartening reaction was the surge of national confidence,
the reaffirmation of our competitive spirit, the willingness to make
a personal sacrifice in pursuit of worthy goals by the man in the
street, the worker on the job, the homemaker trying to balance the
family budget.
17
This letter from a state employee in' Texas, whose wife is a school
teacher, is typical of thousands that came into the White House after
I made that speech, It reads: "We were both due for salary in-
creases in September
but we will survive. If it were necessary
to cut our income in half, I still know of no other country I would
choose to call my own. I've heard the young people using a phrase
that might fit: Right on. "
..?...
18
Let the detractors of America, the doubters of the American
spirit, take note. America's competitive spirit, the work ethic
of this people, is alive and well on Labor Day, 1971.
19
The dignity of work, the value of achievement, the morality of
self-reliance -- none of these is going out of style.
20
With that fact clearly understood, let us also recognize that the
work ethic in America is undergoing some changes.
It means that business, labor and government should explore the
21
new needs of today's wage earners: We must give the individual
worker more responsibility -- more of the feeling that his
opinion counts.
22
We must find ways to better recognize and reward the extra effort a
worker puts into his job.
23
We must open up new and equal opportunities to allow a person to
grow in his job.
24
And we must give more respect to the proud men and women who
do work that is all too often considered "menial. 11
25
I read a report recently about some on welfare in one of our cities
who objected to taking jobs that they considered menial. As I read
that report, I thought of my own father. During the years that 1
was growing up, he worked as a streetcar motorman, oil field
worker; he worked as a farmer, a carpenter and a brick layer.
He worked also in a filling station:
20
Let us recognize once and for all no job is menial in America
if it leads to self-reliance, self-respect and individual dignity.
We must make it possible for workers to try "refresher courses"
and "second careers" to open up the chance for a new variety in
work.
We must reinstill a pride of craftsmanship, a pride in good
service, that results in quality workmanship.
And we must make sure that technology does not dehumanize work,
but makes it more creative and rewarding for the people who will
operate the plants of the future,
-3-
2
Here are the same three pages rewritten so as to demon-
strate the kind of symbolic manipulation we have been dis-
cussing.
The Labor Day Address: The New Version
(Paragraphs 1, 2, 3 and 4 are the same as the original.)
Central to that character is the work ethic. That is,
the inner drive that for two centuries has made the labor of
the American workingman the prime ingredient of America's
greatness.
The work ethic implies a number of things. But to all of
those who have achieved a solid measure of success through
their own toil and sacrifice, it reaffirms the promise inherent
in the consept of the American dream: that in the United States
economic and social rewards are largely determined by merit.
From the earliest days of our colonial period, through the
era of westward expansion, and through the horrors of the great
World Mars, America grew in greatness. But let us remember,
America's bounty is but a reflection of the industriousness,
perseverence, and achievements of its working people.
All through our history. people came here from all parts
of the world. They knew that America was the land of opportunity.
They knew that in America it WHS possible to work their way up
the economic and social ladder.
Those who came here after the country was settled (the
ethnics) quickly took the extresple seu by the workingmen already
here; they rolled up their nileaves and want to work. They were
happy to work at whatever jobc they could find. No job was
below the dignity o:' those who truly wanted to better themselves.
American workingmen have always lives by the coue of hard work
and sacrifice and in doing so they earned and deserved the
economic and social rewards that they achieved. The greatest
reward of all was knowing the, were successful. that they
succeeded in making a better life for themselves, their children
and all Americans who followed them.
Yes, the great majority of the American people pulled them-
selves up by their own bootstraps and proved that the American
dream was within the reach of anyone who Was willing to work to
achieve it. We know that the work ethic has helped to build
the moral fiber of our people. That is why we have come to
respect those who seek to better themselves through gainful
employment.
3
Recently we have seen that work ethic come under attack.
We hear voices saying that it is immoral or materialistic to
strive for an ever-higher standard of living. We are told that
the desire to get ahead must be curbed, because it will leave
others behind. We are told that it doesn't matter whether
America continues to be number one in the world economically
and that we should resign ourselves to being number two or
number three or even number four.
At the same time, we hear these same voices saying that
the American dream is dead. They say that today it is not
possible for Americans to better themselves or to improve their
economic and social position.
It is not surprising then that hard working Americans
today are wondering what is happening to the work ethic in
America. Why is it that some people are unwilling to sacrifice
and to work to improve the selves? NNW is it that some people
refuse to start at the bottom of the ladder as did everyone
else in America?
All those who have achieved success by working their way
up from the bottom of the ladder cannot understand the unwar-
ranted attacks upon the same economic system that enabled the
overwhelling majority of Americans to rise and to achieve.
Those who have attacked the American dream have been blind to
the reality of the American experience. They are Blind to the
fact that better than 75 percent of our people who enjoy
unprecedented prosperity come not from Camilies of great wealth
but are themselves a generation of self-made men.
There comes a time in any country's history when it becomes
necessary to reaffirm its faith in its established traditions.
In America that time is now.
I know that most Americans still cling to the spirit of
sacrifice and perseverence. One indicator of that living
spirit revealed itself in the response cf the American people
to the new economic policy I announced last month.
(Return to the original text of the speech and read paragraphs
13, 14, 15, 16 and 17.)
Let the detractors of America, the doubters of the American
spirit, take note. America's competitive spirit, the work ethic
of this people, is alive and well on Labor Day 1971. In America,
the morality of hard work and sacrifice, the dignity of
4
self-reliance through gainful employment. and the well-deserved
pride of achievement are still the ingredients of success.
None of these is going out of style.
(Return to the original text and read paragraphs 20, 21, 22,
23 and 24.)
We hear reports today which tell of some unemployed
people who refuse to take jobs because they consider the jobs
menial and below their dignity When I hear stories like this,
I cannot help but think of my own father. During the years that
I was growing up, he worked as a streetcar motorman, an oil
field worker; he worked as a farmer, a carpenter and a brick-
layer. He also worked in a filling station. My father was no
different than other Americans. Your parents were the same.
They accepted all kinds of does and worked at them with prido.
(Return to the original text and read paragraph 26 through the
end.)
Analysis
What the revised speech says to the American working-
man:
(1) The work ethic is the inner drive; labor is the prime
ingredient--your labor.
(2) The American dream is based on merit. Those who are
successful succeeded because of their own toil and sacri-
fice.
(3) Opportunity in America equals the chance to work your
way up the ladder. If some people regard a job as below
their dignity, they do not truly want to better them-
selves. Economic and social successes are earned. Racial
minorities want the gains without the sacrifices.
(4) The majority of Americans deserved to achieve success;
they are entitled to it because they earned it by working
for it through gainful employment, not welfare or repara-
tions.
(5) Today, racial minorities are saying that you can't make
it in America. What they really mean is that they refuse
to start at the bottom of the ladder the way you did. They
want to surpass you at your expense.
5
(6) Those who are attacking the work ethic are a small minority
who do not accept the self-made man idea. They want it
handed to them.
(7) You worked the menial jobs to get where you are. Let
them do it too.
The speech has a subconscious thrust:
(1) It conveys to the American laborer a set of symbols with
which he identifies and with which he sees President
Nixon as identifying.
(2) It tells the audience that President Nixon knows that:
(a) some people refuse to work and sacrifice;
(b) some people want the gains of those who have toiled
and achieved, but they refuse to work to obtain
success.
(3) It suggests that the Democrats have initiated and supported
the demands of racial minorities and that they are determined
to appease these minorities at the expense of the working-
man. The Republicans are fighting to protect your hard-
earned successes and your self interests.
(4) By praising those who have succeeded. President Nixon has
withdrawn approval from those who seek to get around the
work ethic. (You can draw your own conclusions about who
those people are.)
(5) He has not opened his flank to the opposition by slapping
welfare recipients. Not all welfare is unjustified. The
opposition likes nothing better than to picture the
Republicans as the enemy of a widow with three children.
(6) The remarks are disguised and fit only those who are
unjustifiably on welfare.
A iconcentrated effort must be made to have the President's
domestic speeches conform to this calculated pattern so that each
speech provides the President with an opportunity to bombard a
selected segment of his audience with a message which is clearly
audible to them but not to those philosophically out of tune
with the President.
Calculated Occasional Speeches
In these instances a series of natural situations will be
exploited to allow the President to make a calculated appeal
6
to a target group. For the present, we will refer to this
tactic as "The President's Achievement Ethic Award. " This
award could be given to a person, a group, or a community.
With each person, group or community awarded there would be:
(1) a speech delivered by the President directly to
the recipient of the honors;
(2) mass coverage by newspapers, television, which
will blanket the nation, swamp the home town and
the state.
The speech must contain verbal symbols capable of striking
sympathetic cords in the target population. The words must
carry symbolic spill-over; that is, they should honor and praise
others who will identify with those receiving the award. The
words must also carry symbolic exclusiveness. (Remember,
Black is beautiful" conveys just that. )
Example 1--A Person. A human interest story appears in
the New York Times about a resident of the Bronx or Queens:
"Angelo Esposito, former sewer cleaner. getsID degree.
Immediately 2 check is made on the individual. If it is deemed
appropriate, the President would make a speech congratulating
this man for his accomplishment.
The syeech would probably run along the following lines:
(1) This person did well because of personal "initiative,"
"drive" and "determination.
(2) This proves once again, "Only in America" - - the Horatio
Alger myth is still true.
(3) Your parents should be proud of you (salute them by
implication).
(4) Your neighbors must be proud of you, because you are one
of them (they helped, too).
(5) Carefully insert: At a time when academicians might
have tended to lower the standards to let this under-
privileged man get by, they demanded more from him, and
it paid off.
7
Out of this speech, the words or verbal symbols actually
convey:
- -patience
-- -sacrifice
These are the rules by which
-
-perseverence
ethnics and all Americans have
- -self-reliance
lived.
-merit
-
-achievement
These sy hols are the opposite of, and exclude those
identified with:
-impatience- I want
it now
-selfishness, self-
These symbols convey the mental
interest
picture of militant minority demands.
-drop-cut--the
They will evoke different races in
system is wrong
Mif erent minds, depending whether
-government's responsi-
you are in Buffalo, Newark. Bridgeport
bility, not self-
;or Houston. They will all produce
reliance
the same kind of polarization.
-not by merit, but by
right
-reward and success are
given, not achieved
The proceding speeches of the President as demonstrated
here obviously have far-reaching racial implications, However,
the same technique could be used to gather support by utilizing
the enormous powers of the President to convey honors and thus
pick up support. Note the following variation on the award
theme that does not have the racial overtones.
Example 2--A Group. The following story appears in the
paper. General Motors was ready to move out of Dayton, because
wages were 31 to $2 higher than the nearcst competitor.
November 21st. workers agreed to forego scheduled contract
raises whereupon G.M. recalled 150 employees. Prices on
Frigidares will be reduced. Everybody sacrificed.
The speech would say something like:
I salute you (workers).
(1) The example you have set is a credit to your character.
(2) America (in the name of its leader) thanks you.
8
(3) Like good Americans, you thought of your neighbors when
they needed you. Your forefathers would be proud to see
you maintaining the American spirit of generosity.
(4) You have set an example for Americans to follow.
Beyond the words, the message conveyed:
(1) The President of the United States actually talked about
me, and us.
(2) President Nixon gives honors.
(3) President Nixon recognized and rewarded.
The News Media Unwittingly Carries the Ball
In the first two examples, the presidential address and
the occasional speech, the news media carries the message. In
the Labor Day speech, the national networks provide the blanket
of information over the nation. In the occasional speeches.
the local media would blanket the local city and probably the
state. If the human interest aspect of the story is interesting
and really unique. we would protably get the national media
to pick it up and carry it along.
Notice. however, that in all of these examples the media
is almost forced to carry the message. Moreover, no matter
what they say we can only gain.
(1) If only the local or state television carries it, we will
be able to say, "See, no one wants to spread the good
"
news about how the President honored you.
(2) If the media blasts the President, "Tricky Dick, " they
will insur the wrath or those who have been honored.
You are stealing my honors. The President is praising
11.
me and you are damning him for it.
(3) The President's enemies are my enemies. Agnew was right.
With the occasional award tactic, great care must be taken
to avoid having the President walk into an embarrassing situation.
If each specific potential award recipient is properly researched,
this danger can be minimized. Further, the "occasional" or
"surprise" element here is vital. There is no new, stated
presidential policy of starting to award people for achievement.
9
The President simply does it. The press or television would
say:
"This morning, in an unprecedented move, President
Nixon went to Dayton, Ohio, and spoke to a crowd of
1,000 G.M. workers. The President paid tribute
to the laborers who last month sacrificed their own
personal gain to help fellow workers who were laid
off, etc., etc.
II
"This afternoon President Nixon honored a former
sewer cleaner who recently received an MD degree from
Georgetown University.
11
If the President takes the initiative (that is, it is not an
award for which one can apply--the President finds you), there
is no embarrassment of having to stop the process.
The Theory Operationalized: The
Mechanis.
In order to operationalize this set of conceptualized
techniques, a key core cf personnel must be put together.
Many of the people described in this sketch may already be
working in the Thite House, but many will have to be recruited.
Initially there will be a need to establish two intellectual
teams: a White House team and a counterpart working at the
highest level of the campaign organization.
The White House Team
There must be a core or team of no more than six or eight
people working in the White House. These people would be
charged with the responsiblity for writing and coordinating
the series of symbolic speeches of the President. They would
select the symbols to be projected at each target population.
In addition, this group would edit (i.e. symbolically load)
all other speeches touching on domestic issues emanating from
the President.
CAUTION -- DANGER
With respect to the calculated polarization described in
this paper, ABSOLUTE secrety CANNOT BF OVERITATED. If our
strategy is leaked to the press or to the opposition, there
would be no way of calculating the damage to the Administration.
Therefore, the inner workings of the core will be known only
to the President and those with the highest degree of White
House clearance, that in, his immediate advisors.
10
Most of the men who merit membership on the White House
team should have the following intellectual preparation and/or
general characteristics:
(a) They should be men who have traveled the social
spectrum from a non-English speaking ethnic lower income
level to a middle or upper class level. The team should
include at least one Armenian, one Spanish-speaking
American, one Pole, one German, one Greek, one Italian,
one Hungarian, and one Swede.
(b) They should know the "cultural peculiarities" of
the ethnic groups they represent, i.e. work habits,
superstitions, morality, sense of fairness and prejudices.
Most of these men should be knowledgeable concerning
class conflicts and social tensions arising out of these
class conflicts, or be skilled political practitioners
who have practical experience in this area and a feeling
for the mission we are undertaking.
(c) Some of these men must be skilled in the use of
symbol analysis and meaning and (given the assistance
of the other team metibers who must be considered experts
on, as well as representatives of, the particular ethnics
within the given tarret novelation). they must be able to
select the appropriate symbols for the occasion.
(d) Some of these men must be writers of the highest
caliber. They must be able to write and edit speeches
and exercise imaginative and innovative judgment.
Special Research Staff
Adjunct to the Team
The White House team must have the use of staff and research
personnel to do any leg work when needed. That is, if a member
of the team needed information on a given area with respect to
ethnic income, education, voting patterns, etc. the team would
not be burdened with staff work. In addition, the team must
have access to all surveys and polls now being conducted and
should have the authority to conduct surveys to obtain deeper
insights into a target population or to assess its impact on an
area, with an eye to correcting for effectiveness.
Although the special research staff will be at the disposal
of the team, the staff will not know why the information is
required or the strategy behind its use.
11
In addition to the special research staff there must be
a core staff which, via newspapers and magazines, scans the
country for special human interest stories like Angelo, the
sewer cleaner and the G.N. Frigidare examples. These talent
scouts must research the ituation and clear the individual
(so as to avoid an embarrassing situation for the President)
and set up some congratualtory award in the particular state
and community. After consideration of the incidentals, the
team will write the speech for the President.
The White House team, then, will be responsible for that
part of the 1972 campaign which actually deals with a series
of calculated maneuvers exercised by the President himself.
In addition to calculating some of the President's major
movements in the 1972 campaign, the team will coordinate similar
but different testics throughout the country in the key electoral
states, To accomplish this, a second team will be necessary.
There should be a second team of eight to ten men working
at the hishest level of the campaign organization. These meh
will again be drawn from the ranks of ethnic groups. who have
worked their way into the middle class. They should be from
different parts of the country and from the highly sought
after electoral states, The intellectual and/or backmround
characteristics of this second team should be similar to those
of the White House team. While it is not necessary for them to
be symbol analysts, there should be several excellent writers
in the group.
The second team will concentrate upon utilizing several
key Administration spokesmen. These spokesmen would function
in a capacity similar to that of the President in that they,
too, would be making speeches in selected areas.
The operation of the second team would be as follows.
They would choose an area in a key state where there is a
heavy concentration of ethnic groups. They would then arrange
for a series of high level speakers. such as Secretary Volpe
or Phillip Sanchez, to go into the area and make a successive
wave of speeches. The speeches might, and probably would, be
written by the second team. But in all cases, they would be
edited by the White House team. Like the President's speeches,
these too must be symbolically loaded. It is not necessary
for anyone but the campaign director (John Mitchell) to be
aware of what modifications the speeches would undergo by the
White House team.
12
The Speakers
The speakers must have many or all of the following
characteristics:
(a) They must be people who come from non-English
speaking groups. It is desirable, but not necessary,
for them to have a speaking knowledge of the language.
(b) They should be people who have achieved a high
degree of economic success or social prestige. Their
achievements should be directly traceable to their
determination to exploit their God-given talents and
to their perseverence in the attainment of their goals.
Hish level government officials. Speakers might include,
for example:
(a) A Cabinet member: John Volpe. During the Depression
he went into the construction business. He took a
gamble and worked hard. Today he is a success.
(b) The Director of a federal agency: Phillip Canchez.
From migrant worker to the Administration's top anti-
poverty official.
Lower lével, but just as vital. national personalities
Here, what is needed is the salt Of the earth, plain and pure
type of man who to ethnic groups could be seen as a modern
embodiment of a hero. The perfect example of the kind of man
needed would be a Vince Lombardi. But there are others with his
traits. They could come from the entertainment world, such as
Frank Sinatra, Bob Hope or John Wayne. Or, they could. come
from countless other fields. The lesser known persons might be
better utilized in their own states or areas, but a Vince
Lombardi would have creditility in any environment. Given
the President's proclivity for sports, celebrities drawn from
this category would be quite appropriate. Again, no matter
who is chosen to speak, the White House team will edit or
write the speech.
The common factor in all these speakers must be that
they made it from the bottom of the dech by their own steam.
They still identify with the people who are trying to emulate
their success and the people will identify with them.
They, the speakers, support the President, because the
President is protecting the systemic and social rules of the
games which allowed them to be successful. Those ethnics
13
identifying with the speaker should support the President,
because he is protecting their personal interests.
The Execution
The actual execution of the plan can be carried out as
follows.
(1) With respect to the domestic addresses of the President,
the speeches would send out a coast-to-coast wave of
symbols from the eastern and western White Houses. These
speeches (the exact number and occasion to be established)
are diagramed in Figure I, plastic sheet #1. The purple
wave represents one symbol-laden domestic address.
(2) Figure I, plastic sheet #2, superimposed over #1, plots
a series of contrived occasional speeches by the President
honoring some individual or group. These speeches are
diagramed in orange. Again, the exact number and frequency
will be determined.
(3) Figure I, plastic sheet #2, superimposed over #1 and #2,
plots speeches by different high level officials and
celebrities.
51 UNIVERSITY within agessa to asn fundain) 33 provided your 5
secretary NATION
ango peg Ford AUV As goodang unitid AUP 10 'deal payments 590 am will ... 4% which
I sheet 'I
P4%
UNITED STATES
4
1.1
I
SIZE 8½ x 11
)
0
Chauxe HAWAII
(+
OOIXER
5
FLORIDA
(VNITOR")
CONVEYS
SMX31
370
OR. AHOMA
07/2 1.M.IN
VNIDOR HIMON
^VSNVX
SINIORIA
If
UNITED
23
OTHO
SION
NEBRASKA
VM
yy
****
MIN
9NW
AM
STATE OUTLINE MAP
NYSHT
NISA
MMA
rarHro
HOW
-
VIO,INNIN
VI *VG HIMON
RAND MENALLY
MAINE
STATE OUTLINE MAP
SIZE 8½11
Figure I, sheet 2
Presidential
award speeches
GEORG
KENTULEY
100
TENNI 111
Y
SCALL N MILLS
2 1 :
SKASSA
OPEJANA
'.
NA
. NORTH DAN CAN
"THIDAK 11 TA
KANSAS
AHOMA
NEURASKA
1 TIMAS
-
-
C A CAHA A DA CAHADA
< ORAGI HAWAII
LANA
COLORADO
",
M NEW MI , - . C 0 50
March
WYC
RIZZIO is (-) O
MONTANA
DAHO
ARIZONA
:
-
:
Tokeny of I - rentacte this : comminated map. or any potien Diereaf by any becaus method, in by including office
copseng % made I ter personal of . DE company 13 e use or resale with et V/I Per permission , 15 :
OREGON
N/A
I
I
9
0
1
9
I
I
14
The frequency and the intensity of each speech will be
most vital in determining the desired effect. But, if properly
executed, the desired areas would be subjected to a symbolic
blanket of speeches. With constant variations of this same
symbolic blanket, the target population would be bombarded with
opinion-shaping information which, properly engineered, would
cost little or nothing. For example, a third of these speeches,
the national addresses, would be carried by the national media
performing their general function of public information.
The other third would be carried by state and local news
media beating the drum in a series of local Greek, Italian,
Polish, German or Armenian "boy makes good" stories.
The final third, of course, the campaign organization
would finance.
Depending upon the social issue under discussion, i.e.
crime, law and order, bussing, etc., a set of symbolic categories
can be constructed to rally segments of a target population
behind a given idea. In this brief outline, I have focused on
one category: the achievement ethic (the work ethic). I have
done so because this category has the greatest potential for
enabling the President to unify the nation, to win re-election
in 1972 (his immediate objective). and to encourage Democrats
to become Republicans (his long-range objective).

Document source description

This file contains:

Action Paper RE: Campaign Strategy. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], 2/7/1972

From: Gordon Strachan To: H.R. Haldeman RE: Polls to Key People. 4 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 1/28/1972

From: Gordon Strachan To: Larry Higby RE: Trial Heat Analysis. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 2/7/1972

From: Thomas W. Benham To: H.R. Haldeman RE: Trial Heats-Shifts in Voter Preference by Demographics (January 1972 versus November 1971 versus June 1971). 9 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 2/3/1972

From: Gordon Strachan To: H.R. Haldeman RE: Assigning one man the responsibility of harnessing the incumbency for political purposes. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 12/29/1971

From: H.R. Haldeman To: Fred Malek RE: Political Review for Incumbency. Page of notes attached along with three copies. 5 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 12/31/1971

From: Gordon Strachan To: Larry Higby RE: William Timmons' convention proposal. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 2/4/1972

From: Gordon Strachan To: William Timmons RE: Young People on T.V. Convention. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 2/4/1972

From: Gordon Strachan To: Charles W. Colson RE: Spokesman Resources. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 12/29/1971

From: Robert M. Teeter To: H. R. Haldeman RE: Catholic Vote. 4 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 1/6/1972

From: Robert M. Teeter To: H. R. Haldeman RE: The Environment. 4 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 1/6/1972

From: Gordon Strachan To: Larry Higby RE: Ehrlichman's campaign memo. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 1/7/1971

From: John D. Ehrlichman To: H. R. Haldeman RE: Re-Election Campaign. 9 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/6/1971

From: Gordon Strachan To: H. R. Haldeman RE: Request for analysis of the Ethnic vote. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 1/19/1972

From: W. Richard Howard To: Bart Porter RE: Warning against repeating past mistakes involving the ethnic problem. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 1/3/1972

From: Michael Balzano To: Charles W. Colson RE: The Ethinic Vote in the 1972 Election. 5 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 12/31/1971

President Nixon's Labor Day Address. 20 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], 9/6/1971

Page data

Page: 1
Source index: 0
Type: document
Media ID: 9b282a6285751cad
Size: unknown

Document data

ID: 26145683
Core: doc
Type: document

DTO data

{
    "id": "26145683",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26145683",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "WHSF: Contested, 16-1",
    "description": "This file contains:\n\nAction Paper RE: Campaign Strategy. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], 2/7/1972\n\nFrom: Gordon Strachan To: H.R. Haldeman RE: Polls to Key People. 4 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 1/28/1972\n\nFrom: Gordon Strachan To: Larry Higby RE: Trial Heat Analysis. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 2/7/1972\n\nFrom: Thomas W. Benham To: H.R. Haldeman RE: Trial Heats-Shifts in Voter Preference by Demographics (January 1972 versus November 1971 versus June 1971). 9 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 2/3/1972\n\nFrom: Gordon Strachan To: H.R. Haldeman RE: Assigning one man the responsibility of harnessing the incumbency for political purposes. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 12/29/1971\n\nFrom: H.R. Haldeman To: Fred Malek RE: Political Review for Incumbency. Page of notes attached along with three copies. 5 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 12/31/1971\n\nFrom: Gordon Strachan To: Larry Higby RE: William Timmons' convention proposal. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 2/4/1972\n\nFrom: Gordon Strachan To: William Timmons RE: Young People on T.V. Convention. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 2/4/1972\n\nFrom: Gordon Strachan To: Charles W. Colson RE: Spokesman Resources. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 12/29/1971\n\nFrom: Robert M. Teeter To: H. R. Haldeman RE: Catholic Vote. 4 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 1/6/1972\n\nFrom: Robert M. Teeter To: H. R. Haldeman RE: The Environment. 4 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 1/6/1972\n\nFrom: Gordon Strachan To: Larry Higby RE: Ehrlichman's campaign memo. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 1/7/1971\n\nFrom: John D. Ehrlichman To: H. R. Haldeman RE: Re-Election Campaign. 9 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/6/1971\n\nFrom: Gordon Strachan To: H. R. Haldeman RE: Request for analysis of the Ethnic vote. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 1/19/1972\n\nFrom: W. Richard Howard To: Bart Porter RE: Warning against repeating past mistakes involving the ethnic problem. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 1/3/1972\n\nFrom: Michael Balzano To: Charles W. Colson RE: The Ethinic Vote in the 1972 Election. 5 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 12/31/1971\n\nPresident Nixon's Labor Day Address. 20 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], 9/6/1971",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26145683",
    "collections": [
        "Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection",
        "Contested Materials Files"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/83/1456/26145683/content/presidential-libraries/nixon/RN-RET/2546065/Contested-Box-16/Contested-16-01.pdf",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/83/1456/26145683/content/presidential-libraries/nixon/RN-RET/2546065/Contested-Box-16/Contested-16-01.pdf",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/83/1456/26145683/content/presidential-libraries/nixon/RN-RET/2546065/Contested-Box-16/Contested-16-01.pdf",
    "imageCount": 1,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

Context sent to Scholar

Document identity

{
    "localId": "26145683",
    "label": "WHSF: Contested, 16-1",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26145683"
}

Document source metadata

{
    "id": "26145683",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26145683",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "WHSF: Contested, 16-1",
    "description": "This file contains:\n\nAction Paper RE: Campaign Strategy. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], 2/7/1972\n\nFrom: Gordon Strachan To: H.R. Haldeman RE: Polls to Key People. 4 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 1/28/1972\n\nFrom: Gordon Strachan To: Larry Higby RE: Trial Heat Analysis. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 2/7/1972\n\nFrom: Thomas W. Benham To: H.R. Haldeman RE: Trial Heats-Shifts in Voter Preference by Demographics (January 1972 versus November 1971 versus June 1971). 9 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 2/3/1972\n\nFrom: Gordon Strachan To: H.R. Haldeman RE: Assigning one man the responsibility of harnessing the incumbency for political purposes. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 12/29/1971\n\nFrom: H.R. Haldeman To: Fred Malek RE: Political Review for Incumbency. Page of notes attached along with three copies. 5 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 12/31/1971\n\nFrom: Gordon Strachan To: Larry Higby RE: William Timmons' convention proposal. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 2/4/1972\n\nFrom: Gordon Strachan To: William Timmons RE: Young People on T.V. Convention. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 2/4/1972\n\nFrom: Gordon Strachan To: Charles W. Colson RE: Spokesman Resources. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 12/29/1971\n\nFrom: Robert M. Teeter To: H. R. Haldeman RE: Catholic Vote. 4 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 1/6/1972\n\nFrom: Robert M. Teeter To: H. R. Haldeman RE: The Environment. 4 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 1/6/1972\n\nFrom: Gordon Strachan To: Larry Higby RE: Ehrlichman's campaign memo. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 1/7/1971\n\nFrom: John D. Ehrlichman To: H. R. Haldeman RE: Re-Election Campaign. 9 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/6/1971\n\nFrom: Gordon Strachan To: H. R. Haldeman RE: Request for analysis of the Ethnic vote. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 1/19/1972\n\nFrom: W. Richard Howard To: Bart Porter RE: Warning against repeating past mistakes involving the ethnic problem. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 1/3/1972\n\nFrom: Michael Balzano To: Charles W. Colson RE: The Ethinic Vote in the 1972 Election. 5 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 12/31/1971\n\nPresident Nixon's Labor Day Address. 20 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], 9/6/1971",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26145683",
    "collections": [
        "Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection",
        "Contested Materials Files"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/83/1456/26145683/content/presidential-libraries/nixon/RN-RET/2546065/Contested-Box-16/Contested-16-01.pdf",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/83/1456/26145683/content/presidential-libraries/nixon/RN-RET/2546065/Contested-Box-16/Contested-16-01.pdf",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/83/1456/26145683/content/presidential-libraries/nixon/RN-RET/2546065/Contested-Box-16/Contested-16-01.pdf",
    "imageCount": 1,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

Document source extras

{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26145683",
    "naId": 26145683,
    "levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}

Page context

{
    "seq": 1,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "document",
    "url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/83/1456/26145683/content/presidential-libraries/nixon/RN-RET/2546065/Contested-Box-16/Contested-16-01.pdf",
    "mediaId": "9b282a6285751cad",
    "ocrText": "Richard Nixon Presidential Library\nContested Materials Collection\nFolder List\nBox Number\nFolder Number\nDocument Date\nNo Date\nSubject\nDocument Type\nDocument Description\n16\n1\n2/7/1972\nCampaign\nOther Document\nAction Paper RE: Campaign Strategy. 1 pg.\n16\n1\n1/28/1972\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom: Gordon Strachan To: H.R. Haldeman\nRE: Polls to Key People. 4 pgs.\n16\n1\n2/7/1972\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom: Gordon Strachan To: Larry Higby RE:\nTrial Heat Analysis. 1 pg.\n16\n1\n2/3/1972\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom: Thomas W. Benham To: H.R.\nHaldeman RE: Trial Heats-Shifts in Voter\nPreference by Demographics (January 1972\nversus November 1971 versus June 1971). 9\npgs.\nMonday, February 07, 2011\nPage 1 of 4\nBox Number\nFolder Number\nDocument Date\nNo Date\nSubject\nDocument Type\nDocument Description\n16\n1\n12/29/1971\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom: Gordon Strachan To: H.R. Haldeman\nRE: Assigning one man the responsibility of\nharnessing the incumbency for political\npurposes. 1 pg.\n16\n1\n12/31/1971\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom: H.R. Haldeman To: Fred Malek RE:\nPolitical Review for Incumbency. Page of\nnotes attached along with three copies. 5 pgs.\n16\n1\n2/4/1972\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom: Gordon Strachan To: Larry Higby RE:\nWilliam Timmons' convention proposal. 1 pg.\n16\n1\n2/4/1972\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom: Gordon Strachan To: William\nTimmons RE: Young People on T.V.\nConvention. 1 pg.\n16\n1\n12/29/1971\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom: Gordon Strachan To: Charles W.\nColson RE: Spokesman Resources. 1 pg.\nMonday, February 07, 2011\nPage 2 of 4\nBox Number\nFolder Number\nDocument Date\nNo Date\nSubject\nDocument Type\nDocument Description\n16\n1\n1/6/1972\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom: Robert M. Teeter To: H. R. Haldeman\nRE: Catholic Vote. 4 pgs.\n16\n1\n1/6/1972\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom: Robert M. Teeter To: H. R.\nHaldeman RE: The Environment. 4 pgs.\n16\n1\n1/7/1971\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom: Gordon Strachan To: Larry Higby RE:\nEhrlichman's campaign memo. 1 pg.\n16\n1\n11/6/1971\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom: John D. Ehrlichman To: H.R.\nHaldeman RE: Re-Election Campaign. 9 pgs.\n16\n1\n1/19/1972\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom: Gordon Strachan To: H. R. Haldeman\nRE: Request for analysis of the Ethnic vote.\n1 pg.\nMonday, February 07, 2011\nPage 3 of 4\nBox Number\nFolder Number\nDocument Date\nNo Date\nSubject\nDocument Type\nDocument Description\n16\n1\n1/3/1972\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom: W. Richard Howard To: Bart Porter\nRE: Warning against repeating past mistakes\ninvolving the ethnic problem. 1 pg.\n16\n1\n12/31/1971\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom: Michael Balzano To: Charles W.\nColson RE: The Ethinic Vote in the 1972\nElection.\n5 pgs.\n16\n1\n9/6/1971\nCampaign\nOther Document\nPresident Nixon's Labor Day Address. 20\npgs.\nMonday, February 07, 2011\nPage 4 of 4\nACTION PAPER . CAMPAIGN STRATEGY\nIn general strategy planning, we've got to consider more appearances\nin the country to counteract the adverse media. In other words, the\nPresident's personal campaigning may be indispensable to combat\nthe slanted coverage that we are going to be getting from the media.\nWe should look carefully at the idea of moving out into the country.\nThe President, as of now, veers away from the concept of serenely\nscaring above the battle. He does feel, however, that he must at all\ncosts, maintain a strong, calm, serene attitude.\nThere is a lot of validity to the Connally theory of uncertainty but the\nproblem is how to deal with it.\nOne flaw in our approach may be that when we advance new programs,\nthat is saying, in effect, that things are in had shape. It therefore plays\ninto the opponent's hands. It's like the doctor with a pill for every ill.\nIt's a bad way to treat a patient over the long haul.\nIt's clear that going into the country is good for the people regarding\nthe uncertainty questions so we've got to do a lot of it.\nHRH :pm\n2/7/72\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nDate:\n2/7\nTO:\nLARRY HIGBY\nFROM:\nGORDON STRACHAN\nThis is Benham's best effort at trial\nheat analysis - it doesn't contain\nsome vital key because Benham says,\n\"I wish there was some subtle analysis\nto be made but I don't know what the\nhell it would be. \"\nI\nOpinion Research Corporation\nNORTH HARRISON STREET, PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY 08540\ntelephone: 609/924-5900\nCHICAGO\nLONDON\nLOS ANGELES\nNEW YORK\nSAN FRANCISCO\nWASHINGTON, D.C.\nTHOMAS W. BENHAM\nPresident\nMEMORANDUM\nFebruary 3, 1972\nTO:\nH. R. Haldeman\nFROM:\nThomas W. Benham\nSUBJECT:\nTrial Heats -- Shifts in Voter Preference by Demographics\n(January 1972 versus November 1971 versus June 1971)\nOver the past six months, President Nixon has made substantial gains\namong various population subgroups in trial elections against Humphrey,\nKennedy and Muskie. These gains in most subgroups carry over to the\nthree-way races which include Wallace. The improvement is not a\nfunction of any one group becoming more favorable while the rest stay\nthe same. It tends to be scattered across many subgroups. Most changes\noccur between November 1971 and January 1972 and virtually no (statis-\ntically significant) changes for any candidate are noted between June\n1971 and November 1971.\nPresident Nixon's gains from November 1971 to January 1972 are fairly\nconsistent regardless of who the Democratic candidate is. This is also\ntrue for the three-way races. There tends to be a corresponding decrease\nfor the Democratic candidates among the groups where President Nixon\ngains. The Democratic candidates make no substantial gains. Shown on\nthe following page are the population subgroups in which President Nixon\ngains in the period November 1971 to January 1972.\n--2\nPopulation Subgroups Showing\nTrial Heat Gains for President Nixon,\nNovember 1971 to January 1972\nNixon vs\nNixon vs\nHumphrey Muskie Kennedy\nHumphrey\nMuskie\nKennedy\nWallace\nWallace Wallace\nTotal Public\nX*\nX*\nX\nX*\nX*\nMen\nX\nX*\nX\nX*\n21-29 years\nX\n30-49 years\nX\nX\nX*\nX\nX\nX\nHigh school graduates\nX*\nX\nSome college\nX*\nX*\nX*\nX*\nX*\nX*\nUnion families\nX\nX\nNonunion families\nX*\nX*\nWhites\nX*\nX*\nX\nX*\nX*\nX\nCatholics\nX\nX\nX\n$5,000-$15,000\nX\nX\nX\nX\nX\nX\nRegistered\nX\nX\nX*\nX\nRepublicans\nX*\nX*\nConservatives\nX\nIndependents\nX*\nLiberals\nX\nX\nNonvoters in 1968\nX*\nX*\nX*\nX\nX\nX\nEast\nX\nX\nX\nMidwest\nX*\nDisapprove of Job as\nPresident\nX*\nX*\nApprove of Job as\nPresident\nX\nApprove of Handling\nof Vietnam\nX\nX\nX\nX\nX\nDisapprove of Handling\nof Economy\nX\nX\nX\nX = Statistically significant gain\n* = January also higher than June\n--3\nNixon vs. Humphrey\nPresident Nixon gains more against Humphrey than any other candidate and\nin most of the subgroups where gains are noted for President Nixon cor-\nresponding losses occur for Humphrey. Most gains for President Nixon\noccur from the November 1971 survey to the January 1972 survey; a few\noccur from June 1971 to January 1972. No changes occur between June and\nNovember.\nNo real pattern is apparent in the subgroups in which President Nixon\ngains. There are, in fact, many diverse elements, making it difficult\nto identify the cause or causes of this upsurge.\nWhen Wallace enters the Nixon-Humphrey race, almost all the gains noted\nin the two-way race are repeated both in the period November 1971 to\nJanuary 1972 and the period June 1971 to January 1972.\nNixon vs. Muskie\nIn the trial election against Muskie, President Nixon gains over the\nperiod November 1971 to January 1972. These gains are very similar to\nthe gains noted in the Nixon-Humphrey race. Losses are noted in far\nfewer subgroups for Muskie, however, than for Humphrey. Again, the\nentry of Wallace into the race has little impact on President Nixon's\ngains.\nNixon vs. Kennedy\nPresident Nixon gains among fewer subgroups against Kennedy than against\nthe other Democratic candidates. But the groups where President Nixon\ndoes gain tend to be the same as in the other races. As in the previous\nraces, however, most of President Nixon's gains occur between November\n1971 and January 1972. Most gains for President Nixon in the two-way\nrace carry-over to the three-way race.\nNIXON VS. MUSKIE\nJanuary 1972 vs. November 1971\nNixon\nMuskie\nGains\nLosses\nGains\nLosses\nTotal Public\nSome college*\nMen\n$5,000-$15,000*\n30-49 years\nEast*\nHigh school graduates\nMidwest*\nSome college\nNonunion families\nWhites\n$5,000-$15,000\nRegistered voters\nLiberals\nNonvoters in 1968\nEast\nMidwest\nDisapprove of Nixon's\nHandling Job as\nPresident\nApprove of Nixon's\nHandling of Vietnam\nDisapprove of Nixon's\nHandling of Economy\nJanuary 1972 vs. June 1971\nTotal Public\nMen*\nMen\nHigh school\n18-20 years\ngraduate*\nHigh school graduate\nSome college*\nSome college\nIndependents*\nNonunion families\nNonvoters in '68*\nWhites\nEast\nWill register\nDisapproved of\nIndependents\nNixon's Handling\nNonvoters in 1968\nJob as President*\nMidwest\nDisapprove of Nixon's\nHandling Job as\nPresident\nNovember 1971 vs. June 1971\nNO CHANGES\nNO CHANGES\n*\nAreas where President Nixon has gained\nNIXON VS. MUSKIE VS. WALLACE\nJanuary 1972 vs. November 1971\nNixon\nMuskie\nWallace\nGains\nLosses\nGains\nLosses\nGains\nLosses\nTotal Public#\nSome college*\nDisapprove\nof Nixon's\nMen#\nHandling of\n30-49 years#\nEconomy*\nHigh school graduates#\nSome college#\nNonunion families#\nWhites#\nCatholics\n$5,000-$15,000#\nRegistered voters#\nLiberals#\nNonvoters in '68#\nEast#\nApprove of Nixon's\nHandling of Vietnam#\nDisapprove of Nixon's\nHandling of Economy#\nJanuary 1972 vs. June 1971\nTotal Public#\nSome college*\nMen#\nDemocrats\nSome college#\nEast\nNonunion fámilies#\nWhites#\nIndependents#\nMidwest#\nNovember 1971 vs. June 1971\nNO CHANGES\nNO CHANGES\nNO CHANGES\n#\nGains also noted in 2-way race\n*\nAreas where President Nixon has gained\nNIXON VS. KENNEDY\nJanuary 1972 vs. November 1971\nNixon\nKennedy\nGains\nLosses\nGains\nLosses\nTotal Public\nNonwhites\nNonwhites\n21-29 years\n30-49 years\nOver $15,000\n$5,000-$15,000*\nSome college\nNonvoters in 1968*\nWhites\nApprove of Nixon's\n$5,000-$15,000\nHandling Job as\nRepublicans\nPresident*\nNonvoters in 1968\nApprove of Nixon's\nHandling Job as\nPresident\nApprove of Nixon's\nHandling of Vietnam\nJanuary 1972 vs. June 1971\n30-49 years\nNonunion families\nRepublicans\nNonvoters in '68\nMidwest\nX\nSome college*\nSome college\nNonvoters in '68*\nNovember 1971 vs. June 1971\nNO CHANGES\nNO CHANGES\n*\nAreas where President Nixon has gained\nNIXON VS. KENNEDY VS. WALLACE\nJanuary 1972 vs. November 1971\nNixon\nKennedy\nWallace\nGains\nLosses\nGains\nLosses\nGains\nLosses\n30-49 years#\nOver $15,000\nProtestants\nSome college#\nRepublicans#\nVoted for Nixon\nX\n$5,000-\nWhites#\n$15,000\n$5,000-$15,000#\nin 1968#\nJanuary 1972 vs. June 1971\nSome college#\nSome college*\nNonunion families#\nNonvoters in\nProtestants\n1968\nRepublicans#\nMidwest#\nNovember 1971 vs. June 1971\nOver $15,000\n#\nGains also noted in 2-way race\n*\nAreas where President Nixon has gained\nNIXON VS. HUMPHREY\nJanuary 1972 vs. November 1971\nNixon\nHumphrey\nGains\nLosses\nGains\nLosses\nTotal Public\n21-29 years of age*\n30-49*\nMen\nSome college*\n21-29 years\nUnion families*\n30-49 years\nWhites*\nSome college\n$5,000-$15,000*\nUnion families\nIndependents\nWhites\nConservatives*\nCatholics\nNonvoters in 1968*\n$5,000-$15,000 income\nMidwest\nRegistered voters\nApprove of Nixon's\nIndependents\nHandling of Economy\nConservatives\nNonvoters in 1968\nDisapprove of Nixon's\nHandling of Job as\nPresident\nApprove of Nixon's\nHandling of Vietnam\nNo opinion of Nixon's\nHandling of Economy\nJanuary 1972 vs. June 1971\nTotal Public\n21-29 years\nSome college\nSome college*\nWhites\nIndependents*\nIndependents\nNonvoters in 1968*\nNonvoters in 1968\nMidwest*\nMidwest\nDisapprove of Nixon's\nHandling of Job as\nPresident\nNovember 1971 vs. June 1971\nNO CHANGE\nNO CHANGE\n*\nAreas where President Nixon has gained\nNIXON VS. HUMPHREY VS. WALLACE\nJanuary 1972 vs. November 1971\nNixon\nHumphrey\nWallace\nGains\nLosses\nGains\nLosses\nGains\nLosses\nTotal Public#\n21-29 years\nDisapprove\nMen#\nSome college*\nof Nixon's\n30-49 years#\n$5,000-$15,000*\nHandling of\nSome college#\nIndependents\nEconomy\nUnion families#\nNonvoters in\nWhites#\n'68*\nCatholics#\nMidwest\n$5,000-$15,000#\nApprove of\nRegistered voters#\nNixon's\nVoted for Nixon in '68\nHandling of\nNonvoters in '68#\nEconomy\nEast\nApprove of Nixon's\nHandling of Vietnam#\nDisapprove of Nixon's\nHandling of Economy\nJanuary 1972 vs. June 1971\nTotal Public#\n21-29 years\nSome college#\nHigh school\nNonunion families\ngraduate\nWhites#\nSome college*\nRegistered voters\nIndependents*\nIndependents#\nNonvoters in\nMidwest#\n1968\nNovember 1971 vs. June 1971\nNO CHANGE\nNO CHANGE\nNO CHANGE\n#\nGain also noted in 2-way race\n*\nAreas where President Nixon has gained\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nDate: Dec. 29, 1971\nTO:\nH.R. HALDEMAN\nFROM:\nGORDON STRACHAN\nOn Sears' political memorandum you\nindicated agreement with the idea\nof assigning one man the responsi-\nbility of harnessing the incumbency\nfor political purposes.\nHigby and I believe Malek should\nbe the one man responsible.\nA memorandum for your signature\nis attached.\nDETERMINED TO BE AN\nADMINISTRATIVE MARKING\nE.O. 12006, Section 6-102\nBy CMP NARS, Date 8-17-81\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nCONFIDENTIAL/EYES ONLY\nDecember 31, 1971\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nFRED MALEK\nFROM:\nH.R. HALDEMAN\nSUBJECT:\nPolitical Review of Incumbency\nThe most important function you can perform before November 7,\n1972 is to assume personal responsibility for harnessing the\npowers of the incumbency for political purposes. In addition\nto an analysis of the budget to determine how and where federal\nmonies are being spent, you should consider all pending and\nproposed programs, policies and legislation from a purely\npolitical standpoint.\nThere is a real need for such an operation since Congressional\nliaison, liaison with special interests and the present political\nliaison all must concern themselves with day to day problems\nand are not broad enough to get control over the full range of\nproblems necessary to achieve the desired result. Also, such\na function should not be left to a group decision since any\nactions which are taken as a result of analyzing government\nactions and policy from a standpoint of politics must be quite\nsecret and quite swift. The analysis should be conducted in\ngreat detail and this can only be accomplished by one person\nwith a small staff being entrusted with full responsibility.\nIt is extremely important that this function be centralized in\none place. It is too much to expect that Cabinet Secretaries and\nother governmental officials can possibly divorce themselves\nfrom the objective good or bad of a problem or decision and\nprovide a purely political assessment. Also, there are too\nmany demands on their time to allow them to follow through on\nall the political considerations which they should.\nAs programs and policies are analyzed, short memos should be\nsubmitted for decision. The flexibility in OMB in terms of\nwhere money is actually spent should also be submitted for\ndiscussion.\nOther projects with which you are involved, such as grantsmanship,\nWhite House Staff reorganization for the Campaign, and one man\nresponsibility for certain issues, fold into this new assignment.\nHowever, this political review and use of the incumbency should\nreceive your careful direct attention.\nTwise\nmore\nI\nPOLITICAL REVIEW FUNCTION\nIt is essential that someone start functioning\nimmediately to harness the powers of office for poli-\ntical purposes. Such a person should have no other\nresponsibilities between now and the election. Essen-\ntially, such a person should (1) analyze the budget to\nsee how Federal monies are being spent and where and\n(2) analyze all pending and proposed programs, policies\nand legislation from a purely political standpoint.\nThere is a real need for such an operation since\nCongressional liaison, liaison with special interests\nand the present political liaison all must concern them-\nselves with day to day problems and are not broad enough\nto get control over the full range of problems necessary\nto achieve the desired result. Also, such a function\nshould not be left to a group decision since any actions\nwhich are taken as a result of analyzing government\nactions and policy from a standpoint of politics must be\nquite secret and quite swift. The analysis should be\nconducted in great detail and this can only be accomplished\nby one person with a small staff being entrusted with full\nresponsibility.\nIt is extremely important that this function be\ncentralized in one place. It is too much to expect that\nCabinet Secretaries and other governmental officials can\npossibly divorce themselves from the objective good or bad\nof a problem or decision and provide a purely political\nassessment. Also, there are too many demands on their time\nto allow them to follow through on all the political con-\nsiderations which they should.\nAs programs and policies are analyzed, short memos\nshould be passed to the President so that he may decide\nproblems with the benefit of a full disclosure of their\npolitical ramifications. The flexibility in OMB in terms O:\nwhere money is actually spent should also be brought to the\nPresident's attention in similar fashion. This should all\nChron\nDETERMINED TO BE AN\nADMINISTRATIVE MARKING\nE.O. 12006, Section 8-17-87 6-102\nBy\nOmp\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nCONFIDENTIAL/EYES ONLY\nDecember 31, 1971\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nFRED MALEK\nFROM:\nH.R. HALDEMAN\nSUBJECT:\nPolitical Review of Incumbenc\nThe most important function you can perform before November 7,\n1972 is to assume personal responsibility for harnessing the\npowers of the incumbency for political purposes. In addition\nto an analysis of the budget to determine how and where federal\nmonies are being spent, you should consider all pending and\nproposed programs, policies and legislation from a purely\npolitical standpoint.\nThere is a real need for such an operation since Congressional\nliaison, liaison with special interests and the present political\nliaison all must concern themselves with day to day problems\nand are not broad enough to get control over the full range of\nproblems necessary to achieve the desired result. Also, such\na function should not be left to a group decision since any\nactions which are taken as a result of analyzing government\nactions and policy from a standpoint of politics must be quite\nsecret and quite swift. The analysis should be conducted in\ngreat detail and this can only be accomplished by one person\nwith a small staff being entrusted with full responsibility.\nIt is extremely important that this function be centralized in\none place. It is too much to expect that Cabinet Secretaries and\nother governmental officials can possibly divorce themselves\nfrom the objective good or bad of a problem or decision and\nprovide a purely political assessment. Also, there are too\nmany demands on their time to allow them to follow through on\nall the political considerations which they should.\nAs programs and policies are analyzed, short memos should be\nsubmitted for decision. The flexibility in OMB in terms of\nwhere money is actually spent should also be submitted for\ndiscussion.\nOther projects with which you are involved, such as grantsmanship,\nWhite House Staff reorganization for the Campaign, and one man\nresponsibility for certain issues, fold into this new assignment.\nHowever, this political review and use of the incumbency should\nreceive your careful direct attention.\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nCONFIDENTIAL/EYES ONLY\nDecember 31, 1971\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nFRED MALEK\nFROM:\nH.R. HALDEMAN\nSUBJECT:\nPolitical Review of Incumbency\nThe most important function you can perform before November 7,\n1972 is to assume personal responsibility for harnessing the\npowers of the incumbency for political purposes. In addition\nto an analysis of the budget to determine how and where federal\nmonies are being spent, you should consider all pending and\nproposed programs, policies and legislation from a purely\npolitical standpoint.\nThere is a real need for such an operation since Congressional\nliaison, liaison with special interests and the present political\nliaison all must concern themselves with day to day problems\nand are not broad enough to get control over the full range of\nproblems necessary to achieve the desired result. Also, such\na function should not be left to a group decision since any\nactions which are taken as a result of analyzing government\nactions and policy from a standpoint of politics must be quite\nsecret and quite swift. The analysis should be conducted in\ngreat detail and this can only be accomplished by one person\nwith a small staff being entrusted with full responsibility.\nIt is extremely important that this function be centralized in\none place. It is too much to expect that Cabinet Secretaries and\nother governmental officials can possibly divorce themselves\nfrom the objective good or bad of a problem or decision and\nprovide a purely political assessment. Also, there are too\nmany demands on their time to allow them to follow through on\nall the political considerations which they should.\nAs programs and policies are analyzed, short memos should be\nsubmitted for decision. The flexibility in OMB in terms of\nwhere money is actually spent should also be submitted for\ndiscussion.\nOther projects with which you are involved, such as grantsmanship,\nWhite House Staff reorganization for the Campaign, and one man\nresponsibility for certain issues, fold into this new assignment.\nHowever, this political review and use of the incumbency should\nreceive your careful direct attention.\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nCONFIDENTIAL/EYES ONLY\nDecember 31, 1971\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nFRED MALEK\nFROM:\nH.R. HALDEMAN\nSUBJECT:\nPolitical Review of Incumbency\nThe most important function you can perform before November 7,\n1972 is to assume personal responsibility for harnessing the\npowers of the incumbency for political purposes. In addition\nto an analysis of the budget to determine how and where federal\nmonies are being spent, you should consider all pending and\nproposed programs, policies and legislation from a purely\npolitical standpoint.\nThere is a real need for such an operation since Congressional\nliaison, liaison with special interests and the present political\nliaison all must concern themselves with day to day problems\nand are not broad enough to get control over the full range of\nproblems necessary to achieve the desired result. Also, such\na function should not be left to a group decision since any\nactions which are taken as a result of analyzing government\nactions and policy from a standpoint of politics must be quite\nsecret and quite swift. The analysis should be conducted in\ngreat detail and this can only be accomplished by one person\nwith a small staff being entrusted with full responsibility.\nIt is extremely important that this function be centralized in\none place. It is too much to expect that Cabinet Secretaries and\nother governmental officials can possibly divorce themselves\nfrom the objective good or bad of a problem or decision and\nprovide a purely political assessment. Also, there are too\nmany demands on their time to allow them to follow through on\nall the political considerations which they should.\nAs programs and policies are analyzed, short memos should be\nsubmitted for decision. The flexibility in OMB in terms of\nwhere money is actually spent should also be submitted for\ndiscussion.\nOther projects with which you are involved, such as grantsmanship,\nWhite House Staff reorganization for the Campaign, and one man\nresponsibility for certain issues, fold into this new assignment.\nHowever, this political review and use of the incumbency should\nreceive your careful direct attention.\nJANUARY 28, 1972\nADMINISTRATIVELY CONFIDENTIAL\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nH.R. HALDEMAN\nFROM:\nGORDON STRACHAN\nSUBJECT:\nPolls To Key People\nThi\naction memo suggests that segments of good, positive polls, get\nquietly to Connally, Rogers, and SO forth. To implement this request\nthe following system could be established:\nHarris Polls - - Colson's office currently receives Harris Polls approximately\none week before theyare released to the public. Only you and Colson receive\ncopies currently. Colson should now begin send copies of all Harris Polls to\nConnally, Rogers, the Attorney General, Kissinger, and Ehrlichman.\nColson periodically talks with Lou Harris about long term trends. Colson\nsummarizes his conversations in memoranda for you. As these arrive, you\nshould make the decision as to whether these memoranda should be\ndistributed to the above liste group it is fairly common knowledge among the\nWhite House Staff that Colson has a special relationship with Harris, so\nthere would seem to be no problem disclosing the Colson/Harris relationship\nto the group abov list.\nGallup Polls - - Harry Dent and I receive the Gallup releases usually the day\nbefore the information becomes public. Occasionally, Dwight Chapin or I\npage 2\ncan get advance information on Presidential Popularity from John Davies,\nbut it is usually SO close to the release date that it makes little sense to send\nof chapen or Strachanmemorand\ncopies to the group.\nCounsellor Rumsfield has been asked to establish a relationship with\nGeorge Gallup, Jr. Rumsfield had lunch with Gallup in December but\nwill neither respond to our requests for information from Gallup nor report to\nanyone but you should he obtain any information. The result is that\nno important information is acquired from Gallup before it becomes public.\nTetter Polls The Campaign surveys are beginning to arrive \"eyes only\"\nfor you and the Attorney General. Most of the issue information should be\nmacleavaluble to\nused \"A the above group. The popularity and trial heat results probably should\nnot be given to them. I suggest that as you read the Teeter reports you make\nThese exerpts would be\nthe paragraphs that could be excerpted. sent to the group over your\nsignature.\nORC Polls\nOnly the President, you, Higby and work on these\npolls with ORC. However, some of the questions are occasionally released to the\nStaff and public. Rather than a general rule of releasing all this information\nto the group, I suggest that Higby and I mark certain questions as candidates\nto be sent to the group, whether other questions will be released to the public\nor not. You can approve the suggestions and the material will be sent over\nyour signature. This will begin with today's poll.\nOn January 25, I started sending the Attorney General copies of the Harris\nand Gollup releases.\nPage 3\nRecommendation\nThat the described information be distributed to Connally, Rogers, the\nAttorney General, Kissinger and Erhlichman over your signature.\nAGREE\nDISAGREE\nCOMMENT\nACTION MEMO\nWe need to work up a plan to make sure that segments of good,\npositive polls, get quietly to Connally, Rogers, and so forth.\nThis would be both our polls and others, Gallup's, etc. It ought\nto go to a few of the key people that are involved with the President\nin general, long-range planning and so on.\nHRH:\n1/20/72\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nDate:\n2/4\nTO:\nLARRY HIGBY\nFROM:\nGORDON STRACHAN\nTimmons' convention proposal must\nstill be in with Bob.\nTo get this T.V. aspect moving I\nsuggest the attached memorandum.\nAny problems?\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nFebruary 4, 1972\nADMINISTRATIVELY CONFIDENTIAL\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nMR. TIMMONS\nFROM:\nGORDON STRACHAN\nG\nSUBJECT:\nYoung People on\nT.V. at Convention\nBob read your proposal on the uses of T.V. at the RNC\nConvention. One of the aspects which particularly\nconcerns him is how we plan on being sure that on\nall the T.V. shots plenty of young people are seen\nrather than the old delegates.\nHarry Flemming has been working on the delegate\nselection process in the states. He has received\nsome rather specific instructions from the Attorney\nGeneral as to the large number of young people who\nwill serve as delegates.\nBob asked that you, Flemming, and members of your\nConvention T.V. task force prepare a brief plan as\nto how T.V. will concentrate on young rather than\nold delegates.\nCC: Harry Flemming\nAdministratively Confidential\nDecember 29, 1971\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nMR. CHARLES W. COLSON\nFROM:\nGORDON STRACHAN\nSUBJECT:\nSpokesman Resources\nBob Haldeman decided on September 22 that there should be monthly\n\"progress reports and evaluations of appearances by political\nsurrogates\". The first report for the month of November is\nattached. It is too long to be useful, too much of what others\nare doing, and too frequently a description of failure.\nChapin and I believe that three changes should be made to\nobtain a more effective program and to give Mr. Haldeman and\nthe Attorney General a better understanding of what is really\nhappening.\nFirst, the Spokesman Resources operation at 1701 (Bart Porter\nand Curt Herge) should concentrate their efforts on\nno more than seven top flight individuals. They should\nreceive premier assistance with speech material from\nColson's office, TV and radio advice, and personal political\nbriefings by Harry Flemming. As the word gets around that\ncertain speakers are getting excellent treatment others\nthat should be used will go to 1701 for similar treatment.\nIn addition to Goldwater, Brock, Scott, Taft, Dole, Romney,\nand Butz could be the basic seven.\nSecond, spot checks should be made to determine how the\nrest of the spokesmen are doing, so that the pressure is\nmaintained.\nThird, John Scali has not followed up on his presentation\nat the November 5 Cabinet meeting. Bob Haldeman sent him a\nmemorandum November 9 praising his performance and directing\nhim to meet individually in three or four weeks to be sure the\nCabinet Officers have begun implementing his message.\nA check with Scali indicates that he has spoken with Rogers\nand Laird (\"nonpolitical\") and Connally and Volpe (who\ndon't need Scali's advice).\nChapin, Higby, and I think it would be helpful if you would\nlook over this report, consider it in light of Pat O'Donnell's\noperation, and suggest what might be done to improve the quality\nof our entire Spokesman Resources operation. Could you please\ngive us your comments at your convenience?\nGS:lm\nCOMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT\nDETERMINED TO BE AN\nJanuary 6, 1972\nADMINISTRATIVE MARKING\nMEMORANDUM\nE.O. 12065, Section 6-102\nBy Emp\nDate 8-17-81\nCONFIDENTIAL\nMEMORANDUM FOR H.R. HALDEMAN\nFROM ROBERT M. TEETER\nSUBJECT: CATHOLIC VOTE\nThis memorandum is in reply to your request for my thoughts on the\nCatholic vote.\nWhile I think we should reserve any hard conclusions until our first\nwave of polling is completed in February, a few trends have emerged\nfrom studies we have done in the past, which I think allow us to make\nsome tentative decisions. It is, however, a very difficult political\nissue because much of the evidence is conflicting. There are clearly\ncases in which Governors have helped themselves markedly by making\novertures directly to the Catholic vote and other instances where\nother Governors in other states have either failed to help themselves\nor hurt themselves at the polls by attempting to appeal directly to\nCatholics.\nAll available data does, however, indicate that there has been a defi-\nnite break in the traditional Democratic voting behavior of Catholics\nin suburban and, to a lesser extent urban areas. Catholics, in and\naround metropolitan areas, particularly in the north are clearly be-\ncoming more independent politically and splitting their ticket at an\nincreasing rate. This trend is not apparent to any significant degree,\nhowever, in rural areas, the border states, or the south.\nThis trend appears to be primarily a result of Catholics becoming more\nupward mobile in the society and assuming increasingly middle class\nvalues, thereby, changing their political attitudes and voting behavior.\nSome of the reasons for this shift, in addition to the fact that many\nCatholics have improved their socio-economic status are that many urban\nCatholics have strong ethnic backgrounds and have remained in somewhat\nclosed ethnic communities in the large cities until recently but have\ntended to leave these ethnic communities in the second or third genera-\ntion as they moved up on the socio-economic scale. At this point, many\nof their ties to their ethnic group, including their traditional politi-\ncal attitudes and voting behavior, weakened.\nCOMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT\nMEMORANDUM\nA second reason for the increasing political independence of Catholics\nis the erosion of the hitherto strong Catholic dogma, particularly\namong younger Catholic families. These two points - upward mobility\nand the diminishing importance of Catholicism per se - contribute to\nthe increasing importance of newly attained social class and economic\nstatus in voting behavior.\nAt this same time, there may also be a group of Catholics who have\nretained their strong religious beliefs and who feel the Democratic\nparty has moved away from them as it has become more liberal and their\nlife-style has been threatened. These people have been primarily\nDemocrats in the past but have always been basically conservative and\nheld the traditional American values which many Democrats now appear\nto repudiate. This group tends to be lower end educationally and\neconomically and also a group that has disliked Republicans fairly\nintensely for a long time. There was (in 1968) and is today some\ndefinite Wallace support among this group. Many of these voters now\nfeel strongly cross pressured politically because their philosophical\nbeliefs tend to push them more towards voting Republican but they have\ngrown up disliking Republicans and formed fairly strong Democratic\nvoting patterns. In my judgement, this group will be much harder for\nthe President to attract than will the middle class upper end Catholics\nwho have moved to the suburbs.\nWhile the data indicates that socio-economic status rather than religion\nare generally the most important determinants of voting behavior, the\nissue of aid to parochial schools is clearly one where Catholics vote\nprimarily on the basis of their religion and one which appears to cut\nacross most socio-economic lines. It is important to understand, however,\nthat even though religion determines voting behavior, on this issue most\nCatholics see it strictly as an economic rather than religious ideological\nissue. The opposition to aid to parochial schools among non-Catholics\nhowever, is based largely on philosophical or ideological grounds. Poli-\ntically, it clearly becomes a question of whether the President can pick\nup more Catholics than he will lose non-Catholics by proposing some type\nof aid to parochial schools.\nBased on the data I have available, I think the President's appeal to this\ngroup of voters should be aimed at them as a social class rather than\nCatholics for two reasons. First, I think there is a strong possibility\nthat he might lose more non-Catholics than he would pick up Catholics, by\nproposing some type of federal aid to parochial schools. This may be par-\nticularly true in several of the Border and Southern States that are\nCOMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT\nMEMORANDUM\nimportant to us and where there is some definite anti-Catholic sentiment.\nMoreover, in many of the states with large Catholic populations where\nsuch a proposal would clearly help them or states that we have very little\nchance of carrying anyway, such as, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecti-\ncut and Michigan. The second reason is that there is a high probability\nthat the President's opponent will be a Catholic and the preliminary re-\nturns on our first wave polls that Illinois, Wisconsin, Kentucky show\nMuskie having a very strong appeal to Catholics which I doubt could be\nloosened even if the President proposed some type of federal aid to paro-\nchial schools and Senator Muskie opposed it. While Kennedy's appeal to\nCatholics is somewhat less than Muskie's, particularly in Illinois, it\nis substantial in Wisconsin and Kentucky and it would probably not be\nchanged on the issue of aid to parochial schools.\nSumming up, I simply think that the potential payoff of such a position\nagainst either Muskie or Kennedy would be small in that risk of a net\nloss with non-Catholics is too great. The Catholics who are most avail-\nable to the President are those who will vote on issues not related to\ntheir Catholicism and whose main concern is with insuring their security\nin their new social environment, which makes them most interested in the\neconomic issues of inflation and unemployment. They are those who have\nor are just realizing the American dream and want desperately to protect\ntheir newfound status.\nCOMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT\nMEMORANDUM\nTOTAL VOTE\nNixon Muskie Wallace Nixon Humphrey Wallace Nixon Kennedy Wallace\nILLINOIS\n100%\nTotal\n45.8\n39.5\n5.8\n45.2\n36.2\n6.5\n44.6\n48.9\n6.1\nRoman Catholic 21.1\n73.7\n--\n43.1\n37.1\n7.3\n44.4\n40.5\n7.3\nTot. Undecided 8.9\n12.1\n10.4\nKENTUCKY\n100%\nTotal\n47.0\n31.0\n11.0\n46.0\n30.0\n10.0\n43.0\n35.0\n9.0\nRoman Catholic\n25.0\n60.0\n5.0\n29.0\n52.0\n6.0\n29.0\n53.0\n8.0\nTot. Undecided 12.0\n14.0\n13.0\nWISCONSIN\n100%\nTotal\n38.8\n48.3\n6.5\n43.8\n42.0\n7.8\n38.9\n50.1\n5.1\nRoman Catholic\n29.0\n58.0\n6.6\n36.3\n49.8\n8.5\n28.7\n62.5\n5.0\nTot. Undecided\n6.5\n6.5\n5.9\nCOMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT\nMEMORANDUM\nJanuary 6, 1972\nDETERMINED TO BE AM\nADMINISTRATIVE MARKING\nE.O. 12065, Section 6-102\nCONFIDENTIAL\nEmp NARS, Date 8-17-81\nMEMORANDUM FOR H. R. HALDEMAN\nFROM ROBERT M. TEETER\nSUBJECT: THE ENVIRONMENT\nThis memorandum is based on survey data we have collected in state-\nwide polls primarily in the midwest and east during the past several\nyears, on a national study done on the environment by Harris about\na year ago for the Public Broadcast Laboratory For Environmental\nQuality, and the Harris Domestic Council poll.\nSeveral conclusions can be drawn from this data.\nFirst and most important is that the environment has, along with\nconsumerism, become the fourth major national issue complex and\nwill continue to be an important issue indefinitely.\nSince the 1930's there have been three basic-national issue com-\nplexes: The war/peace issue, which is, of course, currently\ncentered on Vietnam; the domestic peace issue, which has been\noriented to racial problems and civil rights for the past twenty-\nfive years, and the money issue which at various points in time\nmay be oriented to inflation, cost of living, taxes or unemploy-\nment.\nDuring the past 20 or 30 years, each of these issues has tended\nto rise and fall through time and rarely have all three of them\nbeen acute public concerns at the same time. Occasionally the data\nwill indicate that one of these is of concern to a large number of\npeople, but that it is being held down to some degree by another\nissue which is of more acute concern at that time. This has\nfrequently been true in the past decade when Vietnam was perceived\nas the single most important problem in the country, but at the\nsame time people were seriously concerned about domestic unrest,\ncrime, and inflation.\nCOMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT\nMEMORANDUM\nNineteen sixty-eight was in many ways a unique year, because during\nthe campaign period, the public was acutely concerned and unhappy\nover the status of all three of these problem areas. They were\nfrustrated over the handling of the war, frightened over the in-\ncreasing domestic unrest and civil disorders, and personally feeling\nthe effects of spiraling inflation.\nDuring the 1960's several specific environmental and consumer issues\nsuch as: traffic and highway safety, thalidomide, meat inspection,\nland use, safety of birth control pills, truth in packaging, wild-\nlife preservation, mercury, DDT, etc. rose and fell. At their high\npoint these issues would get up to a total rating of 20-25% but con-\ncern always fell off after the publicity which caused the original\njump subsided. Concern over several of these issues was climaxed by\nbooks such as: Nader's Unsafe at Any Speed and Rachel Carson's Silent\nSpring. I think that many of these specific issues have now bound\ntogether to form a permanent fourth major national issue complex which\nwe now call the environment/ecology issue, which is in a broader\nsense a quality of life issue. Almost all of the individual environ-\nment and consumer issues have the common characteristic of dealing\nwith the individual's problems of living in a complex urban society\nin which he is dependent on a multitude of institutions of which he\nhas little or no knowledge and virtually no control. This means\nthat the individual doesn't know whether or not there is mercury in\nhis fish, whether his vegetables have been sprayed with a harmful\npesticide or whether the air he breathes is killing him, and even if\nhe did, he's powerless to do anything about it. It is also some-\nthing that people see examples of every day and is psychologically\nfrightening to them because it is something over which they have\nno control but yet it directly affects their personal health and well\nbeing and that of their children.\nTwo other factors which will probably also help keep the environment\nan important issue are that it is an easy and attractive issue for\nthe media to cover and an even more attractive one for politicians\nbecause it has virtually no negative side.\n**\nCOMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT\nMEMORANDUM\nTherefore, I think that as Vietnam subsides as an issue and the\neconomy gets back on the upswing, there is a good chance that the\nenvironmental set of issues will increase considerably as an\nimportant national issue. This is particularly true if we continue\nto get by without any major national racial disturbances. There\nare several states where it has already been the first or second\nmost important state issue in the past several months. Also, it\nis a very important issue to the younger generation.\nThe second conclusion is that it can be a very useful issue for\nthe President in this campaign for several reasons.\nFirst, a large majority of the electorate is concerned about it\nand virtually no one is against it. In most of the data I have\nstudied every significant voting behavior group and demographic\ngroup is in favor of vigorous governmental action to improve the\nenvironment. It is truly a non-partisan and non-ideological\nissue. Some of the most ardent environmentalists come from both\nthe left and right ends of the ideological spectrum. Regardless\nof the type of trade-off question that is asked, a large majority\nsay they are willing to make the sacrifice whether it is higher\ntaxes, higher prices or a loss of jobs. (This is also the finding\nof the Domestic Council poll.) In our current wave of polls we\nasked whether the economy or the environment should take precedence\nif a choice had to be made, and the environment is chosen by over a\ntwo-to-one margin in all those states where we have preliminary\ndata-Wisconsin, Kentucky, and New Hampshire. Moreover, a\nmajority of voters clearly do not believe that this choice has to\nbe made.\nSecondly, the groups who are most concerned with this issue and\nwhose voting behavior appears to be most influenced by it, are\ngroups who are important to us and who we may be able to attract\non this issue but not on any other. These are the very young\nvoters (18-24) with whom the environment is always the first or\nsecond most important issue, and the younger ticket-splitters\n(25-40) who are largely white, suburban middle class, and who\nare slightly more affluent than the average voter. I think there\nis a segment of both of these groups who may well vote primarily\non this issue. In the large mid-western and eastern states such\nas Illinois, Ohio, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey, this\nticket-splitting group has been crucial for Republicans in past\nelections and appear to be the key for the President in those\nstates in 1972.\nCOMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT\nMEMORANDUM\nThirdly, neither party nor any of the candidates really has a hold\non the environmental issue yet. The President is rated as handling\nit fairly well in most of the states we have studied and Muskie,\ntry as he might, simply is not perceived as a champion of the environ-\nment.\nLastly, I think this issue may provide an opportunity to show the\nPresident as one who is very concerned about the health and wel-\nfare of individual citizens, as opposed to one who is generally\nconcerned with hard-to-understand issues such as: business, the\nmilitary, foreign affairs, and the international money problem.\nIn conclusion, I do not think the environment will be one of the\nprimary issues in the campaign, but I do think it will be an important\nsecondary issue and that a small but significant number of people\nmay vote on. Even if this group is only 2 or 3% they could be\ncritical to us in close states and I see no risk in appealing to\nthem. While I realize that the President must act responsibly,\nthere is no risk in terms of losing votes with strong environmental\nposition.\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nJanuary 7, 1971\nTO:\nLARRY HIGBY\nFROM:\nGORDON STRACHAN\nThis is Ehrlichman's campaign\nmemo. The material on the\nCatholic vote and the environment\nappear on pages 5 and 6.\nI gave Teeter instructions by\ntelephone to protect against any\ndirect quotation. Teeter, of\ncourse, does not know the source\nof the conflict in opinion on\nthese issues.\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nNovember 6, 1971\nMEMORANDUM FOR\nBOB HALDEMAN\nRE:\nREELECTION CAMPAIGN\nThe tone or theme:\nIn spite of all the talk about this being an age of one-term\nPresidents, I believe it is very hard for the American people\nto turn out a sitting President. Therefore, obviously, the\ntone or theme of the campaign must be keyed to the fact that\nthe President is the President, that he has done a professional\nand competent job, that he has made significant accomplishments\nand that there is, therefore, no reason to change.\nI think people tend to vote against a candidate perhaps more\nfrequently than they vote for him; and certainly a Presidential\nrace always weighs a candidate against his opponent. An incumbent\nPresident has an obvious advantage and President Nixon has a very\nclear advantago in view of his international initiatives on the question\nof \"compared to what?\"\nAt the same time, the President is the national father figure, the\nexemplar, the leader, and the nation's champion against other\nnations. This is what the American people believe a President is\nand they want him to act out these parts. They want him to evidence\ncompassion for the poor, even though individually they may say\nand do things showing callous disregard for the poor. It is alright\nfor Mr. Voter to be indifferent to the poor but it is not alright, in\nhis cyes and mine, for his President to be indifferent to the poor. In\nfact, I suspect he gets a certain amount of psychic relieve from the\nknowledge that his President is being concerned about the less fortunate\neven at the time that he himself is not.\n-2-\nfather\nI think it is indispensable for the President to act out these\nleader\nroles in the course of the next year, with feeling and sincerity,\ncomplex\nto fulfill these expectations. To the extent that he does not we\nwill find vague discontents and negative reactions expressed as\nmaring\n\"the President has no compassion, he doesn't care, he is cold\nchangen\nand indifferent, he has no thought for the little people, he only\ncares about big business, etc. \"\nSince this is role-acting, let's approach it as such. The President\nhas a natural antipathy for doing the phony, the unnatural and the\nnot-felt. But WE are now not talking about making him comfortable\nin what he is doing; we are talking about getting him reelected and,\nin looking at that project coldly, there are some things that are\ngoing to have to be done to do the job properly that he may not totally\nlike. But I am sure he and we would like the alternative oven less.\nBecause I think the alternative is to give exposure to an Achilles\nhecl to which the President may be attacked mercilessly and effectively\nwith unknown results,\nAnd like a tennis game, as long as you can return the ball without\nmistake evory time it doesn't really matter how hard you hit it.\nYou keep playing for the other fc How's mistake. We occupy the\nhigh ground now since the President is the incumbent and all he\nhas to do is 80 on being the incumbent. The other fellow has to\nfigure out how 1.0 take the high ground. Therefore, we should avoid\ngiving him handholds, avoid making mistakes, avoid acting rashly\nor without calculation or conteniplation (e.g., the re-run of the\nPhoenix speech). and close as many of the doors as possible through\nwhich the enemy might enter.\nIn short, I would like to soe the President put in situations which would\nact out his compassion, his fairness, his true concern for his inferiors,\nhis leadership, etc. It does almost no good at all for those of us who\nknow him well to tell about these things. One acting-out session will\nbe worth ten thousand interviews with White House staffers or members\nof the Cabinet.\nBut he doesn't good coverage or Credit when he\nDoes as Them unders thes fillers up - child\nthey Juneraly foil to do.\n-3-\nThe President's part in the campaign\nWe had a good session with the Cabinet yesterday in the\nPresident's absence, and we told them all the things that they\nhad to do in order to get the President reelected. But I\nsuspect you know, and I strongly feel, that in the last analysis\nit isn't going to make much difference what the Cabinet says or\ndocs. The President himself is going to have to co much more\nthan he is inclined to do, much more than he would want to do\nand probably much more than his responsibilities in fact permit\nhim safely to do. But nevertheless I think he will have to do them.\nTelevision and Radio\nI know there is a concern that the President is over-exposing himself\non television. And yet the singular criticism which I hear as I go\nThat's what and\naround the country talking the issues to people is that the President\nis not talking to them about the issues. The Cabinet is talking to thom,\nthe staff is talking to them, Bob Dole is talking to them but they want\nthe President to talk to them. They want fireside chats. Over and over\nthey lator was will\nagain I receive the suggestion that the President sit down and talk to\nthe country about the issues of the time on 0 periodic basis. 60 that\nthey may count regularly on hearing from him not just at times of\ncrisis but under circumstances that will permit them to pull their\nchairs up to the television and listen to him explain to them about the\nproblems of our aged, health problems, the problems of our youth\nand our cities in jerms which they can understand and react to.\nThey since about care.\nWe have discussed the fireside chat format in the past and I gathor\nthat the ten o'clock meeting or the five o'clock meeting 01 the Saturday\nmorning group or somebody doesn't think it's a very good idea. All\n1 know is that there is considerable consumer demand out there in the\nfield for this kind of thing. Everyon The # good idea ? -\nexcess\nAs a variation on this, let me suggest that we think about this hunger\nor market demand in terms of regions. As Ed Harper pointed out to\nus in his analysis, the issue of support to parochial schools is a hot\nissue in limited arcas. The issue of the problems of the aged is almost\ncompletely confined to 8 or 9 states. The farm problem is obviously\nlocalized. Perhaps there in a regional approach to this fireside chat\nidea that would prevent the President from becoming over-exposed\nnationwide and would avoid whatever disadvantages are inherent in such\nover-cxposurc. at problem is that thempare not wally that\nregionalized - and it p just as much\nwork 10 doce regional chatasa national\none\n-4-\nSomething like this would have to be started before campaigning\nbegins in earnest and I know the equal time problem exists, but &\nI also know there is a very strong pull for this among people who\nare thinking about the Presidency and about the nation's problems.\nwho\nconstitute\n1110\n71%\nPersonal Appearances\nZeleshate\nAside from the fact that it prevents the press from writing that the\nPresident is ducking the people, I don't know that there's a great\ndeal of advantage in personal appearances during the campaign\nWe've always been very big for rallies, crowd shots, motorcades\nand balloons but I really seriously question whether they are in my\nappea\nway important for an incumbent President It may be that we need\nsome bandwagon psychology but I wouldn't think so. There are\nobvious tolerance maximums in terms of the use of television, but\nI think those limitations are perhaps limitations on campaigning\ngenerally then, since I think the idea of the President getting out\nand whistle stopping or stumping the nation IS doubtful,\nNew Hampshire\nI think I would stay completely away from Now Hampshire under the\ncircumstances. McCloskey may do better than anyone thinks at this\ntime simply because he is effective up close and can be expected to\nmake substantial inroads in the meager population of that state by\nan intensive hand-shaking and coffee hour campaign. I would think\nit's safer simply to take the position that New Hampshire has little or\nno significance in terms of the Republican nomination. It happens\nto be the first primary but somebody had to be first and it doesn't\nstand for anything. We might even play up McCloskey's obvious\nadvantage in being able to devote unlimited time to hand-shaking in\nNew Hampshire while the President is busy saving the world.\nMc Closkey's absentee record might be emphasized and our chairman\nup there might make the point that it's more important for the President\nto be hard at work in the White House than up in New Hampshire trying\nto tilt for delegates with some unknown Congressman. If we write it\noff now, we don't have to apologize for any results later,\nassuming we can bring it off.\n-5-\ngive this new\nTrips into the Country\nto Teeper r\nI would subscribe to John Whitakor's proposal for more\ndei of copy\nfar oriented as he trips in degree and fewer but I think rallion. he has 1 don't the think right idea. I would He go form quite Derbation as\nto make the point that most of these issues are regional in haracter\nand we can pretty well localize our attack on an issue with some\nintelligent analysis. But he is cortainly right that trips should be\ntaken to discuss problems.\nbad inca cause Carrito offer\nRunning ao an out\nup Civiling effort\nI think John Connally is right that the President has to run as an out,\nagainst the status ano, rather than as a defender of the status quo.\nThere are simply too many unfulfilled proposals, too many unsolved\nproblems, too many unsatisfied needs and wants as demonstrated by\nthe Harris poll. People don't like the way the country is going and\nthe only way to respond to that discontent is LO run against the conditions\nwhich they identify. You have to advocate change under such\nhard good\ncircumstances, rathor than to run on a platform of accomplishment,\nIf it's skillfully done, the President can attack his Senator opponent on\nthe ground that he, the member of Congress, is the defender of the\nstatus quo since the Congress wouldn't change things even though the\nPresident wanted them to. The Senator perpetuated pollution, he\nperpetuated poverty, he perpetuated the conditions in the cities which\nmight have been solved by revenue sharing, etc.\nThe Catholic Vote\nWe are operating under a set of assumptions about the Catholic vote\nneed a\nthat I suspect are totally invalid. You have seen Roy Morey's\nneednue This.\npreliminary analysis and Pat Buchanan's seat-of-the-pants emotional\nresponse. I took the position with Buchanan that Morey had made the\nprima facio caso and It was up to Buchanan to sustain his burden of\nproof and I am afraid Pat has not done so. He has told us with great\nfervor what he, Buchanan, believes but he has no answers for the\nto\nstatistics and polls which indicate the contrary. Because a strongly\npro-Catholic position on some issues costs us votes (as shown by\n?\nthe polls) in the border states and the South, and we are relying on\nthose areas as part of our base of support, we had better be very\nsure of the validity of our assumptions on this subject before we\ngo much farther.\n-6-\nThe Environment\nA somewhat kindred subject is that of the electoral effect of the\nonvironmental issue. There is an instinctive distrust of this\nissue by the President. Yet the polls tell us very clearly that it\nis a highly important issue and everything that we can develop on\nan objective basis tells us over and over again that it is motivajing\nand significant. If I read the Harris poll correctly (and it would\nscem inescapable to inc on the basis of this poll) people don't want\n\"balance\" between the environment and the economy. We know that\nbalance is right, makes good sonse from the standpoint of the future\nof the country, has to be an important consideration in the things we\ndo around here, but it will turn off the environmentally oriented voter.\nAnd here we are talking about broadening our base. It's the young,\nthe wemen, the middle bracket wage carner who is concerned about\nPalato\npollution in overwhelming numbers.\nNow, whether we like it or not, and whether the President agrees\nemotionally with the evidence or m t, I think we have to be roalistic\nabout this issue and begin to act more politically about it.\nOn both these points, what I wish to argue is that We are making\nemotional responses to these two issues. Rather, we have to be\ncold, calculating and thoroughly political in our analysis of the\nissues and how to treat them.\nLabor\nI'm of two minds on this issue and I don't quite know what to suggest.\nWe need to know a lot more about the situation than we do. We would\nlike to think that we can make inroads into the labor vote; we would\nlike to think we can even pick up some labor leaders at the margin wh O\nwill help us. But we are under heavy attack by our friends at the\nmoment for being soft on labor, for having sold out to labor on Phase II,\nfor having tolorated wage increases and strikes to the serious damage\nof business and the nation and, in effect, for being \"dupes\" who have\nbeen taken into camp by labor, largely on a bluff.\n-7-\nIn a minute I am going to mention credibility. We are telling\npeople not to worry about the China trip and the Russia trip\nbecause the President is tough, ho's able to handle them, he\nwon't be taken in by them and they can't bluff him. It is being\nargued that our labor record makes these assertions incredible.\nThe President or the politician?\nTo be reelected the President must attract the support of people\nwho are not party Republicans. The campaign must be inclusive\nrather than exclusive, It must bring to him people who are attracted\nby that extra ingredient rather than by the forms r Senator from\nCalifornia. In other words, everyone knows that the President is\na consummate politician and frequently does things for political\nreasons. They often assign political reasons to things done for non-\npolitical reasons. There's a sort of rebuttable presumption that\neverything the President does is done for political roasons.\nMy thesis is that he will attract additional support if his campaign is\nKey\nessentially Presidential and not political. The closerwe get to election\nday the harder it will be not to be political; not to say and do the purely\npolitical thing, to drop the Presidential mantle and wade into the fray\nat the level of the lowest common denominator. Yet I think that\nthe strategy can be that of the front runner which was so successfully\nemployed in the weeks just before the 1968 convention.\nCredibility\nIn thinking about vulnerability, this has to be an avenue that we should\nbe concerned about. McCloskey is already playing this tune in New\nHampshire, to what effect I don't know. I think many people want to\nbelieve that their government officials are trying to pull a fast ono,\ntrying to slide one by them, trying to get away with something, etc.\nI think each time Chuck Colson is caught at one of his escapades or\nthe Defense Department is nailod on a North Vietnamese pipeline\nexhibit or we attempt to excuse some indefensible mistake by a\nsubordinate we losc some people that we otherwise could have won.\nThere's no doubt that we're going to be attacked as dishonest and\nincredible and 1 think we have to loan over backward to avoid\ncreating grounds or even the appearance of grounds for these attacks.\n-8-\nI think the Bureau of Labor Statistics effort, while right, is going\nto cost us in the long run on this score. We're going to have the\nsame trouble in punishing or firing those guilty of leaking.\nSuppression of the truth comes under the general heading of\nincredibility. This is a problem we're going to have to deal with\non an almost daily basis, making the best judgment calls we\ncan but always keeping in mind the overall problem.\nPerhaps under this general heading comes the Justice Department\nand some of its activities lately.\nThe Law and Order Issue\nThe nationwide crime statistics for the las to three years have not\nbeen very good. On the other hand, Washington, D. C. 's record\nhas been excellent, given all the problems of this place. In truth,\nthe difference is that we have poured an unbelieveable amount of\nmoney into law enforcement in the District and it is governed by a\ndictatorship rather than an elected Mayor and City Council. We've\nbeen able to do a lot of things in the management of the city\ngovernment that the electorate would never have stood for if they\nhad had any say in it. And it's gotten results.\nI'm not sure how this issue can be handled in the coming campaign.\nI suppose one approach would be to point with pride at the city we\nhave responsibility for and say that big city Democrat Mayors could\ndo the same thing if they were as good as we are. And we can say\nthat we've been trying to send more money to the cities in the form\nof revenue sharing but the Congress wouldn't let us. But all in all\nit is not a good national record and we're going to be on the defensive\nin this area and we'd better start laying some plans right now for\nmeeting the political onslaught. There is no sign that the statistics\nare going to get any better in the coming year.\nDrugs - key concern, key opportunity\nno headway.\n-9-\nRights\nThere is going to be a major political offensive against us in\nthe civil rights area and we will have a separate report coming\nto the President within a couple of weeks as to the dimension\nof this problem and the directions that the attacks probably will\ntake.\nThis memorandum started out to be general and ended up being\nspecific on certain issues. Going back to the general, I think\nthat the President should \"declare peace\" at the start of his campaign,\nsay that the Vietnam war is at an end as he promised it would bc,\nthat the country is emerging into an era of peace and prosperity\nand that we have come through the dark night (please, not nightmare)\nwith the President's firm hand on the helm. Many, many problems\nremain to be solved but now we're in a position to attack them with\nthe same leadership, vision and courage that has been displayed in\nbringing us through the problems of war and recession.\nTo carn a generation of peace many international problems are yet\nto be tackled and it's a very bad time to be thinking about changing\nAdministrations, particularly when such a good start has been made\nby the incumbent President.\nWe don't try and defend the domestic status quo; we urge that it be\nchanged and we run against the failures of the Congress (the Democratic\nnominee almost surely coming from that body).\nI apologize for the rambling nature of the memorandum but we 'll try\nand organize this subject matter better for you in succeeding notes.\nJohn John D. Ehrlichman\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nDate: Jan. 19\nTO:\nH.R. HALDEMAN\nFROM:\nGORDON STRACHAN\nColson asked Mike Balzano to\nprepare this analysis of the Ethnic\nvote. It is substantially\ndifferent than the Hallett\nmemorandum you read two weeks\nago.\nBalzano is Colson's candidate for\nthe Ethnic post on the Campaign.\nReach\nJanuary 3, 1972\nMEMORANDUM FOR BART PORTER\nThe attached is additional thinking from Michael\nBalzano that arrived this weekend.\nThere is strong thinking over here that it is\nvery important that we not repeat our mistakes\nof 1968. The ethnic problem requires considerable\namount of creative thinking and we are very\nimpressed with Balzano.\nW. Richard Howard\nCC: Mr. Bell\nbcc: Mr. Strachan\nDecember 31, 1971\nMr. Charles W. Colson\nSpecial Counsel to the President\nThe White House Office\nWashington, D. C.\nDear Mr. Colson:\nEnclosed are the papers you requested. As you know,\nthese few pages contain three and a half years of thinking\nabout this problem.\nYou will probably have a host of questions concerning\ndetails: T am prepared to discuss or support that which I\nhave written in greater depth.\nI hope that in distilling the essence of my theory, or\nin greatly oversimplifying the mechanism, I have not so\ndiluted its meaning that it appears valueless. But distilled\nor not, this theory can be operationalized, and I know it can\nbe done in time to win this election.\nSincerely,\nmike Balzens\nMichael Balzano\nMPB:dw\nEnclosures\nDecember 31, 1971\nMEMORANDUM TO THE PRESIDENT\nFrom: Michael Balzano\nSubject: The Ethnic Vote in the 1972 Election\nThe following pages contain a discussion of a theory\nfor capturing the support of ethnic Americans from all levels\nof the economic and social spectrum. My theory, and the plan\nof action I am advocating in the paper, rests on the following\nassumptions:\n(1) That the Democrats have turned on their traditional\nethnic supporters and are advancing the cause of racial\nminorities over and above the interests of the ethnics.\n(2) That because of the enunciated policies of the Democratic\nleadership, the ethnics who have traditionally supported\nthe Democratic Party have become alienated from that Party.\n(3) That the ethnic Americans from all levels of the economic\nand social spectrum are more in tune. philosophically, with\nthe Republican Party than they are with the Democratic\nParty.\n(4) That in the elections of 1968 and 1970 many ethnics voted\nfor the Republican candidates, or for George Wallace, out\nof outrage and out of a white backlash. Today, however,\nthe \"perceived\" problems in the economy may frighten these\nethnics into supporting the Democrats.\n(5) That the Republicans have used a level of approach which\nfocused on lower income, first generation ethnics. This\nlevel of appeal may not be, and probably is not, sophis-\nticated enough to attract middle income, second and third\ngeneration ethnics. Middle income and better educated\nethnics can be insulted and \"turned off\" by a well-meaning\nstaff of campaign strategists which is culturally off\nbalance (that is, weighted down with 11 professional ethnics\"\nwho speak to ethnics as though \"they just got off the\nboat\").\n2\nTHE THEORY\n(1) A technique can be developed by which the President,\nthrough a series of carefully worded and strategically coordi-\nnated speeches, can capture the highly diffuse array of ethnic\ngroups and weld them into a permanent ideological Republican\ncoalition. To accomplish this the domestic speeches of the\nPresident must be constructed SO as to deliver a consistent\npattern of symbolically laden messages to selected members of\nevery audience.\n(2) The message of each speech must be constructed so\nthat it contains verbal symbols capable of uniting ethnics\nfrom different educational, occupational and age levels, by\nthe conscious and unconscious common denominators which connect\nthem. To do so the symbols must convey and generate a common\nidentity by association. The messages must carefully avoid\nflashing symbols which produce a negative identification. For\nexample, \"Mafia\" is an odious term to honest, middle class\nItalians.\n(3) Most importantly, the selected verbal symbols must\nconvey ideas which establich categories of symbolic exclusive-\nness, i.e. symbols which idaologically unify some people and,\nby definition. exclude others. For example, the symbol \"Black\nis beautiful\" cannot stand for Itelians. Poles or Germans. It\nunites blacks and. by definition, i) encludes all non-blacks.\nIt is at once unifying and mutually exclusive.\nThe concept of symbolic exclusiveness is the key to the\nentire success of our mission. Inherent in the concept of\nsymbolic exclusiveness is a calculated but carefully contrived\nform of polarization. One form of this ideological polariza-\ntion. for example. can be seen as arising out of a controversy\nas to whether cr not the traditionally accepted formula for\nupward economic and social mobility i.e. individual initiative\nand merit, should be replaced by something else. More precisely,\nshould all Americans be judged equally and success be earned,\nor should a vociferous but minuscule minority (whatever their\nrace) change the formula to suit themselves?\nIn theory, the object of the speeches, then, is twofold:\nFirst, to unite ethnics around the Republican Party on\nthe basis of self-interest;\nSecond, to identify the opposition party as the party in\nfavor of sacrificing the majority of Americans (the hard working\nlower and middle class and the entire tradition of individual\nsuccess based on self-reliance) to appease a racial minority.\nTHE PROBLEMS\n(1) How can the President convince traditionally Democratic\nethnic Americans that on social issues they have more in common\nwith the Republican Party and that it would be in their interest\nto become Republicans?\n(2) How can the President tell ethnic members of the lower\nand lower middle classes that the Democrats are yielding to\nthe demands of non-white. minorities at the expense of those at\nthe lower end of the economic and social ladder, that for \"working\nclass' (hard working) people in general to support the Democratic\nParty is to be displaced on the social ladder by a new Democratic\nphilosophy of \"reverse discrimination?\"\n(3) How can the President bring about an ideological\npolitical realignment without having the essence of his argument\neasily identified, thus exposing him to the charge of polarization?\n(4) Rather than to focus its appeal toward ethnic immigrants\nfrom predominantly lower income levels, how can the President\nbroaden the hase of his ethnic support to encompass ethnics with\nwidely differing occupational, educational, and income levels?\n(5) Given the array of ethnic representation in the\nhierarchy of our economic and social spectrum, how can the\nPresident focus his appeal on the members of one stratum with-\nout offending or alienating the ethnic counterparts in other\nstrata? For example, praising Italians by exhalting spaghetti\nand meat balls or calling Mexican-Amoricans \"Chicanos\" can\noffend middle class Italians and Mexican-Americans.\n(6) Once the President has selected a plan involving a\nverbal appeal to the ethnic voter, given the reality of a\nhostile news media, how can he get the media to convey his\nmessage without distorting it?\nTHE ANSWER\nThe President must be able to speak to the people of the\nnation at large and have in his speech a hidden message,\nhidden to all but those for whom the message was intended\n(in this case, ethnic Americans who traditionally vote\nDemocratic). The message must attract these ethnic Democrats\nto the Republican Party by effectively communicating the idea\nthat the Democrats have abandoned \"hard working people\" and\nthat the interest of these people is now championed by the\nRepublicans. Finally, the mescage must be DO disguised that\nthe news media will not be able to identify it, let alone\ndistort it.\n3\nThis technique would be employed in a three-pronged over-\nall strategy:\n(1)\nin the general domestic addresses of the President;\n(2)\nin contrived situational and occasional speeches\ndelivered by the President;\n(3) in speeches delivered by selected high level per-\nsonalities in the Administration and/or national\ncelebrities.\nThese speeches would be conducted under the auspices of the\ncampaign organization.\nThe overall purpose of this approach would be to provide\na carefully contrived symbolic continuity between the domestic\nspeeches of the President. It would also provide this same\nsymbolic continuity in a host of other planned speeches which,\nwhen added to the domestic addresses, would form a unified\ncampaign tactic exclusively articulated through the office\nof the President.\nIf the technique is properly employed. the news media will\nunknowingly carry the political ball for the President.\nTHE THEORY DEMONSTRATED\nAND OPERATIONALIZED: THE MECHANISM\nThe Theory Demonstrated\nA Major Presidential Address: The Labor Day Speech\nThe next three pages are xerox copies of the text of the\nLabor Day address of 1971.\nPRESIDENT NIXON'S LABOR DAY ADDRESS\nSeptember 6, 1971\n1.\nOn this Labor Day, 1971, I call upon all Americans to dedicate\nourselves to a goal we have rarely been able to achieve in the\npast 40 years a new prosperity without war and without in-\nflation.\n2.\nA nation starting out in quest of a great goal, like a young worker\nstarting out on his career, does not always get what it wants;\nrather, a nation gets what it deserves.\nWhat must we do, as a nation, to deserve a generation of peace?\nWhat must we be, as a people, to deserve and to achieve\nthe new prosperity?\n4.\nI would like you to join me in exploring one of the basic elements\nthat gives character to a people and which will make it possible\nfor the American people to earn a generation of prosperity in\npeace.\nCentral to that character is the compétitive spirit. That is the\ninner drive that for two centuries has made the American working-\nman unique in the world and has enabled him to make this land the\ncitadel of individual freedom and opportunity.\n6.\nThe competitive spirit goes by many names. Most simply and\ndirectly, it is called \"the work ethic. 11\ny\nAs the name implies, the work ethic holds that labor is good in\nitself; that as man or woman at work not only makes a contribution\nto his fellow man, but becomes a better person by virtue of the\nact of working.\n8.\nThat work ethic is ingrained in the American character. That is\nwhy most of us consider it immoral to be lazy or slothful -- even\nif a person is well off enough not to have to work or deliberately\navoids work by going on welfare.\n9.\nThat work ethic is why Americans are considered an industrious,\npurposeful people, and why a poor nation of three million people,\nover a course of two centuries, lifted itself into the position of\nthe most powerful and respected leader of the free world today.\n10\nRecently we have seen that work ethic come under attack. We\nhear voices saying that it is immoral or materialistic to strive for\nan ever-higher standard of living, We are told that the desire to\nget ahead must be curbed, because it will leave others behind.\nWe are told that it doesn't matter whether America continues to be\nnumber one in the world economically and that we should resign\nourselves to being number two or number three or even number\nfour. /We see some members of disadvantaged groups being told to\ntake the welfare road rather than the road of hard work, self-\nreliance and self-respect.\nIt is not surprising that so many hard working Americans are\nwondering: What's happening to the work ethic in America today?\nWhat's happening to the willingness for self-sacrifice that enabled\nus to build a great nation, to the moral code that made self-reliance\na part of the American character, to the competitive spirit that\nmade it possible for us to lead the world?\n12\nOne answer to those questions was given in the response of the\nAmerican people to the new economic policy I announced last month.\nI called then for some degree of sacrifice, some inconvenience and\n13\nsome belt-tightening, some temporary restrictions on our economic\nfreedom - - in order to create new jobs, to stop the rise in the cost\nof living, and to protect the American dollar.\n14\nThe overwhelming response to that call is a new justification for\nevery American's faith in himself and faith in his country.\nor course, there have been complaints; there have been counter-\n15\nsuggestions; there have been criticisms by special interest groups.\n16\nBut the most heartening reaction was the surge of national confidence,\nthe reaffirmation of our competitive spirit, the willingness to make\na personal sacrifice in pursuit of worthy goals by the man in the\nstreet, the worker on the job, the homemaker trying to balance the\nfamily budget.\n17\nThis letter from a state employee in' Texas, whose wife is a school\nteacher, is typical of thousands that came into the White House after\nI made that speech, It reads: \"We were both due for salary in-\ncreases in September\nbut we will survive. If it were necessary\nto cut our income in half, I still know of no other country I would\nchoose to call my own. I've heard the young people using a phrase\nthat might fit: Right on. \"\n..?...\n18\nLet the detractors of America, the doubters of the American\nspirit, take note. America's competitive spirit, the work ethic\nof this people, is alive and well on Labor Day, 1971.\n19\nThe dignity of work, the value of achievement, the morality of\nself-reliance -- none of these is going out of style.\n20\nWith that fact clearly understood, let us also recognize that the\nwork ethic in America is undergoing some changes.\nIt means that business, labor and government should explore the\n21\nnew needs of today's wage earners: We must give the individual\nworker more responsibility -- more of the feeling that his\nopinion counts.\n22\nWe must find ways to better recognize and reward the extra effort a\nworker puts into his job.\n23\nWe must open up new and equal opportunities to allow a person to\ngrow in his job.\n24\nAnd we must give more respect to the proud men and women who\ndo work that is all too often considered \"menial. 11\n25\nI read a report recently about some on welfare in one of our cities\nwho objected to taking jobs that they considered menial. As I read\nthat report, I thought of my own father. During the years that 1\nwas growing up, he worked as a streetcar motorman, oil field\nworker; he worked as a farmer, a carpenter and a brick layer.\nHe worked also in a filling station:\n20\nLet us recognize once and for all no job is menial in America\nif it leads to self-reliance, self-respect and individual dignity.\nWe must make it possible for workers to try \"refresher courses\"\nand \"second careers\" to open up the chance for a new variety in\nwork.\nWe must reinstill a pride of craftsmanship, a pride in good\nservice, that results in quality workmanship.\nAnd we must make sure that technology does not dehumanize work,\nbut makes it more creative and rewarding for the people who will\noperate the plants of the future,\n-3-\n2\nHere are the same three pages rewritten so as to demon-\nstrate the kind of symbolic manipulation we have been dis-\ncussing.\nThe Labor Day Address: The New Version\n(Paragraphs 1, 2, 3 and 4 are the same as the original.)\nCentral to that character is the work ethic. That is,\nthe inner drive that for two centuries has made the labor of\nthe American workingman the prime ingredient of America's\ngreatness.\nThe work ethic implies a number of things. But to all of\nthose who have achieved a solid measure of success through\ntheir own toil and sacrifice, it reaffirms the promise inherent\nin the consept of the American dream: that in the United States\neconomic and social rewards are largely determined by merit.\nFrom the earliest days of our colonial period, through the\nera of westward expansion, and through the horrors of the great\nWorld Mars, America grew in greatness. But let us remember,\nAmerica's bounty is but a reflection of the industriousness,\nperseverence, and achievements of its working people.\nAll through our history. people came here from all parts\nof the world. They knew that America was the land of opportunity.\nThey knew that in America it WHS possible to work their way up\nthe economic and social ladder.\nThose who came here after the country was settled (the\nethnics) quickly took the extresple seu by the workingmen already\nhere; they rolled up their nileaves and want to work. They were\nhappy to work at whatever jobc they could find. No job was\nbelow the dignity o:' those who truly wanted to better themselves.\nAmerican workingmen have always lives by the coue of hard work\nand sacrifice and in doing so they earned and deserved the\neconomic and social rewards that they achieved. The greatest\nreward of all was knowing the, were successful. that they\nsucceeded in making a better life for themselves, their children\nand all Americans who followed them.\nYes, the great majority of the American people pulled them-\nselves up by their own bootstraps and proved that the American\ndream was within the reach of anyone who Was willing to work to\nachieve it. We know that the work ethic has helped to build\nthe moral fiber of our people. That is why we have come to\nrespect those who seek to better themselves through gainful\nemployment.\n3\nRecently we have seen that work ethic come under attack.\nWe hear voices saying that it is immoral or materialistic to\nstrive for an ever-higher standard of living. We are told that\nthe desire to get ahead must be curbed, because it will leave\nothers behind. We are told that it doesn't matter whether\nAmerica continues to be number one in the world economically\nand that we should resign ourselves to being number two or\nnumber three or even number four.\nAt the same time, we hear these same voices saying that\nthe American dream is dead. They say that today it is not\npossible for Americans to better themselves or to improve their\neconomic and social position.\nIt is not surprising then that hard working Americans\ntoday are wondering what is happening to the work ethic in\nAmerica. Why is it that some people are unwilling to sacrifice\nand to work to improve the selves? NNW is it that some people\nrefuse to start at the bottom of the ladder as did everyone\nelse in America?\nAll those who have achieved success by working their way\nup from the bottom of the ladder cannot understand the unwar-\nranted attacks upon the same economic system that enabled the\noverwhelling majority of Americans to rise and to achieve.\nThose who have attacked the American dream have been blind to\nthe reality of the American experience. They are Blind to the\nfact that better than 75 percent of our people who enjoy\nunprecedented prosperity come not from Camilies of great wealth\nbut are themselves a generation of self-made men.\nThere comes a time in any country's history when it becomes\nnecessary to reaffirm its faith in its established traditions.\nIn America that time is now.\nI know that most Americans still cling to the spirit of\nsacrifice and perseverence. One indicator of that living\nspirit revealed itself in the response cf the American people\nto the new economic policy I announced last month.\n(Return to the original text of the speech and read paragraphs\n13, 14, 15, 16 and 17.)\nLet the detractors of America, the doubters of the American\nspirit, take note. America's competitive spirit, the work ethic\nof this people, is alive and well on Labor Day 1971. In America,\nthe morality of hard work and sacrifice, the dignity of\n4\nself-reliance through gainful employment. and the well-deserved\npride of achievement are still the ingredients of success.\nNone of these is going out of style.\n(Return to the original text and read paragraphs 20, 21, 22,\n23 and 24.)\nWe hear reports today which tell of some unemployed\npeople who refuse to take jobs because they consider the jobs\nmenial and below their dignity When I hear stories like this,\nI cannot help but think of my own father. During the years that\nI was growing up, he worked as a streetcar motorman, an oil\nfield worker; he worked as a farmer, a carpenter and a brick-\nlayer. He also worked in a filling station. My father was no\ndifferent than other Americans. Your parents were the same.\nThey accepted all kinds of does and worked at them with prido.\n(Return to the original text and read paragraph 26 through the\nend.)\nAnalysis\nWhat the revised speech says to the American working-\nman:\n(1) The work ethic is the inner drive; labor is the prime\ningredient--your labor.\n(2) The American dream is based on merit. Those who are\nsuccessful succeeded because of their own toil and sacri-\nfice.\n(3) Opportunity in America equals the chance to work your\nway up the ladder. If some people regard a job as below\ntheir dignity, they do not truly want to better them-\nselves. Economic and social successes are earned. Racial\nminorities want the gains without the sacrifices.\n(4) The majority of Americans deserved to achieve success;\nthey are entitled to it because they earned it by working\nfor it through gainful employment, not welfare or repara-\ntions.\n(5) Today, racial minorities are saying that you can't make\nit in America. What they really mean is that they refuse\nto start at the bottom of the ladder the way you did. They\nwant to surpass you at your expense.\n5\n(6) Those who are attacking the work ethic are a small minority\nwho do not accept the self-made man idea. They want it\nhanded to them.\n(7) You worked the menial jobs to get where you are. Let\nthem do it too.\nThe speech has a subconscious thrust:\n(1) It conveys to the American laborer a set of symbols with\nwhich he identifies and with which he sees President\nNixon as identifying.\n(2) It tells the audience that President Nixon knows that:\n(a) some people refuse to work and sacrifice;\n(b) some people want the gains of those who have toiled\nand achieved, but they refuse to work to obtain\nsuccess.\n(3) It suggests that the Democrats have initiated and supported\nthe demands of racial minorities and that they are determined\nto appease these minorities at the expense of the working-\nman. The Republicans are fighting to protect your hard-\nearned successes and your self interests.\n(4) By praising those who have succeeded. President Nixon has\nwithdrawn approval from those who seek to get around the\nwork ethic. (You can draw your own conclusions about who\nthose people are.)\n(5) He has not opened his flank to the opposition by slapping\nwelfare recipients. Not all welfare is unjustified. The\nopposition likes nothing better than to picture the\nRepublicans as the enemy of a widow with three children.\n(6) The remarks are disguised and fit only those who are\nunjustifiably on welfare.\nA iconcentrated effort must be made to have the President's\ndomestic speeches conform to this calculated pattern so that each\nspeech provides the President with an opportunity to bombard a\nselected segment of his audience with a message which is clearly\naudible to them but not to those philosophically out of tune\nwith the President.\nCalculated Occasional Speeches\nIn these instances a series of natural situations will be\nexploited to allow the President to make a calculated appeal\n6\nto a target group. For the present, we will refer to this\ntactic as \"The President's Achievement Ethic Award. \" This\naward could be given to a person, a group, or a community.\nWith each person, group or community awarded there would be:\n(1) a speech delivered by the President directly to\nthe recipient of the honors;\n(2) mass coverage by newspapers, television, which\nwill blanket the nation, swamp the home town and\nthe state.\nThe speech must contain verbal symbols capable of striking\nsympathetic cords in the target population. The words must\ncarry symbolic spill-over; that is, they should honor and praise\nothers who will identify with those receiving the award. The\nwords must also carry symbolic exclusiveness. (Remember,\nBlack is beautiful\" conveys just that. )\nExample 1--A Person. A human interest story appears in\nthe New York Times about a resident of the Bronx or Queens:\n\"Angelo Esposito, former sewer cleaner. getsID degree.\nImmediately 2 check is made on the individual. If it is deemed\nappropriate, the President would make a speech congratulating\nthis man for his accomplishment.\nThe syeech would probably run along the following lines:\n(1) This person did well because of personal \"initiative,\"\n\"drive\" and \"determination.\n(2) This proves once again, \"Only in America\" - - the Horatio\nAlger myth is still true.\n(3) Your parents should be proud of you (salute them by\nimplication).\n(4) Your neighbors must be proud of you, because you are one\nof them (they helped, too).\n(5) Carefully insert: At a time when academicians might\nhave tended to lower the standards to let this under-\nprivileged man get by, they demanded more from him, and\nit paid off.\n7\nOut of this speech, the words or verbal symbols actually\nconvey:\n- -patience\n-- -sacrifice\nThese are the rules by which\n-\n-perseverence\nethnics and all Americans have\n- -self-reliance\nlived.\n-merit\n-\n-achievement\nThese sy hols are the opposite of, and exclude those\nidentified with:\n-impatience- I want\nit now\n-selfishness, self-\nThese symbols convey the mental\ninterest\npicture of militant minority demands.\n-drop-cut--the\nThey will evoke different races in\nsystem is wrong\nMif erent minds, depending whether\n-government's responsi-\nyou are in Buffalo, Newark. Bridgeport\nbility, not self-\n;or Houston. They will all produce\nreliance\nthe same kind of polarization.\n-not by merit, but by\nright\n-reward and success are\ngiven, not achieved\nThe proceding speeches of the President as demonstrated\nhere obviously have far-reaching racial implications, However,\nthe same technique could be used to gather support by utilizing\nthe enormous powers of the President to convey honors and thus\npick up support. Note the following variation on the award\ntheme that does not have the racial overtones.\nExample 2--A Group. The following story appears in the\npaper. General Motors was ready to move out of Dayton, because\nwages were 31 to $2 higher than the nearcst competitor.\nNovember 21st. workers agreed to forego scheduled contract\nraises whereupon G.M. recalled 150 employees. Prices on\nFrigidares will be reduced. Everybody sacrificed.\nThe speech would say something like:\nI salute you (workers).\n(1) The example you have set is a credit to your character.\n(2) America (in the name of its leader) thanks you.\n8\n(3) Like good Americans, you thought of your neighbors when\nthey needed you. Your forefathers would be proud to see\nyou maintaining the American spirit of generosity.\n(4) You have set an example for Americans to follow.\nBeyond the words, the message conveyed:\n(1) The President of the United States actually talked about\nme, and us.\n(2) President Nixon gives honors.\n(3) President Nixon recognized and rewarded.\nThe News Media Unwittingly Carries the Ball\nIn the first two examples, the presidential address and\nthe occasional speech, the news media carries the message. In\nthe Labor Day speech, the national networks provide the blanket\nof information over the nation. In the occasional speeches.\nthe local media would blanket the local city and probably the\nstate. If the human interest aspect of the story is interesting\nand really unique. we would protably get the national media\nto pick it up and carry it along.\nNotice. however, that in all of these examples the media\nis almost forced to carry the message. Moreover, no matter\nwhat they say we can only gain.\n(1) If only the local or state television carries it, we will\nbe able to say, \"See, no one wants to spread the good\n\"\nnews about how the President honored you.\n(2) If the media blasts the President, \"Tricky Dick, \" they\nwill insur the wrath or those who have been honored.\nYou are stealing my honors. The President is praising\n11.\nme and you are damning him for it.\n(3) The President's enemies are my enemies. Agnew was right.\nWith the occasional award tactic, great care must be taken\nto avoid having the President walk into an embarrassing situation.\nIf each specific potential award recipient is properly researched,\nthis danger can be minimized. Further, the \"occasional\" or\n\"surprise\" element here is vital. There is no new, stated\npresidential policy of starting to award people for achievement.\n9\nThe President simply does it. The press or television would\nsay:\n\"This morning, in an unprecedented move, President\nNixon went to Dayton, Ohio, and spoke to a crowd of\n1,000 G.M. workers. The President paid tribute\nto the laborers who last month sacrificed their own\npersonal gain to help fellow workers who were laid\noff, etc., etc.\nII\n\"This afternoon President Nixon honored a former\nsewer cleaner who recently received an MD degree from\nGeorgetown University.\n11\nIf the President takes the initiative (that is, it is not an\naward for which one can apply--the President finds you), there\nis no embarrassment of having to stop the process.\nThe Theory Operationalized: The\nMechanis.\nIn order to operationalize this set of conceptualized\ntechniques, a key core cf personnel must be put together.\nMany of the people described in this sketch may already be\nworking in the Thite House, but many will have to be recruited.\nInitially there will be a need to establish two intellectual\nteams: a White House team and a counterpart working at the\nhighest level of the campaign organization.\nThe White House Team\nThere must be a core or team of no more than six or eight\npeople working in the White House. These people would be\ncharged with the responsiblity for writing and coordinating\nthe series of symbolic speeches of the President. They would\nselect the symbols to be projected at each target population.\nIn addition, this group would edit (i.e. symbolically load)\nall other speeches touching on domestic issues emanating from\nthe President.\nCAUTION -- DANGER\nWith respect to the calculated polarization described in\nthis paper, ABSOLUTE secrety CANNOT BF OVERITATED. If our\nstrategy is leaked to the press or to the opposition, there\nwould be no way of calculating the damage to the Administration.\nTherefore, the inner workings of the core will be known only\nto the President and those with the highest degree of White\nHouse clearance, that in, his immediate advisors.\n10\nMost of the men who merit membership on the White House\nteam should have the following intellectual preparation and/or\ngeneral characteristics:\n(a) They should be men who have traveled the social\nspectrum from a non-English speaking ethnic lower income\nlevel to a middle or upper class level. The team should\ninclude at least one Armenian, one Spanish-speaking\nAmerican, one Pole, one German, one Greek, one Italian,\none Hungarian, and one Swede.\n(b) They should know the \"cultural peculiarities\" of\nthe ethnic groups they represent, i.e. work habits,\nsuperstitions, morality, sense of fairness and prejudices.\nMost of these men should be knowledgeable concerning\nclass conflicts and social tensions arising out of these\nclass conflicts, or be skilled political practitioners\nwho have practical experience in this area and a feeling\nfor the mission we are undertaking.\n(c) Some of these men must be skilled in the use of\nsymbol analysis and meaning and (given the assistance\nof the other team metibers who must be considered experts\non, as well as representatives of, the particular ethnics\nwithin the given tarret novelation). they must be able to\nselect the appropriate symbols for the occasion.\n(d) Some of these men must be writers of the highest\ncaliber. They must be able to write and edit speeches\nand exercise imaginative and innovative judgment.\nSpecial Research Staff\nAdjunct to the Team\nThe White House team must have the use of staff and research\npersonnel to do any leg work when needed. That is, if a member\nof the team needed information on a given area with respect to\nethnic income, education, voting patterns, etc. the team would\nnot be burdened with staff work. In addition, the team must\nhave access to all surveys and polls now being conducted and\nshould have the authority to conduct surveys to obtain deeper\ninsights into a target population or to assess its impact on an\narea, with an eye to correcting for effectiveness.\nAlthough the special research staff will be at the disposal\nof the team, the staff will not know why the information is\nrequired or the strategy behind its use.\n11\nIn addition to the special research staff there must be\na core staff which, via newspapers and magazines, scans the\ncountry for special human interest stories like Angelo, the\nsewer cleaner and the G.N. Frigidare examples. These talent\nscouts must research the ituation and clear the individual\n(so as to avoid an embarrassing situation for the President)\nand set up some congratualtory award in the particular state\nand community. After consideration of the incidentals, the\nteam will write the speech for the President.\nThe White House team, then, will be responsible for that\npart of the 1972 campaign which actually deals with a series\nof calculated maneuvers exercised by the President himself.\nIn addition to calculating some of the President's major\nmovements in the 1972 campaign, the team will coordinate similar\nbut different testics throughout the country in the key electoral\nstates, To accomplish this, a second team will be necessary.\nThere should be a second team of eight to ten men working\nat the hishest level of the campaign organization. These meh\nwill again be drawn from the ranks of ethnic groups. who have\nworked their way into the middle class. They should be from\ndifferent parts of the country and from the highly sought\nafter electoral states, The intellectual and/or backmround\ncharacteristics of this second team should be similar to those\nof the White House team. While it is not necessary for them to\nbe symbol analysts, there should be several excellent writers\nin the group.\nThe second team will concentrate upon utilizing several\nkey Administration spokesmen. These spokesmen would function\nin a capacity similar to that of the President in that they,\ntoo, would be making speeches in selected areas.\nThe operation of the second team would be as follows.\nThey would choose an area in a key state where there is a\nheavy concentration of ethnic groups. They would then arrange\nfor a series of high level speakers. such as Secretary Volpe\nor Phillip Sanchez, to go into the area and make a successive\nwave of speeches. The speeches might, and probably would, be\nwritten by the second team. But in all cases, they would be\nedited by the White House team. Like the President's speeches,\nthese too must be symbolically loaded. It is not necessary\nfor anyone but the campaign director (John Mitchell) to be\naware of what modifications the speeches would undergo by the\nWhite House team.\n12\nThe Speakers\nThe speakers must have many or all of the following\ncharacteristics:\n(a) They must be people who come from non-English\nspeaking groups. It is desirable, but not necessary,\nfor them to have a speaking knowledge of the language.\n(b) They should be people who have achieved a high\ndegree of economic success or social prestige. Their\nachievements should be directly traceable to their\ndetermination to exploit their God-given talents and\nto their perseverence in the attainment of their goals.\nHish level government officials. Speakers might include,\nfor example:\n(a) A Cabinet member: John Volpe. During the Depression\nhe went into the construction business. He took a\ngamble and worked hard. Today he is a success.\n(b) The Director of a federal agency: Phillip Canchez.\nFrom migrant worker to the Administration's top anti-\npoverty official.\nLower lével, but just as vital. national personalities\nHere, what is needed is the salt Of the earth, plain and pure\ntype of man who to ethnic groups could be seen as a modern\nembodiment of a hero. The perfect example of the kind of man\nneeded would be a Vince Lombardi. But there are others with his\ntraits. They could come from the entertainment world, such as\nFrank Sinatra, Bob Hope or John Wayne. Or, they could. come\nfrom countless other fields. The lesser known persons might be\nbetter utilized in their own states or areas, but a Vince\nLombardi would have creditility in any environment. Given\nthe President's proclivity for sports, celebrities drawn from\nthis category would be quite appropriate. Again, no matter\nwho is chosen to speak, the White House team will edit or\nwrite the speech.\nThe common factor in all these speakers must be that\nthey made it from the bottom of the dech by their own steam.\nThey still identify with the people who are trying to emulate\ntheir success and the people will identify with them.\nThey, the speakers, support the President, because the\nPresident is protecting the systemic and social rules of the\ngames which allowed them to be successful. Those ethnics\n13\nidentifying with the speaker should support the President,\nbecause he is protecting their personal interests.\nThe Execution\nThe actual execution of the plan can be carried out as\nfollows.\n(1) With respect to the domestic addresses of the President,\nthe speeches would send out a coast-to-coast wave of\nsymbols from the eastern and western White Houses. These\nspeeches (the exact number and occasion to be established)\nare diagramed in Figure I, plastic sheet #1. The purple\nwave represents one symbol-laden domestic address.\n(2) Figure I, plastic sheet #2, superimposed over #1, plots\na series of contrived occasional speeches by the President\nhonoring some individual or group. These speeches are\ndiagramed in orange. Again, the exact number and frequency\nwill be determined.\n(3) Figure I, plastic sheet #2, superimposed over #1 and #2,\nplots speeches by different high level officials and\ncelebrities.\n51 UNIVERSITY within agessa to asn fundain) 33 provided your 5\nsecretary NATION\nango peg Ford AUV As goodang unitid AUP 10 'deal payments 590 am will ... 4% which\nI sheet 'I\nP4%\nUNITED STATES\n4\n1.1\nI\nSIZE 8½ x 11\n)\n0\nChauxe HAWAII\n(+\nOOIXER\n5\nFLORIDA\n(VNITOR\")\nCONVEYS\nSMX31\n370\nOR. AHOMA\n07/2 1.M.IN\nVNIDOR HIMON\n^VSNVX\nSINIORIA\nIf\nUNITED\n23\nOTHO\nSION\nNEBRASKA\nVM\nyy\n****\nMIN\n9NW\nAM\nSTATE OUTLINE MAP\nNYSHT\nNISA\nMMA\nrarHro\nHOW\n-\nVIO,INNIN\nVI *VG HIMON\nRAND MENALLY\nMAINE\nSTATE OUTLINE MAP\nSIZE 8½11\nFigure I, sheet 2\nPresidential\naward speeches\nGEORG\nKENTULEY\n100\nTENNI 111\nY\nSCALL N MILLS\n2 1 :\nSKASSA\nOPEJANA\n'.\nNA\n. NORTH DAN CAN\n\"THIDAK 11 TA\nKANSAS\nAHOMA\nNEURASKA\n1 TIMAS\n-\n-\nC A CAHA A DA CAHADA\n< ORAGI HAWAII\nLANA\nCOLORADO\n\",\nM NEW MI , - . C 0 50\nMarch\nWYC\nRIZZIO is (-) O\nMONTANA\nDAHO\nARIZONA\n:\n-\n:\nTokeny of I - rentacte this : comminated map. or any potien Diereaf by any becaus method, in by including office\ncopseng % made I ter personal of . DE company 13 e use or resale with et V/I Per permission , 15 :\nOREGON\nN/A\nI\nI\n9\n0\n1\n9\nI\nI\n14\nThe frequency and the intensity of each speech will be\nmost vital in determining the desired effect. But, if properly\nexecuted, the desired areas would be subjected to a symbolic\nblanket of speeches. With constant variations of this same\nsymbolic blanket, the target population would be bombarded with\nopinion-shaping information which, properly engineered, would\ncost little or nothing. For example, a third of these speeches,\nthe national addresses, would be carried by the national media\nperforming their general function of public information.\nThe other third would be carried by state and local news\nmedia beating the drum in a series of local Greek, Italian,\nPolish, German or Armenian \"boy makes good\" stories.\nThe final third, of course, the campaign organization\nwould finance.\nDepending upon the social issue under discussion, i.e.\ncrime, law and order, bussing, etc., a set of symbolic categories\ncan be constructed to rally segments of a target population\nbehind a given idea. In this brief outline, I have focused on\none category: the achievement ethic (the work ethic). I have\ndone so because this category has the greatest potential for\nenabling the President to unify the nation, to win re-election\nin 1972 (his immediate objective). and to encourage Democrats\nto become Republicans (his long-range objective)."
}

Survos folio page chat

Ask the Scholar

Page image

OCR

Document source description

Page data

Document data

Context sent to Scholar