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
32
4
4/24/1972
Campaign
Report
Title:Tentative Budget. This document
discusses voting blocs and citizens, youth,
black vote, ethnic, agriculture, Jewish, older
American, Veterans, Labor Spanish
speaking, tranient, etc. 15 pgs.
32
4
6/5/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Fred Malek to H.R. Haldeman. RE:
Progress Report on Campaign Activities. 31
pgs.
32
4
6/8/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Gordon Strachan to H.R. Haldemad.
Re: Mitchell Political Meeting--June 7,
1972. 6 pgs.
32
4
5/11/1982
Campaign
Memo
From Robert M. Teeter to The Honorable
John N. Mitchell. RE: Final First Wave
Analysis. 8 pgs.
Thursday, August 25, 2011
Page 1 of 6
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
32
4
4/26/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Gordon Strachan to H.R Haldeman.
RE: Campaign Meeting. 7 pgs.
32
4
Campaign
Other Document
Hand written document discussing notes on
Democrat campaign results. 4 pgs.
32
4
>
Campaign
Other Document
Talking Paper discussing McGovern primary
results. 2 pgs.
32
4
5/19/1972
Campaign
Other Document
Handwritten Note. RE: Mitchell Political
Meeting May 18, 1972. 3 pgs.
32
4
5/18/1972
Campaign
Other Document
Handwritten Note discussing Final 1st Wave
Analysis. Also included, Analysis on
Campaign and Advertising Strategies. 18
pgs.
Thursday, August 25, 2011
Page 2 of 6
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
32
4
5/31/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Finance Committee for the Re-Election
of the President to Gordon Strachan. RE:
White House Support List. 1 pg.
32
4
Campaign
Report
Title: Western Regional Finance Chairman
for Nixon. 1 pg.
32
4
5/30/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Devan L. Shumway, through Jeb S.
Magruder, to Honorable John N. Mitchell.
RE: Financial Report. 2 pgs.
32
4
5/24/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Harry S. Dent to Honorable John N.
Mitchell. RE: Political Issues Group
Meeting Thursday, May 18, 1972. 5 pgs.
32
4
5/25/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Max Friedersdorf to Harry Dent. RE:
Congressman McCloskey. 2 pgs.
Thursday, August 25, 2011
Page 3 of 6
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
32
4
5/23/1972
Campaign
Letter
From Norris Cotton, U.S. Senator to
Honorable Harry S. Dent. Discusses
Cotton's gratitude to Dent for speaking at the
annual May luncheon of the Federation of
Republican Women's Clubs. 1 pg
32
4
5/22/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Lyn Nofziger to Ronald Reagan. RE:
California Campaign (Week Ending 20 May
1972). 2 pgs.
32
4
5/15/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Lyn Nofziger to Ronald Reagan. RE:
California Campaign (Week Ending 13 May
1972) 3 pgs.
32
4
6/5/1972
Campaign
Other Document
Handwritten document. Notes on McGovern
and concerned Democrats. 2 pgs.
32
4
3/31/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Gordon Strachan to Jeb Magruder.
RE: RNC Registration. 1 pg.
Thursday, August 25, 2011
Page 4 of 6
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
32
4
5/18/1972
Campaign
Memo
From J. Curtis Herge, through Jeb S.
Magruder, to Honorable John N. Mitchell.
RE: Proposal for Campaign Kick-off Event
in San Diego and San Clemente September
14 and 15, 1972. 12 pgs.
32
4
5/11/1972
Campaign
Memo
Form L. Higby to Gordon Strachan.
Discussing preparing Talking Paper
regarding Campaign operations for
Haldeman/Ehrlichman meetings. 1pg.
32
4
5/2/1972
Campaign
Memo
From L. Higby to H.R. Haldeman. RE:
Daily Political Meetings. 3 pgs.
32
4
6/5/1972
Campaign
Newsletter
News From the Committee for the Re-
Election of the President. Discussing
positions held by certain key personnel of the
committee. 4 pgs
32
4
4/13/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Robert Morgan, through Jeb S.
Magruder, to Honorable John N. Mitchell.
RE: Voter Registration Test. 4 pgs.
Thursday, August 25, 2011
Page 5 of 6
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
32
4
4/30/1972
Campaign
Memo
From H.R. Haldeman to John Mitchell.
Follow-up on Ashbrook pulling-out,
Parkinson turning of his deal. President's
concern with Nancy Garcia, Ray Bliss
meeting with President, Walker's Cay, and
California kick-off deal. 2pgs
32
4
5/30/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Ken Rietz to Jeb S. Magruder and Fred
Malek. Topic: Student leaders press
conference in Los Angeles. Includes an
article. 5 pgs.
32
4
6/1/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Fred Malek to H.R. Haldeman. RE:
Weekly Report. 3 pgs.
32
4
5/15/1972
White House Staff
Memo
From Gordon Strachan to Larry Higby. RE:
Stan's Dinner. 2 pgs.
32
4
6/6/1972
White House Staff
Other Document
Handwritten Note. This document discusses
poll meetings. 1 pg.
Thursday, August 25, 2011
Page 6 of 6
Presidential Materials Review Board
Review on Contested Documents
Collection: H. R. Haldeman
Box Number: 312
Folder:
Campaign 20 Part I May 17-June 6, 1972
Document
Disposition
59
Return Private/Political TENTATIVE BUDGET VOTING BLOCS.. n.d
60
Retain
Close Invasion of Privacy MEMO, STRACHAN TO HRH, 6/6/72
61
Return
Private/Political MEMO, MALEK TO HRH, 6/5/72
62
Retain Close Invasion of Privacy MEMD, STRACHAN TO HRH, 6/6/72
63
Return
Private/Political mEmo, MALE'S TO HRH, 6/5/72
64
Return
Private/Political MEMO, STRACHAH TO HRH, 6/8/72
65
Return
Private/Political NOTES, "Jm, MILLER..., 6/7/72
66
Return
Private/Political NOTES, MF. H. F. G...", 5/19/72
67
Return
Private/Political MEMO, TEETER TO MITCHELL, 5/11/72
68
Return
Private/Political NOTES, SELFC- DIF BALLS, 5/18/72
69
Return
Private/Political MEMO, STRACHAN TO HIGBY, 5/15/72
70
Return
Private/Political MEMO, NUNN TO STRACHAN, 5/31/72
71
Return
Private/Political PRESS RELEASE, n.d.
72
Return
Private/Political MEMO, SHUMWAY TO MITCHELL, 5/30/72
73
Return
Private/Political MEMO, DENT TO MITCHELL, 5/24/72
74
Return
Private/Political NOTE/ATTACH., DENT TO STRACHAH, 5/26/72
75
Return
Private/Political(TR, COTTON TO DENT, 5/23/72
76
Return
Private/Political MEMO, NOFZIGER TO REAGAN, 5/22/72
77
Return
Private/Political NOTE/ATTACH., MAGRUDER TO HRH, 5/17/72
78
Retain
Open
79
Retain
Open
80
Retain
Open
81
Retain Open
82
Return
Private/Political NOTES," H. MT6 w/Jm..., nid
Presidential Materials Review Board
Review on Contested Documents
Collection: H. R. Haldeman
Box Number: 312
83
Retain Open
84
Return Private/Political NOTES, "COLSON, Jm, MAEG. ; 6/5/[72]
85
Retain Open
86
Return
Private/Political MEMO, STRACHAH TO 3/31/72
87
Return
Private/Political MEMO, HERGE TO mITCHELL, 5/18/72
88
Return
Private/Political MEMO, HERGE TO mITCHELL, 5/1/72
89
Return
Private/Political MEMO, HIGBY TO STRACHAN, 5/11/72
90
Return
Private/Political MEMO, HIGBY TO HRH, 5/2/72
91
Return
Private/Political PRESS RELEASE, 6/5/[72]
92
Return Private/PoliticalNTS) : Fm DERSONNEL- BIGGEST 0/1/[72]
93
Retain
Open
94
Retain Open
95
Return
Private/Political NOTES, CWC
I
H..., 6/6/[77]
96
Return
Private/Political MEMO, HRH TD MITCHELL, 4/30/72
97
Return
Private/Political NOTE/ATTACH, MALE'S TO DHRH, 6/5/[72]
98
Return
Private/Political MEMO, MALEK TO HRH, 6/1/72
TENTATIVE BUDGET
VOTING BLOCS AND CITIZENS
Old
New
Group
Estimate (3/7)
Estimate
Youth
$401,000
$298,000
Business & Industry
199,000
184,000
Black Vote
153,000
137,000
Ethnics
106,000
119,000
Older Americans
118,000
114,000
Agriculture
117,000
134,000
Spanish Speaking
103,000
118,000
Veterans
101,000
107,000
Labor
93,000
100,000
Jewish
77,000
82,000
Transients
62,000
66,000
Lawyers
37,000
37,000
Physicians
26,000
26,000
Educators
0
35,000
Women
$04,000
230,000
Voters Rights
109,000
109,000
Citizens General and
Functional Groups
350,000
319,000
Total
$2,461,000
$2,215,000
There forhs should hand be be
old
4/24/72
TENTATIVE BUDGET
YOUTH DIVE [ON
Staff
Salary
Cost
Present Staff (per earlier schedule)
$ 98,000
Wisc. Fieldman (Krueger)
- 4/7
10,500
6,200
Border States Fieldman (Davis)
- 4/7
10,000
5,800
Penn. Fieldman
- 5/15
12,000
6,000
Ohio Fieldman
- 5/15
12,000
6,000
Farm States Fieldman
- 6/1
12,000
5,500
Midwest Director
- 5/15
18,000
9,000
Rocky Mtn. & Northwest
Fieldman (Wigger)
- 5/15
7,800
4,000
Convention staff man (Burkop)
- 5/1
7,800
4,400
Convention secretary
- 5/1
7,200
2,400
Convention staff man
- 5/1
7,200
1,800
Convention secretary
- 6/1
7,200
1,800
Convention staff man
- 7/1
7,200
1,200
4 Field secretaries
- 5/15
3,000
12,000
Total Staff
164,100
Payroll Burden
10,900
Staff Travel & Expenses
60,000
Rent & Supplies for State Hdqtrs.
10,000
Convention - Buses & Events
21,000
Special Brochures & Buttons
12,000
State Chmn Travel & Expenses
5,000
Organization Meetings
5,000
Misc. Mailings & Promotional Items
10,000
Total
$ 298,000
Notes to Youth Budget:
1. CaHoway (South) or Davis (Border States) will be transferred
to another area effective 6/15. The remaining man will cover the
entire Southeast.
2. Wigger will remain in Oregon until the primary. He will then
focus on Washington and all Rocky Mtn. States as well until the
election.
3. N. Y. contingency - in event State does not add 2 full-time
fieldmen as expected, we may want to add our own fieldman to
assist in N. Y.
4. Burhop will stay on after the convention to fill in where needed.
4/24/
TENTATIVE BUDGET
BLACK VOTE DIVISION
Staff
Salary
Cost
Director (Jones)
- 4/7
$ 32,000
Secretary (Petross)
- 4/7
10,000
Assistant Dir.
- 5/15
21,000
Field Coordinator
- 5/15
18,000
Field Coordinator
- 6/1
18,000
Secretary
- 5/15
8,400
Total Staff
56,500
Payroll Burden
4,200
Staff Travel & Expenses
15,000
Consultants/Surrogates - fees & expenses*
12,500
Organization Meetings
6,000
Formation of Citizens Committee (mailings & brochures)
12,000
Meeting of key Black Leaders
3,000
Brochures
15,000
Newsletter
3,000
Contingency
10,000
Total
$ 137,200
* Consultants used in certain cities in place of field men - fees of $10,000
and expenses of $2, 500.
4/21/72
TENTATIVE BUDGET
ETHNICS DIVISION*
Staff
Salary
Cost
Director (
- 5/15
$ 30,000
Secretary
- 5/15
8,400
Asst. to Director
- 6/15
18,000
Fieldman
- 6/15
18,000
Fieldman
- 6/15
18,000
Fieldman
- 6/15
18,000
Fieldman
- 7/15
18,000
2 Secretaries
- 6/15
16,800
Total Staff
62,200
Payroll Burden
4,700
Staff Travel & Expenses
28,000
Consultants & Surrogates Travel
6,000
Organization Meetings
6,000
Field Meetings/Lxpenses
7,000
Special Mailings/Promotions
5,000
Total
$ 118,900
* Budget is highly tentative and will be finalized when campaign plan
is completed.
4/21/72
TENTATIVE BUDGET
AGRICULTURE DIVISION
Staff
Salary
Cost
Director (Yeutter)
- 4/7
$ 36,000
Asst. Director (Foltz)
- 4/7
27,000
Field Director (Madson)
- 4/7
20,000
Secretary (Haggert)
- 4/7
7,600
Secretary (Hill)
- 4/7
8,000
Fieldman
- 5/15
18,000
Fieldman*
- 6/1
18,000
Total Staff
134,600
74,700
PayroH Burden
5,600
Staff Travel & Expenses
31,000
Surrogate Travel
5,000
Organization Meetings
3,200
Field Meetings & State Chairmen Expenses
10,000
Special Mailings
4,000
Total
$ 133,500
4/21/7.
TENTATIVE BUDGET
JEWISH DIVISION
Staff
Salary
Cost
Director (Goldberg)
- 4/7
$ 32,000
Secretary (Peters)
- 4/17
10,000
Asst. Dir. (Greenwald)
- 4/10
24,000
Secretary (Cohen)
- 4/24
7,500
Fieldman (Abrams)
- 5/15
21,600
Total Staff
95,100
53,000
Payrell Burden
4,000
Staff Travel & Expenses
10,000
Consultant/Surregates Travel
7,000
Organization Meetings
5,000
Special Mailings
3,000
Total
$ 82,000
4/21/7
TENTATIVE BUDGET
OLDER AMERICANS DIVISION
Staff
Salary
Cost
Director (Todd)
- 4/7
$ 36,000
Secretary (Sedlak)
- 4/7
10,000
Field Dir. (Mills)
- 4/7
14,000
Fieldman (Todd)
. 4/7
12,500
Fieldman (Groom)
- 5/1
12,000
Secretary
. 5/1
8,500
Total Staff
93,000
52,000
Field Director
- 6/15
18,000
7,500
Payroll Burden
4,500
Staff Travel & Expenses
30,000
Surrogate Travel
5,000
Organization Meetings
5,000
Field Meetings/Dinners
5,000
Special Mailings/Promotion
5,000
Total
$ 114,000
4/21/71
TENTATIVE BUDGET
VITER NIT DIVISION
Staff
Salary
Cost
Director (Naylor)
- 4/7
30,000
Secretary
- 4/24
8,400
Fieldman & Asst. Dir.
- 5/15
24,000
Fieldman
- 6/1
18,000
Fieldman
- 8/1
18,000
Secretary
- 6/1
7,200
Secretary (part time)
1,200
Total Staff
51,700
Payroll Burden
3,900
Staff Travel & Expenses
16,500
Consultants/Surrogates expenses
16,000
Organization Meetings
5,000
Field Meetings/expenses
5,000
Promotional Items
6,000
Special Mailings
3,000
Total
$ 107,100
4/21/7
TENTATIVE BUDGET
LABOR DIVISION
Staff
Salary
Cost
Director
- 5/15
$ 30,000
Field Director
- 5/15
24,000
Fieldman
- 6/15
18,000
Fieldman
- 6/15
18,000
Secretary
- 5/15
9,000
Secretary
- 6/15
8,000
Total Staff
50,000
Payroll Burden
3,300
Staff Travel is Expenses
18,500
Consultants/Surrogates expenses
10,000
Organization Meetings
5,000
Field Meetings/expenses
5,000
Promotional Items
5,000
Special Mailings
3,000
Total
$ 100,300
4/24/71
TENTATIVE BUDGET
SPANISH SPEAKING DIVISION
Staff
Salary
Cost
Director (Armendariz)
- 4/7
$30,000
Secretary
- 4/7
8,000
Field Director (Gar
- 5/1
20,000
Fieldman (Mexican)
- 5/15
15,000
Fieldman (PR)
- 5/15
15,000
Asst. to Director
- 6/1
15,000
2 Secretaries
5/5/15
16,000
Total Staff
62,200
Payroll Burden
4,700
Staff Travel & Expenses
21,000
Consultants/Volunteer expenses
5,000
Organization Meetings
5,000
Field Meetings/Expenses
5,000
Special Brochures & Mailings
5,000
Contingency
10,000
Total
$ 117,900
5/2/72
TENTATIVE BUDGET
TRANSIENTS (SPECIAL BALLOTS)
Staff
Salary
Cost
Director (McAdoo)
- 4/15
$ 25,000
$14,500
Secretary
- 5/1
10,000
5,500
Western Field Man
- 6/15
13,000
7,500
Eastern Field Man
- 6/15
18,000
7,500
Total Staff
35,000
Staff Benefits/Overhead
2,600
Staff Tr:vel & Expenses
18,000
Printing & Materials
10,000
Total
65,600
5/4/72
TEN TATIEE BUDGET
BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY
Staff
Salary
Cost
Director (Kayser)
$ 60,000
Asst. Dir. (Fangboner
30,000
Asst. Dir. (Rocchio)
30,000
Admin. Asst. (Harper)
9,600
Secretary (Cochran)
9,600
Secretary (Koob)
8,000
Total Staff
147,200
90,000
Payroll Burden
6,800
Mailings
4,500
Field Kits
20,000
Staff Travel & Expenses
41,500
Organization Dinner
3,000
Regional Meetings
8,000
Visual Aids
10,000
Total
$ 183,800
4/24/7:
TENTATIVE BUDGET
CITIZENS - C IRAL & FUNC ICNAL GROUPS
Staff
Salary
Cost
Citizens Director (Shourer)
- 5/8
$ 36,000
Secretary
- 5/8
9,000
3 Asst. Directors
- 6/1
60,000
4 Secretaries
- 6/1
32,000
1 Executive Assistant
- 6/1
20,000
4 Part time Secretaries
- 7/1
6,000
Total Staff
73,500
Payroll Burden
5,500
National Citizens Crientation Expenses
5,000
Travel & Expenses for National Committee
5,000
Staff Travel & Expenses
20,000
Travel & Expenses - Consultants & Volunteers
30,000
Expenses for each of estimated 30 groups
Organization Dinners/meetings
- 1,000 X 30 =
30,000
Travel & Empenses for Chmn & Coms.
- 2,000 3 30 =
60,000
Mailings & Brochures
- 3,000 X 30 #
90,000
Total
$ 319,000
5/5/72
TENTATIVE BUDGET
VOLUNTEERS/WOMEN
Staff
Salary
Cost
Director (Hutar)
- 4/7
$ 25,000
$*15,000
Assistant (Steerts)
- 4/7
15,000
9,000
Assistant
- 6/1
18,000
8,300
PR Consultant
- 5/15
24,000
12,000
Secretary
- 4/7
8,400
5,500
Secretary
- 5/15
9,000
4,500
Secretary
- 9/1
8,400
1,500
3 Regional Field Dirs,
- 6/1
14,400
19,800
4 Regional Field Dirs.
- 7/1
14,400
21,600
Total Staff
97,200
Payroll Burden
7,300
Staff Travel & Expenses:
Hdqts Staff
18,000
Regional Dirs.
37,000
Volunteer Manual
6,000
Training Manual
5,000
Speakers Burcau
10,000
Volunteer sign-up cards for hospitality suites
1,000
Hospitality Suites:
Four regionals and June RNC meeting
3,000
Hospitality suite during RNC Leadership Conference
1,300
Salute to the President Luncheon (telephone hook-up
to luncheon sites
10,000
Letterheads and envelopes
4,000
Re-Election Canvass Team and Victory Squad Kits
5,000
Special volunteer recognition pins, insignia
for key leaders
10,000
Volunteer Newsletter
15,000
Total
$ 230,300
MEMORANDUM
DETERMIN
BE
AN
KING
THE WHITE HOUSE
6-102
Date 3-31-82
WASHINGTON
By EP
CONFIDENTIAL
June 5, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
H. R. HALDEMAN
FROM:
FRED MALEK 70m
SUBJECT:
Progress Report on Campaign
Activities
As we have discussed, it seems desirable to provide you with monthly
progress reports on my campaign-related activities. Since this is the
first report, it reviews overall progress and accomplishments for the
first several months as well as highlighting activities of the past month.
Particular focus is placed on major problems that we have encountered.
PROGRESS TO DATE
Initial Efforts
My initial efforts at 1701 were concentrated on developing an overall
concept for Citizens and Voting Bloc operations. Briefly, the concept
that I developed established two objectives for a 1701 Citizens group
activity: (1) Developing a national public relations effort aimed at
persuading members of a constituent group to vote for the President;
and (2) Assisting the State Nixon organizations in the establishment of
field organizations comprised of members of the particular constituent
group. A Citizens group organization within a state, in turn, has two
principal purposes: (1) To gain support for the President from the
members of that constituency both from word-of-mouth and the conduct
of special, persuasive programs; and (2) To provide workers for regular
campaign activities (voter identification, registration, get-out-the vote,
etc. ). The concept is developed more fully in the copy of a memorandum
to Mitchell at Tab A. Concurrently with the development of this concept,
I focused on completing the recruiting of Citizens Directors, the develop-
ment of plans and budgets, and the establishment of White House/1701
teamwork.
Recruiting. In the recruiting area, in addition to Directors already on
board when I arrived, I have added the following:
- 2 -
-- Chuck Shearer (Overall Citizens)
-- Dick McAdoo (Special Ballots - Transients)
-- Bill Stover (Physicians)
-- Dan Piliero (Lawyers)
-- Frank Naylor (Veterans)
-- Tony De Falco (Ethnics)
In addition, due to the combined efforts of Chuck Colson and myself,
Don Rodgers was brought on recently to cover the Labor constituency
both for the White House and 1701.
Plans and Budgets. Comprehensive campaign plans for all groups
except Ethnics and Labor have now been developed, and most of these
have been reviewed and approved by John Mitchell. Budgets have also
been developed and approved for all Citizens groups, as shown at Tab B.
Most of the groups are well into the implementation of their plans. At
this point in time, the Citizens Directors have' recruited fieldmen and
other necessary staff, and are concentrating on working with the
political coordinators and the States to develop functioning field organi-
zations. Many of the Citizens group State Chairmen have already been
selected. In a few key States, delay in the selection of the State Nixon
Chairmen has held up final selection of the State Citizens group Chair-
men. In those cases, I have told the Citizens Directors to proceed to
set up tentative organizations, contingent on the final approval of the
State Nixon Chairman, when he is chosen.
Teamwork. The area of fostering teamwork among the Voting Bloc
Directors, the related White House people (Colson's staff, Domestic
Council, Congressional Relations, etc.), and the RNC has been more
difficult.
To minimize unproductive competitive efforts (such as accusatory memo
writing), I have held regular meetings of each constituent group "team",
and tried to discuss problems openly. I feel we are making progress
here, although there will always be some bickering. The meeting at
Camp David (discussed later) was a particularly effective way of get-
ting the individuals to talk out mutual problems.
- 3 -
I feel for the most part that we now have fairly harmonious and effective
team efforts, although we are hampered by some personnel weaknesses
as will be discussed later. The most effective teams seem to be in
Spanish-Speaking, Older Americans, Veterans, and Agriculture.
Developments in May
Specific highlights of the past month include: (a) Viet Nam response
efforts; (b) Development of guidelines for State Chairmen; (c) Camp
David conference; (d) Campaign control system development; and (e)
Coordination of schedule proposals.
Viet Nam. The work of the Citizens/Voting Bloc groups in generating
a favorable response to the President's Viet Nam initiatives has been
well documented to you in other reports. The Citizens/Voting Bloc
directors and their staffs spent most of their time for a full week
generating telegrams and letters to the President, letters to key
Congressmen, and in organizing events (vigils, petitions, etc. ) to
demonstrate support for the President.
While these efforts set regular activities back a bit, the results appear
to have been more than worthwhile. Evidence of regional media cover-
age of the various events continues to come in, even at this late date.
Guidelines. The purpose and content of the various programs offered
at 1701 (Citizens/Voting Bloc groups, telephone, direct mail, etc.)
have never been adequately communicated to the State organizations by
the political division. To alleviate the confusion that exists in the field,
we are developing a set of guidelines describing each of the programs, its
national organization, a suggested State organization, and how the State
and national operations should relate. This set of guidelines will be com-
pleted next week and sent to each State Chairman. Then, beginning in the
middle of June, each State Chairman will be brought to Washington to
discuss the programs that apply to his State, and to develop a final
plan for State re-election activities.
To date, the Voter Blocs and other 1701 programs have always been at
a more advanced stage of development than the political division. Hope-
fully, the planning procedure will force the States to catch up.
- 4 -
Camp David Conference. As you know, I had the Voting Bloc Directors
and their counterparts from Colson's staff to Camp David for a one and
one-half day meeting last week. The conference was successful beyond
my expectations, both from a substantive and a morale/camaraderie
standpoint. A full report on the meeting is on its way to you.
Campaign Control System. Jerry Jones, now on my staff at 1701 as
Campaign Controller, spent most of May in California, developing a
reporting and control system by which campaign management will be
able to plan and control essential activities such as voter identification
and registration. I am currently in the process of reviewing the system,
and it is being pilot-tested in Orange County during the California Primary.
Bill Horton has provided considerable help on this and will continue as
part of Nofziger's staff (part-time) when he returns to California next
month.
We should have a finished product in the next couple of weeks, at which
time we will provide you with a complete description of the system.
Schedule Proposals.
Schedule proposal packages for the President
and First Family have been submitted for almost all of the voter blocs.
Labor is the sole exception, and now that Don Rodgers is on board, we
will work with him to develop proposals in this area. The proposals
cover 5 months and represent the combined efforts of 1701, Domestic
Council, and White House communications staff. We will keep Dave
Parker informed of any changes in priorities, and we look forward to
receiving feedback on the proposals already submitted.
PROBLEMS
Naturally, the campaign operation is not without problems. Five areas
that I consider to be of major concern are discussed below.
1. Ethnics. The ethnic constituent group will undoubtedly be
critical to our success in November. Unfortunately, Tony De Falco,
the individual we selected to head up the ethnic effort at 1701, turned
out to be not suited to the managerial role required of a voting bloc
director. He could not develop a plan for how we should attract the
ethnic vote, nor was he capable of structuring the requisite national
organization. The situation was compounded by the fact that Mike
Balzano, the ethnic project manager on Colson's staff, is not a
- 5 -
planner or manager, either.
To solve the problem, I have releived De Falco, and am in the process
of recruiting for a new Director, with a target date of July 1. To
ensure that we do not lose much time, we have already hired a Special
Assistant to the Director (John Wirth) who will begin Monday to analyze
the ethnic demographics and to develop a campaign strategy and plan.
Hopefully, by the time the Director is on board, much of the planning
work will be done, and he can turn his energies immediately to field
organization.
2. Blacks. Though certainly less important than the ethnics, weak-
ness in the 1701/White House/RNC Black team is also a matter of con-
cern to me. The extent of the incompetence has become apparent in the
poor planning of the June 10 Black $100-a-plate fundraiser at the Statler
Hilton. Hopefully, the dinner will be escued from complete failure, but
this will not alleviate my worries about a group that thinks that conducting
registration drives in Bedford-Stuyvesant would be a good idea.
The primary long-range problem is lack of political experience, result-
ing nusatisfactory progress in field-orgnization. Our team just does
not know how to organize Black leadership in key urban areas and shows
no signs of being able to put together the strong organized efforts that
we needed in the Black areas of these cities. I have concluded that Paul
Jones (hired at 1701 last January) is simply the wrong man for the job,
but we may be stuck with him at this time. Bob Brown has provided only
limited support -- he seems to be all rhetoric but little action and follow up.
We are taking steps to rectify this, and John Clarke is helping me further
analyze the situation and develop suggested courses of action. I hope
to have this completely planned out by 6/10 with corrective actions begin-
ning immediately. Even though the Blacks might not represent a sig-
nigicant vote, our effort to get this vote is highly visible, and there is
certainly some potential there.
- 6 -
3. Business and Industry. The Director of the Business and
Industry effort, Paul Kayser, was hired by the Committee before
I arrived. He has been an irritation, and has shown consistent
poor judgment in the development of programs and the use of
resources. Kayser, a former Pepsico Vice President, feels
that he is outside the campaign structure and can run around me
to Don Kendall (the Chairman), which he has done with at least
partial success on a couple of occasions.
This is a problem I will probably have to endure, although I hope
to alleviate the programmatic weakness by working Cliff White into
the Business and Industry area when he comes on board as a con-
sultant next week.
4. PR Support. Lack of coordination of PR for some of the Viet
Nam related events and slowness in development of communications
plans for the Citizens groups have surfaced a weakness in the PR
area at both 1701 and the White House.
At 1701, the problem seems to be lack of manpower -- only 11/2
persons are assigned to do the PR for all of the Citizens groups.
This is simply not enough to accomplish all that needs to be done,
and after discussion of this problem at Camp David, we have obtained
Jeb's agreement to hire two more full-time people to concentrate on
Citizens PR.
At the White House, the problem seems to be somewhat different.
Several of the White House project managers (e.g., Cohen, Evans,
and Balzano) are incredibly weak on public relations and have not
been doing the job. The problem is they are simply not experienced
or able enough to handle the communications responsibility without
support. Consequently, I intend to recommend to Colson that he
have Bill Rhatican, who is one of his ablest people in this area,
delegate his specific responsibility for Veterans, and instead work
with all of the project managers on public relations and communica-
tions.
- 7 -
5. Organizational Relationships. A final major problem area involves
development of the relationship between the Citizens/Voting Bloc groups
and the State organizations. As discussed above, the basic concept is
that the national Citizens organizations exist to serve the States. How-
ever, while recognizing the final authority of the Nixon State Chairman
within his State, we must nevertheless ensure that he gives full consid-
eration to programs developed by the Citizens Group directors for use
within the States. Unfortunately, several State Chairmen have not
cooperated with the Citizens Group directors, preferring instead to
institut their own programs.
Unfortunately, the state organizations have suffered from weak leader-
ship and lack of direction from Washington, and they are far behind all
program activities. The reorganization of states under five political
coordinators will help, but it will take time for them to really gain
control. Until the political division was reorganized, the only appeal
for a Citizens group Director was to Flemming, who was not very
helpful, or through me to Mitchell, who obviously does not have the
time to deal with such minor matters.
The reorganization of the political division should help to solve this
problem. Mitchell has made it very clear to the political coordinators
that they are expected to reinforce the position of the Citizens group
Directors with the State Chairmen, and ensure that appropriate pro-
gram are implemented. Also, I imagine that some of our present
problems result from Flemming not adequately communicating the
Citizens group concept to the State Chairmen. This should be remedied
by the Guidelines and planning sessions that were discussed above.
NEXT STEPS
While problems do exist, my overall impression is that the campaign
organization is basically sound, and is reasonably on target. Jeb in my
opinion is doing a good job with all the support activities, and he and I
are working quite well together as a team. During the next month, in
addition to day-to-day management of the Citizens Groups, I plan to focus
on the following priority areas:
-- Making certain that the ethnic effort is on track and the Black
problems rectified.
- 8 -
-- Preparing for and participating in the discussions with
State Chairmen regarding the Citizens group guidelines.
-- Finalizing the campaign control system.
I will send you another overall progress report at the end of June.
In addition, I will pass on to you items of special interest, as they arise.
Attachments
Tab A
--
Camp. Sin cit
March 1, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
JOHN MITCHELL
FROM:
FRED MALEK
SUBJECT:
Preliminary Citizens Campaign
Strategy
The purpose of this memorandum is to review my preliminary strategy and
plans for the Citizens/Voting Bloc organizations. General campaign plans
covering each voting bloc are being prepared and will be submitted to you
over the next several weeks. I feel it is important, however, to have a
unifying strategy that binds the individual plans together and provides a
framework for operation.
OBJECTIVES AND STRATEGY OF CITIZENS ACTIVITIES
Objectives. The most important objective is to gain the favor cf broad
blocs of voters by demonstrating convincingly the President's understanding
of and interest in their problems and by publicizing his accomplishments
and initlatives in areas of major concern to them. The secondary objective
is to increase enthusiasm for and interest in the Nixon campaign among
particular funcgional groups and to thereby provide manpower to assist in
overall State compaign efforts. In many cases this will include canvassing,
registration, and get-out-the-vote drives under the direction of the State
Nizon Chairman.
Stretegy. We should set priorities and devote the major part of our re-
sources on those voting groups with the greatest pay-off potential. Conse-
quently, groups are divided into two categories: a dozen major voting blocs
(c.g., olderly, ethnics) and some fifty small functional groups (c.g., dentists
and scientists). Our major emphasis will, of course, be on the major voting
blocs in order to convince them to vote for the President and to enlist their
support in the campaign. The effort expended on the functional groups will
be focused on obtaining manpower support for the campaign.
Also, priorities should be set between major voting blocs in order to
guide resource decisions, management attention, and White House and Presi-
dential efforts. Top priority should be devoted to those groups:
-- Which are large or important beyond their national average
in key States.
- 2 -
-- Where the issues and accomplishments are favorable and
a special effort can be instrumental in either attracting or re-
taining votes for the President.
Based on these criteria, the blocs singled out for top priority and
second priority attention are outlined below. of course, these are only gen-
eral guidelines 20 the priority requirements in each State will vary (0.8.,
Spanish-speaking will be a top priority in Texas and California).
Top Priority
Second Priority
Group
Voters (millions)
Group
Voters (millions)
Youth
25
Transients
6
Older Americans
20
Labor
26
Ethnics
40
Spanish-Speaking
6
Farm
5
Black
7.5
Women*
Jewish
3.5
Business
3
Veterans
28
Agree
Disagree
One additional voting bloc warrants your attention: Catholics, who are
ostimated to comprise nearly 30% of the expected voters. There are seemingly
no commanding reasons for Catholics to vote against the President, and he is
on the right side of the germane issues (e.g., aid to parochial schools and
abortion). Yet, most polls show Catholics supporting the President's opponents.
In past campaigns there has never been a separate effort to attract the Catholic
vote as the Ethnics group usually encompasses it. This year, however, we
may want to mount a distinct Catholic campaign under a different name. My
recommendation is that I study this issue and present a proposal to you if I
feel this group should also be singled out for top or secondary priority.
Agree
Disagree
*Women effort under Pat Hutar not an Integral part of Citizens but is included
here as there will be close coordination with this effort.
- 3 -
Most of the voting bloc and functional groups will have programs in
all States. However, the degree of emphasis will vary so as to concentrate
on the largest voting blocs in each State and on those most apt to be swayed.
Also, a much greater proportional effort will be made in the large key States
such as California and Illinois. This will range down to a minimal effort in
the smallest States such as Rhode Island or Wyoming where the outcome is
already fairly clear.
Planning. To effectively integrate Citizens into the campaign, it
will be important to involve Voting Bloc Directors in the planning process.
As pointed out earlier, general campaign plans are being prepared now for
various voting blocs. Later, the Voting Bloc Director should participate
with Bob Marik and the State Nixon Chairman in developing that part of the
State Victory Plan pertaining to his area. These State plans would then
govern his and his organization's activities for the remainder of the campaign.
Agree
Disagree
ORGANIZATION
National. Ao we have discussed, a National Citizens Director will be
brought in to organize and ride herd on the many functional groups and to
assist in managing voter bloc operations. In addition, I estimate 3 - 4
medium level Assistants will be needed to develop and control the 50 or so
functional groups. Edward Nixon will function as a top level assistant to the
National Director and me, undertaking key projects of sensitivity and coun-
seling with National Chairmen and Committee members.
Each voting bloc group will have a full-time Director along with some
support staff. Directors are already on board for 8 of these groups, and
they are shown, along with target hiring dates for the remaining 4, at Tab A.
Budgeta are currently being prepared for each voting bloc group, and the size
of staff for each group will vary with the size of target and complexity of
mission. Overall, I intend to keep the staffs small with most added pro-
fessionals devoted to field support.
A prominent National Citizens Chairman and broadly representative
National Citizens Committee will be formed ostensibly to oversee all of the
voting bloc and functional group activities. Of course, the Dale Committee
will remain the major overall committee. Recommended names for the
Citizens Committee will be submitted to you for approval. Similarly, Chair-
men and Committees will be formed for all the Voting Bloc groups and most of
the Citizens functional groups. We plan to maintain tight control over all
Chairmen and their committees.
Agree
Disagree
- a -
State. In conjunction with the State Nixon Chairman, a Chairman
and Committee will be formed in each State for most of the Voting Bloc and
functional groups. Criteria for selection will be similar to that at the national
level. In keeping with holding the State Nixon Chairman accountable for re-
sults in his State, the State Voting Bloc Chairmen (o.g., State Older
Americans Chairman) would be selected jointly by the State Nixon Chair-
man and the National Voting Bloc Director. He would report directly to the
State Nixon Chairman and receive functional/programmatic guidance from
the National Director as long as this guidance is not inconsistent with the
State Victory Plan. In some cases it may be necessary to hire a full-time
State Director for a major voting bloc (e.g., Spanish-Speaking in California).
This would be decided in conjunction with the State Nixon Chairman and would
come out of his State budget.
Since Citizens is integrated into the Campaign, in most cases there
will be no need for an overall Citizens Chairman at the State level. In some
States, however, where the registration is largely Democratic and where
the Nixon group is not broadly representative, we may consider an overall
Citizens Chairman and Committee. In these cases the Citizens Chairman
would report (although not visibly) to the State Nixon Chairman, would not
have authority over the Voting Bloc Chairmen, and would be primarily
oriented toward public relations. We are currently studying this concept
further, and any specific decisions would be made in collaboration with the
State Nixon Chairman.
Agree
Disagree
OPERATING TIMETABLE
More detailed operating plans are being developed for each voting bloc and
will later be developed for each functional group. The following are the major
general steps to be taken and the approximate time period for completion.
For Voting Bloc Groups
Time Period
Step
for Completion
1.
Complete staffing of National Directors
4/1 - 4/15
2.
Complete General Campaign Plans for each
Voting Bloc and begin operating programs*
3/15 - 5/1
*Youth program well underway. Some activity in other arcas, but full
programs not yet underway.
- 5 -
3.
Select California Chairman and complete
3/31
plans for primary activity for selected
groups**
4.
Select National Citizens Chairman and Com-
mittee
5/1
5.
Select National Chairman and Committee for
each Voting Bloc
5/1 - 5/15
6.
Select State Chairman and Committee for
each Voting Bloc and begin State organization
efforts
5/1 # 5/15
7.
Begin mounting specific programs in selected
areas of each State in conjunction with State
organizations
6/1
For Citizens Functional Grouns***
Time Period
Step
for Completion
1.
1.
Bring on National Citizens Director
3/17
2.
Designate States where overall Citizens
Committee needed
4/15
3.
Determine functional groups desired
4/15
4.
Select National Chairman and Committee
for each group
5/1 - 6/1
5.
Develop plans for each group
5/15 - 6/30
6.
Select overall Chairmen and Committee in
States where desired
6/1 - 6/15
**Part of tentative California primary plan includes certain amount of activity
and testing by 3 - 4 voting bloc groups.
***Some groups such as lawyers and physicians are on an accelerated
schedule.
- 6 -
7.
Select State Chairmen and Committee for
each group
6/1 - 7/15
8.
Begin organizational efforts
6/1 - 7/15
Attachment
Tab B
TENTATIVE BUDGET
VOTING BLOCS AND CITIZENS
Old
New
Group
Estimate (3/7)
Estimate
Youth
$401,000
$298,000
Business & Industry
199,000
184,000
Black Vote
153,000
137,000
Ethnics
106,000
119,000
Older Americans
118,000
114,000
Agriculture
117,000
134,000
Spanich Speaking
103,000
118,000
Veterans
101,000
107,000
Labor
93,000
100,000
Jewish
77,000
82,000
Transients
62,000
66,000
Lawyers
37,000
37,000
Physicians
26,000
26,000
Educators
0
35,000
Women
204,000
230,000
Voters Rights
109,000
109,000
Citizens General and
Functional Groups
350,000
319,000
Total
$2,461,000
$2,215,000
4/24/72
TENTATIVE BUDGET
YOUTH DIVISION
Staff
Salary
Cost
Present Staff (per carlier schedule)
$ 98,000
Wisc. Fieldman (Krueger)
- 4/7
10,500
6,200
Border States Fieldman (Davis)
- 4/7
10,000
5,800
Penn. Fieldman
- 5/15
12,000
6,000
Ohio Fieldman
- 5/15
12,000
6,000
Farm States Fieldman
- 6/1
12,000
5,500
Midwest Director
- 5/15
18,000
9,000
Rocky Mtn. & Northwest
Fieldman (Wigger)
- 5/15
7,800
4,000
Convention staff man (Burkop)
- 5/1
7,800
4,400
Convention secretary
- 5/1
7,200
2,400
Convention staff man
- 5/1
7,200
1,800
Convention secretary
- 6/1
7,200
1,800
Convention staff man
- 7/1
7,200
1,200
4 Field secretaries
- 5/15
3,000
12,000
Total Staff
164,100
Payroll Burden
10,900
Staff Travel & Expenses
60,000
Rent & Supplies for State Hdqtrs.
10,000
Convention - Buses & Events
21,000
Special Brochures & Buttons
12,000
State Chmn Travel & Expenses
5,000
Organization Meetings
5,000
Misc. Mailings & Promotional Items
10,000
Total
$ 298,000
Notes to Youth Budget:
1. Cabbway (South) or Davis (Border States) will be transferred
to another area effective 6/15. The remaining man will cover the
entire Southeast.
2. Wigger will remain in Oregon until the primary. He will then
focus on Washington and all Rocky Mtn. States as well until the
election.
3. N. Y. contingency - in event State does not add 2 full-time
fieldmen as expected, we may want to add our own fieldman to
assist in N. Y.
4. Burhop will stay on after the convention to fill in where needed.
4/24/
TENTATIVE BUDGET
BLACK VOTE DIVISION
Staff
Salary
Cost
Director (Jones)
- 4/7
$ 32,000
Secretary (Petross)
- 4/7
10,000
Assistant Dir.
- 5/15
21,000
Field Coordinator
- 5/15
18,000
Field Coordinator
- 6/1
18,000
Secretary
- 5/15
8,400
Total Staff
56,500
Payroll Burden
4,200
Staff Travel & Expenses
15,000
Consultants/Surrogates - fees & expenses*
12,500
Organization Meetings
6,000
Formation of Citizens Committee (mailings & brochures)
12,000
Meeting of key Black Leaders
3,000
Brochures
15,000
Newsletter
3,000
Contingency
10,000
Total
$ 137,200
* Consultants used in certain cities in place of field men - fees of $10,000
and expenses of $2, 500.
4/21/72
TENTATIVE BUDGET
ETHNICS DIVISION*
Staff
Salary
Cost
Director (
- 5/15
$ 30,000
Secretary
- 5/15
8,400
Asst. to Director
- 6/15
18,000
Fieldman
- 6/15
18,000
Fieldman
- 6/15
18,000
Fieldman
- 6/15
18,000
Fieldman
of 7/15
18,000
2 Secretaries
- 6/15
16,800
Total Staff
62,200
Payroll Burden
4,700
Staff Travel & Expenses
28,000
Consultants & Surregates Travel
6,000
Organization Meetings
6,000
Field Moetings/Expenses
7,000
Special Mailings/Promotions
5,000
Total
$ 118,900
* Budget is highly tentative and will be finalized when campaign plan
is completed.
4/21/78
TENTATIVE BUDGET
AGRICULTURE DIVISION
Staff
Salary
Cost
Director (Yeutter)
- 4/7
$ 36,000
Asst. Director (Foltz)
- 4/7
27,000
Field Director (Madson)
- 4/7
20,000
Secretary (Haggert)
- 4/7
7,600
Secretary (Hill)
- 4/7
8,000
Fieldman
- 5/15
18,000
Fieldman*
- 6/1
18,000
Total Staff
134,600
74,700
PayroH Burden
5,600
Staff Travel & Expenses
31,000
Surrogate Travel
5,000
Organization Meetings
3,200
Field Meetings & State Chairmen Expenses
10,000
Special Mailings
4,000
Total
$ 133,500
4/21/7
TENTATIVE BUDGET
JEWISH DIVISION
Staff
Salary
Cost
Director (Goldberg)
- 4/7
$ 32,000
Secretary (Peters)
- 4/17
10,000
Asot. Dir. (Greenwald)
- 4/10
24,000
Secretary (Cohen)
- 4/24
7,500
Fieldman (Abrams)
- 5/15
21,600
Total Staff
95,100
53,000
Payroll Burden
4,000
Staff Travel & Expenses
10,000
Consultant/Surregates Travel
7,000
Organization Meetings
5,000
Special Mailings
3,000
Total
$ 82,000
4/21/7
TENTATIVE BUDGET
OLDER AMERICANS DIVISION
Staff
Salary
Cost
Director (Todd)
- 4/7
$ 36,000
Secretary (Sedlak)
- 4/7
10,000
Field Dir. (Mills)
- 4/7
14,000
Fieldman (Todd)
- 4/7
12,500
Fieldman (Groom)
- 5/1
12,000
Secretary
- 5/1
8,500
Total Staff
93,000
52,000
Field Director
- 6/15
18,000
7,500
Payroll Burden
4,500
Staff Travel & Expenses
30,000
Surrogate Travel
5,000
Organization Meetings
5,000
Field Meetings/Dinners
5,000
Special Mailings/Promotion
5,000
Total
$ 114,000
4/21/72
TENTATIVE BUDGET
VITER NY DIVISION
Staff
Salary
Cost
Director (Naylor)
- 4/7
30,000
Secretary
- 4/24
8,400
Fieldman & Asst. Dir.
- 5/15
24,000
Fieldman
- 6/1
18,000
Fieldman
- 8/1
13,000
Secretary
- 6/1
7,200
Secretary (part time)
1,300
Total Staff
51,700
Payroll Burden
3,900
Staff Travel & Expenses
16,500
Consultants/Surrogates expenses
16,000
Organization Meetings
5,000
Field Meetings/expenses
5,000
Promotional Items
6,000
Special Mailings
3,000
Total
$ 107,100
4/21/7
TENTATIVE BUDGET
LABOR DIVISION
Staff
Salary
Cost
Director
- 5/15
$ 30,000
Field Director
- 5/15
24,000
Fieldman
- 6/15
18,000
Fieldman
- 6/15
18,000
Secretary
- 5/15
9,000
Secretary
- 6/15
8,000
Total Staff
50,000
Payroll Burden
3,300
Staff Travel & Expenses
18,500
Consultents/Surrogates expenses
10,000
Organization Meetings
5,000
Field Meetings/expenses
5,000
Promotional Items
5,000
Special Mailings
3,000
Total
$ 100,300
4/24/71
TENTATIVE BUDGET
SPANJSH SPEAKING DIVISION
Staff
Salary
Cost
Director (Armendariz)
- 4/7
$30,000
Secretary
- 4/7
8,000
Field Director (Gar
- 5/1
20,000
Fieldman (Mexican)
- 5/15
15,000
Fieldman (PR)
- 5/15
15,000
Asst. to Director
- 6/1
15,000
2 Secretaries
5/5/15
16,000
Total Staff
62,200
Payroll Burden
4,700
Staff Travel & Expenses
21,000
Consultants/Volunteer expenses
5,000
Organization Meetings
5,000
Field Meetings/Expenses
5,000
Special Brochures & Mailings
5,000
Contingency
10,000
Total
$ 117,900
5/2/72
TENTATIVE BUDGET
TRANSIENTS (SPECIAL BALLOTS)
Staff
Salary
Cost
Director (McAdoo)
- 4/15
$ 25,000
$14,500
Secretary
- 5/1
10,000
5,500
Western Field Man
- 6/15
18,000
7,500
Eastern Field Man
- 6/15
18,000
7,500
Total Staff
35,000
Staff Benefits/Overhead
2,600
Staff Travel & Expenses
18,000
Printing & Materials
10,000
Total
65,600
5/4/72
TEN TATIEE BUDGET
BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY
Staff
Salary
Cost
Director (Kayser)
$ 60,000
Asnt. Dir. (Fangboner
30,000
Asst. Dir. (Rocchio)
30,000
Admin. Asst. (Harper)
9,600
Secretary (Cochran)
9,600
Secretary (Koob)
8,000
Total Staff
147,200
90,000
Payroll Burden
6,800
Mailings
4,500
Field Kits
20,000
Staff Travel & Expenses
41,500
Organization Dinner
3,000
Regional Meetings
8,000
Visual Aids
10,000
Total
$ 183,800
4/24/77
TENTATIVE BUDGET
CITIZENS - GENERAL is FUN NAL GROUPS
Staff
Salary
Cost
Citizens Director (Shourer)
- 5/8
$ 36,000
Secretary
- 5/8
9,000
3 Asst. Directors
- 6/1
60,000
4 Secretaries
- 6/1
32,000
1 Executive Assistant
- 6/1
20,000
4 Part time Secretaries
- 7/1
6,000
Total Staff
73,500
Payroll Burden
5,500
National Citizens Orientation Expenses
5,000
Travel & Expenses for National Committee
5,000
Staff Travel &: Expenses
20,000
Travel & Expenses - Consultants & Volunteers
30,000
Expenses for each of estimated 30 groups
Organization Dinners/mestings
- 1,000 X 30 =
30,000
Travel & Empenses for Chmn & Coms.
- 2,000 X 30 =
60,000
Mailings & Brochures
- 3,000 X 30 #
90,000
Total
$ 319,000
5/5/72
TENTATIVE BUDGET
VOLUNTEERS/WOMEN
Staff
Salary
Cost
Director (Hutar)
- 4/7
$ 25,000
$*15,000
Assistant (Steerts)
- 4/7
15,000
9,000
Assistant
- 6/1
18,000
8,300
PR Consultant
- 5/15
24,000
12,000
Secretary
- 4/7
8,400
5,500
Secretary
- 5/15
9,000
4,500
Secretary
- 9/1
8,400
1,500
3 Regional Field Dirs.
- 6/1
14,400
19,800
4 Regional Field Dirs.
- 7/1
14,400
21,600
Total Staff
97,200
Payroll Burden
7,300
Staff Travel & Expenses:
Hdgts Staff
18,000
Regional Dirs.
37,000
Volunteer Menual
6,000
fraining Manual
5,000
Speakers Burcau
10,000
Volunteer sign-up cards for hospitality suites
1,000
Hospitality Suites:
Four regionals and June RNC meeting
3,000
Hospitality suite during RNC Leadership Conference
1,300
Salute to the President Luncheon (telephone hook-up
to luncheon sites
10,000
Letterheads and envelopes
4,000
Re-Election Canvass Team and Victory Squad Kits
5,000
Special volunteer recognition pins, insignia
for key leaders
10,000
Volunteer Newsletter
15,000
Total
$ 230,300
June 8, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
II. R. HALDEMAN
FROM:
GORDON STRACHAN
SUBJECT:
Mitchell Polatical Meeting --
June 7, 1972
Mitchell met with Magruder, Malek, LaRue, Marik, and
Teeter to discuss the political situation in light of
McGovern's victories and situation June 6, 1972. Subjects
discussed were:
1) Mitchell mentioned he just had had lunch with the
Wednesday Senate Group (Percy and other liberal Republican
Senators). Scott and Griffin attended. According to
Mitchell there was general euphoria about a possible
McGovern candidacy. Most believe McGovern at the top of
the Democratic ticket could be very helpful to Republicans
running for House and Senate Seats.
This view was confirmed by Senator "Fritz" Hollings
(D-S.C.) who is advising all candidates to run their own
campaigns and to avoid McGovern. Mitchell is concerned
about resulting complacency in the state organizations,
as well as White House Staffers.
2) Mitchell asked the group to develop a political
line emphasizing that either the Democratic Party or
McGovern will have to modify policy positions, that Humphrey
made a remarkable recovery; and that the election would be
close because Republicans are a minority party. The state-
ment is attached at Tab A and has been distributed pursuant
to Mitchell's directions, to the White House Staff by Dent,
the campaign committee by Magruder, and the Administration
spokesmen by Bart Porter.
3) Mitchell is having a detailed precinct analysis of
the Jewish, black, and chicano vote prepared by the cam-
paign's demographer, Art Finkelstein;
- 2 -
4) Mitchell is directing a covert, well-financed
program, headed by Democrate, to explain McGovern's
"extreme positions to labor, veterans, and Jewish voters.
The goal is to keep the Democrats fighting for the nomi-
nation, though realizing McGovern has it, and hopefully
acquiring these voting blocs in November;
5) Mitchell believes the substantive issue spokes-
men (e.g. Laird and Rogers) can appropriately comment on
the differences between the Administration's stands and
McGovern's. However, he directed Magruder and Miller to
meet with Tom Wilck and John Lofton to assure that Monday
only comments on the Democrats, not on McGovern or Humphrey.
6) Mitchell directed the campaign to focus on McGovern
on the big issues (national defense, welfare, and taxes).
Mitchell believes if the 3 A's of Scott (acid, amnesty, and
abortion) can be marginally effective in certain areas and
among certain groups only.
I reviewed with Bob Marik the ghree previous meetings held
before I was invited. They covered the Teeter First Wave
polling analysis submitted to you on May 11, 1972. Marik
had prepared a summary of the comments, which is attached
at Tab B.
GS/jb
THE Worrd House
WASHINCTON
June 8, 1972
TO:
WHITE HOUSE STAFF
FROM:
HARRY S. DENT
Attached for your information is
an assessment of the situation at
the conclusion of the Presidential
primaries. This statement should
serve as your guidance for the
campaign between now and the time
that the Democrat nominee is
finally selected or some new
position develops.
':' CONCERSION OF PRIMARIES
LY SH P.M. C." CN DELLCTOR
COMPLETE TC THE NEW CTION OF THE PRESIDENT
The Deposit Party appears to be approaching a crossroads. Although
it is not U.nt S.n. Coorge McGovern will be the Democrat Party's
Presidential notince this year, the choices available to the National
Convention are rapidly narrowing.
And if Senator McGovern is the nominee, one of two things is going
to have to occt : either the Democrat Party is going to have to accept
Senator McGovern's views on domestic, defense and foreign policy -- views
which many Democrats find extreme -- or Senator McGovern is going to have
to modify his views to conform with the mainstream of his party.
The seriousness with which many Democrats look upon Senator
McGovern's positions is reflected in Senator Humphrey's strong finish in
the California Primary. In the space of one week, Senator Humphrey reduced
the McGovern lead from the 20 percent shown in a widely-read public opinion
poll just a for days ago to the 5 percent which actually separated the
two mon when the votes were counted. If the primary had been held two or
three days later, Senator Humphrey may well have won.
Again, although Senator McGovern ran an extememly expensive media
campaign, a majority of California Democrats voted for someone else. Thus,
the Democrat presidential no: ination has by no means been decided.
In any case, no natter who the oventual nominee is, the Committee fo:
the Re-election of the President is preparing a maximum effort on behalf of
the President this fall. We-raust never Jone sight of the fact that the
Republics .1 Party is a minority party and that a coulition of Republicans,
Dember US i...' Independents will in no led to re-elect President Mixon in
the general election, a geal 10 will reach.
Committee for the Re-election of the President
MEMORANDUM
May 24, 1972
FIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR:
ROBERT TEETER
FROM:
BOB MARIK
SUBJECT:
Comments on the First Wave Analysis
This memorandum summarizes the important comments made by the Strategy
Group in their discussion of your analysis of the first wave of polling.
Although your mathematical analysis showed past party voting behavior
to be a stronger variable than demographic grouping, it was still felt
that the campaign strategy should be oriented to some degree around
the important voter blocs. In particular, the idea was raised of
seeking an appropriate sample of pivotal voter groups and tracking the
attitudes of that group by monthly surveys up to the election. This
information would be used to augment the state-by-state data which
would be developed through the existing polling plan. Two groups
which should be tracked in this manner are urban ethnics (potential
shift to Nixon), and upper income White suburbanites (potential shift
to McGovern).
In the statistical analysis, the Group also commented on the substantial
variation of important factors among the states. For example, Party
Type had 21% influence in California and only 6% in Ohio. The question
was raised as to whether the nation-wide analysis is useful for strategy
development or whether it would have to be approached state by state.
The Group was concerned that the questionnaire be framed in such a way
that the important issues could be identified and their intensity measured
perhaps more sharply in the first wave. In particular, the question was
raised as to whether the apparent importance of busing in Florida and
Michigan vas accurately reflected in the first wave results. The analysis
recommended that issues such as crime, drugs and unerployment should not
be emphanized except to perticular audiences and when we had an impressive
story to tell. lic will want to get into that strategy more deeply when
the advertising program is developed in dotail.
The feeling of the group was that the President's support among young
voters wight well be higher than was implied in your MOMO. This can
be checked with the second vave results.
CONVIDENTIAL
- 2 -
There was agreement that the ticket-splitter analysis should be done
and would be useful as a tool to guide campaign strategy. There was
disagreement with the statement that no special effort needs to be
made to register older voters. Newly retired people are often transient
and may well represent a fertile area for registration canvassing
activities.
There was disagreement on the comment that registration drives among
young voters should be stopped as we have discussed in detail in last
week's meeting.
There was agreement with the point that we should attempt to build as
large a lead as possible between now and the national conventions. Our
activities, should be geared to push McGovern to the left before he
becomes well known to the voting public. The specific tactics need
to be developed over the next few weeks.
It was mentioned that one important issue was general unrest. It would
be useful if a clearer definition could be established of what is on
the voters mind when they discuss the issue cluster of general unrest.
Finally, as we discussed over the telephone, it would be useful for us
to devote a portion of a meeting in the near future to a presentation
by you of the techniques used in the survey program and the significance
of the information that is being obtained. With that background, our
future discussions would be much more fruitful.
CONFIDENTIAL
Committee for the Re-election of the President
MEMORANDUM
May 11, 1972
CONFIDENTIAL/EYES ONLY
MEMORANDUM FOR:
THE HONORABLE JOHN N. MITCHELL
FROM:
ROBERT M. TEETER
SUBJECT:
Final First Wave Analysis
During the past several weeks we have analyzed the first wave
polling results utilizing a number of the most advanced statistical
techniques available. This analysis has enabled us to identify
the most important independent variables which influence presi-
dential vote and to develop a very sophisticated analysis package
which can be run and interpreted rapidly on all of our subsequent
polling.
While it is not necessary to have knowledge of these techniques in
order to use the results, I would be happy to go over them in more
detail with you anytime.
Our conclusions from this analysis are:
1. Past party voting behavior is the single most important factor
which affects the presidential vote. The classification of voters
into behavioral Republicans, Democrats, or Ticket-splitters accounts
for almost three times as much of the variance why people vote for
or against the President as is explained by any other variable.
This appears to be particularly true in Wisconsin, Indiana, and
California.
2. The next most important factors affecting the Presidential
vote are the voters perceptions of the President's trust and his
issue handling cbility. Trust is best defined by the following
variables -- honesty, open minded, and just. Seemingly, these
personality traits are related to perceptions of credibility. To
a lesser degree the presidential vote is related to perceptions of
competence -- experienced, trained, and informed.
Most voters have a general perception of how well the President
handles issues and problems overall and that appears to be more
important to voting than is their perception of his handling of
any one or two insues. This overall issue handling ability seems
to be perceived by the voters as a single personality Jimension
similar in many ways to the dimensions of trust, competence, etc.
-2-
The only individual issues which appear to have any significant
independent effect on voting are Vietnam inflation, and general
?
unrest, Vietnam and inflation were also, fortunately, the issues
that the President was seen as handling well, and his ability to
handle the general unrest problem was rated about equally to that
of his opponents.
Those issues on which the President is rated relatively poorly --
?
crime, drugs, and (unceployment) -- do not appear to affect presidential
voting to any major degree. This is particularly true of crime and
unemployment. Apparently the President is seen as having done a
good job on those problems that the voters think have gotten better
overall, while he is seen as having done a poor job on those pro-
blems which have become worse during the last few years. There
also appears to be little believability that the President will
make much difference in the crime or drug problems.
malek
3. Demographic bloc voting is significantly less important than
past party voting behavior, and less important than perceptions of
the candidates trust, competence, and issue handling ability. Once
party behavior is taken into account there is little difference in
the vote for various demographic groups. In other words, differences
in the rate that various demographic groups support Nixon can be
explained almost entirely by party preferences rather than member-
ship in any particular demographic group. The factors having some
but small effect on the vote are age, income, and education. Gen-
erally speaking, voters who are older, have higher incomes, and
have more education seem to have a greater propensity to vote for
the President, primarily because of their propensity to vote Repub-
lican more than as a result of their demographic group. Bloc voting
against the President is evident only with a limited number of
groups -- blacks, young voters (18 to 25 year olds especially in
California), and Jewish voters in New York. All appear to oppose
the President to a greater degree than would be predicted by their
past voting behavior or party preference.
It appears to be possible to improve the vote for the President in
several demographic groups where he is weak. We have made these
conclusions from our analysis of the data from the individual voting
blocs:
A. Older voters (60 years and over) are the single
most important group in the election. In Missouri
and Oregon, the President is especially weak. Taxes,
inflation, and the economy are the important issues.
B. The President is running very poorly with young voters
(18 to 24). Heavy turnout and registration by this
group could be devastating. The percentage of Repub-
lican support among youth is very small. Vietnam and
the economy are the issues. We have special weakness
in California and Wisconsin.
-3-
C. The vote for Nixon among blacks varies greatly. The
President is running well with this group in the south,
the border states, and New Jersey and New York. There
is a severe credibility problem and racial appeals to
this group are unlikely to work. Pocketbook issues will
be important.
D. Spanish-Americans are supporting the President to a
greater degree than expected. The support appears to
be flexible. We could expect to improve our support
with this group by at least 15% in California.
E. Ethnic support in Philadelphia is very weak and seems to
be causing our poor showing there.
4. The importance of each of the vote determining factors varies
considerably from state to state. Generally, the relative importance
of these factors in affecting the vote is listed below:
Party
Nixon Trust
Comparative Issue Handling Ability
Age
Opponents Competence
Income
Religion
Education
After party, the voters' perceptions of Nixon trust and comparative
issue handling ability are the factors which have the greatest
influence on the President's vote.
The factors in the individual state studies are shown in Attachment
A. Attachment B graphically shows the importance of these factors.
5. While the President was in relatively good shape against any of
his potential opponents in January, there was a relatively small
undecided vote for that point in time and there appears to be some
limits on the President's potential vote. There are relatively
large groups of voters who vote for the President on all of the
sample ballots and who vote against the President regardless of
who his opponent is on all the sample ballots. This indicates to
me that once the Democratic nominee is selected the undecided vote
may be very small. This, along with the probability that the Demo-
cratic candidate will increase his support and that the ratio will
get closer during September and October, means that we should attempt
to build as large a lead as possible between now and the national
conventions on the theory that we will lose ground after the con-
ventions. Moreover, every point we can gain between now and the
conventions will come with less effort and at less cost than those
percentage points needed during the fall campaign.
-4-
6. There does not appear to be any definite ideological basis for
voting on any of the ballots. That is, very few people if any are
voting for the President because they feel he is particularly con-
servative or liberal, or that people are voting against the President
because they feel he is too conservative or too liberal.
7. The Vice-President's approval rating is somewhat lower than the
President's in almost all of the states but follows up and down
about in line with the President's. I cannot identify any particular
segment of voters with whom the Vice-President is either adding or
subtracting from the ticket.
8. The net effect of a Wallace third party candidacy was very
small in January and has undoubtedly changed since then. We should
defer any hard conclusions as to whether we want him on or off the
ballot until after the second wave of polling, but my inclination
at this point is that we would do better without him on the ballot.
9. There is no question but that we have a very realistic chance
to carry any or all of the big states -- New York, New Jersey,
Pennsylvania, Ohio, Illinois, Texas, and California and we should
continue to make a maximum effort in those states. California
appears to me to be the one state where we may not be doing as
well as we might be at this time and where there are indications
of future problems. Voters in California seem to have a more fixed
perception of the President. That is, of course, logical in that
California voters probably know him better than those in any other
state.
Recommendations
Based on our analysis, we make the following recommendations:
1. A ticket-splitter analysis should be done in each of the priority
states by precinct or ward and township. For the rest of the country,
the analysis should be done by county. This is undoubtedly the most
efficient way to locate ticket-splitters and to develop priority
areas for both our organizational and communications efforts. More-
over, it will allow us to identify Democratic areas which have some
propensity to split their ticket, and from these areas we may be
able to cause ticket-splitting in favor of the President.
2. With apparently small undecided vote, a strong organizational
effort will be critical. I would recommend putting a dispropor-
tionate share of our resources into organizational personnel to
assure that this effort is maximized. 1 also think our organiza-
tional effort should be structured SO that we have the flexibility
to concentrate our people in a few states late in the campaign,
even to the degree of assigning one to each county or congressional
district for the top priority states in late September and October.
-5-
Special organizational effort should be made to improve the
President's voting strength in Philadelphia (especially with ethnics),
New York City (outside Manhattan), Buffalo, Los Angeles (Orange
County), Baltimore suburbs, Montgomery County (Maryland), Mid-Texas
(Austin), rural Missouri, and Kenosha/Racine Wisconsin.
3. As indicated before, I think the development of an overall
theme or idea for the campaign is imperative and that this should
be done before the Democratic convention and should center around
the President's hopes and aspirations for our country. To be effec-
tive it must be positive and give people the hope that many of our
problems can and will improve.
4. As the President's overall issue handling ability is more impor-
tant to determining vote than his handling of any individual issue,
those issues on which he is perceived as handling well should be
emphasized and those he is seen as handling poorly should only be
used if we have an impressive story to tell or if the appeal is
designed for some particular group.
5. We should emphasize the following personal attributes in our
media programs:
Trust - Just
Honest
Open Minded
Competence - Experienced
Trained
Informed
Competent
It is possible to use the President's ability to handle issues in
communicating the above attributes. No special effort needs to be
directed to make the President appear -- warm, relaxed, and having
a sense of humor. To the extent that it is possible to convey
these characteristics, we should do so, but not at the expense of
the trust and competence variables.
6. Special efforts should be implemented to maximize the President's
strength with specific voting blocs.
A. A campaign directed at older Americans through the
voting bloc group should be given top priority. Maximum
available resources should be allocated into this program.
A massive turnout drive should be implemented, and a
supportive direct mail effort should be considered.
Because of the current high level of registration, no
special effort in this regard needs to be made to register
older voters. Special emphasis should be made to improve
our level of support with older Americans in the follow-
ing priorities:
-6-
Missouri (Primarily Rural)
Oregon
Texas
Wisconsin
Maryland
Indiana
California
Pennsylvania
New York
Taxes and inflation should be given emphasis.
B. All registration drives among young voters should be
stopped. Our primary objective with this group should
be low turnout and persuasion of Democrats and swing
voters to vote for the President. Areas for special
emphasis to improve support among young voters should
be:
Wisconsin
California
Maryland
Pennsylvania
New York
Primary issue emphasis should be made on Vietnam, jobs
for youth, and pollution.
In meeting our objective of converting Democrats and
independents, we must be careful not to direct our young
voter campaign solely at our own voters. To keep turnout
at a minimum we should attempt to keep the marijuana
referenda now proposed for California and Michigan off
the ballot if possible.
C. The Jewish vote bloc should implement a program to
improve the President's strength with this voter group
in New York state. Careful consideration should be
given to the question of parochial schools with this
group. Our data indicates support of aid to parochial
schools may be a negative with Jewish voters.
D. In order to carry several critical northern states we
will need to carry a greater percentage of blacks than
we did in 1968. Because of our credibility problems,
we must be careful in making any racial appeals so that
our efforts are not counterproductive.
CONFIDENTIAL/EYES ONLY
MARKET OPINION RESEARCH
ATTACHMENT A
CALIFORNIA
NEW JERSEY
OHIO
TEXAS
NEW YORK
PENNSYLVANIA
WISCONSIN
INDIANA
Party Type
21%
Party Type
7%
Opp. Issue
11%
Nixon Trust
10%
Age
12%
Opp.
Party Type
29%
Party Type
14%
Competence
9%
Opp. Trust
4
Nixon Trust
6
Party Type
6
Party Type
8
Party Type
7
Age
8
Party Type
7
Opp. Issue
11
Age
4
Opp.
Education
5
Nixon Issue
8
Nixon Issue
7
Income
3
Competence
6
Income
7
Income
9
Income
4
Age
4
Age
7
Nixon Trust
5
Opp. Issue
3
Age
5
Age
5
Nixon Trust
4
Nixon
Opp.
Nixon
Opp. Issue
4
Religion
2
Strength
3
Opp. Issue
4
Strength
3
Strength
5
Opp. Issue
2
Nixon Issue
4
Income
4
Nixon Trust
2
Nixon
Income
4
Nixon Issue
3
Opp. Issue
3
Education
2
Age
4
Competence
3
Education
4
Opp. Trust
1
Religion
3
Religion
2
Income
2
Nixon
Religion
2
Sex
3
Nixon
Competence
1
Nixon
Nixon Issue
2
Opp.
Religion
2
Competence
2
Education
1
Strength
1
Nixon Trust
2
Competence
1
Opp. Trust
1
Sex
2
Opp.
Sex
2
Nixon
Education
1
Nixon Issue
2
Nixon Trust
1
Strength
2
Nixon Trust
1
Competence
1
Education
1
Opp. Trust
1
Nixon Issue
1
Education
2
Income
1
Opp. Trust
1
Nixon Issue
1
Opp.
Nixon
Nixon
Competence
1
Nixon
Opp.
Competence
1
Nixon
Nixon
Strength
1
Religion
*
Competence
1
Competence
2
Competence
*
Competence
1
Nixon
Nixon
Opp.
Sex
*
Strength
1
Opp.
Opp.
Strength
*
Opp.
Opp.
Competence
1
Strength
*
Strength
1
Competence
*
Competence
1
Nixon
Opp. Trust
1
Opp.
Religion
1
Strength
*
Sex
*
Opp. Issue
1
Strength
*
Nixon
Education
*
Opp.
Strength
*
Opp.
Opp.
Strength
*
Opp.
Religion
1
Opp. Trust
*
Sex
*
Strength
*
Strength
*
Competence
*
Sex
*
Sex
*
*
Less than 1%
Numbers following each factor indicate percentage of influence on the presidential vote.
ATTACHMENT B
NIXON - MUSKIE
Rep.
.9
T-S,Dem. ,Marg.
.4
Nixon Trust
Nixon Trust
Dem.
Hi
Lo
.6
.2
.1
T-S, Marg.
Dems.
T-S, Marg.
.8
.4
.4
Muskie
Muskie
Muskie
Muskie
Muskie
Muskie
Comp.
Comp.
Trust
Trust
Trust
Trust
Lo
Hi
Lo
Hi
Lo
Hi
.9
.6
.5
.2
.5
.1
Muskie
Muskie
Nixon
Nixon
Issue
Issue
Issue
Issue
Lo
Hi
Hi
Lo
.9
.5
.6
.3
Muskie
Muskie
Issue
Issue
Lo
Hi
.5
.2
Prot.
Other
Religions
.7
.5
Numbers under boxes indicate probability of voting for Nixon. The
higher the number, the greater the probability of voting for Nixon.
THE WHITE
ADMINISTRATIVELY CONFIDENTIAL
WASHINGTON Vide HOUSE 26
MEMORANDUM FOR:
R
HALDEMAN
FROM:
GORDON STRACHAN
G
SUBJECT:
Campaign Meetings
Magruder proposes a new campaign strategy meeting to Mitchell
in the memorandum attached at Tab A.
Mitchell, has approved the meeting and participants (Miller,
Magruder, LaRue, Marik, Dailey, Teeter, Finkelstein). The
first meeting will be this week on Key States. There is
currently no agreement on Key States within the Committee
to Re-Elect the President, as Magruder's memorandum attached
at Tab B indicates.
In light of the importance of getting Mitchell's views on Key
States and campaign strategy for you, I asked Magruder if I
could attend. Magruder said he was opposed and would not
raise the question of my attendance with Mitchell. Magruder's
reasons for objecting to my attending are:
1) The meeting must be kept small;
2) Marik can brief me afterwords on the decisions, and
3) The meeting should be purely campaign people without
any White House Staff (hence, Malek's exclusion).
You agreed last July to ask Mitchell if I could attend a much
higher level meeting (that was eventually cancelled) on your
Ltulte
behalf. To reassert in Magruder's mind the importance of keep-
ing you fully informed, I believe it is an important matter of
principle for you to intervene with Mitchell on my behalf. A
to
memorandum for your signature to Mitchell is attached at Tab C.
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE NW
WASHINGTON D C. 20006
April 18, 1972
(202) 333.0920
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR:
THE HONORABLE JOHN N. MITCHELL
FROM:
JEB S. MACRUDER
CLIFF MILLER
SUBJECT:
Strategy Planning for the Campaign
Campaign strategy is now developed in several areas:
Campaign Strategy Group (Monday evening meetings). Brings
together the thoughts of key White House personnel and those on
the Re-Election Committee. Reviews and develops recommendations
on broad strategy, with particular emphasis on advertising and
the media.
Strategy Planning Group (Saturday meetings). The directors
responsible for pertinent campaign activities meet with each state
chairman to develop a detailed strategy and operating plan for
conducting the campaign in that state. The resulting recommenda-
tions in the form of a state plan are presented to you for
approval.
November Group. Develops an advertising strategy consistent
with the overall strategy of the campaign.
Polling. Provides the basic research data for all of the
strategy groups described above.
In addition, the political division and the directors of the
functional activities develop strategy relating to their own areas
of responsibility, consistent with the overall campaign strategy.
All of those groups perform a useful function in developing elements
of the strategy for the campaign. However, they do not perform
the essential function because:
1. They do not work closely enough with you.
2. Their membership is too large to make effective strategy
recommendations in atimely manner when the campaign is in
full swing.
CONFIDENTIAL
- 2 -
Therefore, we recommend that another group be formed, under your
chairmanship, to develop the overall strategy from which state
plans, advertising, budget, etc., will flow. The suggested
membership would be:
Cliff Miller
(Communications)
Jeb Magruder
(Administration/Coordination)
Fred LaRue
(Political)
Bob Marik
(Planning/Mail/Telephone)
Peter Dailey
(Advertising)
Bob Teeter
(Polling)
Arthur Finkelstein
(Demographics)
Recommendations
That you. approve the creation of the group described above.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
That a meeting be scheduled within the next two weeks to start the
group on its task of developing strategy for the 'general campaign.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
CONFIDENTIAL
April 21, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
MR. DWIGHT CHAPIN
FROM:
JEB S. MAGRUDER
SUBJECT:
Key States
As you know, we have been using a number of lists of key states
for different purposes such as surrogate scheduling, early pri-
mary strategy development, and media planning. The groupings
of states have not been completely consistent, however, and we
feel that in order to plan effectively for the general campaign
we should establish one firm list. Therefore, during the course
of the next week, we will analyze alternative selections of key
states, consider the implications of each, and adopt a consolidated
list.
cc: Mr. Larry Higby
Gordon Strachan
6/7
Jm, Miller, Magreuler, ha Rue, Maril,
malex, Teeter
JM - Wed Sen Group - complete
euphoria re me G condidary
Pelcy Scott, Griffin
- maybe we shed cerenter euphoria
but had Rue thinks me G
screefing local cand's shill
be public to complicate Dem lenser
Teeter - 6790 turnout
Jm - breakdown of st
marik - Feeler Findstein in Cal
analyzing precinets (1st
2days conclusion McGdid well in
black + chicanos
Jm - wants breadeen of blacks
checoras + Jeurisa Rr/Finlul
J8M - Spiling appois let now +
(Discussion) Jej 9 - key Suris have
30day shot at me G
JM- - me G extreme
pose why Demo prols
? is will will move Democr Me G
Jm-Covent well Renunced Dems among
Gajon
laber, vets, jursh to get
MCG position out
- goal nomination to deep Dems Right for
- why Pa + mo listed asuncom te P.
-mccl can't get anything
nominated. filthat I Del - not even
- -We chase the delegate
Jm. - hofton must onlycomment
on Dems, not on Mc G
- must be cleared here Iam
serious about this
- J8m * CAM clear +
MCG can't really compromiseon issues or
lose his creditity
* 4 P strong view - don't conduct
nate Survey at this time
wait wave II after Dem Conven
- Poel Dem too confused +
we're confused after second
MeG machine, Ht clooing gapful it
20 to 5, HI could have won
comp another been days
JM - $ fr/ Cal etc not organiz
beel that means people
- media juggernant ratherthan
Jm arrest colunteers utz, Holling Puls.c. Chin of Pemo
cen advise all lands to avoid
MCG + upn own comp's
J8m - all coleemnests want take
as - So line devel Mark
Teeter- - must get line to Rn St Orman
Jan - SUNAS
St
WHS Chem I Toset sense of urgency
Jm/J8m material on issues thru covert,
3P now,
JM - Mon not discuss issues
rather just those w/ creditity
descuss
me G issues,
- Economests + bus comm will
release their analysis of cost of org
am abortion not used nattles used but
only locally the Card Kroe, etc.
56th
Jm - - stay on Mc G big coones
not'l del, well tax,
- Higher Edice Bill - Puill not
veto we even-ho t includes
weak eusing + P will
- USS at will consider Richmond
me posture hinself later,
decision on ments next
Fall after elee,
TALKING PAPER
As a result of the primaries of yesterday, McGovern is in good shape to
sew up the Democratic nomination. It is important, therefore, that we
give exposure to his extreme proposals and statements in the next few
weeks, in order to SOW seeds of doubt among union members and the "estab-
lishment" Democrats. Humphrey/Jackson statements might be one of the
better vehicles. After the nomination, these lines of communication will
be shut off, as the Democratic power structure closes ranks behind the
nominee.
There is general agreement that the approach should be measured, reasoned,
and not excessively tough or embattled. The objective should not be to
attack the character or personality of McGovern, who has come across to
the voters as a candid, honest and decent man. It should rather be
specifically oriented to the issues where his great vulnerability lies.
In this regard, the term, "radical" should probably be downplayed because
it evokes negative memories of earlier campaigns. The term "extreme"
might be more appropriate for our purposes.
As a first step, detailed, factual data must be compiled as a basis
for speeches and other materials. This is being done by Pat Buchanan
and by the November Group. Secondly, the method of publicizing McGovern's
position must be carefully programmed. The tone will be set by upcoming
- 2 -
statements by John Mitchell:
0
Wednesday, June 7 - Comments on the primary results
o
Thursday, June 8 - Press briefing
o
Sunday, June 11 - Appearance on ABC's "Face the
Nation"
That tone should then be carried forth by surrogates and op.ed.
columns in major newspapers.
The key issues should be highlighted one at a time, so that the substance
of each argument gets through to the voter. Such material can also be
provided to columnists and editorial writers. An additional part of
this program could be negative advertising by third parties such as
civic, professional and labor organizations, and prominent Democrats,
if they are available.
It will be important that all these activities be limited to exposing
McGovern's position on the issues and not be allowed to develop into an
early beginning of the Nixon campaign. The President or his positions
should not be emphasized because we do not want to elevate McGovern this
early to the level of head-on confrontation with the President.
5/19
mF
G
to
H
S
Mitchell Political Meeting-
may 18, 1972
John mitchell met with
Magweer, malel, Teeter,
Miller, ha Rue, Findelstein,
maril, Dailey, and Flemming
at All for 1 1/2 hours. The
discussion paper was Boe
Teelor's Final First wave
Polling analysis. (you recead
read a way on may 12Blut
at Tal A
another copy is attached]. Several
interesting points emerged during the describen:
1) The single most important
factor for letermining who the
voter's probable hereicn ner7
is past voting behavir. Republic
sup about 90% of all Repul's
will vote for the P. with any
controlust opponer 2) against any
reaso nable opponent
Democratic opponent with
wellace at 46 % of the electerate
will vote ag/ the P. 30-34% of
4'cay
the electorate will always vote
st
for the P no regardless of his
opposition. Therefore, the market
is only 20-21% these
3) Trust of the P and his
general overall isove-aandling
ability are the next mostinpt
factors in determing voters' behavior.
Genal ability tohandle all issues
as distingushed
Selle - dil balls
5/18
Jm, J8m, FM Teeter, Miller, LaRue
Finldsteen, marik, Dailey, Flemming
Final 1SI Wave analysis
Date
weighted
Single most imp facter - past
How
Elec voles
voting belovior
46% are always ag / P
33-349 are always w/ P
80 only 20-21% are the mkt.
Real swing Voters
Trust + Issue Handling ability.
on overall is - - han abil,
asa personality dimenoion.
un, Infla, Unrest - Pratel
pooit + are mp to public
Crime - still issued as respen
of st + Local Gois not on P
accounding to Haves Dom Coce Poll
Drug Proe- no dif who's P
unempl - people concerned
are already anti - P
so no effect on P's
voters a seving
Demogis- age, Incomet
most impt if
Emk candid
68 same
Mich - w allace stronger in Youth / Basing
Older Voters -begyest grp + sengle
most impt gip for elec
me - older voters crucial
P has some non - college youth
support in parkets but in
all 11 sts the P is not
strong among youth- -
- -But this conflicts w/ Mich,
- -Col Youth definitely anti - P
non col slightly anti - P
but no grp of youth are
pro P.
- no regis rally or public presence,
among youth - Rotter Jm urges
quiet convass,
- meest get 35-45% of Youth
Vote in all -68 states just
to stay even + still win sts
- must determine me G ability
to get EMK's youth cote
Jm - what segment of the youth
V
Exponel
are in the Galleep projects.
marik, Teeter, Rietz will
forker & for &
include map
by ty
prepare guidelines per St
Regis packet
camen on youth reges
Jy 1 - maril will have
precent by precence demog
lensus
track
regis Pl Finls th of lange
of tie - spe per taget voter
overlay
for 68 - 70, Reagan vote in 70.
mark
Target Camp not just Regis.
Donnally List - accurate age +
ine of all people by telepa
- -target causes
People Dave Rim, fixed were
of the P- very small
undecided vote after the
Convention.
What do we do to get all
our pts before Iem Convention?
P hi number of substantive
domes trips ?
'68 Panel phowed 33%
of elee shlfter after Sep
but not Prl was HHH
but rather all crups
moving HH P wal + back,
no liberal/Conoere onel to P cate,
rather personality oriented,
The U.P. up. covelated te the P's
(slightly lower); UP has no
special constituency.
Don't shore up our
weaknesses rather pash
our strong soves
Twst + Competence - push;
forget amiable, priendly,
warm, we
Jm - where do you disagree
next mtg all w/ disg's
bod at their critiques,
wave II - oversomple youth in
certain sts
MTP - Scammon + Havis
next wave go after Handleng
Jm - domn confusing
olv n + For affairs beel
up to noul Jm we have
wanted un to go away but
Harris says For of a plus +
Teeter says P. handling of
vn is a positive tis the
media may want to empha un
me G. Commercials
Right from the Start"
Very
Vut Vets - 5 min spot on Gor
Perpul
providing joes per Desabled
Vets 15th
Reght to know,
ANALYSIS
CAMPAIGN AND ADVERTISING STRATEGIES
1) GEORGE McGOVERN
2) HUBERT H. HUMPHREY
3) EDMUND MUSKIE
4) GEORGE WALLACE
Prepared by: November Group, Inc.
date: May 12, 1972
GEORGE McGOVERN
I. ISSUES/POSITON
ISSUE
EARLY PRIMARY POSITION
CURRENT POSITION
1. Vietnam
Proposed immediate cessation
Unchanged.
of bombing in Southeast Asia
and then the complete with-
drawal of American troops
within 90 days.
2. Unemploy-
Proposed cutting waste from
Unchanged.
ment
"our bloated military budget"
and investing the savings
in job creating enterprises.
"I pledge to do whatever
is necessary to see there
is a job for every American
who wants a job.'
3. Taxes
Proposed closing $28 billion
Unchanged.
in tax loopholes for the rich
and powerful (including
limiting inheritances' to
$500,000), relieving tax
burden by having federal
government assume a major
part of education and
welfare costs.
4. Inflation
Proposed revised trade policies,
Unchanged.
increased foreign outlets for
American goods, expanded public
service employment.
5. Big
Favors federal chartering to
Unchanged.
Business
enforce public interest limi-
tation on corporate activities,
favors efforts to compel cor-
porations to abolish secrecy
and efforts to break up monop-
olies.
6. Busing
Pro defeat of anti-busing
Says busing is not
referendum in Florida.
as important an
issue as the war, tax
reform, unemployment
or inflation. Suggeste
the Supreme Court has
ruled in favor of
busing and "tinkering
with the Courts jur-
isdiction could set a
precedent that would
jeopardise other area
McGOVERN (con't.)
-2-
ISSUE
EARLY PRIMARY POSITION
CURRENT POSITION
7. Senior
Proposed total social security
Unchanged.
Citizens
benefits start at age 62,
increased minimum payment with
a realistic cost of living
increase, reforms in tax laws
which burden the retired,
Medicare to pay for prescription
drugs and out of hospital
treatment, expanded housing
program for the elderly.
8. Health
Proposed a program of guaranteed Unchanged.
health insurance, Medicare to
cover prescription drugs and
hospital treatment, a program
of research and treatment of
dread diseases, expanded me-
dical care for people isolated
from medical facilities.
9. Amnesty
Favored amnesty only after the
Unchanged.
Vietnam war is over.
10. Abortion
Pro abortion as a "medical
Says "abortion is
matter between a woman and
a matter for the
her physician."
states there has
to be some restrictio
you can't just permit
anybody that wants an
abortion to walk into
a doctor's office and
have one. "
11. Drugs
Cited his legislation on
Opposes legalizing
drugs: Controlled Substance
marijuana "pending
Act, the Federal Drug Abuse
further research on i
and Drug Dependence Act.
effects. "
Proposed more law enforcement
"I wouldn't legalize
in cracking down on racketeers
marijuana it ought
and pushers.
to be treated as a
misdemeanor
"
12. Government
Accused government of betray-
Unchanged.
ing the public trust. Regard-
ing Pakistan, McGovern said
"
they wanted to work this
deal in secret, not tell
"
congress
McGovern (con!t.)
-3-
II. CAMPAIGN STRATEGY
Over a year ago, McGovern and his campaign strategists mapped
out the primary states they considered essential to the McGovern
effort: New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Massachusetts, Nebraska,
Oregon and California. Wins or strong showings in each of
these primary contests were of prime importance to the success-
ful culmination of McGovern's drive for the nomination. Until
Pennsylvania, McGovern never wavered from this original strategy.
McGovern placed second in New Hampshire, won in Wisconsin and,
based on indications that Massachusetts was in the bag, decided
to make a special effort in Pennsylvania. He added several un-
planned days of campaigning and beefed up his media effort. As
a result, he placed a close third in the primary and won 38
delegates.
With the decline of Muskie, McGovern then moved quickly and
strongly into another unplanned state - Ohio. He literally
blanketed the state with a heavy media effort and campaigned
there personally for about 7 full days. And, for the first time,
he failed to visit a single college or university, but concen-
trated instead on the blue collar and black vote. McGovern
placed second to Humphrey in Ohio and picked up several more
delegates.
The next big state in McGovern's campaign plan was Nebraska.
Here things did not go according to plan as McGovern fell under
attack from both Jackson and Humphrey for his stands vis-a-vis
amnesty, marijuana, and abortion. For the first time in his
campaign, he taped a last minute TV program to defend and clarity
his position on these issues. In spite of the attacks, McGovern
did succeed in carrying conservative, heavily Catholic Nebraska.
III. ADVERTISING STRATEGY
Copy - All McGovern commercials (with the exception of the
previously noted Nebraska program) were filmed or taped over
four months ago and have been used ever since without a single
modification. Of all the major candidates, McGovern, in both
his advertising and appearances, has sought to provide a clear
position and solution on the issues.
Under the campaign slogan, "McGovern, Right from the Start", the
radio commercials feature personal endorsements or an announcer
setting forth McGovern's position on the issues. The TV commer-
cials feature naturalism and issues. The TV spots are edited
McGOVERN (con t.)
-4-
from long, spontaneous conversations that McGovern holds with
carefully selected groups of voters. The resulting TV spots
suggest that McGovern is listening to ordinary people, that
he is directly accessible to their complaints, that he responds
with sympathy, understanding and a solution - or at least a
heartfelt promise to find one. The spots never show the candidate
selling himself directly to the TV audience.
Throughout all the TV commercials, there is no opening title
and the candidate is never identified by either print or
voice until the final frame when the action is frozen. "McGovern
for President" appears at the bottom of the screen and an
announcer says: "McGovern
Right from the Start."
Media - In those states he considered his prime objectives, McGovern
is reported to have consistently outspent his competititon. He
is reported to have spent over one half million dollars in cam-
paign media through the Ohio primary. In two of the states -
Wisconsin and Massachusetts - he won. In New Hampshire and Ohio
he finished a strong second. Based on November Group audits,
McGovern has, with the exception of New Hampshire and Pennsylvania,
spent 60-70% of individual state media. dollars in television.
-5-
HUBERT H. HUMPHREY
I. ISSUES/POSITION
ISSUE
EARLY PRIMARY POSITION
CURRENT POSITION
1. Vietnam
Proposed pulling all troops
"The time has come
out of Vietnam in less than
to end the war
it's
90 days, if elected.
a lost cause to con-
tinue to pour materia
and men into this war
2. Economy
Denounced Nixon's economic
Unchanged.
control program.
3. Taxes
Sponsored tax reform bill
Proposed sending tax
aimed at closing specified
reform plan to Congre
tax loopholes and raising
within 100 days of
$16 billion in 1973.
becoming President.
4. Busing
Against busing - " it
hasn't solved our racial
problems.
Pro the President's position
Against the President
saying "He's in agreement with
anti-busing moratoriu
me. If
" ...it's insufficient
deceptive insensi-
tive.
"
5. Amnesty
Against granting uncondi-
Unchanged.
tional amnesty to draft
evaders.
6. Older
Proposed cabinet level depart-
Unchanged.
Citizens
ment of senior citizens.
Pro increased social security,
Unchanged.
national health insurance,
laws against job discrimination
because of age, inexpensive
housing.
7. Youth
Proposed cabinet level depart-
Unchanged.
ment of youth affairs.
8. Crime
Proposed federal law to make the Unchanged.
killing of a policeman, prison
guard or fireman a federal
offense.
HUMPHREY (con't.)
-6-
ISSUES
EARLY PRIMARY POSITION
CURRENT POSITION
9. Drugs
Proposed U.S. seek govern-
Unchanged.
ment with the foreign countries
Proposed making use of
that are the source of nar-
marijuana a misdemea-
cotics to stop the flow or be
nor rather than a
cut off from all military or
felony.
economic aid.
10. Space
Pro Space Shuttle program.
Unchanged.
Shuttle
Program
II. CAMPAIGN STRATEGY
Campaigning from the start as the "People's Democrat," Humphrey
more recently has been championing himself as the leader of the
new "progressive vital center" of the party. His campaign thrust
seems to center around his political personality and his long
record of Government service and experience. He has shown a
marked reluctance to broaden his base of appeal from the ranks
of his traditional constituency - the elderly, the Jews, the
Blacks and the unions.
Spurred by the fear Muskie would lock up the Democratic nomination
prior to the convention, Humphrey entered selected primary contests
somewhat earlier than planned. Following Muskie's poor showing
in Wisconsin, Humphrey entered several unplanned primary contests
in an effort to pick up additional delegate votes - Ohio, Indiana,
Nebraska, West Virginia, Maryland and Michigan. Current plans
include bypassing Oregon for the more crucial California primary
and, if that goes well, continuing on to New York (NOTE: Humphrey
workers are frantically attempting to persuade New York delegates
pledged to Muskie and Jackson to support Humphrey in the June 20
primary)
Although Humphrey had abided by his pledge not to criticize any
of his Democratic opponents, the McGovern phenomenon caused him,
in Nebraska, to attempt to cast McGovern in the role of the
wild-eyed radical who favors amnesty for draft evaders, legalization
of marijuana and more liberal abortion laws. Although McGovern
won the race, it is probable that Humphrey will continue to speak
out more strongly against his Democratic oponent in the upcoming
contests.
III. ADVERTISING STRATEGY
Copy - Throughout the primary campaigns, Humphrey has labeled
himself "The People's Democrat." In some commercials this is
expanded to "In the Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy tradition."
HUMPHREY (cont'd.
-7-
The overall campaign plays to the "little guy". Earlier TV
and radio commercials and,more recently radio commercials
utilizing Lorne Greene and other announcers as spokesmen for the
Senator, point out his Senate record on civil rights, Medicare,
the Job Corps, the fcod stamp program; set forth his proposals
on social security, the elderly. When Humphrey himself appears
he speaks to the voters "You need a President that understands
what a working family goes through
"
In recent primaries, Humphrey has eliminated his use of spot
television in favor of cheaper radio spots. He has used the
telephone interview format on television (emceed by Lorne Green
and backed up with selected special interest group visitors)
as his TV platform for speaking to the voters.
Media - In audited primary contests, Humphrey spent between
$25-55M per state for media, well below his leading Democratic
rivals. He won three of these primaries and placed second or
third in the others. Humphrey placed over 75% of his media
monies in spot television in Florida and Wisconsin, However,
in the more recent contests in Pennsylvania and Ohio, he has
favored spot radio backed up by the TV telephone interview
programs.
-8-
EDMUND MUSKIE
I. ISSUES/POSITION
ISSUE
EARLY PRIMARY POSITION
CURRENT POSITION
1. Vietnam
Proposed definite date for with-
Guaranteed withdrawal
drawal of all forces and all
of all American forces
military activity in Vietnam
from Indochina within
contingent on return of POW's.
two weeks of his
inauguration.
Proposed Saigon accommodate
Proposed cut off of
politically all elements of
military aid to Saigor.
South Vietnamese society.
if it does not make
substantial progress
to peace.
2. Economy
Anti president's management
Proposed 90 day freeze
of the economy.
on food prices (appli-
cable to wholesalers
and retailers but not
to farmers)
3. Unemploy-
Pro restaining inflation,
Proposed federal
ment
increasing employment.
relief to areas of
high unemployment;
retraining programs;
and an increase in the
number of public
service jobs.
4. Busing
Anti Constitutional Amend-
Pro busing "if used
ment on busing.
with common sense.'
Pro funding schools
and integration of
jobs and housing.
5. Older
Proposed program of housing
Unchanged.
Citizens
security to provide regular
monthly payments to meet
increased property taxes.
6. Taxes
Proposed 9 point tax reform
Unchanged.
plan. Also pledged to close
a total of $14 billion in
Federal tax loopholes.
7. Education
Proposed $7.2 billion program
Unchanged.
to help provide all elementary
and secondary pupils with
equal instruction.
8. Defense
Pro elimination of five
Unchanged.
specified defense programs.
MUSKIE (con't.)
-9-
ISSUE
EARLY PRIMARY POSITION
CURRENT POSITION
9. Space Shuttle
Against space shuttle program.
Unchanged.
Program
10. Pollution
Pro more federal programs to
Unchanged.
solve polution.
11. Drugs
Pro stopping drugs at their
Unchanged.
source of supply; also pro
educating youth to conse-
quences of drugs.
II. CAMPAIGN STRATEGY
Muskie entered the 1972 primaries as the frontrunning Democratic
candidate. His going-in strategy was apparently to enter and
to win as many primaries as possible, gathering delegates along
the way, and to arrive at the July convention as the pre-ordained
candidate. His poor showings in New Hampshire and Florida caused
him to attempt to sharpen his campaign promises in both advertising
and public appearances as he entered Illinois.
After Illinois, as his funds and personnel began to fade, Muskie
began to concentrate on the primary states with large delegate
counts (Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, California and New York)
and to focus on only three or four issues.
Then, following his poor performance in Wisconsin, Muskie insisted
the preference contests were unimportant and indicated he would
concentrate on collecting convention delegates. He tried to
collect convention delegates by campaigning simultaneously in
both the Pennsylvania and Massachusetts primaries, once again
spread himself too thin, and lost both.
After these two defeats, Muskie withdrew from all future primary
races but contended he was still a candidate for the Democratic
nomination.
Last week Muskie announced he would (money permitting) make a
series of national TV appearances as a means of keeping his
name and ideas before the delegates. Meanwhile, Muskie is
speaking on the issues from the Senate floor in the hope that,
in a convention deadlock, the party will turn to him.
III. ADVERTISING STRATEGY
Copy - Muskie has evidenced three major changes in advertising
copy strategy
MUSKIE (con't.)
-10-
Phase I - New Hampshire through Florida - Using the slogan
"Muskie for the Country," the first series of Muskie commercials
were low key in approach. Although voter concerns were voiced,
in many cases using man-in-the-street interviews, there was little
attempt to establish a specific Muskie position with regard to
the problems.
Phase II - Following Muskies poor showing in Florida, a new group
of commercials were hastily produced to make the candidate appear
more forceful, more decisive. Two basic TV executions were used -
1) Muskie speaking, in profile, to an unseen interviewer 2) endorse-
ments by public figures such as Birch Bayh and Adlai Stevenson Jr.
Phase III- - Finally came Massachusetts and Pennsylvania. Here
Muskie limited his campaign issues and, speaking directly to the
camera, presented better defined campaign positions. The campaign
slogan became "Vote for Muskie because you're not just voting
in a primary, you're voting for President " in an obvious attempt
to stop disenchanted voter moves to McGovern in Massachusetts
and Wallace in Pennsylvania.
Media - Muskie spent over $100M for media in each of his losing
primaries in Florida and Wisconsin. When he entered the
Massachusetts and Pennsylvania primaries - which he also lost -
his expenditure by state had dropped by more than half - $40-50M
per state. And although he continued to invest heavily in spot
TV in Massachusetts (60-70% as in Florida and Wisconsin) in
Pennsylvania he moved to the cheaper mediums of radio and news-
papers.
-11-
GEORGE WALLACE
I. ISSUES/POSITION
ISSUE
EARLY PRIMARY POSITION
CURRENT POSITION
1. Busing
Against busing children to
Unchanged.
achieve racial balance.
2. Taxes
Pro tax reform to eliminate
Unchanged.
exemptions to foundations,
churches, endowment funds.
3. Welfare
Against paying hard earned
Unchanged.
money to "welfare loafers.
4. Crime
Pro policemen and firemen;
Unchanged.
law and order-no specific
proposals.
5. Foreign aid
Against giving money to
Unchanged.
foreign countries, especially
those who fought against us
in Vietnam; voted against us
in the U.N.
6. Vietnam
Pro whatever action necessary
Unchanged.
to insure safe withdrawal
of American personnel.
7. Older Citizens
Pro increased social security,
Unchanged.
higher old age pensions, tax
exemptions on medicine, im-
proved medical facilities.
8. Big Government
1) Against government inter-
Unchanged.
ference in peoples lives.
2) Pro Senate review of
Supreme Court every six yrs.
II. CAMPAIGN STRATEGY
Wallace's theme "send them a message," quite accurately describes
the thrust of his campaign. He has been saying a vote for
Wallace will send Washington a message to take action on busing,
tax reform, etc.
WALLACE (con't.)
-12-
Wallace apparently entered the Presidential primary race this
year to gain sufficient delegate strength to ensure his anti-
busing, protest policies would be written into the party's
platform. Today, however, he has broadened his appeals and
appears to be seeking popular strength in the hopes that, if
the convention deadlocks, the party will be forced to turn
to the candidate who has demonstrated he can win the popular
vote. Or failing a convention endorsement, he may run again
as a third party candidate.
Wallace's third party candidacy continues a question. He opened
his campaign by denying he would run as a third party candidate
unless treated "cavalierly" at the convention. On April 19th,
in Indiana, he disavowed any plans for a third party candidacy
even if he were treated badly at the convention. However, on
April 28th, in North Carolina, he returned to his original
position of a possible third party candidacy.
Supporters in several states already have filed petitions placing
Wallace on the American Party ticket in November. However, having
entered the primaries as a Democratic' candidate he cannot be
listed as a third party candidate in the General Election in
several states, including Michigan, Indiana, Pennsylvania and
Maryland.
Wallace has used, throughout the campaign, giant rallies as his
primary political platform. Reminiscent of old time Southern
politiking, rallies include entertainment by selected country
and Western stars - Hank Snow, Billy Grammer, etc.
III. ADVERTISING STRATEGY
Copy - Wallace's broadcast commercials and programs have, through-
out his campaign, featured excerpts from Wallace rallies or the
candidate talking directly to the voters via the television camera.
In both situations he talks to the voters in everyday language -
using words like "asinine" and refering to "welfare loafers",
"intellectual snobs, etc. Most commercials end with a plea for
support via campaign contributions.
Media - In the primary states audited (Florida, Wisconsin and
Pennsylvania) Wallace has consistently spent nearly 75% of his
advertising monies in spot television. Wallace's total dollars
by state ($40-50M) have ranked third or fourth among the four
major contenders. However, in spite of this spending deficit,
the man has placed first or second in all major primaries he
has entered.
H
THE WHITE HOUSE
FU
WASHINGTON
ADMINISTRATIVELY CONFIDENTIAL
May 15, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
LARRY HIGBY
FROM:
GORDON STRACHAN
G
SUBJECT:
Stans' Dinner
In follow-up, the attached memorandum from you regarding
checking with Maurice Stans' request for a quiet dinner
for eight new people in June appeared. Have you heard
anything from Stans? Or should we wait to hear from him?
Or should I contact his office directly?
at feast antil
we getlachy bachfrom Russia
L
H
THE WHITE HOUSE
FU F U
WASHINGTON
5/10
April 4, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
FOLLOW-UP
FROM:
L. HIGBY L
Follow-up at the middle of May with Maurice Stans' request for a
quiet dinner for eight new people in June with the President.
8 "new" people,
not the group to c'D
,
FINANCE COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
MEMORANDUM
May 31, 1972
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR GORDON STRACHAN
SUBJECT: White House Support List
The results of our mailing to the White House Support List
are as follows:
pieces mailed
5,300
pieces received
103
total dollars received
$1,973.
average contribution
$19.15
percent response
1.9
dollars received per letter mailed
.37
This response is more than double our break-even point and is
considered a very successful mailing. The greatest profit, however,
will be derived from additional follow up mailings to the 103
contributors.
It is recommended that future mailings be held until after the
Democratic National Convention in July. The decision on what
copy to use should be determined from tests and experience with
other lists during the next 30 - 50 days.
However, in order to mail this list, it would be helpful for
us to have additional names so that they may be key punched,
verified and transferred to magnetic tape
Lee Lee Nunn
X
News
from
the Committee
for the Re-election
of the President
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006 (202) 333-0920
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
WESTERN REGIONAL FINANCE CHAIRMAN FOR NIXON
CONTACT: DeVan L. Shumway
(202) 333-7060
#5-40(25)
WASHINGTON -- Darius N. Keaton, Jr. of Pebble Beach,
California, will direct fund-raising activities for President
Nixon's re-election campaign in a seven-state western area,
according to Maurice Stans, chairman of the national Finance
.
Committee to Re-elect the President.
The newly named chairman's Region IX includes Alaska, Arizona,
California, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon and Washington.
Mr. Keaton is chairman of the board of the Charter Oil Company,
a subsidiary of the Charter Company, and is president of the
Charter Trading Company.
A native of Georgia, he entered college at the age of 16
but left after one year to work in shipyards, becoming general
foreman of the Kaiser Yards in Vancouver at 18. Following service
with the U.S. Army in Germany, he entered the University of
California, Berkeley, in 1946 and received his B.S. degree
in 1948. Since that time he has been in the petroleum business.
-30-
Committee for the Re-election of the President
MEMORANDUM
May 30, 1972
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR THE HONORABLE JOHN N. MITCHELL
THROUGH:
JEB S. MAGRUDER
SUBJECT:
Financial Report
I met with Secretary Stans last week to discuss the release of
our first financial report on June 10. Subject, of course, to
your approval, we plan to issue a brief statement on the
date of release quoting Mr. Stans and then make the report
available to the press.
We will not have a press conference with the Secretary or anyone
else although I will be prepared to answer, or not answer as the
case may be, any specific questions. Generally, I will not go
beyond the report except to point out that it complies with the
law as passed by a Democratic-controlled Congress.
The press release as suggested by Secretary Stans will be along
the general lines of the attached.
Enclosure
DEVAN L. SHUMWAY
The four national finance committees raising funds
for the re-election of President Nixon today filed their
reports with the Comptroller General as required by law.
Various state committees similarly engaged are filing
separate accountings.
Maurice H. Stans, Chairman of the National Finance
Committee for the Re-election of the President, said the filings
meet every requirement of the law enacted by the Congress
earlier this year.
The four committees received
contributions
in the period between April 7 and May 31 for an average of
per contribution. Contributions totaled
.
Stans has previously indicated that his goal is to
secure close to one million contributions for the Nixon re-election
this year.
Committee for the Re-election of the President
MEMORANDUM
May 24, 1972
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR THE HONORABLE JOHN N. MITCHELL
SUBJECT:
Political Issues Group Meeting
Thursday, May 18, 1972
Those invited to attend the meeting were:
Anne Armstrong
Rita Hauser
Buehl Brentsen
Pat Hutar
Robert J. Brown
Herbert Klein
Ken Cole
Fred LaRue
Charles Colson
John Lehman
Senator Bob Dole
Clark MacGregor
Senator Peter H. Dominick
Fred Malek
Thomas B. Evans
Bob Marik
Robert Finch
Ray Price
Barbara Franklin
Donald Rumsfeld
James Galbraith
William Safire
Leonard Garment
Gordon Strachan
Roy Goodearle
Van Shumway
Bryce Harlow
Robert Teeter
Edwin Harper
William Timmons
Rose Mary Woods
Those in attendance were:
Buehl Brentsen
Ray Hanzlek
Harry Dent
Bob Marik
James Galbraith
Ray Price
Leonard Garment
Van Shumway
Following a short discussion by Harry Dent of the Wallace shooting
and speculation concerning the Governor's likely actions, Ken
Rietz discussed issues affecting youth during the campaign. In
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
-2-
addition, he described the campaign's strategy in appealing to the
18-24 year old voter.
From the research conducted publicly and within the campaign Ken
drew a picture of the young voter which is significantly different
from the conventional wisdom contained in the national news media.
It would appear, he asserted, that there is presently no "youth"
candidate, only candidates who are more associated with youth than
others. To him, the influence of peer group pressures are more
significant than the impact of charismatic media figures. What
appeals to young voters is a candidate's straightforward presenta-
tion of his beliefs, not 100% conformity on all "youth issues.'
Several times the youth staff has found individuals who supported
the President, but have not told their friends about it since they
were afraid of being censured. Youth may be supportive of the
President because of some of his stands or because of his experi-
ence, and yet frequently be afraid to admit it for fear of not
being "in."
In light of this picture, the strategy of the youth campaign for
the President has been to concentrate on breaking down these group
pressures by encouraging involvement in organizational activity.
Wherever possible the campaign is trying to organize youth to par-
ticipate in canvassing and in other activities requested by the
State Chairmen. The concept of the campaign is to approach young
people individually with the request that they support the Presi-
dent. Gallop has stated that only 3# of the electorate is asked to
participate in political campaigns and Ken has found that simply by
asking them, it is possible to involve large quantities of people
with the President's campaign. Rather than concentrate merely on
college campuses where many of the group pressures are the strong-
est, the campaign has gone door-to-door concentrating on the
18,000,000 18-24 year old voters who are living at home.
Ken's program, therefore, has concentrated on canvasses, individual
contact, and speakers in small groups who work at asking people to
participate. The concept of the "floating precinct" has been used
extensively to identify leaders who may not cover a conventional
precinct but belong to affinity groups such as bowling leagues and
sororities. These floating leaders are able to ask a large cross
section of youth to participate in supporting the President.
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
-3-
A major obstacle to Ken's efforts thus far has come from getting
the word of these achievements out through the media. He pointed
to two cases where there were clear and dramatic instances of
support for the President which, nevertheless, went unreported.
In New Hampshire the largest youth campaign in the state was
mounted in support of the President though contenders shared press
recognition as the candidates of youth. And, in one instance in
Connecticut, the President won a high school poll though the head-
lines on the article indicated that Kennedy was the preferred
choice of youth (see attachment).
Perhaps more difficult have been the problems that have been
posed by surrogate candidates and other spokesmen in support of
the President who have either found it impossible to attend impor-
tant youth events or have spoken to the issues rather than for the
President. Ken explained that invitations for no less than 25
separate state vocational conferences were turned down for lack
of any speaker in support of the President. In many of these
cases, the event might have been covered if the youth vote were a
higher priority. By reordering priorities and identifying the
President with young people, by creating a campaign that involves
young people and that explicitly asks for the support of the 18-24
year old voter, Ken hopes to turn in a significantly different
performance than that which is expected by many. Ken is certain
that there can be a major showing of youth support for the
President.
JEB S. MAGRUDER
HARRY S. DENT
Attachment
Committee
for the Re-election
of the President 1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006 (202) 333-0920
May 16, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
JEB MAGRUDER
FRED MALEK
FROM:
KEN RIETZ KR
I thought you would be interested in the attached
article regarding a nationwide poll of 200,000 high
school students. While the headline indicates Ken-
nedy won, a careful reading of the news story shows
the President won with 31.4%.
Comeract
100
100
ly
T- r- Kenne 5/14/75 Wins Poll
of
ly
in
1-
Of High Benoolers
).
a
Sen. Edward M. Kennedy of Maine, who received 21,515
T
Massachus its, who repeatedly
votes.
Young People
e
has said he does not seek the
George S. McGovern, the
II
nomination for president,
South Daketa schator consi-
r
Cireninte-Petil
C
emerged the favorite Democrat-
dered the front-runner for the
3
ic candidate in a nationwide poll
Democratic nomination, pelled
Backing Nixon
1
of some 200,000 high school siu-
18,631 and Sen. Hubert H. Hum-
C
dents.
phrey, his closest rival, had
Results of the T II, announced
More than 200 young pcm
16,933. They placed fifth and
last week. had Kennedy with 15
the state went out onto
sixih in the balloting.
per cent of the total vote. Gov.
streets Saturday to gather
1,
George Wellace of Alabama fol-
A surprisingly strong showing
signatures for a polition sup
57
lowed him among Democrats.
was made by New York U.S.
parting President Nixen's policy
is
President Ninen I-! the entire
Rep. Shirky Chisholm, the first
31
field with 50.90 VOICE, or 31.4
black woman from it major par-
in Vietnam.
note
in
per cent.
ty to seek the presidency. Mrs.
According to 18-year-old Rober-
].
The pull, known as the Fifth
Chisholm received 13.048 votes.
ta Bryant, of Bloomfield, one of
National Student's Presidential
The editors of Current Events
those gathering names, the Vict-
to
Preference Poll, was conducted
T Ned that the total vote for all
nam Action Phone WAS sponsor-
:!-
by American Education Publi-
Democratic candidates outsen
ing the drive and hoped to send
:s
cations of Middlet will.
bered the Nixon vote by 2 to 1.
Dr
The balloting gave Kennedy
If the Democrats could unite Lc-
a group of youths to Washing-
ed
27.038 votes- less than half Nix-
hind a candidate before Novem-
ton, D.C. sometime next week
11-
on's tally-and Wallace, 23.013.
her. they state they have a Road
to present the signatures to the
à
Next in line was Sen. Edmund
chance of victory over the lie-
President.
11.
S. Muskie. the Democrat (non
publicans.
The potition praised Nixon's
Comedian Pat Paulsen led the
"effort to eshieve posice in Viet-
write-in votes with 407 while Ar-
chie Dunker received 131.
nam, pertect the remaining
Americans there and have the
American prisoners of war re-
turned.'
Heattord
3
Correct
5/11/72
1
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Date : May 26, 1972
To:
GORDON STRACHAN
FROM:
HARRY DENT
Please handle
For your information
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
May 25, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
HARRY DENT
FROM:
MAX FRIEDERSDORF
SUBJECT:
Congressman McCloskey
Burt Talcott and Charlie Gubser report that polls in California
show Barry 31%, McCloskey 270 and Cole 17%. Gubser believes
McCloskey is gaining and probably will win if Cole stays in the
race.
CC: Clark MacGregor
Bill Timmons
Dick Cook
Chuck Colson
WARREN G. MAGNUSON. WASH., CHAIRMAN
JOHN D. PASTORE, R.I.
NORRIS COTTON. N.H.
VANCE HARTKE, IND.
JAMES B. PEARSON, KANS.
PHILIP A. HART, MICH.
RCBERT P. GRIFFIN, MICH.
HOWARD W. CANNON. NEV.
HOWARD H. BAKER, JR., TENN.
RUSSELL B. LONG. LA.
MARLOW W. COOK. KY,
FRANK E. MOSS, UTAH
TED STEVENS. ALASKA
United States Senate
ERNEST F. HOLLINGS, S.C.
J. GLENN BEALL JR., MD.
DANIEL K. INDUYE. HAWAII
LOWELL P. WEICKER, JR., CONN.
WILLIAM B. SPONG, JR., VA,
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE
FREDERICK J. LORDAN, STAFF DIRECTOR
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20510
MICHAEL PERTSCHUK, CHIEF COUNSEL
May 23, 1972
Honorable Harry S. Dent
Special Counsel to the President
The White House
Washington, D. C.
Dear Harry:
I want to confirm and reiterate my expressions of gratitude
to you for going to New Hampshire and speaking at the annual May
luncheon of the Federation of Republican Women's Clubs at Wentworth-
by-the-Sea.
I am not "polishing the apple" but speaking in complete
sincerity when I tell you that in all the years of my campaigning
I have not heard a more effective speech. You need not take my
judgment alone because since our return I have had occasion to talk
with the Governor, the State Chairman, and have received letters
from many of the officers of the Women's Clubs. They were all most
complimentary to you and indicated that you said just the things
that stirred them up to fight for the President and gave them the
ammunition with which to do SO.
I hope that you will be exposed to as many groups around
this country between now and November as possible.
Thank you again.
Yours sincerely,
Norris Cotton
U. S. Senator
NC:eb
California Committee
for the Re-election
of the President
1670 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017 (213) 484-1330
May 22, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR RONALD REAGAN
FROM LYN NOFZIGER in
RE: California Campaign (Week Ending 20 May 1972)
Relations with Put Livermore seem to have hit an all-time low as he
refuses to cooperate in any way. He is rewriting a contract on the use
of Compass Systems, the data company, that was drawn by Bob Morgan of the
national re-election committee, and I am fearful that if he does not stall
indefinitely he will redraw it so as to make it difficult for the campaign
to get access to necessary data.
As you know, the data is controlled by a board of trustees made up of you,
Bob Monagan and Put. It may be necessary for you and Monagan to insist on
taking direct control. This situation is going to have to be straightened
out very soon if we are to get maximum use of Compass data.
Ron, I frankly don't believe we can continue putting up with Put's obstruc-
tionism, even if it means demanding his resignation. He is hurting the
State Central Committee, and he is hurting the campaign. He seems to have
no concept of the seriousness of the situation; he is certainly more
interested in controlling his own little domain than he is in re-electing
the President.
The phone and mail programs are now in full swing. If nothing else, we
are learning that you can't treat California the same way you treat New
Hampshire or even Florida.
The phone banks, although there have been a couple that have lagged, have
generally performed well. The mail program is forcing county organization
along, and this will be its main benefit. However, there have been some
bad breakdowns and mistakes in both programs due largely to initial delays
by Compass Systems and then because of errors and misunderstandings by the
Reuben H. Donnelly Company that provides much of the material and does the
mailings, and also because it is difficult for many of those involved to
understand the size and complexity of California. Another problem has been
the fact that about 40 percent of all telephones in California are unlisted.
2
We have been in constant touch with Washington on this matter, and they are
confident that the bugs can be ironed out by the general election. I concur.
This is one reason that I have been so insistent that we use the primary as
a time for organizing and for getting out the bugs. Incidentally, our staff
is performing well in handling these crises as they occur.
Registration proceeds on target. The Los Angeles County staff is a great
addition and is working in nicely. Our problem is a shortage of competent
staff, which makes even more incomprehensible Put's refusal to lend us any
staff.
We expect to be able to utilize the volunteers the mail and phone programs
are turning up for registration purposes, especially during our three blitz
days this summer.
Other segments of the campaign seem to be progressing satisfactorily. Our
Spanish-speaking and black efforts are doing well, and the senior citizens
program is getting organized.
I believe our communications/press effort is the best in the country. We
are the only campaign feeding film to television. In addition, we are
actively soliciting radio actualities and are working hard to maximize the
impact of surrogates and others who either are already in the state or who
come to the state.
Likewise, our speakers bureau is functioning effectively.
All in all, things are going well. However, we need to (1) get our budgets
approved, (2) straighten Mr. Livermore out, (3) make sure we get the kinks
in the mail and phone programs ironed out during this primary election. I
think Livemore presents the only serious problem at this time.
CC: John Mitchell
Bob Haldeman
Bob Mardian
Jeb Magruder
Gordon Luce
Ed Meese
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
May 17, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR MR. H. R \HALDEMAN
FROM:
JEB S. MAGINDER
For your information.
California Committee
Bob Haldeman
for the Re-election
of the President
1670 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017 (213) 484-1330
May 15, 1972
MEMORANDUM FROM LYN NOFZIGER FOR RONALD REAN REAGAN
RE: California Campaign (Week Ending 13 May 1972)
Last week was a week of some accomplishment and some disappointment.
The chief disappointment is the failure of Put Livermore to offer more
than lipservice on behalf of this campaign.
1. He stands alone among the State Central Committee officers in
refusing to provide us any staff help in our registration efforts.
Despite repeated requests on my part for at least token staff support
by the Republican State Central Committee for registration, he has
not provided any help.
2. At the state meeting last Friday he ordered the Youth for Nixon to
take down a table that was distributing literature and soliciting
signatures on petitions supporting the President. This was done
over my personal protests and despite my willingness to allow the
Ashbrook people to put up a table, also.
3. His inability to get satisfactory performance out of Compass Systems
which is supposed to provide the California campaign with demographic,
census and historical data.
Aside from the area of Compass Systems, where we seemingly have no choice,
I see no percentage in attempting to work with Mr. Livermore any further.
We will continue to maintain good relations but will not look to him for
material aid because I do not think he will deliver.
In effect this means we will literally take over registration in the
state, although we will work with county central committees, since they
do not come under his authority. This means we will work within the
Cal-Plan districts, which we initially had hoped would be registered
through state committee efforts.
Despite our problems at the RSCC meeting, the Nixon Youth picked up
more than 600 names on petitions supporting the President in Vietnam.
There was no visible sign of Ashbrook support.
2
Tuesday Region III opens its headquarters in San Mateo and on Wednesday
Sacramento opens its headquarters. Both will be low keyed because of the
shooting of George Wallace.
As you know, we meet with John Mitchell Tuesday afternoon on budgets,
including county budgets. I will report to you on the results at our
Thursday meeting.
We have scheduled a Steering Committee meeting May 24 and will add a few
names to take in some of our new leadership.
Our phone banks--we have nine in operation--are picking up although
running behind the quota given us by national. Part of the problem has
been a breakdown in the data processing, which is not our area. Out of
something over 46,000 calls made through last Saturday, the President is
getting 78 percent approval with Ashbrook getting 7 percent and the
remainder undecided. This compares with a Field poll which shows Ashbrook
at three percent and my own very broad prediction that he'll get between
10 and 20 percent.
I believe the Wallace assassination attempt, unfortunate as it may be,
will trigger a conservative trend and will hurt those, such as McGovern
and Kennedy, who have been at least tacitly supporting the peace mobs.
Registration: As you know, we are in the process of putting together
four major "blitz" days this summer.
We have run into a rather pleasant problem: Because of our constant
harping on registration, our Nixon chairmen are all planning registration
on their own. This means we must meld Bruce Nestande's efforts, which
have been funnelling through the county central committees, into the Nixon
campaign.
This will increase our volunteers and broaden our efforts.
Primarily, we must work to coordinate all segments of the party into one
unified registration effort. I do not see any major problem in this.
Organization. Organization is now about complete. Our task is to make
our organizations operate effectively. We are pushing this now. The
primary will tell us where our weak spots are. As I have said before,
one of the problems is the fact that they are not involved in money-
raising nor in raising money for their campaigns. This takes away some
of the zest. Hopefully, we can add to that with registration.
Support for the President has been heavy, and we have turned must effort
to make it vocal and to letting Congress and the White House know it.
Indications are that thousands of letters and wires have been sent.
6/5
Colsen J8M J m, mae G, Harlout
-on mc Govern
- Concerned Dem's
- 5/6 - 430 andersen
Minn - Dwayne
Type of Comm, who
ont etc
-Get to me G now three
Dems before nom
Doestair nomen
Locked,
H mtg ul J.M.
Tal Pap to Pcl mats
Telephone -
Tol Pap for H mty w/up?
Status.
H.G K- - LP agnew chosen
- sen E mk on the Dem Twat
personal opinion
cal, nJ, J, nm, S.D- - Dem Cancer
HGK H
to
FU TUESDAY MORNING
FIRST THING - April 4
March 31, 1972
Met H
the
MEMORANDUM FOR:
JEB MAGRUDER
FROM:
GORDON STRACHAN
SUBJECT:
RNC Registration
deport,
2
too
toppy
The agreement of last fall between the Committee to Re-
Elect the President and the RNC that voter registration
would be almost entirely an RNC function may have to be
reviewed. I just read Ed DeBolt's March 29 memorandum
entitled "Spring Registration Activity Report #4". (Copy
attached.) I think it represents a dismal failure. All
commitments, programs, and activities are projected rather
than accomplished. It would be interesting to know what
in fact has been done in some of these cases.
of particular concern to me is the statement on page #2
that "California, for example, is still having difficulty
getting their ambitious registration project off the ground".
My recollection of the amount of money under the direction
of Ken Rietz is very substantial. Yet, your comments
yesterday about Nofziger's shaky implementation increases
my concern. I would enjoy discussing this entire matter with
you 30 that we could prepare a recommendation for John Mitchell.
Let's try to get together on Tuesday.
4/4 H/A G Tal Pap
GS:1m
FU Tuesday, Ap. 4
Committee for the Re-election of the President
May 18, 1972
MEMORANDUM
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR THE HONORABLE JOHN N. MITCHELL
THROUGH:
JEB S. MAGRUDER
FROM:
J. CURTIS HERGE
SUBJECT:
Proposal for Campaign Kick-Off Event
in San Diego and San Clemente
September 14 and 15, 1972
It has been proposed that the President and Mrs. Nixon host a two
day gathering of Republican leaders in San Diego, California, during
the period September 14 and 15, 1972. The purpose of the gathering
would be (1) to provide an opportunity for discussions and meetings
about campaign strategy and plans and (2) to provide an attractive
and suitable forum for the initial campaign address by the President.
In that connection, consideration is being given to a proposal that
the President deliver his formal acceptance speech during this two
day period in California, rather than at the Convention in Miami.
The purpose of this memorandum is to set forth the points which
should be considered in connection with this proposal and to describe
a proposed agenda.
1. Participants. In addition to the President and
Mrs. Nixon and the candidate for Vice President and his wife, the
following groups of individuals might be invited to the gathering:
Approximate Number of
Group
Individuals in the Group
a. The surrogate candidates
32
b. Members of the Cabinet who
are not surregate candidates
(Laird, Rogers, Shultz)
3
C. Republican Senators who are
not surrogate candidates
35
d. Republican Governors who are
not surrogate candidates
17
Page Two
e. Republican Congressmen who
are not surrogate candidates
(Not including Congressmen
Ashbrook, McCloskey, Schmitz
and Riegle)
171
f. Officers of the Republican
National Committee
12
g. National Committeemen and
Committeewomen
100
h. State GOP Chairmen
50
i. State Committee for the Re-
election of the President
Chairmen
50
j. State Finance Committee to
Re-elect the President
Chairmen
50
k. State Committee for the Re-
election of the President
Executive Directors
50
1. Under Secretaries, Assistant
Secretaries and Agency Heads
70
m. Senior members of the White
House staff
15
n. Senior members of the 1701
staff and voting bloc
coordinators
20
O. Celebrities for the President
10
p. Athletes for the President
10
q. Elected Republican State
Officeholders from California
4
r. Non-incumbent Republican
candidates for Congress from
California
31
S. Republican leaders not listed
above, e.g. Mayor Lugar, Dr.
Arthur Flemming and substantial
contributors
60
Sub-Total
790
Spouses
790
TOTAL
1,580
Page Three
The number of participants could be reduced, if deemed advisable,
by not inviting (a) the Republican Congressmen who are not surrogate
candidates, (b) the Assistant Secretaries, and (c) selected Agency
Heads. This question becomes relevant in connection with cost
considerations and the proposed barbecue (or fish fry) at the
residence in San Clemente. We have been advised that the areas
available for that event are either the golf course, or the area
immediately to the east. Both areas at the residence could handle
"1,000 plus," but 1,580 might exceed the comfortable limit unless
the areas were combined.
We recommend that consideration continue to be given to inviting all
the listed groups, plus their spouses (a total of approximately
1,580 pcople), subject to a more definitive determination of the
costs involved and the numbers that can be accommodated at San
Clemente. If reductions are then indicated, consideration would be
given to not inviting, in the order listed, (a) the Republican
Congressmen who are not surrogate candidates (the leadership and
the California Congressmen should nevertheless be invited), (b)
the Assistant Secretaries, and (c) selected Agency Heads.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
2. Dates. The dates proposed are Thursday, September
14, and Friday, September 15.
It should be noted that there will be the following other activities
in San Diego during that period:
a. The Inland Empire Credit Union will be holding a convention
at the Town and Country Hotel. Expected attendance: 900;
b. The U.S.S. Saratoga Reunion will commence on September 15th
at the Sheraton Inn. Expected attendance: 300;
C. Provident Mutual Life Insurance Company will be holding a
convention at the Notel Del Cornado from September 7th
through September 14th. Expected attendance: 700;
d.
The Humble Oil and Refining Company will be holding
meetings at the Town and Country Hotel from September 10th
through September 14th. The expected attendance is not
known at this time;
Page Four
e. The U.S. Pro Tennis Association will hold a convention
at the Hotel Del Cornado from September 14th through
September 17th. Expected attendance: 400;
f. California Affiliate Representatives, Inc. will be
meeting at the Bi-hia Hotel from September 14th through
September 17th. Expected attendance: 400.
It does not appear that these activities would cause any media or
accommodation conflict. It should be noted, however, that the San
Diego Padres are scheduled to play in Houston on September 14 and
15. Those games may be televised locally in San Diego.
3. Format. As noted, consideration is being given
to a proposal that the President deliver his acceptance speech
during this period. It is our understanding that Messrs. Bryan
and Willkie, as well as a number of other nominees, delivered their
acceptance addresses at a time considerably later than the Convention.
The thought in this instance is that there would be some obvious
advantages in getting some major attention and television coverage
in September when the audiences would be larger than in late August.
An inherent problem is that the three television networks would
have to be convinced that (1) the speech is, in fact, the acceptance
speech and (2) free time should be provided. The networks probably
cannot be convinced that the acceptance speech will be delivered in
California until the conclusion of the Convention in Miami. Even
then, the networks might want to hear, or read the advance text of,
the California speech before deciding if free time should be granted.
A more remote problem is that the networks may decide, after the
Convention, that we have locked ourselves in and, as a consequence,
force us to buy time to have the speech covered.
Mike Duval, at the White House, has presented the following options:
a. If the address is the President's acceptance speech
and it is carried live (video tape) on a national or
selected cities hook-up, it should be held on Thursday,
September 14, 1972, at 7:00 p.m., before a "canned"
audience of about 5,000, including the key participants
suggested above. The place selected should be inside,
e.g. at the Convention Hall, but not in a dinner setting.
In order to create campaign excitement, a rally atmosphere
was suggested.
Page Five
b. If the address were not the President's acceptance
speech and there is only film coverage, it should also
be held on Thursday, September 14, but in Charger
Stadium (capacity 50,000). Admission would be by
ticket and there would be pre-program entertainment
and post-speech fireworks.
In view of the tenuous situation with the television networks, we
recommend that the President deliver his acceptance speech at the
Convention in Miami and that the speech in San Diego be considered
as his initial campaign address. We also recommend that this
address be delivered indoors on Thursday, September 14, 1972, at
7:00 p.m. The program would be developed in a rally type atmos-
phere and the President's address should be preceded with a
procession of celebrities and entertainment. The site selected,
such as the Convention Hall, might accommodate 5,000 people.
Negotiations should be undertaken with one network to buy thirty
minutes of time to broadcast the President's address.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
The major event on Friday, September 15, 1972, might be to have the
President host a barbecue (or fish fry) at the residence in San
Clemente either on the golf course or the area immediately to the
east. Mike Duval has noted that "both areas at the residence could
easily handle 1,000 plus. "
Mike Duval has recommended that this event be held at noon, or in
mid-afternoon, to permit the participants to fly home that evening.
Our view is that the event should be held from 5:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.
as the conclusion of a series of working sessions that would also
be scheduled. (Our proposed agenda for the two days' activities,
including the working sessions, is attached at Tab A.)
For our guidance, we would appreciate receiving your recommendation
whether the event should be held at:
a. Noon or mid-afternoon
b. From 5:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.
Page Six
4. Cost, It is estimated that, if all the proposed
participants were invited, the two day program would cost approxi-
mately $403,460. That estimate was based upon the following
assumptions:
a. Transportation. It was assumed that charter
aircraft would be utilized to transport the
surrogate candidates; the other members of
the Cabinet; the other Republican Senators;
the other Republican Congressmen; the Under
Secretaries, Assistant Secretaries and Agency
Heads; the 1701 staff members; and, their
spouses between Washington, D.C. and San
Diego. That includes approximately 660
people, which would require five aircraft
at approximately $22,000 each.
$110,000
It was also assumed that we would pay the
cost of coach class, round trip transporta-
tion for the 300 campaign chairmen,
campaign finance chairmen, campaign execu-
tive directors and their spouses, from
their home states to San Diego
88,500
b. Television Time. Thirty minutes of time
for a network broadcast of the President's
address on September 14, 1972, would cost
between $65,000 and $85,000, depending
upon the network and the number of
affiliate feeds.
80,000
C. Rooms. It was assumed that one-half the
participants might arrive in San Diego
on Wednesday evening and that the
balance would arrive on the chartered
aircraft on Thursday morning. It was
also assumed that all the participants
would overnight in San Diego on Thursday
and Friday nights. The assumed room
cost per person per night was $20 for
a single and $25 for a double.
49,500
Page Seven
d. Food. It was assumed that lunch would
be provided on Thursday; and, that break-
fast and lunch would be provided on
Friday. Other food costs would be borne
by the individual participants.
31,600
e. Barbecue. It was assumed that the
barbecue at the residence would cost
approximately $15.00 per person.
23,700
f. Buses. It was assumed that forty-
three charter buses would be required
to bus the participants between San
Diego and San Clemente on Friday,
September 15, 1972. The cost per bus
for the six hour charter would be
approximately $120.
5,160
8. Rally. The cost of the rally on
Thursday, September 14, 1972, was
estimated at $15,000.
15,000
TOTAL
$403,460
It should be noted that the cost of the "Spirit of '76" and the cost
of landscaping at the residence have not been included in the fore-
going estimate.
If it were decided not to invite all the Republican Congressmen, the
Assistant Secretaries, the Agency Heads and their spouses, the total
number of participants would be reduced to approximately 1,120
participants. Accordingly, the cost of the program would be reduced
and would amount to approximately $309,000.
If the concept of the program is approved, it should be noted that
planning should be commenced as promptly as possible. This is par-
ticularly true in connection with chartering the aircraft and buses
and in negotiating for the television time.
CC: Mr. Herbert L. Porter
TAB A
PROPOSED AGENDA
Thursday, September 14, 1972
9:00 a.m. - 12:00 noon
Arrival and check-in
12:00 noon - 2:00 p.m.
Luncheon, with address by Gov. Reagan
(Host Governor)
2:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.
Working sessions, with addresses by
Mr. Mitchell, Mr. Stans and Sen. Dole
6:00 p.m. - 7:00 p.m.
Indoor rally, with celebrities and
entertainment
7:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m.
Address by the President
7:30 p.m. -
Staff time
Friday, September 15, 1972
7:30 a.m. - 9:00 a.m.
Breakfast buffet
9:30 a.m. - 12:00 noon
Working sessions with addresses by
Gov. Rockefeller, Sen. Goldwater,
Sen. Scott and Cong. Ford
12:30 p.m. - 2:00 p.m.
Luncheon, with address by the Vice
Presidential candidate
3:30 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.
Bus participants to San Clemente
5:00 p.m. - 8:00 p.m.
Barbecue (or fish fry) at San Clemente
8:00 p.m. - 9:30 p.m.
Return to San Diego
Committee for the Re-election of the President
May 1, 1972
MEMORANDUM
CONT IDENT TAL
MEMORANDUM FOR:
THE HONORABLE JOIN N. MITCHELL
THROUGH:
JEB S. MAGRUDER
FROM:
J. CURTIS HERGE
SUBJECT:
Proposal for Major Republican
Conference in San Diego in
September
It has been proposed that the President and Mrs. Nixon host
a two day gathering of Republican leaders in San Diego,
California, during the week after Labor Day. The purpose of
the gathering would be (1) to provide an opportunity for
informal discussions and meetings about campaign strategy
and plans, (2) to provide an attractive and suitable forum
for the initial campaign address by the President, and (3)
to placate, if such is necessary, those residents of San
Diego who may be disturbed over the loss of the Republican
National Convention. The purpose of this memorandum is to
set forth the points which should be considered in connection
with this proposal.
1. Participants. In addition to the President and
Mrs. Nixon and the candidate for Vice President and his wife,
the following groups of individuals might be invited to the
gathering:
Approximate Number of
Group
Individuals in the Group
a. The surrogate candidates
32
b. Members of Cabinet who are
not surrogate candidates
(Connally, Laird and Rogers)
3
C. State campaign chairmen
50
2
d. State GOP chairmen
50
e. Republican Senators who are
not surrogate candidates
35
f. Republican Congressmen who
are not surrogate candidates
(Not including Congressmen
Ashbrook, McCloskey, Schmitz
and Riegle)
171
g. Republican Governors who are
not surrogate candidates
17
h.
Officers, Executive Committee
and Members of the Republican
National Committee, not
including State Chairmen who
are listed above
112
i. Under Secretaries, Assistant
Secretaries and Agency Heads
70
j. State campaign finance chairmen
50
k. State campaign executive
directors
50
1.
Senior members of the White
House staff
15
m. Senior members of the 1701
staff
15
n.
Celebrities for the President
10
O. Athletes for the President
10
p. Republican leaders not listed
above, such as Mayor Lugar,
Dr. Arthur Flemming, etc.
10
Sub-Total
700
Spouses
700
TOTAL
1,400
2. Dates. The dates proposed are Thursday, September 7,
and Friday, September 8.
3. Location. It has been proposed that the meeting
be held in San Diego, which would be a convenient locale
for the President. It is known that adequate hotel accommodations
are available and that facilities such as the Civic Center are
available for the proposed dinner.
3
4.
Format. The program might be developed, as
follows:
Thursday, September 7
9:00 a.m. - 12:00 noon
Check in
12:00 noon - 2:00 p.m.
Reception and Buffet
2:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.
Working sessions
6:00
p.m.
-
7:00
p.m.
Banquet (Black tie)
?
7:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m.
Address by the President
Friday, September 8
9:00 a.m. -- 10:00 a.m.
Breakfast
10:00 a.m.
--
1:00 p.m.
Working sessions
1:00 p.m.
-
2:00 p.m.
Lunch
2:00 p.m.
-
2:30 p.m.
Address by the Vice President
3:00 p.m.
-
4:30 p.m.
Working sessions
6:30 p.m.
-
8:00 p.m.
Barbecue at the golf course
at San Clemente
8:00
p.m.
-
9:30
p.m.
Entertainment and fireworks
display at the golf course
at San Clemente
The tenor of the weekend might be that of the "team" gathering
together 1.0 discuss how they are going to win. The working
sessions should be made known to the press to give the weekend
credibility, but emphasis should be placed on the unity of
spirit, the unanimity of support and the anticipated importance
of the President's address Thursday night.
It will be recalled that President Eisenhower held a similar
gathering in Gettysburg after the Republican National Conven-
tion in 1956. That precedent might be referred to when faced
with the question: "Why is this meeting being held in San
Diego. 11 It could be pointed out that the President (who might
arrive in San Clemente several days ahead of time) could not
accommodate 1,400 people in the Western White House, so San
Diego was the natural locale for the meeting.
4
5. Costs. The cost of the program could range
between $115,000 and $163,000.
It was estimated that, with the exception of air travel
and the banquet, the weekend would cost $60 per couple per
day. The banquet would cost approximately $35 per person.
[State dinners cost approximately $40 per person. That
price includes the printing and mailing of invitations. ]
The projected cost could reach the upper end of the scale
if we were to pay for the air travel expenses of the key
participants. If we were to bear that expense, it would be
less expensive to charter an aircraft. A chartered DC-8,
which holds 141 people, would cost $24,000. The round trip
cost per capita on a chartered plane would be $170, as com-
pared with a cost per capita of $310 on a commercial flight.
It appears that two aircraft would be required to transport
the surrogate candidates, the Members of the Cabinet, the
Under Secretaries, Assistant Secretaries, Agency Heads and
1701 staff. It is assumed that the White House staff would
travel on the "Spirit of '76."
6. Other activities in San Diego on September 7-8.
a. U.S. Travel Service Convention, Town and Country llotel,
September 4-9
b. California Police 01ympics, Hilton Inn, September 5-9
C. Provident Mutual Life Insurance Convention, Hotel Del
Cornado, September 5-9.
CC: JSM working
JSM chron
JSM subject
HLP chron
HLP subject
JCH
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
May 11, 1972
ADMINISTRATIVELY CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR:
GORDON STRACHAN
FROM:
L. HIGBY
Now that Haldeman is locked into the Ehrlichman Monday/Thursday
political meetings, we should make sure there is a Talking Paper
prepared for him for each one of these meetings that raises, or
gives him the opportunity to raise those subjects regarding the
Campaign operation that need to be settled.
Will you please take this on as an assignment. Make sure that we
have the Talking Paper by Wednesday at noon to review and that
he has it in his Wednesday evening material each time.
Also, Magruder was supposed to be sending over to me a letter
or memorandum of understanding on how the surrogate program
was to work. Would you please make sure we get this from
Magruder before the week is out.
Thank you.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
May 2, 19'
Male MS 1 mally
have
ADMINISTRATIVELY CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR:
H. R. HALDEMAN
there
FROM:
L. Daily HIGBY Political L Meetings
SUBJECT:
Uwak Doort
In his memorandum to you, April 29, (attached) the President
raised with you the importance of meeting with the political
group and developing the strategies with regard to the key
Thus
Democratic candidates. This also raises once again the need
you have expressed to establish a daily political meeting.
I would be my recommendation that you begin this meeting as
soon as possible so that it is an operational fact, prior to the
departure for Russia. Also, the meeting could be a convenient
vehicle for making some long-term assignments that could be
worked on during the Russian period.
Three immediate issues come to mind:
1. Strategy for all key candidates -- The meeting would
comply with the President's request for our coordinated
strategies on McGovern, Humphrey and Kennedy.
2. Our stance on the key issues -- Ehrlichman, for the
past three weeks, I believe, was supposed to be developing
these, but so far nothing has come about. The meeting would
be a good vehicle to use to press Ehrlichman into action.
2
3. Political line -- The meeting could be used to set
the appropriate political line on the issues raised in
the morning News Summary that may be in doubt. It
would act as a guidance vehicle, a check on Colson,
and give Mitchell the feeling that this area is being
pulled together.
Per your earlier instruction, the participants in the meeting
would be Mitchell, Colson, Ehrlichman and MacGregor. If
this is still the case, I would suggest that you hold the first
meeting on Wednesday, May 3, immediately following the
8:15 a.m. staff meeting.
Gordon Strachan should sit in on these daily meetings as note-
taker (although I'd sure like to do so).
Attachment
April 29, 1972
Set Up
Mtybere
MEMORANDUM FOR:
H. R. HALDEMAN
FROM:
THE PRESIDENT
I think it is important that you meet with the political group,
including, of course, Mitchell and try to develop a strategy
with regard to McGovern, Humphrey, and Teddy Kennedy.
I want to be sure that we don't go off in all directions. By
the end of next week I think we should pretty well have in
mind what we expect is going to develop, and by that time,
we should synchronize our own efforts to attempt to contri-
bute to the kind of result we want. I would like to see a report
on this by the end of next week.
Mitchell
Ma & Hregor.
Colson
Ehrlichmane
RN:kb
1
j
Malel
News
from
the Committee
for the Re-election
of the President
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006 (202) 333-0920
FOR RELEASE, AM, MONDAY, JUNE 5
CONTACT: DeVan L. Shumway
202/333-7060
NIXON CAMPAIGN STAFF
#5-41
WASHINGTON -- John N. Mitchell, Campaign Director of the Committee for the
Re-election of the President, today announced the positions held by certain
key personnel of that committee.
Jeb S. Magruder of Los Angeles, former Deputy Director of Communications
for the Executive Branch who has been serving as campaign coordinator since
the Committee was formed in May, 1971, was named Chief of Staff.
Fred C. LaRue of Jackson, Miss. was appointed Special Assistant to
the Campaign Director. He held the same post in the 1968 campaign and has also
served as a Special Consultant to the President.
Harry S. Flemming of Alexandria, Va., and Robert C. Mardian of Pasadena,
Calif., were named Special Assistants to the Campaign Director for Political
Affairs.
Flemming, formerly a Special Assistant to the President and vice president
of an electronics manufacturing firm, also published four weekly newspapers
in Virginia.
Mardian is a former Vice President and General Counsel of Wesco Financial
Corporation and its principal subsidiary, Mutual Savings and Loan Association.
He recently resigned as an Assistant Attorney General of the United States.
Mr. Mitchell also appointed three political coordinators.
Allan G. Kaupinen -- former executive with Procter and Gamble Co. in
Cincinnati, Cleveland, Philadelphia and New York City. Now lives in Alexandria
Virginia.
(more)
2-2-2-2
NIXON CAMPAIGN STAFF
Donald M. Mosiman of Indianapolis, Ind. -- former Deputy and Assistant
Attorney General for the State of Indiana and an Assistant Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency in 1971 and early 1972.
Clayton Yeutter of Lincoln, Nebraska -- formerly an Executive Assistant
to the Governor of Nebraska and past Chairman of the Board, Platte Valley
Packing Co., Cozad, Neb.
Clifford A. Miller, a Los Angeles-based business and public relations
consultant, will serve as Consultant to the Campaign Director.
Murray M. Chotiner of Springfield, Va., will serve as Director of
Ballot Security. He is an experienced political organizer and lawyer in
Washington, who has served as Special Counsel to the President.
Peter H. Dailey, President of Dailey and Associates, Los Angeles, is
Director of Advertising, heading a campaign advertising task force in New
York City known as the November Group.
Jon Foust of Hammond, Ind., Director of Surrogate Services, was formerly
accounting manager of the Sacramento Regional Office of All State Insurance Co.
Mrs. Pat Hutar of Chicago, former Co-Chairman of the Young Republican
National Federation (1961-63) and Assistant Chairman of the Republican
National Committee (1963064), is Director of Volunteers. She is presently
Second Vice President of the National Federation of Republican Women.
Dr. Robert H. Marik of Agoura, Calif., Director of Planning and Research,
holds a Ph.D. in chemical engineering from Carnegie Mellon University and a
masters degree in Industrial Management from the University of Southern
California. He has held several top management posts in research-oriented
corporations.
Robert C. Odle, Jr. of Port Huron, Mich. is Director of Administration
with responsibility for staffing and maintaining the campaign headquarters. A
(more)
3-3-3-3
NIXON CAMPAIGN STAFF
veteran of the 1968 campaign, he holds a law degree from The Detroit College of
Law.
Herbert L. (Bart) Porter of Monrovia, Calif., Scheduling Director,
is a former Vice President and Director of National Computing Industries, Phoenix.
Glenn J. Sedam, Jr. of Great Falls, Virginia, the Committee's General
Counsel, was formerly with the Washington law firm of Steptoe and Johnson.
DeVan L. Shumway of Salt Lake City was appointed Director of Public Affairs.
He was Western Political Editor of United Press International from 1963 to 1969,
serving with UPI for 19 years.
Robert M. Teeter, Vice President of Market Opinion Research, Detroit,
and former Field Representative for the Michigan Republican State Central Committee,
will serve as Director of Polling.
In addition, Mr. Mitchell announced that Mrs. Nancy Brataas of Rochester,
Minn. will serve as Director of Telephone Operations and L. Robert Morgan
of Houston as Director of Direct Mail Operations assisting the Director of
Planning and Research.
Mrs. Brataas was Minnesota Republican State Chairwoman for three terms
(1963-69) and a delegate to the last three Republican National Conventions.
Morgan joined the Committee from the Reuben H. Donnelley Corporation
where he was Southwest Regional Sales Manager.
30
Committee for the Re-election of the President
MEMORANDUM
April 13, 1972
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR:
THE HONORABLE JOHN N. MITCHELL
THROUGH:
JEB S. MAGRUDER
FROM:
ROBERT MORGAN
SUBJECT:
Voter Registration Test
In a recent meeting, Herman Bloom, Executive Director of
the Pennsylvania Committee for the Re-election of the President,
presented a voter registration proposal. Ed DeBolt was of the
opinion that the RNC "target" method produced more effective
results. The meeting adjourned with the agreement that we
test both methods and closely follow costs per new voter. The
evaluation should be on cost per new voter and the number of
new voters per volunteer.
The DeBolt voter registration technique is well known:
1. Volunteers gather on a Saturday.
2. Streets are assigned.
3. Volunteers knock on all doors and check
on registration.
4. Volunteers meet back at the starting spot.
5. The names of the Republican leaning non-
registered voters are given to the local
organization to register.
The Bloom method works this way:
1. A list of registered voters is acquired on
magnetic tape for a city.
2. This registration list is passed by a list
of all households in the same area.
3. The non-registered voters are then printed
out in two groups --
-households with telephones
--households with cars but no
telephones or have unlisted
telephones.
CONF IDENTIAL
4. Volunteers now call all non-registered voter
households on the phone to determine their
party preference. Then they have them
registered by the local organization.
5. Volunteers go door to door only to those
households without telephones to determine
their party preference and then give the
names to the local organization to register.
We are initiating this request instead of the field organization
because the development of the registered voter list and the
list of the other non-registered households come under the
direct mail responsibility. The feasibility and techniques
have been discussed with Harry Flemming's S people and they look
forward to a test as described. Herman Bloom has been dis-
cussing this with us and we in turn have been keeping Harry
Flemming's people informed.
The budget to accomplish these tests will be spent on software,
registered list acquisition, computer time to identify the
non-registered households, putting the telephone numbers on
the tape by computer and developing the computer printouts
necessary to technically accomplish the test as designed.
Recommendation
That you approve a test in Pennsylvania that will evaluate both
methods of voter registration. This test will not exceed
$4,500 in direct costs.
Approve
Disapprove
Comments
X
CONFIDENTIAL
6/1
Fm
Personnell - biggest prol
- J8m area - no attack man
meechan- - turned deen
- no adeq PR for cat's -
Milleis a mistalle
Only angela Harris Parmisgup
need new person
cwc proj nans terrible
except for Relation in
pr area
PR
- when - worthless Yould
- Evans - older"om
- Balzano 7 "
Ellnnics
- mahu /Conde - OK
- Scott - Blades - Pain
- Uets - Rhat - supere
- Laber + Don Rodgers -
nepr r but OK
Solution:
1
Rhatican oversee
Hire PT types at 1701
2
Dr consult Consteter
Ethnics - Brips De F alco learny
John Worth - begins men
Pub pushing aRis Rx avon -
FM- Ethnics memo Pa JM.
all Const Grp Plans resolvedu/Tm
industry holor —
Cits Pean
Iransient /5m Come neat
meet cel
Dill ncadoo week
ChullSheared - Cets w/ LaTendre
as assis
Pol Coordinators
al Koup - the best
behind Flemm - open time feel
Months Mosimon - pretty good
rest of
compleel under had
(dring! Lahue maRue
drinks disclosing w Jerry Jenes
guy for
Jerry Jones to Cal cel Romer &
long time
mandion time peon. wore
wasted - all derec's
- shoots On / hip
JON deeping him in line
- jumps in + out of projs
Domes Cerenul - CD - 20 mins
on pol over- Most on Cegenda Rol 73 Lears
6/6
cuc
It There appeal
on Blair use Dinness
Poe Mtg- - men e IE
H/JM mtg this
GeorgeCoble- - Family in MB.
Conven Hang No family w/ Hat KB
Conern mtg - yesterday Chapen
Proe w/Fm him poot
Elee scothing
April 30, 1972
F
FU
MEMORANDUM FOR:
JOHN MITCHELL
5/10
A-M
FROM:
H. R. HALDEMAN
Following up on some of the things we covered on the
phone over the weekend, and some I amy not have raised
with you --
Can't we get Ashbrook to pull out now by working through
Lee Kaieser and Bill Buckley and then try to build some
party unity? This would be a dramatic move on his part,
of course. and would make Asabrook a big man. Can we
work on Parkinson to turn 066 his deal in this regard?
The President is concerned that nothing has been done on
arrangements with Manny Garcia. It was supposed to have
been set up to have someone give him a retainer and
apparently Bebe has talked with the President about the
fact that nothing has been done on this and the President
is very much concerned.
Math
On Ray Bliss, I will wait until you say we should bring
him in to see the President and then we will set something
up on your recommendation.
As I mentioned, the President wants you to consider the
use 06 Walker's Cay for meetings with high-level people
and select groups. 16 you want to have a strategy session
with the Rockefellers and Reagan types or with your state
leaders or something of that sort, this is the place that
can be used for that purpose. It can accomodate 200 people
at the present time.
2
The President wants us to start some very basic
planning on the California kick-off deal that
I discussed with you on the phone. This, in his
mind, would be a two-day operation with a big night
time gathering 06 all the people in the San Diego
Convention Hall for a major speech by the President.
It would be barbecues or picnics at the President's
residence in San Clemente, with maybe the candidates
on one day and the Campaign leadership on the sedond
day. This would also provide the opportunity for the
President to meet with the Campaign wheels from time
to time during the sessions while they are out there.
It should be made a big deal with all the GOP State
Chairmen, National Committeemen, and so forth, and
they should all stay in San Diego for obvious reasons.
The question was raised as to whether we are putting
enough young people in positions of major responsibility
in the Campaign.
HRH:
I
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
June 5th
Note for Bob Haldeman - -
I thought you would be interested
in the attached.
7m
Fred Malek
Attachment
Committee
for the Re-election
of the President
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006 (202) 333-0920
May 30, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
JEB S. MAGRUDER
PRED MALEK
FROM:
KEN RIETZ
. I thought you would be interested in the attached
articles from the student leaders press conference
in Los Angeles Monday. A full report on press cov-
erage is coming from Jack Easton.
CAMPUS BACKING FOR CHIEF EXECUTIVE TOLD IN CONFERENCE HERE
"Strong support by more than 100 student leaders claimed by group
Students Tell
Of Support
For Nixon
Eleven college student body
leaders from across the nation
today declared their support for
President Richard Nixon's re-ei-
ection. adding that there is
much more backing for him on
the nation's campuses than most
A-12 Los Angeles Herald-Examiner, Monday, May 22, 1772
people realize.
The students, who said they
have the backing of over 100
student leaders across the coun-
try. outlined their reasons for
supporting Nixon at a news con-
ference at the Lns Angeles
Press Club.
Kent Clemence. 22. student
body president at the University
of Southern California. said
claims that "all the students"
were against Nixon's policies
were "hogwash," and that there
was "strong" support for the
President at USC.
John Ramey. 22. student body
president at South Dakota State
University, said a recent mock
election on his campus in the
home state of Sen. George Mc-
Govern was won by Nixon.
Ralph Anderson. 21. student
body president at the University
of Washington, said he is im-
pressed with Nixon's foreign
and domestic expertise.
Gregg Adams. 20. of Wabash
University in Indiana, said he
strongly agrees with Nixon's
foreign policies. while Jeff Wis-
well, 21, of the University of
Wisconsin. sees the trip 10
China as a stroke of "diplomat-
ic genius."
Mark Tults. 21. of Brandeis
University. said the President ist
"responsive to the needs of
Americans," and Inc Phasta. 20.
of the University of San Fran-
cisen, landed Nixon's foreign
and domestre policies.
A-Las Angeles Herald-Examiner, Tuesday, May 23, 1972
A-11
Herald-Ex-miner
PRESIDENT NIXON'S RE-CLECTION BOOSTED BY 11 COLLEGE STUDENT BODY LEADERS
Claim that all the students' were against the President's policies is labeled 'hogwash'
STUDENT LIADERS BOOST NIXON
President Richard Nixon's cody president at the University Nixon is "moving to meal our tens to them."
re-election has been gard 2 of Washington, said be 15 im- domestic needs.' and Roger. L. Patrick Mosher. 2. of
boost by 11 college student body presed with Necon's domestic Lee. 22. of the University of Al- University of Texas. said :
leaders from across the coun- and fore gn policies.
try. who said there is much Greez Adams. 20, of Wabash
abama, said the people of the President's stands on econo
South realize the President "listeontrols impress him.
more backing for the Chief Ex- University in Indiana. said he
ecutive on the nation's campus- agrees with the President's for.
CS than most people 103L20. cogn policies. while Jeff Wis-
The young leaders. who said well. 21. of the University of
they have the backing of mere; Wisconsin, saw the trip to China
than 100 student leaders acrossies a stroke of adiplematic gen-
the nation, outlined their
sons for supporting the Presi- Mark Tulis, 21. of Brandeis
dent during a news conference University, said the President is
yesterday at the Los Angeles "responsive to the needs of
Press Ciub.
Americans." and The Plasta. 20.
Kent Clemence. 22. studenting the University of San Fran-
body president at the University CISCO. lauded the President's
of Southern California. said foreign and domestic stands.
claims that "all the students" Bruce Bishop, 20, of Old Do.
were against Mr. Nicon's poll- minion College in Virginia, said
of
cies were "hogwash" and That
there was "stronz" support for
the President at USC.
John Ramay. 22, student body
president at South Dakota State
University, said a recent mock
election on his campus in the
home state of Sen. George Mc-
Govern was win by President
Nixon.
Ralph Anderson, 21, student
STUDENTS FOR NIXON-USC student body president Kent Clemence,
leaders from 11 colleges across country. Clemence anrounced formotion
second from right, speaks of news conference held here by student
of group to organize students backing reelection of President Nixon.
Times photo b5 Joe Kennedy
Student Leaders
Launch Drive for
Nixon Reelection
A drive to organize students who
support President Nixon's bid for
reelection was launched Monday by
student body presidents from 11 col-
leges across the country
Kent Clemence, student body
president at USC. announced the
formation of the Student Leaders
for the President Committee and
said the group would attempt to dis-
2* Los Singsles Times
Tues. May 23, 1972-Partl
3
prove that most students are op-
posed to President Nixon's policies
eni favor Sen. George S. McGovern
(D-S.D.) for President.
In news conference at the Great-
er Los Angeles Press Club. 11 stu-
dent leaders said the President's
support on college campuses would
become evident as the campaign
starts
Speaking of students who have
demonstrated to protest U.S. in-
volvement in Vietnam, Clemence
said:
"All students want peace. But the
great balk still want to show their
ovn political leanings through the
ballot box and not by rock throwing,
burning ROTC buildings and seizing
classrooms."
100 Return Pledges
In January, Clemence sent a letter
seeking support for the President to
the student body governments of
about 500 schools. The result so far,
he said, 13 more than 100 student
leaders who have pledged their sup-
port About 30 are student body
presidents at junior colleges, col-
legos or universities.
The students attending the press
conference tepresented 10 georra-
phic parts of tite country. Those
from out of the Los Angeles area
were Bown here by the Committee
to Reelect the President
They indicated that support for
Mr. Nixon already has surfaced in
some mock elections held on college
campuses that have resulted in the
President defeating McGovern.
The home states of both McGovern
and Gov. George Wallace were rep-
rescured at the news conference.
Roter Lee. student body pic ident
at the University of Airhama, said
be visited the Prr prient in
the state" unless Wallace 12 the
Democrate presidential nominee
John Berev. student bely PTAS
Ident a* the unders of Smith Dr.
c'= of 1'1' MeGn on
VPIN, and emport among st's CAST
in tis Mare
MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
June 1, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
H. R. HALDEMAN
FROM:
FRED MALEK 7um
SUBJECT:
Weekly Activity Reports
Each of the Voting Bloc Directors submits a weekly activity report to
me in addition to the regular meetings we hold. I thought the attached
report outlined a sufficiently interesting activity to forward it to you.
Attachment
5/22
Committee for the Re-election of the President
MEMORANDUM
May 22, 1972
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR:
FRED MALEK
FROM:
FRANK NAYLOR
SUBJECT:
Weekly Activity Report
1. Summary of Past Week
The veterans continued work with organized veteran groups
to generate congressional mail in support of the
President's Vietnam action. Efforts were concentrated
at selected Senators during the latter part of the
week.
Friday, Saturday and part of Sunday were spent in
Wichita working with the Gold Star Mothers, the Jaycees
and the American Legion. Plans were finalized for
parades which were held to support the President's
recent actions and petition efforts were developed
which took place over the weekend. A large 39' X 72'
flag, manufactured by the Gold Star Mothers, was
erected on a major downtown building in Wichita and
this activity received good regional press coverage.
Three Gold Star Mothers who lost sons in Vietnam will
travel to Washington from Wichita, Kansas, to present
a petition at the White House on Tuesday, the 23rd.
On Thursday a meeting was held in Kansas City, Missouri,
with the Executive heads of the VFW, Julian Dickson
and Curt Jewell, and the head of the ladies auxiliary.
Appreciation for their support and work on behalf of
the President was expressed and upcoming campaign
activities were reviewed.
State chairmen for the Veterans Committee were named in
Illinois and California.
CONFIDENTIAL
Memo to Fred Malek
-2-
May 22, 1972
2. Problems - None
3. Major Activities Planned for Coming Week
- Presentation of petition by Gold Star Mothers and
Kansas State American Legion Commander on Tuesday,
the 23rd, at the White House. Arrangements for
press coverage of event are being made.
- Selection of balance of veterans chairmen in key states.
- Development of veterans chairmen handbook.
- Setting up of schedule for field meetings with
the veterans state chairmen who have been
appointed.
4. Travel - None
5. Personnel
Laughlin Waters - California Veterans Chairman
A1 Keller - Illinois Veterans Chairman
CONFIDENTIAL
Document source description
This file contains:
Title:Tentative Budget. This document discusses voting blocs and citizens, youth, black vote, ethnic, agriculture, Jewish, older American, Veterans, Labor Spanish speaking, tranient, etc. 15 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Report], 4/24/1972
From Fred Malek to H.R. Haldeman. RE: Progress Report on Campaign Activities. 31 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/5/1972
From Gordon Strachan to H.R. Haldemad. Re: Mitchell Political Meeting--June 7, 1972. 6 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/8/1972
From Robert M. Teeter to The Honorable John N. Mitchell. RE: Final First Wave Analysis. 8 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/11/1982
From Gordon Strachan to H.R Haldeman. RE: Campaign Meeting. 7 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 4/26/1972
Hand written document discussing notes on Democrat campaign results. 4 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], no date
Talking Paper discussing McGovern primary results. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], no date
Handwritten Note. RE: Mitchell Political Meeting May 18, 1972. 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], 5/19/1972
Handwritten Note discussing Final 1st Wave Analysis. Also included, Analysis on Campaign and Advertising Strategies. 18 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], 5/18/1972
From Finance Committee for the Re-Election of the President to Gordon Strachan. RE: White House Support List. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/31/1972
Title: Western Regional Finance Chairman for Nixon. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Report], no date
From Devan L. Shumway, through Jeb S. Magruder, to Honorable John N. Mitchell. RE: Financial Report. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/30/1972
From Harry S. Dent to Honorable John N. Mitchell. RE: Political Issues Group Meeting Thursday, May 18, 1972. 5 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/24/1972
From Max Friedersdorf to Harry Dent. RE: Congressman McCloskey. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/25/1972
From Norris Cotton, U.S. Senator to Honorable Harry S. Dent. Discusses Cotton's gratitude to Dent for speaking at the annual May luncheon of the Federation of Republican Women's Clubs. 1 pg [Subject: Campaign] [Letter], 5/23/1972
From Lyn Nofziger to Ronald Reagan. RE: California Campaign (Week Ending 20 May 1972). 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/22/1972
From Lyn Nofziger to Ronald Reagan. RE: California Campaign (Week Ending 13 May 1972) 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/15/1972
Handwritten document. Notes on McGovern and concerned Democrats. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], 6/5/1972
From Gordon Strachan to Jeb Magruder. RE: RNC Registration. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/31/1972
From J. Curtis Herge, through Jeb S. Magruder, to Honorable John N. Mitchell. RE: Proposal for Campaign Kick-off Event in San Diego and San Clemente September 14 and 15, 1972. 12 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/18/1972
Form L. Higby to Gordon Strachan. Discussing preparing Talking Paper regarding Campaign operations for Haldeman/Ehrlichman meetings. 1pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/11/1972
From L. Higby to H.R. Haldeman. RE: Daily Political Meetings. 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/2/1972
News From the Committee for the Re- Election of the President. Discussing positions held by certain key personnel of the committee. 4 pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Newsletter], 6/5/1972
From Robert Morgan, through Jeb S. Magruder, to Honorable John N. Mitchell. RE: Voter Registration Test. 4 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 4/13/1972
From H.R. Haldeman to John Mitchell. Follow-up on Ashbrook pulling-out, Parkinson turning of his deal. President's concern with Nancy Garcia, Ray Bliss meeting with President, Walker's Cay, and California kick-off deal. 2pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 4/30/1972
From Ken Rietz to Jeb S. Magruder and Fred Malek. Topic: Student leaders press conference in Los Angeles. Includes an article. 5 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/30/1972
From Fred Malek to H.R. Haldeman. RE: Weekly Report. 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/1/1972
From Gordon Strachan to Larry Higby. RE: Stan's Dinner. 2 pgs. [Subject: White House Staff] [Memo], 5/15/1972
Handwritten Note. This document discusses poll meetings. 1 pg. [Subject: White House Staff] [Other Document], 6/6/1972
Page data
- Page
- 1
- Source index
- 0
- Type
- document
- Media ID
- c439a325a0d098ea
- Size
- unknown
Document data
- ID
- 26145976
- Core
- doc
- Type
- document
DTO data
{
"id": "26145976",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26145976",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "WHSF: Contested, 32-4",
"description": "This file contains:\n\nTitle:Tentative Budget. This document discusses voting blocs and citizens, youth, black vote, ethnic, agriculture, Jewish, older American, Veterans, Labor Spanish speaking, tranient, etc. 15 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Report], 4/24/1972\n\nFrom Fred Malek to H.R. Haldeman. RE: Progress Report on Campaign Activities. 31 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/5/1972\n\nFrom Gordon Strachan to H.R. Haldemad. Re: Mitchell Political Meeting--June 7, 1972. 6 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/8/1972\n\nFrom Robert M. Teeter to The Honorable John N. Mitchell. RE: Final First Wave Analysis. 8 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/11/1982\n\nFrom Gordon Strachan to H.R Haldeman. RE: Campaign Meeting. 7 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 4/26/1972\n\nHand written document discussing notes on Democrat campaign results. 4 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], no date\n\nTalking Paper discussing McGovern primary results. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], no date\n\nHandwritten Note. RE: Mitchell Political Meeting May 18, 1972. 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], 5/19/1972\n\nHandwritten Note discussing Final 1st Wave Analysis. Also included, Analysis on Campaign and Advertising Strategies. 18 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], 5/18/1972\n\nFrom Finance Committee for the Re-Election of the President to Gordon Strachan. RE: White House Support List. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/31/1972\n\nTitle: Western Regional Finance Chairman for Nixon. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Report], no date\n\nFrom Devan L. Shumway, through Jeb S. Magruder, to Honorable John N. Mitchell. RE: Financial Report. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/30/1972\n\nFrom Harry S. Dent to Honorable John N. Mitchell. RE: Political Issues Group Meeting Thursday, May 18, 1972. 5 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/24/1972\n\nFrom Max Friedersdorf to Harry Dent. RE: Congressman McCloskey. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/25/1972\n\nFrom Norris Cotton, U.S. Senator to Honorable Harry S. Dent. Discusses Cotton's gratitude to Dent for speaking at the annual May luncheon of the Federation of Republican Women's Clubs. 1 pg [Subject: Campaign] [Letter], 5/23/1972\n\nFrom Lyn Nofziger to Ronald Reagan. RE: California Campaign (Week Ending 20 May 1972). 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/22/1972\n\nFrom Lyn Nofziger to Ronald Reagan. RE: California Campaign (Week Ending 13 May 1972) 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/15/1972\n\nHandwritten document. Notes on McGovern and concerned Democrats. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], 6/5/1972\n\nFrom Gordon Strachan to Jeb Magruder. RE: RNC Registration. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/31/1972\n\nFrom J. Curtis Herge, through Jeb S. Magruder, to Honorable John N. Mitchell. RE: Proposal for Campaign Kick-off Event in San Diego and San Clemente September 14 and 15, 1972. 12 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/18/1972\n\nForm L. Higby to Gordon Strachan. Discussing preparing Talking Paper regarding Campaign operations for Haldeman/Ehrlichman meetings. 1pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/11/1972\n\nFrom L. Higby to H.R. Haldeman. RE: Daily Political Meetings. 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/2/1972\n\nNews From the Committee for the Re- Election of the President. Discussing positions held by certain key personnel of the committee. 4 pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Newsletter], 6/5/1972\n\nFrom Robert Morgan, through Jeb S. Magruder, to Honorable John N. Mitchell. RE: Voter Registration Test. 4 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 4/13/1972\n\nFrom H.R. Haldeman to John Mitchell. Follow-up on Ashbrook pulling-out, Parkinson turning of his deal. President's concern with Nancy Garcia, Ray Bliss meeting with President, Walker's Cay, and California kick-off deal. 2pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 4/30/1972\n\nFrom Ken Rietz to Jeb S. Magruder and Fred Malek. Topic: Student leaders press conference in Los Angeles. Includes an article. 5 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/30/1972\n\nFrom Fred Malek to H.R. Haldeman. RE: Weekly Report. 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/1/1972\n\nFrom Gordon Strachan to Larry Higby. RE: Stan's Dinner. 2 pgs. [Subject: White House Staff] [Memo], 5/15/1972\n\nHandwritten Note. This document discusses poll meetings. 1 pg. [Subject: White House Staff] [Other Document], 6/6/1972",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26145976",
"collections": [
"Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection",
"Contested Materials Files"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/76/1459/26145976/content/presidential-libraries/nixon/RN-RET/2546065/Contested-Box-32/Contested-32-04.pdf",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/76/1459/26145976/content/presidential-libraries/nixon/RN-RET/2546065/Contested-Box-32/Contested-32-04.pdf",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/76/1459/26145976/content/presidential-libraries/nixon/RN-RET/2546065/Contested-Box-32/Contested-32-04.pdf",
"imageCount": 1,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Context sent to Scholar
Document identity
{
"localId": "26145976",
"label": "WHSF: Contested, 32-4",
"core": "doc",
"dtoType": "document",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26145976"
}
Document source metadata
{
"id": "26145976",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26145976",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "WHSF: Contested, 32-4",
"description": "This file contains:\n\nTitle:Tentative Budget. This document discusses voting blocs and citizens, youth, black vote, ethnic, agriculture, Jewish, older American, Veterans, Labor Spanish speaking, tranient, etc. 15 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Report], 4/24/1972\n\nFrom Fred Malek to H.R. Haldeman. RE: Progress Report on Campaign Activities. 31 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/5/1972\n\nFrom Gordon Strachan to H.R. Haldemad. Re: Mitchell Political Meeting--June 7, 1972. 6 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/8/1972\n\nFrom Robert M. Teeter to The Honorable John N. Mitchell. RE: Final First Wave Analysis. 8 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/11/1982\n\nFrom Gordon Strachan to H.R Haldeman. RE: Campaign Meeting. 7 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 4/26/1972\n\nHand written document discussing notes on Democrat campaign results. 4 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], no date\n\nTalking Paper discussing McGovern primary results. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], no date\n\nHandwritten Note. RE: Mitchell Political Meeting May 18, 1972. 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], 5/19/1972\n\nHandwritten Note discussing Final 1st Wave Analysis. Also included, Analysis on Campaign and Advertising Strategies. 18 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], 5/18/1972\n\nFrom Finance Committee for the Re-Election of the President to Gordon Strachan. RE: White House Support List. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/31/1972\n\nTitle: Western Regional Finance Chairman for Nixon. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Report], no date\n\nFrom Devan L. Shumway, through Jeb S. Magruder, to Honorable John N. Mitchell. RE: Financial Report. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/30/1972\n\nFrom Harry S. Dent to Honorable John N. Mitchell. RE: Political Issues Group Meeting Thursday, May 18, 1972. 5 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/24/1972\n\nFrom Max Friedersdorf to Harry Dent. RE: Congressman McCloskey. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/25/1972\n\nFrom Norris Cotton, U.S. Senator to Honorable Harry S. Dent. Discusses Cotton's gratitude to Dent for speaking at the annual May luncheon of the Federation of Republican Women's Clubs. 1 pg [Subject: Campaign] [Letter], 5/23/1972\n\nFrom Lyn Nofziger to Ronald Reagan. RE: California Campaign (Week Ending 20 May 1972). 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/22/1972\n\nFrom Lyn Nofziger to Ronald Reagan. RE: California Campaign (Week Ending 13 May 1972) 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/15/1972\n\nHandwritten document. Notes on McGovern and concerned Democrats. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], 6/5/1972\n\nFrom Gordon Strachan to Jeb Magruder. RE: RNC Registration. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/31/1972\n\nFrom J. Curtis Herge, through Jeb S. Magruder, to Honorable John N. Mitchell. RE: Proposal for Campaign Kick-off Event in San Diego and San Clemente September 14 and 15, 1972. 12 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/18/1972\n\nForm L. Higby to Gordon Strachan. Discussing preparing Talking Paper regarding Campaign operations for Haldeman/Ehrlichman meetings. 1pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/11/1972\n\nFrom L. Higby to H.R. Haldeman. RE: Daily Political Meetings. 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/2/1972\n\nNews From the Committee for the Re- Election of the President. Discussing positions held by certain key personnel of the committee. 4 pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Newsletter], 6/5/1972\n\nFrom Robert Morgan, through Jeb S. Magruder, to Honorable John N. Mitchell. RE: Voter Registration Test. 4 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 4/13/1972\n\nFrom H.R. Haldeman to John Mitchell. Follow-up on Ashbrook pulling-out, Parkinson turning of his deal. President's concern with Nancy Garcia, Ray Bliss meeting with President, Walker's Cay, and California kick-off deal. 2pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 4/30/1972\n\nFrom Ken Rietz to Jeb S. Magruder and Fred Malek. Topic: Student leaders press conference in Los Angeles. Includes an article. 5 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/30/1972\n\nFrom Fred Malek to H.R. Haldeman. RE: Weekly Report. 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/1/1972\n\nFrom Gordon Strachan to Larry Higby. RE: Stan's Dinner. 2 pgs. [Subject: White House Staff] [Memo], 5/15/1972\n\nHandwritten Note. This document discusses poll meetings. 1 pg. [Subject: White House Staff] [Other Document], 6/6/1972",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26145976",
"collections": [
"Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection",
"Contested Materials Files"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/76/1459/26145976/content/presidential-libraries/nixon/RN-RET/2546065/Contested-Box-32/Contested-32-04.pdf",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/76/1459/26145976/content/presidential-libraries/nixon/RN-RET/2546065/Contested-Box-32/Contested-32-04.pdf",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/76/1459/26145976/content/presidential-libraries/nixon/RN-RET/2546065/Contested-Box-32/Contested-32-04.pdf",
"imageCount": 1,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras
{
"url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26145976",
"naId": 26145976,
"levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
"recordType": "description",
"ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}
Page context
{
"seq": 1,
"pageIndex": 0,
"type": "document",
"url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/76/1459/26145976/content/presidential-libraries/nixon/RN-RET/2546065/Contested-Box-32/Contested-32-04.pdf",
"mediaId": "c439a325a0d098ea",
"ocrText": "Richard Nixon Presidential Library\nContested Materials Collection\nFolder List\nBox Number\nFolder Number\nDocument Date\nNo Date\nSubject\nDocument Type\nDocument Description\n32\n4\n4/24/1972\nCampaign\nReport\nTitle:Tentative Budget. This document\ndiscusses voting blocs and citizens, youth,\nblack vote, ethnic, agriculture, Jewish, older\nAmerican, Veterans, Labor Spanish\nspeaking, tranient, etc. 15 pgs.\n32\n4\n6/5/1972\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom Fred Malek to H.R. Haldeman. RE:\nProgress Report on Campaign Activities. 31\npgs.\n32\n4\n6/8/1972\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom Gordon Strachan to H.R. Haldemad.\nRe: Mitchell Political Meeting--June 7,\n1972. 6 pgs.\n32\n4\n5/11/1982\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom Robert M. Teeter to The Honorable\nJohn N. Mitchell. RE: Final First Wave\nAnalysis. 8 pgs.\nThursday, August 25, 2011\nPage 1 of 6\nBox Number\nFolder Number\nDocument Date\nNo Date\nSubject\nDocument Type\nDocument Description\n32\n4\n4/26/1972\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom Gordon Strachan to H.R Haldeman.\nRE: Campaign Meeting. 7 pgs.\n32\n4\nCampaign\nOther Document\nHand written document discussing notes on\nDemocrat campaign results. 4 pgs.\n32\n4\n>\nCampaign\nOther Document\nTalking Paper discussing McGovern primary\nresults. 2 pgs.\n32\n4\n5/19/1972\nCampaign\nOther Document\nHandwritten Note. RE: Mitchell Political\nMeeting May 18, 1972. 3 pgs.\n32\n4\n5/18/1972\nCampaign\nOther Document\nHandwritten Note discussing Final 1st Wave\nAnalysis. Also included, Analysis on\nCampaign and Advertising Strategies. 18\npgs.\nThursday, August 25, 2011\nPage 2 of 6\nBox Number\nFolder Number\nDocument Date\nNo Date\nSubject\nDocument Type\nDocument Description\n32\n4\n5/31/1972\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom Finance Committee for the Re-Election\nof the President to Gordon Strachan. RE:\nWhite House Support List. 1 pg.\n32\n4\nCampaign\nReport\nTitle: Western Regional Finance Chairman\nfor Nixon. 1 pg.\n32\n4\n5/30/1972\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom Devan L. Shumway, through Jeb S.\nMagruder, to Honorable John N. Mitchell.\nRE: Financial Report. 2 pgs.\n32\n4\n5/24/1972\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom Harry S. Dent to Honorable John N.\nMitchell. RE: Political Issues Group\nMeeting Thursday, May 18, 1972. 5 pgs.\n32\n4\n5/25/1972\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom Max Friedersdorf to Harry Dent. RE:\nCongressman McCloskey. 2 pgs.\nThursday, August 25, 2011\nPage 3 of 6\nBox Number\nFolder Number\nDocument Date\nNo Date\nSubject\nDocument Type\nDocument Description\n32\n4\n5/23/1972\nCampaign\nLetter\nFrom Norris Cotton, U.S. Senator to\nHonorable Harry S. Dent. Discusses\nCotton's gratitude to Dent for speaking at the\nannual May luncheon of the Federation of\nRepublican Women's Clubs. 1 pg\n32\n4\n5/22/1972\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom Lyn Nofziger to Ronald Reagan. RE:\nCalifornia Campaign (Week Ending 20 May\n1972). 2 pgs.\n32\n4\n5/15/1972\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom Lyn Nofziger to Ronald Reagan. RE:\nCalifornia Campaign (Week Ending 13 May\n1972) 3 pgs.\n32\n4\n6/5/1972\nCampaign\nOther Document\nHandwritten document. Notes on McGovern\nand concerned Democrats. 2 pgs.\n32\n4\n3/31/1972\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom Gordon Strachan to Jeb Magruder.\nRE: RNC Registration. 1 pg.\nThursday, August 25, 2011\nPage 4 of 6\nBox Number\nFolder Number\nDocument Date\nNo Date\nSubject\nDocument Type\nDocument Description\n32\n4\n5/18/1972\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom J. Curtis Herge, through Jeb S.\nMagruder, to Honorable John N. Mitchell.\nRE: Proposal for Campaign Kick-off Event\nin San Diego and San Clemente September\n14 and 15, 1972. 12 pgs.\n32\n4\n5/11/1972\nCampaign\nMemo\nForm L. Higby to Gordon Strachan.\nDiscussing preparing Talking Paper\nregarding Campaign operations for\nHaldeman/Ehrlichman meetings. 1pg.\n32\n4\n5/2/1972\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom L. Higby to H.R. Haldeman. RE:\nDaily Political Meetings. 3 pgs.\n32\n4\n6/5/1972\nCampaign\nNewsletter\nNews From the Committee for the Re-\nElection of the President. Discussing\npositions held by certain key personnel of the\ncommittee. 4 pgs\n32\n4\n4/13/1972\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom Robert Morgan, through Jeb S.\nMagruder, to Honorable John N. Mitchell.\nRE: Voter Registration Test. 4 pgs.\nThursday, August 25, 2011\nPage 5 of 6\nBox Number\nFolder Number\nDocument Date\nNo Date\nSubject\nDocument Type\nDocument Description\n32\n4\n4/30/1972\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom H.R. Haldeman to John Mitchell.\nFollow-up on Ashbrook pulling-out,\nParkinson turning of his deal. President's\nconcern with Nancy Garcia, Ray Bliss\nmeeting with President, Walker's Cay, and\nCalifornia kick-off deal. 2pgs\n32\n4\n5/30/1972\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom Ken Rietz to Jeb S. Magruder and Fred\nMalek. Topic: Student leaders press\nconference in Los Angeles. Includes an\narticle. 5 pgs.\n32\n4\n6/1/1972\nCampaign\nMemo\nFrom Fred Malek to H.R. Haldeman. RE:\nWeekly Report. 3 pgs.\n32\n4\n5/15/1972\nWhite House Staff\nMemo\nFrom Gordon Strachan to Larry Higby. RE:\nStan's Dinner. 2 pgs.\n32\n4\n6/6/1972\nWhite House Staff\nOther Document\nHandwritten Note. This document discusses\npoll meetings. 1 pg.\nThursday, August 25, 2011\nPage 6 of 6\nPresidential Materials Review Board\nReview on Contested Documents\nCollection: H. R. Haldeman\nBox Number: 312\nFolder:\nCampaign 20 Part I May 17-June 6, 1972\nDocument\nDisposition\n59\nReturn Private/Political TENTATIVE BUDGET VOTING BLOCS.. n.d\n60\nRetain\nClose Invasion of Privacy MEMO, STRACHAN TO HRH, 6/6/72\n61\nReturn\nPrivate/Political MEMO, MALEK TO HRH, 6/5/72\n62\nRetain Close Invasion of Privacy MEMD, STRACHAN TO HRH, 6/6/72\n63\nReturn\nPrivate/Political mEmo, MALE'S TO HRH, 6/5/72\n64\nReturn\nPrivate/Political MEMO, STRACHAH TO HRH, 6/8/72\n65\nReturn\nPrivate/Political NOTES, \"Jm, MILLER..., 6/7/72\n66\nReturn\nPrivate/Political NOTES, MF. H. F. G...\", 5/19/72\n67\nReturn\nPrivate/Political MEMO, TEETER TO MITCHELL, 5/11/72\n68\nReturn\nPrivate/Political NOTES, SELFC- DIF BALLS, 5/18/72\n69\nReturn\nPrivate/Political MEMO, STRACHAN TO HIGBY, 5/15/72\n70\nReturn\nPrivate/Political MEMO, NUNN TO STRACHAN, 5/31/72\n71\nReturn\nPrivate/Political PRESS RELEASE, n.d.\n72\nReturn\nPrivate/Political MEMO, SHUMWAY TO MITCHELL, 5/30/72\n73\nReturn\nPrivate/Political MEMO, DENT TO MITCHELL, 5/24/72\n74\nReturn\nPrivate/Political NOTE/ATTACH., DENT TO STRACHAH, 5/26/72\n75\nReturn\nPrivate/Political(TR, COTTON TO DENT, 5/23/72\n76\nReturn\nPrivate/Political MEMO, NOFZIGER TO REAGAN, 5/22/72\n77\nReturn\nPrivate/Political NOTE/ATTACH., MAGRUDER TO HRH, 5/17/72\n78\nRetain\nOpen\n79\nRetain\nOpen\n80\nRetain\nOpen\n81\nRetain Open\n82\nReturn\nPrivate/Political NOTES,\" H. MT6 w/Jm..., nid\nPresidential Materials Review Board\nReview on Contested Documents\nCollection: H. R. Haldeman\nBox Number: 312\n83\nRetain Open\n84\nReturn Private/Political NOTES, \"COLSON, Jm, MAEG. ; 6/5/[72]\n85\nRetain Open\n86\nReturn\nPrivate/Political MEMO, STRACHAH TO 3/31/72\n87\nReturn\nPrivate/Political MEMO, HERGE TO mITCHELL, 5/18/72\n88\nReturn\nPrivate/Political MEMO, HERGE TO mITCHELL, 5/1/72\n89\nReturn\nPrivate/Political MEMO, HIGBY TO STRACHAN, 5/11/72\n90\nReturn\nPrivate/Political MEMO, HIGBY TO HRH, 5/2/72\n91\nReturn\nPrivate/Political PRESS RELEASE, 6/5/[72]\n92\nReturn Private/PoliticalNTS) : Fm DERSONNEL- BIGGEST 0/1/[72]\n93\nRetain\nOpen\n94\nRetain Open\n95\nReturn\nPrivate/Political NOTES, CWC\nI\nH..., 6/6/[77]\n96\nReturn\nPrivate/Political MEMO, HRH TD MITCHELL, 4/30/72\n97\nReturn\nPrivate/Political NOTE/ATTACH, MALE'S TO DHRH, 6/5/[72]\n98\nReturn\nPrivate/Political MEMO, MALEK TO HRH, 6/1/72\nTENTATIVE BUDGET\nVOTING BLOCS AND CITIZENS\nOld\nNew\nGroup\nEstimate (3/7)\nEstimate\nYouth\n$401,000\n$298,000\nBusiness & Industry\n199,000\n184,000\nBlack Vote\n153,000\n137,000\nEthnics\n106,000\n119,000\nOlder Americans\n118,000\n114,000\nAgriculture\n117,000\n134,000\nSpanish Speaking\n103,000\n118,000\nVeterans\n101,000\n107,000\nLabor\n93,000\n100,000\nJewish\n77,000\n82,000\nTransients\n62,000\n66,000\nLawyers\n37,000\n37,000\nPhysicians\n26,000\n26,000\nEducators\n0\n35,000\nWomen\n$04,000\n230,000\nVoters Rights\n109,000\n109,000\nCitizens General and\nFunctional Groups\n350,000\n319,000\nTotal\n$2,461,000\n$2,215,000\nThere forhs should hand be be\nold\n4/24/72\nTENTATIVE BUDGET\nYOUTH DIVE [ON\nStaff\nSalary\nCost\nPresent Staff (per earlier schedule)\n$ 98,000\nWisc. Fieldman (Krueger)\n- 4/7\n10,500\n6,200\nBorder States Fieldman (Davis)\n- 4/7\n10,000\n5,800\nPenn. Fieldman\n- 5/15\n12,000\n6,000\nOhio Fieldman\n- 5/15\n12,000\n6,000\nFarm States Fieldman\n- 6/1\n12,000\n5,500\nMidwest Director\n- 5/15\n18,000\n9,000\nRocky Mtn. & Northwest\nFieldman (Wigger)\n- 5/15\n7,800\n4,000\nConvention staff man (Burkop)\n- 5/1\n7,800\n4,400\nConvention secretary\n- 5/1\n7,200\n2,400\nConvention staff man\n- 5/1\n7,200\n1,800\nConvention secretary\n- 6/1\n7,200\n1,800\nConvention staff man\n- 7/1\n7,200\n1,200\n4 Field secretaries\n- 5/15\n3,000\n12,000\nTotal Staff\n164,100\nPayroll Burden\n10,900\nStaff Travel & Expenses\n60,000\nRent & Supplies for State Hdqtrs.\n10,000\nConvention - Buses & Events\n21,000\nSpecial Brochures & Buttons\n12,000\nState Chmn Travel & Expenses\n5,000\nOrganization Meetings\n5,000\nMisc. Mailings & Promotional Items\n10,000\nTotal\n$ 298,000\nNotes to Youth Budget:\n1. CaHoway (South) or Davis (Border States) will be transferred\nto another area effective 6/15. The remaining man will cover the\nentire Southeast.\n2. Wigger will remain in Oregon until the primary. He will then\nfocus on Washington and all Rocky Mtn. States as well until the\nelection.\n3. N. Y. contingency - in event State does not add 2 full-time\nfieldmen as expected, we may want to add our own fieldman to\nassist in N. Y.\n4. Burhop will stay on after the convention to fill in where needed.\n4/24/\nTENTATIVE BUDGET\nBLACK VOTE DIVISION\nStaff\nSalary\nCost\nDirector (Jones)\n- 4/7\n$ 32,000\nSecretary (Petross)\n- 4/7\n10,000\nAssistant Dir.\n- 5/15\n21,000\nField Coordinator\n- 5/15\n18,000\nField Coordinator\n- 6/1\n18,000\nSecretary\n- 5/15\n8,400\nTotal Staff\n56,500\nPayroll Burden\n4,200\nStaff Travel & Expenses\n15,000\nConsultants/Surrogates - fees & expenses*\n12,500\nOrganization Meetings\n6,000\nFormation of Citizens Committee (mailings & brochures)\n12,000\nMeeting of key Black Leaders\n3,000\nBrochures\n15,000\nNewsletter\n3,000\nContingency\n10,000\nTotal\n$ 137,200\n* Consultants used in certain cities in place of field men - fees of $10,000\nand expenses of $2, 500.\n4/21/72\nTENTATIVE BUDGET\nETHNICS DIVISION*\nStaff\nSalary\nCost\nDirector (\n- 5/15\n$ 30,000\nSecretary\n- 5/15\n8,400\nAsst. to Director\n- 6/15\n18,000\nFieldman\n- 6/15\n18,000\nFieldman\n- 6/15\n18,000\nFieldman\n- 6/15\n18,000\nFieldman\n- 7/15\n18,000\n2 Secretaries\n- 6/15\n16,800\nTotal Staff\n62,200\nPayroll Burden\n4,700\nStaff Travel & Expenses\n28,000\nConsultants & Surrogates Travel\n6,000\nOrganization Meetings\n6,000\nField Meetings/Lxpenses\n7,000\nSpecial Mailings/Promotions\n5,000\nTotal\n$ 118,900\n* Budget is highly tentative and will be finalized when campaign plan\nis completed.\n4/21/72\nTENTATIVE BUDGET\nAGRICULTURE DIVISION\nStaff\nSalary\nCost\nDirector (Yeutter)\n- 4/7\n$ 36,000\nAsst. Director (Foltz)\n- 4/7\n27,000\nField Director (Madson)\n- 4/7\n20,000\nSecretary (Haggert)\n- 4/7\n7,600\nSecretary (Hill)\n- 4/7\n8,000\nFieldman\n- 5/15\n18,000\nFieldman*\n- 6/1\n18,000\nTotal Staff\n134,600\n74,700\nPayroH Burden\n5,600\nStaff Travel & Expenses\n31,000\nSurrogate Travel\n5,000\nOrganization Meetings\n3,200\nField Meetings & State Chairmen Expenses\n10,000\nSpecial Mailings\n4,000\nTotal\n$ 133,500\n4/21/7.\nTENTATIVE BUDGET\nJEWISH DIVISION\nStaff\nSalary\nCost\nDirector (Goldberg)\n- 4/7\n$ 32,000\nSecretary (Peters)\n- 4/17\n10,000\nAsst. Dir. (Greenwald)\n- 4/10\n24,000\nSecretary (Cohen)\n- 4/24\n7,500\nFieldman (Abrams)\n- 5/15\n21,600\nTotal Staff\n95,100\n53,000\nPayrell Burden\n4,000\nStaff Travel & Expenses\n10,000\nConsultant/Surregates Travel\n7,000\nOrganization Meetings\n5,000\nSpecial Mailings\n3,000\nTotal\n$ 82,000\n4/21/7\nTENTATIVE BUDGET\nOLDER AMERICANS DIVISION\nStaff\nSalary\nCost\nDirector (Todd)\n- 4/7\n$ 36,000\nSecretary (Sedlak)\n- 4/7\n10,000\nField Dir. (Mills)\n- 4/7\n14,000\nFieldman (Todd)\n. 4/7\n12,500\nFieldman (Groom)\n- 5/1\n12,000\nSecretary\n. 5/1\n8,500\nTotal Staff\n93,000\n52,000\nField Director\n- 6/15\n18,000\n7,500\nPayroll Burden\n4,500\nStaff Travel & Expenses\n30,000\nSurrogate Travel\n5,000\nOrganization Meetings\n5,000\nField Meetings/Dinners\n5,000\nSpecial Mailings/Promotion\n5,000\nTotal\n$ 114,000\n4/21/71\nTENTATIVE BUDGET\nVITER NIT DIVISION\nStaff\nSalary\nCost\nDirector (Naylor)\n- 4/7\n30,000\nSecretary\n- 4/24\n8,400\nFieldman & Asst. Dir.\n- 5/15\n24,000\nFieldman\n- 6/1\n18,000\nFieldman\n- 8/1\n18,000\nSecretary\n- 6/1\n7,200\nSecretary (part time)\n1,200\nTotal Staff\n51,700\nPayroll Burden\n3,900\nStaff Travel & Expenses\n16,500\nConsultants/Surrogates expenses\n16,000\nOrganization Meetings\n5,000\nField Meetings/expenses\n5,000\nPromotional Items\n6,000\nSpecial Mailings\n3,000\nTotal\n$ 107,100\n4/21/7\nTENTATIVE BUDGET\nLABOR DIVISION\nStaff\nSalary\nCost\nDirector\n- 5/15\n$ 30,000\nField Director\n- 5/15\n24,000\nFieldman\n- 6/15\n18,000\nFieldman\n- 6/15\n18,000\nSecretary\n- 5/15\n9,000\nSecretary\n- 6/15\n8,000\nTotal Staff\n50,000\nPayroll Burden\n3,300\nStaff Travel is Expenses\n18,500\nConsultants/Surrogates expenses\n10,000\nOrganization Meetings\n5,000\nField Meetings/expenses\n5,000\nPromotional Items\n5,000\nSpecial Mailings\n3,000\nTotal\n$ 100,300\n4/24/71\nTENTATIVE BUDGET\nSPANISH SPEAKING DIVISION\nStaff\nSalary\nCost\nDirector (Armendariz)\n- 4/7\n$30,000\nSecretary\n- 4/7\n8,000\nField Director (Gar\n- 5/1\n20,000\nFieldman (Mexican)\n- 5/15\n15,000\nFieldman (PR)\n- 5/15\n15,000\nAsst. to Director\n- 6/1\n15,000\n2 Secretaries\n5/5/15\n16,000\nTotal Staff\n62,200\nPayroll Burden\n4,700\nStaff Travel & Expenses\n21,000\nConsultants/Volunteer expenses\n5,000\nOrganization Meetings\n5,000\nField Meetings/Expenses\n5,000\nSpecial Brochures & Mailings\n5,000\nContingency\n10,000\nTotal\n$ 117,900\n5/2/72\nTENTATIVE BUDGET\nTRANSIENTS (SPECIAL BALLOTS)\nStaff\nSalary\nCost\nDirector (McAdoo)\n- 4/15\n$ 25,000\n$14,500\nSecretary\n- 5/1\n10,000\n5,500\nWestern Field Man\n- 6/15\n13,000\n7,500\nEastern Field Man\n- 6/15\n18,000\n7,500\nTotal Staff\n35,000\nStaff Benefits/Overhead\n2,600\nStaff Tr:vel & Expenses\n18,000\nPrinting & Materials\n10,000\nTotal\n65,600\n5/4/72\nTEN TATIEE BUDGET\nBUSINESS AND INDUSTRY\nStaff\nSalary\nCost\nDirector (Kayser)\n$ 60,000\nAsst. Dir. (Fangboner\n30,000\nAsst. Dir. (Rocchio)\n30,000\nAdmin. Asst. (Harper)\n9,600\nSecretary (Cochran)\n9,600\nSecretary (Koob)\n8,000\nTotal Staff\n147,200\n90,000\nPayroll Burden\n6,800\nMailings\n4,500\nField Kits\n20,000\nStaff Travel & Expenses\n41,500\nOrganization Dinner\n3,000\nRegional Meetings\n8,000\nVisual Aids\n10,000\nTotal\n$ 183,800\n4/24/7:\nTENTATIVE BUDGET\nCITIZENS - C IRAL & FUNC ICNAL GROUPS\nStaff\nSalary\nCost\nCitizens Director (Shourer)\n- 5/8\n$ 36,000\nSecretary\n- 5/8\n9,000\n3 Asst. Directors\n- 6/1\n60,000\n4 Secretaries\n- 6/1\n32,000\n1 Executive Assistant\n- 6/1\n20,000\n4 Part time Secretaries\n- 7/1\n6,000\nTotal Staff\n73,500\nPayroll Burden\n5,500\nNational Citizens Crientation Expenses\n5,000\nTravel & Expenses for National Committee\n5,000\nStaff Travel & Expenses\n20,000\nTravel & Expenses - Consultants & Volunteers\n30,000\nExpenses for each of estimated 30 groups\nOrganization Dinners/meetings\n- 1,000 X 30 =\n30,000\nTravel & Empenses for Chmn & Coms.\n- 2,000 3 30 =\n60,000\nMailings & Brochures\n- 3,000 X 30 #\n90,000\nTotal\n$ 319,000\n5/5/72\nTENTATIVE BUDGET\nVOLUNTEERS/WOMEN\nStaff\nSalary\nCost\nDirector (Hutar)\n- 4/7\n$ 25,000\n$*15,000\nAssistant (Steerts)\n- 4/7\n15,000\n9,000\nAssistant\n- 6/1\n18,000\n8,300\nPR Consultant\n- 5/15\n24,000\n12,000\nSecretary\n- 4/7\n8,400\n5,500\nSecretary\n- 5/15\n9,000\n4,500\nSecretary\n- 9/1\n8,400\n1,500\n3 Regional Field Dirs,\n- 6/1\n14,400\n19,800\n4 Regional Field Dirs.\n- 7/1\n14,400\n21,600\nTotal Staff\n97,200\nPayroll Burden\n7,300\nStaff Travel & Expenses:\nHdqts Staff\n18,000\nRegional Dirs.\n37,000\nVolunteer Manual\n6,000\nTraining Manual\n5,000\nSpeakers Burcau\n10,000\nVolunteer sign-up cards for hospitality suites\n1,000\nHospitality Suites:\nFour regionals and June RNC meeting\n3,000\nHospitality suite during RNC Leadership Conference\n1,300\nSalute to the President Luncheon (telephone hook-up\nto luncheon sites\n10,000\nLetterheads and envelopes\n4,000\nRe-Election Canvass Team and Victory Squad Kits\n5,000\nSpecial volunteer recognition pins, insignia\nfor key leaders\n10,000\nVolunteer Newsletter\n15,000\nTotal\n$ 230,300\nMEMORANDUM\nDETERMIN\nBE\nAN\nKING\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\n6-102\nDate 3-31-82\nWASHINGTON\nBy EP\nCONFIDENTIAL\nJune 5, 1972\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nH. R. HALDEMAN\nFROM:\nFRED MALEK 70m\nSUBJECT:\nProgress Report on Campaign\nActivities\nAs we have discussed, it seems desirable to provide you with monthly\nprogress reports on my campaign-related activities. Since this is the\nfirst report, it reviews overall progress and accomplishments for the\nfirst several months as well as highlighting activities of the past month.\nParticular focus is placed on major problems that we have encountered.\nPROGRESS TO DATE\nInitial Efforts\nMy initial efforts at 1701 were concentrated on developing an overall\nconcept for Citizens and Voting Bloc operations. Briefly, the concept\nthat I developed established two objectives for a 1701 Citizens group\nactivity: (1) Developing a national public relations effort aimed at\npersuading members of a constituent group to vote for the President;\nand (2) Assisting the State Nixon organizations in the establishment of\nfield organizations comprised of members of the particular constituent\ngroup. A Citizens group organization within a state, in turn, has two\nprincipal purposes: (1) To gain support for the President from the\nmembers of that constituency both from word-of-mouth and the conduct\nof special, persuasive programs; and (2) To provide workers for regular\ncampaign activities (voter identification, registration, get-out-the vote,\netc. ). The concept is developed more fully in the copy of a memorandum\nto Mitchell at Tab A. Concurrently with the development of this concept,\nI focused on completing the recruiting of Citizens Directors, the develop-\nment of plans and budgets, and the establishment of White House/1701\nteamwork.\nRecruiting. In the recruiting area, in addition to Directors already on\nboard when I arrived, I have added the following:\n- 2 -\n-- Chuck Shearer (Overall Citizens)\n-- Dick McAdoo (Special Ballots - Transients)\n-- Bill Stover (Physicians)\n-- Dan Piliero (Lawyers)\n-- Frank Naylor (Veterans)\n-- Tony De Falco (Ethnics)\nIn addition, due to the combined efforts of Chuck Colson and myself,\nDon Rodgers was brought on recently to cover the Labor constituency\nboth for the White House and 1701.\nPlans and Budgets. Comprehensive campaign plans for all groups\nexcept Ethnics and Labor have now been developed, and most of these\nhave been reviewed and approved by John Mitchell. Budgets have also\nbeen developed and approved for all Citizens groups, as shown at Tab B.\nMost of the groups are well into the implementation of their plans. At\nthis point in time, the Citizens Directors have' recruited fieldmen and\nother necessary staff, and are concentrating on working with the\npolitical coordinators and the States to develop functioning field organi-\nzations. Many of the Citizens group State Chairmen have already been\nselected. In a few key States, delay in the selection of the State Nixon\nChairmen has held up final selection of the State Citizens group Chair-\nmen. In those cases, I have told the Citizens Directors to proceed to\nset up tentative organizations, contingent on the final approval of the\nState Nixon Chairman, when he is chosen.\nTeamwork. The area of fostering teamwork among the Voting Bloc\nDirectors, the related White House people (Colson's staff, Domestic\nCouncil, Congressional Relations, etc.), and the RNC has been more\ndifficult.\nTo minimize unproductive competitive efforts (such as accusatory memo\nwriting), I have held regular meetings of each constituent group \"team\",\nand tried to discuss problems openly. I feel we are making progress\nhere, although there will always be some bickering. The meeting at\nCamp David (discussed later) was a particularly effective way of get-\nting the individuals to talk out mutual problems.\n- 3 -\nI feel for the most part that we now have fairly harmonious and effective\nteam efforts, although we are hampered by some personnel weaknesses\nas will be discussed later. The most effective teams seem to be in\nSpanish-Speaking, Older Americans, Veterans, and Agriculture.\nDevelopments in May\nSpecific highlights of the past month include: (a) Viet Nam response\nefforts; (b) Development of guidelines for State Chairmen; (c) Camp\nDavid conference; (d) Campaign control system development; and (e)\nCoordination of schedule proposals.\nViet Nam. The work of the Citizens/Voting Bloc groups in generating\na favorable response to the President's Viet Nam initiatives has been\nwell documented to you in other reports. The Citizens/Voting Bloc\ndirectors and their staffs spent most of their time for a full week\ngenerating telegrams and letters to the President, letters to key\nCongressmen, and in organizing events (vigils, petitions, etc. ) to\ndemonstrate support for the President.\nWhile these efforts set regular activities back a bit, the results appear\nto have been more than worthwhile. Evidence of regional media cover-\nage of the various events continues to come in, even at this late date.\nGuidelines. The purpose and content of the various programs offered\nat 1701 (Citizens/Voting Bloc groups, telephone, direct mail, etc.)\nhave never been adequately communicated to the State organizations by\nthe political division. To alleviate the confusion that exists in the field,\nwe are developing a set of guidelines describing each of the programs, its\nnational organization, a suggested State organization, and how the State\nand national operations should relate. This set of guidelines will be com-\npleted next week and sent to each State Chairman. Then, beginning in the\nmiddle of June, each State Chairman will be brought to Washington to\ndiscuss the programs that apply to his State, and to develop a final\nplan for State re-election activities.\nTo date, the Voter Blocs and other 1701 programs have always been at\na more advanced stage of development than the political division. Hope-\nfully, the planning procedure will force the States to catch up.\n- 4 -\nCamp David Conference. As you know, I had the Voting Bloc Directors\nand their counterparts from Colson's staff to Camp David for a one and\none-half day meeting last week. The conference was successful beyond\nmy expectations, both from a substantive and a morale/camaraderie\nstandpoint. A full report on the meeting is on its way to you.\nCampaign Control System. Jerry Jones, now on my staff at 1701 as\nCampaign Controller, spent most of May in California, developing a\nreporting and control system by which campaign management will be\nable to plan and control essential activities such as voter identification\nand registration. I am currently in the process of reviewing the system,\nand it is being pilot-tested in Orange County during the California Primary.\nBill Horton has provided considerable help on this and will continue as\npart of Nofziger's staff (part-time) when he returns to California next\nmonth.\nWe should have a finished product in the next couple of weeks, at which\ntime we will provide you with a complete description of the system.\nSchedule Proposals.\nSchedule proposal packages for the President\nand First Family have been submitted for almost all of the voter blocs.\nLabor is the sole exception, and now that Don Rodgers is on board, we\nwill work with him to develop proposals in this area. The proposals\ncover 5 months and represent the combined efforts of 1701, Domestic\nCouncil, and White House communications staff. We will keep Dave\nParker informed of any changes in priorities, and we look forward to\nreceiving feedback on the proposals already submitted.\nPROBLEMS\nNaturally, the campaign operation is not without problems. Five areas\nthat I consider to be of major concern are discussed below.\n1. Ethnics. The ethnic constituent group will undoubtedly be\ncritical to our success in November. Unfortunately, Tony De Falco,\nthe individual we selected to head up the ethnic effort at 1701, turned\nout to be not suited to the managerial role required of a voting bloc\ndirector. He could not develop a plan for how we should attract the\nethnic vote, nor was he capable of structuring the requisite national\norganization. The situation was compounded by the fact that Mike\nBalzano, the ethnic project manager on Colson's staff, is not a\n- 5 -\nplanner or manager, either.\nTo solve the problem, I have releived De Falco, and am in the process\nof recruiting for a new Director, with a target date of July 1. To\nensure that we do not lose much time, we have already hired a Special\nAssistant to the Director (John Wirth) who will begin Monday to analyze\nthe ethnic demographics and to develop a campaign strategy and plan.\nHopefully, by the time the Director is on board, much of the planning\nwork will be done, and he can turn his energies immediately to field\norganization.\n2. Blacks. Though certainly less important than the ethnics, weak-\nness in the 1701/White House/RNC Black team is also a matter of con-\ncern to me. The extent of the incompetence has become apparent in the\npoor planning of the June 10 Black $100-a-plate fundraiser at the Statler\nHilton. Hopefully, the dinner will be escued from complete failure, but\nthis will not alleviate my worries about a group that thinks that conducting\nregistration drives in Bedford-Stuyvesant would be a good idea.\nThe primary long-range problem is lack of political experience, result-\ning nusatisfactory progress in field-orgnization. Our team just does\nnot know how to organize Black leadership in key urban areas and shows\nno signs of being able to put together the strong organized efforts that\nwe needed in the Black areas of these cities. I have concluded that Paul\nJones (hired at 1701 last January) is simply the wrong man for the job,\nbut we may be stuck with him at this time. Bob Brown has provided only\nlimited support -- he seems to be all rhetoric but little action and follow up.\nWe are taking steps to rectify this, and John Clarke is helping me further\nanalyze the situation and develop suggested courses of action. I hope\nto have this completely planned out by 6/10 with corrective actions begin-\nning immediately. Even though the Blacks might not represent a sig-\nnigicant vote, our effort to get this vote is highly visible, and there is\ncertainly some potential there.\n- 6 -\n3. Business and Industry. The Director of the Business and\nIndustry effort, Paul Kayser, was hired by the Committee before\nI arrived. He has been an irritation, and has shown consistent\npoor judgment in the development of programs and the use of\nresources. Kayser, a former Pepsico Vice President, feels\nthat he is outside the campaign structure and can run around me\nto Don Kendall (the Chairman), which he has done with at least\npartial success on a couple of occasions.\nThis is a problem I will probably have to endure, although I hope\nto alleviate the programmatic weakness by working Cliff White into\nthe Business and Industry area when he comes on board as a con-\nsultant next week.\n4. PR Support. Lack of coordination of PR for some of the Viet\nNam related events and slowness in development of communications\nplans for the Citizens groups have surfaced a weakness in the PR\narea at both 1701 and the White House.\nAt 1701, the problem seems to be lack of manpower -- only 11/2\npersons are assigned to do the PR for all of the Citizens groups.\nThis is simply not enough to accomplish all that needs to be done,\nand after discussion of this problem at Camp David, we have obtained\nJeb's agreement to hire two more full-time people to concentrate on\nCitizens PR.\nAt the White House, the problem seems to be somewhat different.\nSeveral of the White House project managers (e.g., Cohen, Evans,\nand Balzano) are incredibly weak on public relations and have not\nbeen doing the job. The problem is they are simply not experienced\nor able enough to handle the communications responsibility without\nsupport. Consequently, I intend to recommend to Colson that he\nhave Bill Rhatican, who is one of his ablest people in this area,\ndelegate his specific responsibility for Veterans, and instead work\nwith all of the project managers on public relations and communica-\ntions.\n- 7 -\n5. Organizational Relationships. A final major problem area involves\ndevelopment of the relationship between the Citizens/Voting Bloc groups\nand the State organizations. As discussed above, the basic concept is\nthat the national Citizens organizations exist to serve the States. How-\never, while recognizing the final authority of the Nixon State Chairman\nwithin his State, we must nevertheless ensure that he gives full consid-\neration to programs developed by the Citizens Group directors for use\nwithin the States. Unfortunately, several State Chairmen have not\ncooperated with the Citizens Group directors, preferring instead to\ninstitut their own programs.\nUnfortunately, the state organizations have suffered from weak leader-\nship and lack of direction from Washington, and they are far behind all\nprogram activities. The reorganization of states under five political\ncoordinators will help, but it will take time for them to really gain\ncontrol. Until the political division was reorganized, the only appeal\nfor a Citizens group Director was to Flemming, who was not very\nhelpful, or through me to Mitchell, who obviously does not have the\ntime to deal with such minor matters.\nThe reorganization of the political division should help to solve this\nproblem. Mitchell has made it very clear to the political coordinators\nthat they are expected to reinforce the position of the Citizens group\nDirectors with the State Chairmen, and ensure that appropriate pro-\ngram are implemented. Also, I imagine that some of our present\nproblems result from Flemming not adequately communicating the\nCitizens group concept to the State Chairmen. This should be remedied\nby the Guidelines and planning sessions that were discussed above.\nNEXT STEPS\nWhile problems do exist, my overall impression is that the campaign\norganization is basically sound, and is reasonably on target. Jeb in my\nopinion is doing a good job with all the support activities, and he and I\nare working quite well together as a team. During the next month, in\naddition to day-to-day management of the Citizens Groups, I plan to focus\non the following priority areas:\n-- Making certain that the ethnic effort is on track and the Black\nproblems rectified.\n- 8 -\n-- Preparing for and participating in the discussions with\nState Chairmen regarding the Citizens group guidelines.\n-- Finalizing the campaign control system.\nI will send you another overall progress report at the end of June.\nIn addition, I will pass on to you items of special interest, as they arise.\nAttachments\nTab A\n--\nCamp. Sin cit\nMarch 1, 1972\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nJOHN MITCHELL\nFROM:\nFRED MALEK\nSUBJECT:\nPreliminary Citizens Campaign\nStrategy\nThe purpose of this memorandum is to review my preliminary strategy and\nplans for the Citizens/Voting Bloc organizations. General campaign plans\ncovering each voting bloc are being prepared and will be submitted to you\nover the next several weeks. I feel it is important, however, to have a\nunifying strategy that binds the individual plans together and provides a\nframework for operation.\nOBJECTIVES AND STRATEGY OF CITIZENS ACTIVITIES\nObjectives. The most important objective is to gain the favor cf broad\nblocs of voters by demonstrating convincingly the President's understanding\nof and interest in their problems and by publicizing his accomplishments\nand initlatives in areas of major concern to them. The secondary objective\nis to increase enthusiasm for and interest in the Nixon campaign among\nparticular funcgional groups and to thereby provide manpower to assist in\noverall State compaign efforts. In many cases this will include canvassing,\nregistration, and get-out-the-vote drives under the direction of the State\nNizon Chairman.\nStretegy. We should set priorities and devote the major part of our re-\nsources on those voting groups with the greatest pay-off potential. Conse-\nquently, groups are divided into two categories: a dozen major voting blocs\n(c.g., olderly, ethnics) and some fifty small functional groups (c.g., dentists\nand scientists). Our major emphasis will, of course, be on the major voting\nblocs in order to convince them to vote for the President and to enlist their\nsupport in the campaign. The effort expended on the functional groups will\nbe focused on obtaining manpower support for the campaign.\nAlso, priorities should be set between major voting blocs in order to\nguide resource decisions, management attention, and White House and Presi-\ndential efforts. Top priority should be devoted to those groups:\n-- Which are large or important beyond their national average\nin key States.\n- 2 -\n-- Where the issues and accomplishments are favorable and\na special effort can be instrumental in either attracting or re-\ntaining votes for the President.\nBased on these criteria, the blocs singled out for top priority and\nsecond priority attention are outlined below. of course, these are only gen-\neral guidelines 20 the priority requirements in each State will vary (0.8.,\nSpanish-speaking will be a top priority in Texas and California).\nTop Priority\nSecond Priority\nGroup\nVoters (millions)\nGroup\nVoters (millions)\nYouth\n25\nTransients\n6\nOlder Americans\n20\nLabor\n26\nEthnics\n40\nSpanish-Speaking\n6\nFarm\n5\nBlack\n7.5\nWomen*\nJewish\n3.5\nBusiness\n3\nVeterans\n28\nAgree\nDisagree\nOne additional voting bloc warrants your attention: Catholics, who are\nostimated to comprise nearly 30% of the expected voters. There are seemingly\nno commanding reasons for Catholics to vote against the President, and he is\non the right side of the germane issues (e.g., aid to parochial schools and\nabortion). Yet, most polls show Catholics supporting the President's opponents.\nIn past campaigns there has never been a separate effort to attract the Catholic\nvote as the Ethnics group usually encompasses it. This year, however, we\nmay want to mount a distinct Catholic campaign under a different name. My\nrecommendation is that I study this issue and present a proposal to you if I\nfeel this group should also be singled out for top or secondary priority.\nAgree\nDisagree\n*Women effort under Pat Hutar not an Integral part of Citizens but is included\nhere as there will be close coordination with this effort.\n- 3 -\nMost of the voting bloc and functional groups will have programs in\nall States. However, the degree of emphasis will vary so as to concentrate\non the largest voting blocs in each State and on those most apt to be swayed.\nAlso, a much greater proportional effort will be made in the large key States\nsuch as California and Illinois. This will range down to a minimal effort in\nthe smallest States such as Rhode Island or Wyoming where the outcome is\nalready fairly clear.\nPlanning. To effectively integrate Citizens into the campaign, it\nwill be important to involve Voting Bloc Directors in the planning process.\nAs pointed out earlier, general campaign plans are being prepared now for\nvarious voting blocs. Later, the Voting Bloc Director should participate\nwith Bob Marik and the State Nixon Chairman in developing that part of the\nState Victory Plan pertaining to his area. These State plans would then\ngovern his and his organization's activities for the remainder of the campaign.\nAgree\nDisagree\nORGANIZATION\nNational. Ao we have discussed, a National Citizens Director will be\nbrought in to organize and ride herd on the many functional groups and to\nassist in managing voter bloc operations. In addition, I estimate 3 - 4\nmedium level Assistants will be needed to develop and control the 50 or so\nfunctional groups. Edward Nixon will function as a top level assistant to the\nNational Director and me, undertaking key projects of sensitivity and coun-\nseling with National Chairmen and Committee members.\nEach voting bloc group will have a full-time Director along with some\nsupport staff. Directors are already on board for 8 of these groups, and\nthey are shown, along with target hiring dates for the remaining 4, at Tab A.\nBudgeta are currently being prepared for each voting bloc group, and the size\nof staff for each group will vary with the size of target and complexity of\nmission. Overall, I intend to keep the staffs small with most added pro-\nfessionals devoted to field support.\nA prominent National Citizens Chairman and broadly representative\nNational Citizens Committee will be formed ostensibly to oversee all of the\nvoting bloc and functional group activities. Of course, the Dale Committee\nwill remain the major overall committee. Recommended names for the\nCitizens Committee will be submitted to you for approval. Similarly, Chair-\nmen and Committees will be formed for all the Voting Bloc groups and most of\nthe Citizens functional groups. We plan to maintain tight control over all\nChairmen and their committees.\nAgree\nDisagree\n- a -\nState. In conjunction with the State Nixon Chairman, a Chairman\nand Committee will be formed in each State for most of the Voting Bloc and\nfunctional groups. Criteria for selection will be similar to that at the national\nlevel. In keeping with holding the State Nixon Chairman accountable for re-\nsults in his State, the State Voting Bloc Chairmen (o.g., State Older\nAmericans Chairman) would be selected jointly by the State Nixon Chair-\nman and the National Voting Bloc Director. He would report directly to the\nState Nixon Chairman and receive functional/programmatic guidance from\nthe National Director as long as this guidance is not inconsistent with the\nState Victory Plan. In some cases it may be necessary to hire a full-time\nState Director for a major voting bloc (e.g., Spanish-Speaking in California).\nThis would be decided in conjunction with the State Nixon Chairman and would\ncome out of his State budget.\nSince Citizens is integrated into the Campaign, in most cases there\nwill be no need for an overall Citizens Chairman at the State level. In some\nStates, however, where the registration is largely Democratic and where\nthe Nixon group is not broadly representative, we may consider an overall\nCitizens Chairman and Committee. In these cases the Citizens Chairman\nwould report (although not visibly) to the State Nixon Chairman, would not\nhave authority over the Voting Bloc Chairmen, and would be primarily\noriented toward public relations. We are currently studying this concept\nfurther, and any specific decisions would be made in collaboration with the\nState Nixon Chairman.\nAgree\nDisagree\nOPERATING TIMETABLE\nMore detailed operating plans are being developed for each voting bloc and\nwill later be developed for each functional group. The following are the major\ngeneral steps to be taken and the approximate time period for completion.\nFor Voting Bloc Groups\nTime Period\nStep\nfor Completion\n1.\nComplete staffing of National Directors\n4/1 - 4/15\n2.\nComplete General Campaign Plans for each\nVoting Bloc and begin operating programs*\n3/15 - 5/1\n*Youth program well underway. Some activity in other arcas, but full\nprograms not yet underway.\n- 5 -\n3.\nSelect California Chairman and complete\n3/31\nplans for primary activity for selected\ngroups**\n4.\nSelect National Citizens Chairman and Com-\nmittee\n5/1\n5.\nSelect National Chairman and Committee for\neach Voting Bloc\n5/1 - 5/15\n6.\nSelect State Chairman and Committee for\neach Voting Bloc and begin State organization\nefforts\n5/1 # 5/15\n7.\nBegin mounting specific programs in selected\nareas of each State in conjunction with State\norganizations\n6/1\nFor Citizens Functional Grouns***\nTime Period\nStep\nfor Completion\n1.\n1.\nBring on National Citizens Director\n3/17\n2.\nDesignate States where overall Citizens\nCommittee needed\n4/15\n3.\nDetermine functional groups desired\n4/15\n4.\nSelect National Chairman and Committee\nfor each group\n5/1 - 6/1\n5.\nDevelop plans for each group\n5/15 - 6/30\n6.\nSelect overall Chairmen and Committee in\nStates where desired\n6/1 - 6/15\n**Part of tentative California primary plan includes certain amount of activity\nand testing by 3 - 4 voting bloc groups.\n***Some groups such as lawyers and physicians are on an accelerated\nschedule.\n- 6 -\n7.\nSelect State Chairmen and Committee for\neach group\n6/1 - 7/15\n8.\nBegin organizational efforts\n6/1 - 7/15\nAttachment\nTab B\nTENTATIVE BUDGET\nVOTING BLOCS AND CITIZENS\nOld\nNew\nGroup\nEstimate (3/7)\nEstimate\nYouth\n$401,000\n$298,000\nBusiness & Industry\n199,000\n184,000\nBlack Vote\n153,000\n137,000\nEthnics\n106,000\n119,000\nOlder Americans\n118,000\n114,000\nAgriculture\n117,000\n134,000\nSpanich Speaking\n103,000\n118,000\nVeterans\n101,000\n107,000\nLabor\n93,000\n100,000\nJewish\n77,000\n82,000\nTransients\n62,000\n66,000\nLawyers\n37,000\n37,000\nPhysicians\n26,000\n26,000\nEducators\n0\n35,000\nWomen\n204,000\n230,000\nVoters Rights\n109,000\n109,000\nCitizens General and\nFunctional Groups\n350,000\n319,000\nTotal\n$2,461,000\n$2,215,000\n4/24/72\nTENTATIVE BUDGET\nYOUTH DIVISION\nStaff\nSalary\nCost\nPresent Staff (per carlier schedule)\n$ 98,000\nWisc. Fieldman (Krueger)\n- 4/7\n10,500\n6,200\nBorder States Fieldman (Davis)\n- 4/7\n10,000\n5,800\nPenn. Fieldman\n- 5/15\n12,000\n6,000\nOhio Fieldman\n- 5/15\n12,000\n6,000\nFarm States Fieldman\n- 6/1\n12,000\n5,500\nMidwest Director\n- 5/15\n18,000\n9,000\nRocky Mtn. & Northwest\nFieldman (Wigger)\n- 5/15\n7,800\n4,000\nConvention staff man (Burkop)\n- 5/1\n7,800\n4,400\nConvention secretary\n- 5/1\n7,200\n2,400\nConvention staff man\n- 5/1\n7,200\n1,800\nConvention secretary\n- 6/1\n7,200\n1,800\nConvention staff man\n- 7/1\n7,200\n1,200\n4 Field secretaries\n- 5/15\n3,000\n12,000\nTotal Staff\n164,100\nPayroll Burden\n10,900\nStaff Travel & Expenses\n60,000\nRent & Supplies for State Hdqtrs.\n10,000\nConvention - Buses & Events\n21,000\nSpecial Brochures & Buttons\n12,000\nState Chmn Travel & Expenses\n5,000\nOrganization Meetings\n5,000\nMisc. Mailings & Promotional Items\n10,000\nTotal\n$ 298,000\nNotes to Youth Budget:\n1. Cabbway (South) or Davis (Border States) will be transferred\nto another area effective 6/15. The remaining man will cover the\nentire Southeast.\n2. Wigger will remain in Oregon until the primary. He will then\nfocus on Washington and all Rocky Mtn. States as well until the\nelection.\n3. N. Y. contingency - in event State does not add 2 full-time\nfieldmen as expected, we may want to add our own fieldman to\nassist in N. Y.\n4. Burhop will stay on after the convention to fill in where needed.\n4/24/\nTENTATIVE BUDGET\nBLACK VOTE DIVISION\nStaff\nSalary\nCost\nDirector (Jones)\n- 4/7\n$ 32,000\nSecretary (Petross)\n- 4/7\n10,000\nAssistant Dir.\n- 5/15\n21,000\nField Coordinator\n- 5/15\n18,000\nField Coordinator\n- 6/1\n18,000\nSecretary\n- 5/15\n8,400\nTotal Staff\n56,500\nPayroll Burden\n4,200\nStaff Travel & Expenses\n15,000\nConsultants/Surrogates - fees & expenses*\n12,500\nOrganization Meetings\n6,000\nFormation of Citizens Committee (mailings & brochures)\n12,000\nMeeting of key Black Leaders\n3,000\nBrochures\n15,000\nNewsletter\n3,000\nContingency\n10,000\nTotal\n$ 137,200\n* Consultants used in certain cities in place of field men - fees of $10,000\nand expenses of $2, 500.\n4/21/72\nTENTATIVE BUDGET\nETHNICS DIVISION*\nStaff\nSalary\nCost\nDirector (\n- 5/15\n$ 30,000\nSecretary\n- 5/15\n8,400\nAsst. to Director\n- 6/15\n18,000\nFieldman\n- 6/15\n18,000\nFieldman\n- 6/15\n18,000\nFieldman\n- 6/15\n18,000\nFieldman\nof 7/15\n18,000\n2 Secretaries\n- 6/15\n16,800\nTotal Staff\n62,200\nPayroll Burden\n4,700\nStaff Travel & Expenses\n28,000\nConsultants & Surregates Travel\n6,000\nOrganization Meetings\n6,000\nField Moetings/Expenses\n7,000\nSpecial Mailings/Promotions\n5,000\nTotal\n$ 118,900\n* Budget is highly tentative and will be finalized when campaign plan\nis completed.\n4/21/78\nTENTATIVE BUDGET\nAGRICULTURE DIVISION\nStaff\nSalary\nCost\nDirector (Yeutter)\n- 4/7\n$ 36,000\nAsst. Director (Foltz)\n- 4/7\n27,000\nField Director (Madson)\n- 4/7\n20,000\nSecretary (Haggert)\n- 4/7\n7,600\nSecretary (Hill)\n- 4/7\n8,000\nFieldman\n- 5/15\n18,000\nFieldman*\n- 6/1\n18,000\nTotal Staff\n134,600\n74,700\nPayroH Burden\n5,600\nStaff Travel & Expenses\n31,000\nSurrogate Travel\n5,000\nOrganization Meetings\n3,200\nField Meetings & State Chairmen Expenses\n10,000\nSpecial Mailings\n4,000\nTotal\n$ 133,500\n4/21/7\nTENTATIVE BUDGET\nJEWISH DIVISION\nStaff\nSalary\nCost\nDirector (Goldberg)\n- 4/7\n$ 32,000\nSecretary (Peters)\n- 4/17\n10,000\nAsot. Dir. (Greenwald)\n- 4/10\n24,000\nSecretary (Cohen)\n- 4/24\n7,500\nFieldman (Abrams)\n- 5/15\n21,600\nTotal Staff\n95,100\n53,000\nPayroll Burden\n4,000\nStaff Travel & Expenses\n10,000\nConsultant/Surregates Travel\n7,000\nOrganization Meetings\n5,000\nSpecial Mailings\n3,000\nTotal\n$ 82,000\n4/21/7\nTENTATIVE BUDGET\nOLDER AMERICANS DIVISION\nStaff\nSalary\nCost\nDirector (Todd)\n- 4/7\n$ 36,000\nSecretary (Sedlak)\n- 4/7\n10,000\nField Dir. (Mills)\n- 4/7\n14,000\nFieldman (Todd)\n- 4/7\n12,500\nFieldman (Groom)\n- 5/1\n12,000\nSecretary\n- 5/1\n8,500\nTotal Staff\n93,000\n52,000\nField Director\n- 6/15\n18,000\n7,500\nPayroll Burden\n4,500\nStaff Travel & Expenses\n30,000\nSurrogate Travel\n5,000\nOrganization Meetings\n5,000\nField Meetings/Dinners\n5,000\nSpecial Mailings/Promotion\n5,000\nTotal\n$ 114,000\n4/21/72\nTENTATIVE BUDGET\nVITER NY DIVISION\nStaff\nSalary\nCost\nDirector (Naylor)\n- 4/7\n30,000\nSecretary\n- 4/24\n8,400\nFieldman & Asst. Dir.\n- 5/15\n24,000\nFieldman\n- 6/1\n18,000\nFieldman\n- 8/1\n13,000\nSecretary\n- 6/1\n7,200\nSecretary (part time)\n1,300\nTotal Staff\n51,700\nPayroll Burden\n3,900\nStaff Travel & Expenses\n16,500\nConsultants/Surrogates expenses\n16,000\nOrganization Meetings\n5,000\nField Meetings/expenses\n5,000\nPromotional Items\n6,000\nSpecial Mailings\n3,000\nTotal\n$ 107,100\n4/21/7\nTENTATIVE BUDGET\nLABOR DIVISION\nStaff\nSalary\nCost\nDirector\n- 5/15\n$ 30,000\nField Director\n- 5/15\n24,000\nFieldman\n- 6/15\n18,000\nFieldman\n- 6/15\n18,000\nSecretary\n- 5/15\n9,000\nSecretary\n- 6/15\n8,000\nTotal Staff\n50,000\nPayroll Burden\n3,300\nStaff Travel & Expenses\n18,500\nConsultents/Surrogates expenses\n10,000\nOrganization Meetings\n5,000\nField Meetings/expenses\n5,000\nPromotional Items\n5,000\nSpecial Mailings\n3,000\nTotal\n$ 100,300\n4/24/71\nTENTATIVE BUDGET\nSPANJSH SPEAKING DIVISION\nStaff\nSalary\nCost\nDirector (Armendariz)\n- 4/7\n$30,000\nSecretary\n- 4/7\n8,000\nField Director (Gar\n- 5/1\n20,000\nFieldman (Mexican)\n- 5/15\n15,000\nFieldman (PR)\n- 5/15\n15,000\nAsst. to Director\n- 6/1\n15,000\n2 Secretaries\n5/5/15\n16,000\nTotal Staff\n62,200\nPayroll Burden\n4,700\nStaff Travel & Expenses\n21,000\nConsultants/Volunteer expenses\n5,000\nOrganization Meetings\n5,000\nField Meetings/Expenses\n5,000\nSpecial Brochures & Mailings\n5,000\nContingency\n10,000\nTotal\n$ 117,900\n5/2/72\nTENTATIVE BUDGET\nTRANSIENTS (SPECIAL BALLOTS)\nStaff\nSalary\nCost\nDirector (McAdoo)\n- 4/15\n$ 25,000\n$14,500\nSecretary\n- 5/1\n10,000\n5,500\nWestern Field Man\n- 6/15\n18,000\n7,500\nEastern Field Man\n- 6/15\n18,000\n7,500\nTotal Staff\n35,000\nStaff Benefits/Overhead\n2,600\nStaff Travel & Expenses\n18,000\nPrinting & Materials\n10,000\nTotal\n65,600\n5/4/72\nTEN TATIEE BUDGET\nBUSINESS AND INDUSTRY\nStaff\nSalary\nCost\nDirector (Kayser)\n$ 60,000\nAsnt. Dir. (Fangboner\n30,000\nAsst. Dir. (Rocchio)\n30,000\nAdmin. Asst. (Harper)\n9,600\nSecretary (Cochran)\n9,600\nSecretary (Koob)\n8,000\nTotal Staff\n147,200\n90,000\nPayroll Burden\n6,800\nMailings\n4,500\nField Kits\n20,000\nStaff Travel & Expenses\n41,500\nOrganization Dinner\n3,000\nRegional Meetings\n8,000\nVisual Aids\n10,000\nTotal\n$ 183,800\n4/24/77\nTENTATIVE BUDGET\nCITIZENS - GENERAL is FUN NAL GROUPS\nStaff\nSalary\nCost\nCitizens Director (Shourer)\n- 5/8\n$ 36,000\nSecretary\n- 5/8\n9,000\n3 Asst. Directors\n- 6/1\n60,000\n4 Secretaries\n- 6/1\n32,000\n1 Executive Assistant\n- 6/1\n20,000\n4 Part time Secretaries\n- 7/1\n6,000\nTotal Staff\n73,500\nPayroll Burden\n5,500\nNational Citizens Orientation Expenses\n5,000\nTravel & Expenses for National Committee\n5,000\nStaff Travel &: Expenses\n20,000\nTravel & Expenses - Consultants & Volunteers\n30,000\nExpenses for each of estimated 30 groups\nOrganization Dinners/mestings\n- 1,000 X 30 =\n30,000\nTravel & Empenses for Chmn & Coms.\n- 2,000 X 30 =\n60,000\nMailings & Brochures\n- 3,000 X 30 #\n90,000\nTotal\n$ 319,000\n5/5/72\nTENTATIVE BUDGET\nVOLUNTEERS/WOMEN\nStaff\nSalary\nCost\nDirector (Hutar)\n- 4/7\n$ 25,000\n$*15,000\nAssistant (Steerts)\n- 4/7\n15,000\n9,000\nAssistant\n- 6/1\n18,000\n8,300\nPR Consultant\n- 5/15\n24,000\n12,000\nSecretary\n- 4/7\n8,400\n5,500\nSecretary\n- 5/15\n9,000\n4,500\nSecretary\n- 9/1\n8,400\n1,500\n3 Regional Field Dirs.\n- 6/1\n14,400\n19,800\n4 Regional Field Dirs.\n- 7/1\n14,400\n21,600\nTotal Staff\n97,200\nPayroll Burden\n7,300\nStaff Travel & Expenses:\nHdgts Staff\n18,000\nRegional Dirs.\n37,000\nVolunteer Menual\n6,000\nfraining Manual\n5,000\nSpeakers Burcau\n10,000\nVolunteer sign-up cards for hospitality suites\n1,000\nHospitality Suites:\nFour regionals and June RNC meeting\n3,000\nHospitality suite during RNC Leadership Conference\n1,300\nSalute to the President Luncheon (telephone hook-up\nto luncheon sites\n10,000\nLetterheads and envelopes\n4,000\nRe-Election Canvass Team and Victory Squad Kits\n5,000\nSpecial volunteer recognition pins, insignia\nfor key leaders\n10,000\nVolunteer Newsletter\n15,000\nTotal\n$ 230,300\nJune 8, 1972\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nII. R. HALDEMAN\nFROM:\nGORDON STRACHAN\nSUBJECT:\nMitchell Polatical Meeting --\nJune 7, 1972\nMitchell met with Magruder, Malek, LaRue, Marik, and\nTeeter to discuss the political situation in light of\nMcGovern's victories and situation June 6, 1972. Subjects\ndiscussed were:\n1) Mitchell mentioned he just had had lunch with the\nWednesday Senate Group (Percy and other liberal Republican\nSenators). Scott and Griffin attended. According to\nMitchell there was general euphoria about a possible\nMcGovern candidacy. Most believe McGovern at the top of\nthe Democratic ticket could be very helpful to Republicans\nrunning for House and Senate Seats.\nThis view was confirmed by Senator \"Fritz\" Hollings\n(D-S.C.) who is advising all candidates to run their own\ncampaigns and to avoid McGovern. Mitchell is concerned\nabout resulting complacency in the state organizations,\nas well as White House Staffers.\n2) Mitchell asked the group to develop a political\nline emphasizing that either the Democratic Party or\nMcGovern will have to modify policy positions, that Humphrey\nmade a remarkable recovery; and that the election would be\nclose because Republicans are a minority party. The state-\nment is attached at Tab A and has been distributed pursuant\nto Mitchell's directions, to the White House Staff by Dent,\nthe campaign committee by Magruder, and the Administration\nspokesmen by Bart Porter.\n3) Mitchell is having a detailed precinct analysis of\nthe Jewish, black, and chicano vote prepared by the cam-\npaign's demographer, Art Finkelstein;\n- 2 -\n4) Mitchell is directing a covert, well-financed\nprogram, headed by Democrate, to explain McGovern's\n\"extreme positions to labor, veterans, and Jewish voters.\nThe goal is to keep the Democrats fighting for the nomi-\nnation, though realizing McGovern has it, and hopefully\nacquiring these voting blocs in November;\n5) Mitchell believes the substantive issue spokes-\nmen (e.g. Laird and Rogers) can appropriately comment on\nthe differences between the Administration's stands and\nMcGovern's. However, he directed Magruder and Miller to\nmeet with Tom Wilck and John Lofton to assure that Monday\nonly comments on the Democrats, not on McGovern or Humphrey.\n6) Mitchell directed the campaign to focus on McGovern\non the big issues (national defense, welfare, and taxes).\nMitchell believes if the 3 A's of Scott (acid, amnesty, and\nabortion) can be marginally effective in certain areas and\namong certain groups only.\nI reviewed with Bob Marik the ghree previous meetings held\nbefore I was invited. They covered the Teeter First Wave\npolling analysis submitted to you on May 11, 1972. Marik\nhad prepared a summary of the comments, which is attached\nat Tab B.\nGS/jb\nTHE Worrd House\nWASHINCTON\nJune 8, 1972\nTO:\nWHITE HOUSE STAFF\nFROM:\nHARRY S. DENT\nAttached for your information is\nan assessment of the situation at\nthe conclusion of the Presidential\nprimaries. This statement should\nserve as your guidance for the\ncampaign between now and the time\nthat the Democrat nominee is\nfinally selected or some new\nposition develops.\n':' CONCERSION OF PRIMARIES\nLY SH P.M. C.\" CN DELLCTOR\nCOMPLETE TC THE NEW CTION OF THE PRESIDENT\nThe Deposit Party appears to be approaching a crossroads. Although\nit is not U.nt S.n. Coorge McGovern will be the Democrat Party's\nPresidential notince this year, the choices available to the National\nConvention are rapidly narrowing.\nAnd if Senator McGovern is the nominee, one of two things is going\nto have to occt : either the Democrat Party is going to have to accept\nSenator McGovern's views on domestic, defense and foreign policy -- views\nwhich many Democrats find extreme -- or Senator McGovern is going to have\nto modify his views to conform with the mainstream of his party.\nThe seriousness with which many Democrats look upon Senator\nMcGovern's positions is reflected in Senator Humphrey's strong finish in\nthe California Primary. In the space of one week, Senator Humphrey reduced\nthe McGovern lead from the 20 percent shown in a widely-read public opinion\npoll just a for days ago to the 5 percent which actually separated the\ntwo mon when the votes were counted. If the primary had been held two or\nthree days later, Senator Humphrey may well have won.\nAgain, although Senator McGovern ran an extememly expensive media\ncampaign, a majority of California Democrats voted for someone else. Thus,\nthe Democrat presidential no: ination has by no means been decided.\nIn any case, no natter who the oventual nominee is, the Committee fo:\nthe Re-election of the President is preparing a maximum effort on behalf of\nthe President this fall. We-raust never Jone sight of the fact that the\nRepublics .1 Party is a minority party and that a coulition of Republicans,\nDember US i...' Independents will in no led to re-elect President Mixon in\nthe general election, a geal 10 will reach.\nCommittee for the Re-election of the President\nMEMORANDUM\nMay 24, 1972\nFIDENTIAL\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nROBERT TEETER\nFROM:\nBOB MARIK\nSUBJECT:\nComments on the First Wave Analysis\nThis memorandum summarizes the important comments made by the Strategy\nGroup in their discussion of your analysis of the first wave of polling.\nAlthough your mathematical analysis showed past party voting behavior\nto be a stronger variable than demographic grouping, it was still felt\nthat the campaign strategy should be oriented to some degree around\nthe important voter blocs. In particular, the idea was raised of\nseeking an appropriate sample of pivotal voter groups and tracking the\nattitudes of that group by monthly surveys up to the election. This\ninformation would be used to augment the state-by-state data which\nwould be developed through the existing polling plan. Two groups\nwhich should be tracked in this manner are urban ethnics (potential\nshift to Nixon), and upper income White suburbanites (potential shift\nto McGovern).\nIn the statistical analysis, the Group also commented on the substantial\nvariation of important factors among the states. For example, Party\nType had 21% influence in California and only 6% in Ohio. The question\nwas raised as to whether the nation-wide analysis is useful for strategy\ndevelopment or whether it would have to be approached state by state.\nThe Group was concerned that the questionnaire be framed in such a way\nthat the important issues could be identified and their intensity measured\nperhaps more sharply in the first wave. In particular, the question was\nraised as to whether the apparent importance of busing in Florida and\nMichigan vas accurately reflected in the first wave results. The analysis\nrecommended that issues such as crime, drugs and unerployment should not\nbe emphanized except to perticular audiences and when we had an impressive\nstory to tell. lic will want to get into that strategy more deeply when\nthe advertising program is developed in dotail.\nThe feeling of the group was that the President's support among young\nvoters wight well be higher than was implied in your MOMO. This can\nbe checked with the second vave results.\nCONVIDENTIAL\n- 2 -\nThere was agreement that the ticket-splitter analysis should be done\nand would be useful as a tool to guide campaign strategy. There was\ndisagreement with the statement that no special effort needs to be\nmade to register older voters. Newly retired people are often transient\nand may well represent a fertile area for registration canvassing\nactivities.\nThere was disagreement on the comment that registration drives among\nyoung voters should be stopped as we have discussed in detail in last\nweek's meeting.\nThere was agreement with the point that we should attempt to build as\nlarge a lead as possible between now and the national conventions. Our\nactivities, should be geared to push McGovern to the left before he\nbecomes well known to the voting public. The specific tactics need\nto be developed over the next few weeks.\nIt was mentioned that one important issue was general unrest. It would\nbe useful if a clearer definition could be established of what is on\nthe voters mind when they discuss the issue cluster of general unrest.\nFinally, as we discussed over the telephone, it would be useful for us\nto devote a portion of a meeting in the near future to a presentation\nby you of the techniques used in the survey program and the significance\nof the information that is being obtained. With that background, our\nfuture discussions would be much more fruitful.\nCONFIDENTIAL\nCommittee for the Re-election of the President\nMEMORANDUM\nMay 11, 1972\nCONFIDENTIAL/EYES ONLY\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nTHE HONORABLE JOHN N. MITCHELL\nFROM:\nROBERT M. TEETER\nSUBJECT:\nFinal First Wave Analysis\nDuring the past several weeks we have analyzed the first wave\npolling results utilizing a number of the most advanced statistical\ntechniques available. This analysis has enabled us to identify\nthe most important independent variables which influence presi-\ndential vote and to develop a very sophisticated analysis package\nwhich can be run and interpreted rapidly on all of our subsequent\npolling.\nWhile it is not necessary to have knowledge of these techniques in\norder to use the results, I would be happy to go over them in more\ndetail with you anytime.\nOur conclusions from this analysis are:\n1. Past party voting behavior is the single most important factor\nwhich affects the presidential vote. The classification of voters\ninto behavioral Republicans, Democrats, or Ticket-splitters accounts\nfor almost three times as much of the variance why people vote for\nor against the President as is explained by any other variable.\nThis appears to be particularly true in Wisconsin, Indiana, and\nCalifornia.\n2. The next most important factors affecting the Presidential\nvote are the voters perceptions of the President's trust and his\nissue handling cbility. Trust is best defined by the following\nvariables -- honesty, open minded, and just. Seemingly, these\npersonality traits are related to perceptions of credibility. To\na lesser degree the presidential vote is related to perceptions of\ncompetence -- experienced, trained, and informed.\nMost voters have a general perception of how well the President\nhandles issues and problems overall and that appears to be more\nimportant to voting than is their perception of his handling of\nany one or two insues. This overall issue handling ability seems\nto be perceived by the voters as a single personality Jimension\nsimilar in many ways to the dimensions of trust, competence, etc.\n-2-\nThe only individual issues which appear to have any significant\nindependent effect on voting are Vietnam inflation, and general\n?\nunrest, Vietnam and inflation were also, fortunately, the issues\nthat the President was seen as handling well, and his ability to\nhandle the general unrest problem was rated about equally to that\nof his opponents.\nThose issues on which the President is rated relatively poorly --\n?\ncrime, drugs, and (unceployment) -- do not appear to affect presidential\nvoting to any major degree. This is particularly true of crime and\nunemployment. Apparently the President is seen as having done a\ngood job on those problems that the voters think have gotten better\noverall, while he is seen as having done a poor job on those pro-\nblems which have become worse during the last few years. There\nalso appears to be little believability that the President will\nmake much difference in the crime or drug problems.\nmalek\n3. Demographic bloc voting is significantly less important than\npast party voting behavior, and less important than perceptions of\nthe candidates trust, competence, and issue handling ability. Once\nparty behavior is taken into account there is little difference in\nthe vote for various demographic groups. In other words, differences\nin the rate that various demographic groups support Nixon can be\nexplained almost entirely by party preferences rather than member-\nship in any particular demographic group. The factors having some\nbut small effect on the vote are age, income, and education. Gen-\nerally speaking, voters who are older, have higher incomes, and\nhave more education seem to have a greater propensity to vote for\nthe President, primarily because of their propensity to vote Repub-\nlican more than as a result of their demographic group. Bloc voting\nagainst the President is evident only with a limited number of\ngroups -- blacks, young voters (18 to 25 year olds especially in\nCalifornia), and Jewish voters in New York. All appear to oppose\nthe President to a greater degree than would be predicted by their\npast voting behavior or party preference.\nIt appears to be possible to improve the vote for the President in\nseveral demographic groups where he is weak. We have made these\nconclusions from our analysis of the data from the individual voting\nblocs:\nA. Older voters (60 years and over) are the single\nmost important group in the election. In Missouri\nand Oregon, the President is especially weak. Taxes,\ninflation, and the economy are the important issues.\nB. The President is running very poorly with young voters\n(18 to 24). Heavy turnout and registration by this\ngroup could be devastating. The percentage of Repub-\nlican support among youth is very small. Vietnam and\nthe economy are the issues. We have special weakness\nin California and Wisconsin.\n-3-\nC. The vote for Nixon among blacks varies greatly. The\nPresident is running well with this group in the south,\nthe border states, and New Jersey and New York. There\nis a severe credibility problem and racial appeals to\nthis group are unlikely to work. Pocketbook issues will\nbe important.\nD. Spanish-Americans are supporting the President to a\ngreater degree than expected. The support appears to\nbe flexible. We could expect to improve our support\nwith this group by at least 15% in California.\nE. Ethnic support in Philadelphia is very weak and seems to\nbe causing our poor showing there.\n4. The importance of each of the vote determining factors varies\nconsiderably from state to state. Generally, the relative importance\nof these factors in affecting the vote is listed below:\nParty\nNixon Trust\nComparative Issue Handling Ability\nAge\nOpponents Competence\nIncome\nReligion\nEducation\nAfter party, the voters' perceptions of Nixon trust and comparative\nissue handling ability are the factors which have the greatest\ninfluence on the President's vote.\nThe factors in the individual state studies are shown in Attachment\nA. Attachment B graphically shows the importance of these factors.\n5. While the President was in relatively good shape against any of\nhis potential opponents in January, there was a relatively small\nundecided vote for that point in time and there appears to be some\nlimits on the President's potential vote. There are relatively\nlarge groups of voters who vote for the President on all of the\nsample ballots and who vote against the President regardless of\nwho his opponent is on all the sample ballots. This indicates to\nme that once the Democratic nominee is selected the undecided vote\nmay be very small. This, along with the probability that the Demo-\ncratic candidate will increase his support and that the ratio will\nget closer during September and October, means that we should attempt\nto build as large a lead as possible between now and the national\nconventions on the theory that we will lose ground after the con-\nventions. Moreover, every point we can gain between now and the\nconventions will come with less effort and at less cost than those\npercentage points needed during the fall campaign.\n-4-\n6. There does not appear to be any definite ideological basis for\nvoting on any of the ballots. That is, very few people if any are\nvoting for the President because they feel he is particularly con-\nservative or liberal, or that people are voting against the President\nbecause they feel he is too conservative or too liberal.\n7. The Vice-President's approval rating is somewhat lower than the\nPresident's in almost all of the states but follows up and down\nabout in line with the President's. I cannot identify any particular\nsegment of voters with whom the Vice-President is either adding or\nsubtracting from the ticket.\n8. The net effect of a Wallace third party candidacy was very\nsmall in January and has undoubtedly changed since then. We should\ndefer any hard conclusions as to whether we want him on or off the\nballot until after the second wave of polling, but my inclination\nat this point is that we would do better without him on the ballot.\n9. There is no question but that we have a very realistic chance\nto carry any or all of the big states -- New York, New Jersey,\nPennsylvania, Ohio, Illinois, Texas, and California and we should\ncontinue to make a maximum effort in those states. California\nappears to me to be the one state where we may not be doing as\nwell as we might be at this time and where there are indications\nof future problems. Voters in California seem to have a more fixed\nperception of the President. That is, of course, logical in that\nCalifornia voters probably know him better than those in any other\nstate.\nRecommendations\nBased on our analysis, we make the following recommendations:\n1. A ticket-splitter analysis should be done in each of the priority\nstates by precinct or ward and township. For the rest of the country,\nthe analysis should be done by county. This is undoubtedly the most\nefficient way to locate ticket-splitters and to develop priority\nareas for both our organizational and communications efforts. More-\nover, it will allow us to identify Democratic areas which have some\npropensity to split their ticket, and from these areas we may be\nable to cause ticket-splitting in favor of the President.\n2. With apparently small undecided vote, a strong organizational\neffort will be critical. I would recommend putting a dispropor-\ntionate share of our resources into organizational personnel to\nassure that this effort is maximized. 1 also think our organiza-\ntional effort should be structured SO that we have the flexibility\nto concentrate our people in a few states late in the campaign,\neven to the degree of assigning one to each county or congressional\ndistrict for the top priority states in late September and October.\n-5-\nSpecial organizational effort should be made to improve the\nPresident's voting strength in Philadelphia (especially with ethnics),\nNew York City (outside Manhattan), Buffalo, Los Angeles (Orange\nCounty), Baltimore suburbs, Montgomery County (Maryland), Mid-Texas\n(Austin), rural Missouri, and Kenosha/Racine Wisconsin.\n3. As indicated before, I think the development of an overall\ntheme or idea for the campaign is imperative and that this should\nbe done before the Democratic convention and should center around\nthe President's hopes and aspirations for our country. To be effec-\ntive it must be positive and give people the hope that many of our\nproblems can and will improve.\n4. As the President's overall issue handling ability is more impor-\ntant to determining vote than his handling of any individual issue,\nthose issues on which he is perceived as handling well should be\nemphasized and those he is seen as handling poorly should only be\nused if we have an impressive story to tell or if the appeal is\ndesigned for some particular group.\n5. We should emphasize the following personal attributes in our\nmedia programs:\nTrust - Just\nHonest\nOpen Minded\nCompetence - Experienced\nTrained\nInformed\nCompetent\nIt is possible to use the President's ability to handle issues in\ncommunicating the above attributes. No special effort needs to be\ndirected to make the President appear -- warm, relaxed, and having\na sense of humor. To the extent that it is possible to convey\nthese characteristics, we should do so, but not at the expense of\nthe trust and competence variables.\n6. Special efforts should be implemented to maximize the President's\nstrength with specific voting blocs.\nA. A campaign directed at older Americans through the\nvoting bloc group should be given top priority. Maximum\navailable resources should be allocated into this program.\nA massive turnout drive should be implemented, and a\nsupportive direct mail effort should be considered.\nBecause of the current high level of registration, no\nspecial effort in this regard needs to be made to register\nolder voters. Special emphasis should be made to improve\nour level of support with older Americans in the follow-\ning priorities:\n-6-\nMissouri (Primarily Rural)\nOregon\nTexas\nWisconsin\nMaryland\nIndiana\nCalifornia\nPennsylvania\nNew York\nTaxes and inflation should be given emphasis.\nB. All registration drives among young voters should be\nstopped. Our primary objective with this group should\nbe low turnout and persuasion of Democrats and swing\nvoters to vote for the President. Areas for special\nemphasis to improve support among young voters should\nbe:\nWisconsin\nCalifornia\nMaryland\nPennsylvania\nNew York\nPrimary issue emphasis should be made on Vietnam, jobs\nfor youth, and pollution.\nIn meeting our objective of converting Democrats and\nindependents, we must be careful not to direct our young\nvoter campaign solely at our own voters. To keep turnout\nat a minimum we should attempt to keep the marijuana\nreferenda now proposed for California and Michigan off\nthe ballot if possible.\nC. The Jewish vote bloc should implement a program to\nimprove the President's strength with this voter group\nin New York state. Careful consideration should be\ngiven to the question of parochial schools with this\ngroup. Our data indicates support of aid to parochial\nschools may be a negative with Jewish voters.\nD. In order to carry several critical northern states we\nwill need to carry a greater percentage of blacks than\nwe did in 1968. Because of our credibility problems,\nwe must be careful in making any racial appeals so that\nour efforts are not counterproductive.\nCONFIDENTIAL/EYES ONLY\nMARKET OPINION RESEARCH\nATTACHMENT A\nCALIFORNIA\nNEW JERSEY\nOHIO\nTEXAS\nNEW YORK\nPENNSYLVANIA\nWISCONSIN\nINDIANA\nParty Type\n21%\nParty Type\n7%\nOpp. Issue\n11%\nNixon Trust\n10%\nAge\n12%\nOpp.\nParty Type\n29%\nParty Type\n14%\nCompetence\n9%\nOpp. Trust\n4\nNixon Trust\n6\nParty Type\n6\nParty Type\n8\nParty Type\n7\nAge\n8\nParty Type\n7\nOpp. Issue\n11\nAge\n4\nOpp.\nEducation\n5\nNixon Issue\n8\nNixon Issue\n7\nIncome\n3\nCompetence\n6\nIncome\n7\nIncome\n9\nIncome\n4\nAge\n4\nAge\n7\nNixon Trust\n5\nOpp. Issue\n3\nAge\n5\nAge\n5\nNixon Trust\n4\nNixon\nOpp.\nNixon\nOpp. Issue\n4\nReligion\n2\nStrength\n3\nOpp. Issue\n4\nStrength\n3\nStrength\n5\nOpp. Issue\n2\nNixon Issue\n4\nIncome\n4\nNixon Trust\n2\nNixon\nIncome\n4\nNixon Issue\n3\nOpp. Issue\n3\nEducation\n2\nAge\n4\nCompetence\n3\nEducation\n4\nOpp. Trust\n1\nReligion\n3\nReligion\n2\nIncome\n2\nNixon\nReligion\n2\nSex\n3\nNixon\nCompetence\n1\nNixon\nNixon Issue\n2\nOpp.\nReligion\n2\nCompetence\n2\nEducation\n1\nStrength\n1\nNixon Trust\n2\nCompetence\n1\nOpp. Trust\n1\nSex\n2\nOpp.\nSex\n2\nNixon\nEducation\n1\nNixon Issue\n2\nNixon Trust\n1\nStrength\n2\nNixon Trust\n1\nCompetence\n1\nEducation\n1\nOpp. Trust\n1\nNixon Issue\n1\nEducation\n2\nIncome\n1\nOpp. Trust\n1\nNixon Issue\n1\nOpp.\nNixon\nNixon\nCompetence\n1\nNixon\nOpp.\nCompetence\n1\nNixon\nNixon\nStrength\n1\nReligion\n*\nCompetence\n1\nCompetence\n2\nCompetence\n*\nCompetence\n1\nNixon\nNixon\nOpp.\nSex\n*\nStrength\n1\nOpp.\nOpp.\nStrength\n*\nOpp.\nOpp.\nCompetence\n1\nStrength\n*\nStrength\n1\nCompetence\n*\nCompetence\n1\nNixon\nOpp. Trust\n1\nOpp.\nReligion\n1\nStrength\n*\nSex\n*\nOpp. Issue\n1\nStrength\n*\nNixon\nEducation\n*\nOpp.\nStrength\n*\nOpp.\nOpp.\nStrength\n*\nOpp.\nReligion\n1\nOpp. Trust\n*\nSex\n*\nStrength\n*\nStrength\n*\nCompetence\n*\nSex\n*\nSex\n*\n*\nLess than 1%\nNumbers following each factor indicate percentage of influence on the presidential vote.\nATTACHMENT B\nNIXON - MUSKIE\nRep.\n.9\nT-S,Dem. ,Marg.\n.4\nNixon Trust\nNixon Trust\nDem.\nHi\nLo\n.6\n.2\n.1\nT-S, Marg.\nDems.\nT-S, Marg.\n.8\n.4\n.4\nMuskie\nMuskie\nMuskie\nMuskie\nMuskie\nMuskie\nComp.\nComp.\nTrust\nTrust\nTrust\nTrust\nLo\nHi\nLo\nHi\nLo\nHi\n.9\n.6\n.5\n.2\n.5\n.1\nMuskie\nMuskie\nNixon\nNixon\nIssue\nIssue\nIssue\nIssue\nLo\nHi\nHi\nLo\n.9\n.5\n.6\n.3\nMuskie\nMuskie\nIssue\nIssue\nLo\nHi\n.5\n.2\nProt.\nOther\nReligions\n.7\n.5\nNumbers under boxes indicate probability of voting for Nixon. The\nhigher the number, the greater the probability of voting for Nixon.\nTHE WHITE\nADMINISTRATIVELY CONFIDENTIAL\nWASHINGTON Vide HOUSE 26\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nR\nHALDEMAN\nFROM:\nGORDON STRACHAN\nG\nSUBJECT:\nCampaign Meetings\nMagruder proposes a new campaign strategy meeting to Mitchell\nin the memorandum attached at Tab A.\nMitchell, has approved the meeting and participants (Miller,\nMagruder, LaRue, Marik, Dailey, Teeter, Finkelstein). The\nfirst meeting will be this week on Key States. There is\ncurrently no agreement on Key States within the Committee\nto Re-Elect the President, as Magruder's memorandum attached\nat Tab B indicates.\nIn light of the importance of getting Mitchell's views on Key\nStates and campaign strategy for you, I asked Magruder if I\ncould attend. Magruder said he was opposed and would not\nraise the question of my attendance with Mitchell. Magruder's\nreasons for objecting to my attending are:\n1) The meeting must be kept small;\n2) Marik can brief me afterwords on the decisions, and\n3) The meeting should be purely campaign people without\nany White House Staff (hence, Malek's exclusion).\nYou agreed last July to ask Mitchell if I could attend a much\nhigher level meeting (that was eventually cancelled) on your\nLtulte\nbehalf. To reassert in Magruder's mind the importance of keep-\ning you fully informed, I believe it is an important matter of\nprinciple for you to intervene with Mitchell on my behalf. A\nto\nmemorandum for your signature to Mitchell is attached at Tab C.\nCOMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT\n1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE NW\nWASHINGTON D C. 20006\nApril 18, 1972\n(202) 333.0920\nCONFIDENTIAL\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nTHE HONORABLE JOHN N. MITCHELL\nFROM:\nJEB S. MACRUDER\nCLIFF MILLER\nSUBJECT:\nStrategy Planning for the Campaign\nCampaign strategy is now developed in several areas:\nCampaign Strategy Group (Monday evening meetings). Brings\ntogether the thoughts of key White House personnel and those on\nthe Re-Election Committee. Reviews and develops recommendations\non broad strategy, with particular emphasis on advertising and\nthe media.\nStrategy Planning Group (Saturday meetings). The directors\nresponsible for pertinent campaign activities meet with each state\nchairman to develop a detailed strategy and operating plan for\nconducting the campaign in that state. The resulting recommenda-\ntions in the form of a state plan are presented to you for\napproval.\nNovember Group. Develops an advertising strategy consistent\nwith the overall strategy of the campaign.\nPolling. Provides the basic research data for all of the\nstrategy groups described above.\nIn addition, the political division and the directors of the\nfunctional activities develop strategy relating to their own areas\nof responsibility, consistent with the overall campaign strategy.\nAll of those groups perform a useful function in developing elements\nof the strategy for the campaign. However, they do not perform\nthe essential function because:\n1. They do not work closely enough with you.\n2. Their membership is too large to make effective strategy\nrecommendations in atimely manner when the campaign is in\nfull swing.\nCONFIDENTIAL\n- 2 -\nTherefore, we recommend that another group be formed, under your\nchairmanship, to develop the overall strategy from which state\nplans, advertising, budget, etc., will flow. The suggested\nmembership would be:\nCliff Miller\n(Communications)\nJeb Magruder\n(Administration/Coordination)\nFred LaRue\n(Political)\nBob Marik\n(Planning/Mail/Telephone)\nPeter Dailey\n(Advertising)\nBob Teeter\n(Polling)\nArthur Finkelstein\n(Demographics)\nRecommendations\nThat you. approve the creation of the group described above.\nApprove\nDisapprove\nComment\nThat a meeting be scheduled within the next two weeks to start the\ngroup on its task of developing strategy for the 'general campaign.\nApprove\nDisapprove\nComment\nCONFIDENTIAL\nApril 21, 1972\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nMR. DWIGHT CHAPIN\nFROM:\nJEB S. MAGRUDER\nSUBJECT:\nKey States\nAs you know, we have been using a number of lists of key states\nfor different purposes such as surrogate scheduling, early pri-\nmary strategy development, and media planning. The groupings\nof states have not been completely consistent, however, and we\nfeel that in order to plan effectively for the general campaign\nwe should establish one firm list. Therefore, during the course\nof the next week, we will analyze alternative selections of key\nstates, consider the implications of each, and adopt a consolidated\nlist.\ncc: Mr. Larry Higby\nGordon Strachan\n6/7\nJm, Miller, Magreuler, ha Rue, Maril,\nmalex, Teeter\nJM - Wed Sen Group - complete\neuphoria re me G condidary\nPelcy Scott, Griffin\n- maybe we shed cerenter euphoria\nbut had Rue thinks me G\nscreefing local cand's shill\nbe public to complicate Dem lenser\nTeeter - 6790 turnout\nJm - breakdown of st\nmarik - Feeler Findstein in Cal\nanalyzing precinets (1st\n2days conclusion McGdid well in\nblack + chicanos\nJm - wants breadeen of blacks\nchecoras + Jeurisa Rr/Finlul\nJ8M - Spiling appois let now +\n(Discussion) Jej 9 - key Suris have\n30day shot at me G\nJM- - me G extreme\npose why Demo prols\n? is will will move Democr Me G\nJm-Covent well Renunced Dems among\nGajon\nlaber, vets, jursh to get\nMCG position out\n- goal nomination to deep Dems Right for\n- why Pa + mo listed asuncom te P.\n-mccl can't get anything\nnominated. filthat I Del - not even\n- -We chase the delegate\nJm. - hofton must onlycomment\non Dems, not on Mc G\n- must be cleared here Iam\nserious about this\n- J8m * CAM clear +\nMCG can't really compromiseon issues or\nlose his creditity\n* 4 P strong view - don't conduct\nnate Survey at this time\nwait wave II after Dem Conven\n- Poel Dem too confused +\nwe're confused after second\nMeG machine, Ht clooing gapful it\n20 to 5, HI could have won\ncomp another been days\nJM - $ fr/ Cal etc not organiz\nbeel that means people\n- media juggernant ratherthan\nJm arrest colunteers utz, Holling Puls.c. Chin of Pemo\ncen advise all lands to avoid\nMCG + upn own comp's\nJ8m - all coleemnests want take\nas - So line devel Mark\nTeeter- - must get line to Rn St Orman\nJan - SUNAS\nSt\nWHS Chem I Toset sense of urgency\nJm/J8m material on issues thru covert,\n3P now,\nJM - Mon not discuss issues\nrather just those w/ creditity\ndescuss\nme G issues,\n- Economests + bus comm will\nrelease their analysis of cost of org\nam abortion not used nattles used but\nonly locally the Card Kroe, etc.\n56th\nJm - - stay on Mc G big coones\nnot'l del, well tax,\n- Higher Edice Bill - Puill not\nveto we even-ho t includes\nweak eusing + P will\n- USS at will consider Richmond\nme posture hinself later,\ndecision on ments next\nFall after elee,\nTALKING PAPER\nAs a result of the primaries of yesterday, McGovern is in good shape to\nsew up the Democratic nomination. It is important, therefore, that we\ngive exposure to his extreme proposals and statements in the next few\nweeks, in order to SOW seeds of doubt among union members and the \"estab-\nlishment\" Democrats. Humphrey/Jackson statements might be one of the\nbetter vehicles. After the nomination, these lines of communication will\nbe shut off, as the Democratic power structure closes ranks behind the\nnominee.\nThere is general agreement that the approach should be measured, reasoned,\nand not excessively tough or embattled. The objective should not be to\nattack the character or personality of McGovern, who has come across to\nthe voters as a candid, honest and decent man. It should rather be\nspecifically oriented to the issues where his great vulnerability lies.\nIn this regard, the term, \"radical\" should probably be downplayed because\nit evokes negative memories of earlier campaigns. The term \"extreme\"\nmight be more appropriate for our purposes.\nAs a first step, detailed, factual data must be compiled as a basis\nfor speeches and other materials. This is being done by Pat Buchanan\nand by the November Group. Secondly, the method of publicizing McGovern's\nposition must be carefully programmed. The tone will be set by upcoming\n- 2 -\nstatements by John Mitchell:\n0\nWednesday, June 7 - Comments on the primary results\no\nThursday, June 8 - Press briefing\no\nSunday, June 11 - Appearance on ABC's \"Face the\nNation\"\nThat tone should then be carried forth by surrogates and op.ed.\ncolumns in major newspapers.\nThe key issues should be highlighted one at a time, so that the substance\nof each argument gets through to the voter. Such material can also be\nprovided to columnists and editorial writers. An additional part of\nthis program could be negative advertising by third parties such as\ncivic, professional and labor organizations, and prominent Democrats,\nif they are available.\nIt will be important that all these activities be limited to exposing\nMcGovern's position on the issues and not be allowed to develop into an\nearly beginning of the Nixon campaign. The President or his positions\nshould not be emphasized because we do not want to elevate McGovern this\nearly to the level of head-on confrontation with the President.\n5/19\nmF\nG\nto\nH\nS\nMitchell Political Meeting-\nmay 18, 1972\nJohn mitchell met with\nMagweer, malel, Teeter,\nMiller, ha Rue, Findelstein,\nmaril, Dailey, and Flemming\nat All for 1 1/2 hours. The\ndiscussion paper was Boe\nTeelor's Final First wave\nPolling analysis. (you recead\nread a way on may 12Blut\nat Tal A\nanother copy is attached]. Several\ninteresting points emerged during the describen:\n1) The single most important\nfactor for letermining who the\nvoter's probable hereicn ner7\nis past voting behavir. Republic\nsup about 90% of all Repul's\nwill vote for the P. with any\ncontrolust opponer 2) against any\nreaso nable opponent\nDemocratic opponent with\nwellace at 46 % of the electerate\nwill vote ag/ the P. 30-34% of\n4'cay\nthe electorate will always vote\nst\nfor the P no regardless of his\nopposition. Therefore, the market\nis only 20-21% these\n3) Trust of the P and his\ngeneral overall isove-aandling\nability are the next mostinpt\nfactors in determing voters' behavior.\nGenal ability tohandle all issues\nas distingushed\nSelle - dil balls\n5/18\nJm, J8m, FM Teeter, Miller, LaRue\nFinldsteen, marik, Dailey, Flemming\nFinal 1SI Wave analysis\nDate\nweighted\nSingle most imp facter - past\nHow\nElec voles\nvoting belovior\n46% are always ag / P\n33-349 are always w/ P\n80 only 20-21% are the mkt.\nReal swing Voters\nTrust + Issue Handling ability.\non overall is - - han abil,\nasa personality dimenoion.\nun, Infla, Unrest - Pratel\npooit + are mp to public\nCrime - still issued as respen\nof st + Local Gois not on P\naccounding to Haves Dom Coce Poll\nDrug Proe- no dif who's P\nunempl - people concerned\nare already anti - P\nso no effect on P's\nvoters a seving\nDemogis- age, Incomet\nmost impt if\nEmk candid\n68 same\nMich - w allace stronger in Youth / Basing\nOlder Voters -begyest grp + sengle\nmost impt gip for elec\nme - older voters crucial\nP has some non - college youth\nsupport in parkets but in\nall 11 sts the P is not\nstrong among youth- -\n- -But this conflicts w/ Mich,\n- -Col Youth definitely anti - P\nnon col slightly anti - P\nbut no grp of youth are\npro P.\n- no regis rally or public presence,\namong youth - Rotter Jm urges\nquiet convass,\n- meest get 35-45% of Youth\nVote in all -68 states just\nto stay even + still win sts\n- must determine me G ability\nto get EMK's youth cote\nJm - what segment of the youth\nV\nExponel\nare in the Galleep projects.\nmarik, Teeter, Rietz will\nforker & for &\ninclude map\nby ty\nprepare guidelines per St\nRegis packet\ncamen on youth reges\nJy 1 - maril will have\nprecent by precence demog\nlensus\ntrack\nregis Pl Finls th of lange\nof tie - spe per taget voter\noverlay\nfor 68 - 70, Reagan vote in 70.\nmark\nTarget Camp not just Regis.\nDonnally List - accurate age +\nine of all people by telepa\n- -target causes\nPeople Dave Rim, fixed were\nof the P- very small\nundecided vote after the\nConvention.\nWhat do we do to get all\nour pts before Iem Convention?\nP hi number of substantive\ndomes trips ?\n'68 Panel phowed 33%\nof elee shlfter after Sep\nbut not Prl was HHH\nbut rather all crups\nmoving HH P wal + back,\nno liberal/Conoere onel to P cate,\nrather personality oriented,\nThe U.P. up. covelated te the P's\n(slightly lower); UP has no\nspecial constituency.\nDon't shore up our\nweaknesses rather pash\nour strong soves\nTwst + Competence - push;\nforget amiable, priendly,\nwarm, we\nJm - where do you disagree\nnext mtg all w/ disg's\nbod at their critiques,\nwave II - oversomple youth in\ncertain sts\nMTP - Scammon + Havis\nnext wave go after Handleng\nJm - domn confusing\nolv n + For affairs beel\nup to noul Jm we have\nwanted un to go away but\nHarris says For of a plus +\nTeeter says P. handling of\nvn is a positive tis the\nmedia may want to empha un\nme G. Commercials\nRight from the Start\"\nVery\nVut Vets - 5 min spot on Gor\nPerpul\nproviding joes per Desabled\nVets 15th\nReght to know,\nANALYSIS\nCAMPAIGN AND ADVERTISING STRATEGIES\n1) GEORGE McGOVERN\n2) HUBERT H. HUMPHREY\n3) EDMUND MUSKIE\n4) GEORGE WALLACE\nPrepared by: November Group, Inc.\ndate: May 12, 1972\nGEORGE McGOVERN\nI. ISSUES/POSITON\nISSUE\nEARLY PRIMARY POSITION\nCURRENT POSITION\n1. Vietnam\nProposed immediate cessation\nUnchanged.\nof bombing in Southeast Asia\nand then the complete with-\ndrawal of American troops\nwithin 90 days.\n2. Unemploy-\nProposed cutting waste from\nUnchanged.\nment\n\"our bloated military budget\"\nand investing the savings\nin job creating enterprises.\n\"I pledge to do whatever\nis necessary to see there\nis a job for every American\nwho wants a job.'\n3. Taxes\nProposed closing $28 billion\nUnchanged.\nin tax loopholes for the rich\nand powerful (including\nlimiting inheritances' to\n$500,000), relieving tax\nburden by having federal\ngovernment assume a major\npart of education and\nwelfare costs.\n4. Inflation\nProposed revised trade policies,\nUnchanged.\nincreased foreign outlets for\nAmerican goods, expanded public\nservice employment.\n5. Big\nFavors federal chartering to\nUnchanged.\nBusiness\nenforce public interest limi-\ntation on corporate activities,\nfavors efforts to compel cor-\nporations to abolish secrecy\nand efforts to break up monop-\nolies.\n6. Busing\nPro defeat of anti-busing\nSays busing is not\nreferendum in Florida.\nas important an\nissue as the war, tax\nreform, unemployment\nor inflation. Suggeste\nthe Supreme Court has\nruled in favor of\nbusing and \"tinkering\nwith the Courts jur-\nisdiction could set a\nprecedent that would\njeopardise other area\nMcGOVERN (con't.)\n-2-\nISSUE\nEARLY PRIMARY POSITION\nCURRENT POSITION\n7. Senior\nProposed total social security\nUnchanged.\nCitizens\nbenefits start at age 62,\nincreased minimum payment with\na realistic cost of living\nincrease, reforms in tax laws\nwhich burden the retired,\nMedicare to pay for prescription\ndrugs and out of hospital\ntreatment, expanded housing\nprogram for the elderly.\n8. Health\nProposed a program of guaranteed Unchanged.\nhealth insurance, Medicare to\ncover prescription drugs and\nhospital treatment, a program\nof research and treatment of\ndread diseases, expanded me-\ndical care for people isolated\nfrom medical facilities.\n9. Amnesty\nFavored amnesty only after the\nUnchanged.\nVietnam war is over.\n10. Abortion\nPro abortion as a \"medical\nSays \"abortion is\nmatter between a woman and\na matter for the\nher physician.\"\nstates there has\nto be some restrictio\nyou can't just permit\nanybody that wants an\nabortion to walk into\na doctor's office and\nhave one. \"\n11. Drugs\nCited his legislation on\nOpposes legalizing\ndrugs: Controlled Substance\nmarijuana \"pending\nAct, the Federal Drug Abuse\nfurther research on i\nand Drug Dependence Act.\neffects. \"\nProposed more law enforcement\n\"I wouldn't legalize\nin cracking down on racketeers\nmarijuana it ought\nand pushers.\nto be treated as a\nmisdemeanor\n\"\n12. Government\nAccused government of betray-\nUnchanged.\ning the public trust. Regard-\ning Pakistan, McGovern said\n\"\nthey wanted to work this\ndeal in secret, not tell\n\"\ncongress\nMcGovern (con!t.)\n-3-\nII. CAMPAIGN STRATEGY\nOver a year ago, McGovern and his campaign strategists mapped\nout the primary states they considered essential to the McGovern\neffort: New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Massachusetts, Nebraska,\nOregon and California. Wins or strong showings in each of\nthese primary contests were of prime importance to the success-\nful culmination of McGovern's drive for the nomination. Until\nPennsylvania, McGovern never wavered from this original strategy.\nMcGovern placed second in New Hampshire, won in Wisconsin and,\nbased on indications that Massachusetts was in the bag, decided\nto make a special effort in Pennsylvania. He added several un-\nplanned days of campaigning and beefed up his media effort. As\na result, he placed a close third in the primary and won 38\ndelegates.\nWith the decline of Muskie, McGovern then moved quickly and\nstrongly into another unplanned state - Ohio. He literally\nblanketed the state with a heavy media effort and campaigned\nthere personally for about 7 full days. And, for the first time,\nhe failed to visit a single college or university, but concen-\ntrated instead on the blue collar and black vote. McGovern\nplaced second to Humphrey in Ohio and picked up several more\ndelegates.\nThe next big state in McGovern's campaign plan was Nebraska.\nHere things did not go according to plan as McGovern fell under\nattack from both Jackson and Humphrey for his stands vis-a-vis\namnesty, marijuana, and abortion. For the first time in his\ncampaign, he taped a last minute TV program to defend and clarity\nhis position on these issues. In spite of the attacks, McGovern\ndid succeed in carrying conservative, heavily Catholic Nebraska.\nIII. ADVERTISING STRATEGY\nCopy - All McGovern commercials (with the exception of the\npreviously noted Nebraska program) were filmed or taped over\nfour months ago and have been used ever since without a single\nmodification. Of all the major candidates, McGovern, in both\nhis advertising and appearances, has sought to provide a clear\nposition and solution on the issues.\nUnder the campaign slogan, \"McGovern, Right from the Start\", the\nradio commercials feature personal endorsements or an announcer\nsetting forth McGovern's position on the issues. The TV commer-\ncials feature naturalism and issues. The TV spots are edited\nMcGOVERN (con t.)\n-4-\nfrom long, spontaneous conversations that McGovern holds with\ncarefully selected groups of voters. The resulting TV spots\nsuggest that McGovern is listening to ordinary people, that\nhe is directly accessible to their complaints, that he responds\nwith sympathy, understanding and a solution - or at least a\nheartfelt promise to find one. The spots never show the candidate\nselling himself directly to the TV audience.\nThroughout all the TV commercials, there is no opening title\nand the candidate is never identified by either print or\nvoice until the final frame when the action is frozen. \"McGovern\nfor President\" appears at the bottom of the screen and an\nannouncer says: \"McGovern\nRight from the Start.\"\nMedia - In those states he considered his prime objectives, McGovern\nis reported to have consistently outspent his competititon. He\nis reported to have spent over one half million dollars in cam-\npaign media through the Ohio primary. In two of the states -\nWisconsin and Massachusetts - he won. In New Hampshire and Ohio\nhe finished a strong second. Based on November Group audits,\nMcGovern has, with the exception of New Hampshire and Pennsylvania,\nspent 60-70% of individual state media. dollars in television.\n-5-\nHUBERT H. HUMPHREY\nI. ISSUES/POSITION\nISSUE\nEARLY PRIMARY POSITION\nCURRENT POSITION\n1. Vietnam\nProposed pulling all troops\n\"The time has come\nout of Vietnam in less than\nto end the war\nit's\n90 days, if elected.\na lost cause to con-\ntinue to pour materia\nand men into this war\n2. Economy\nDenounced Nixon's economic\nUnchanged.\ncontrol program.\n3. Taxes\nSponsored tax reform bill\nProposed sending tax\naimed at closing specified\nreform plan to Congre\ntax loopholes and raising\nwithin 100 days of\n$16 billion in 1973.\nbecoming President.\n4. Busing\nAgainst busing - \" it\nhasn't solved our racial\nproblems.\nPro the President's position\nAgainst the President\nsaying \"He's in agreement with\nanti-busing moratoriu\nme. If\n\" ...it's insufficient\ndeceptive insensi-\ntive.\n\"\n5. Amnesty\nAgainst granting uncondi-\nUnchanged.\ntional amnesty to draft\nevaders.\n6. Older\nProposed cabinet level depart-\nUnchanged.\nCitizens\nment of senior citizens.\nPro increased social security,\nUnchanged.\nnational health insurance,\nlaws against job discrimination\nbecause of age, inexpensive\nhousing.\n7. Youth\nProposed cabinet level depart-\nUnchanged.\nment of youth affairs.\n8. Crime\nProposed federal law to make the Unchanged.\nkilling of a policeman, prison\nguard or fireman a federal\noffense.\nHUMPHREY (con't.)\n-6-\nISSUES\nEARLY PRIMARY POSITION\nCURRENT POSITION\n9. Drugs\nProposed U.S. seek govern-\nUnchanged.\nment with the foreign countries\nProposed making use of\nthat are the source of nar-\nmarijuana a misdemea-\ncotics to stop the flow or be\nnor rather than a\ncut off from all military or\nfelony.\neconomic aid.\n10. Space\nPro Space Shuttle program.\nUnchanged.\nShuttle\nProgram\nII. CAMPAIGN STRATEGY\nCampaigning from the start as the \"People's Democrat,\" Humphrey\nmore recently has been championing himself as the leader of the\nnew \"progressive vital center\" of the party. His campaign thrust\nseems to center around his political personality and his long\nrecord of Government service and experience. He has shown a\nmarked reluctance to broaden his base of appeal from the ranks\nof his traditional constituency - the elderly, the Jews, the\nBlacks and the unions.\nSpurred by the fear Muskie would lock up the Democratic nomination\nprior to the convention, Humphrey entered selected primary contests\nsomewhat earlier than planned. Following Muskie's poor showing\nin Wisconsin, Humphrey entered several unplanned primary contests\nin an effort to pick up additional delegate votes - Ohio, Indiana,\nNebraska, West Virginia, Maryland and Michigan. Current plans\ninclude bypassing Oregon for the more crucial California primary\nand, if that goes well, continuing on to New York (NOTE: Humphrey\nworkers are frantically attempting to persuade New York delegates\npledged to Muskie and Jackson to support Humphrey in the June 20\nprimary)\nAlthough Humphrey had abided by his pledge not to criticize any\nof his Democratic opponents, the McGovern phenomenon caused him,\nin Nebraska, to attempt to cast McGovern in the role of the\nwild-eyed radical who favors amnesty for draft evaders, legalization\nof marijuana and more liberal abortion laws. Although McGovern\nwon the race, it is probable that Humphrey will continue to speak\nout more strongly against his Democratic oponent in the upcoming\ncontests.\nIII. ADVERTISING STRATEGY\nCopy - Throughout the primary campaigns, Humphrey has labeled\nhimself \"The People's Democrat.\" In some commercials this is\nexpanded to \"In the Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy tradition.\"\nHUMPHREY (cont'd.\n-7-\nThe overall campaign plays to the \"little guy\". Earlier TV\nand radio commercials and,more recently radio commercials\nutilizing Lorne Greene and other announcers as spokesmen for the\nSenator, point out his Senate record on civil rights, Medicare,\nthe Job Corps, the fcod stamp program; set forth his proposals\non social security, the elderly. When Humphrey himself appears\nhe speaks to the voters \"You need a President that understands\nwhat a working family goes through\n\"\nIn recent primaries, Humphrey has eliminated his use of spot\ntelevision in favor of cheaper radio spots. He has used the\ntelephone interview format on television (emceed by Lorne Green\nand backed up with selected special interest group visitors)\nas his TV platform for speaking to the voters.\nMedia - In audited primary contests, Humphrey spent between\n$25-55M per state for media, well below his leading Democratic\nrivals. He won three of these primaries and placed second or\nthird in the others. Humphrey placed over 75% of his media\nmonies in spot television in Florida and Wisconsin, However,\nin the more recent contests in Pennsylvania and Ohio, he has\nfavored spot radio backed up by the TV telephone interview\nprograms.\n-8-\nEDMUND MUSKIE\nI. ISSUES/POSITION\nISSUE\nEARLY PRIMARY POSITION\nCURRENT POSITION\n1. Vietnam\nProposed definite date for with-\nGuaranteed withdrawal\ndrawal of all forces and all\nof all American forces\nmilitary activity in Vietnam\nfrom Indochina within\ncontingent on return of POW's.\ntwo weeks of his\ninauguration.\nProposed Saigon accommodate\nProposed cut off of\npolitically all elements of\nmilitary aid to Saigor.\nSouth Vietnamese society.\nif it does not make\nsubstantial progress\nto peace.\n2. Economy\nAnti president's management\nProposed 90 day freeze\nof the economy.\non food prices (appli-\ncable to wholesalers\nand retailers but not\nto farmers)\n3. Unemploy-\nPro restaining inflation,\nProposed federal\nment\nincreasing employment.\nrelief to areas of\nhigh unemployment;\nretraining programs;\nand an increase in the\nnumber of public\nservice jobs.\n4. Busing\nAnti Constitutional Amend-\nPro busing \"if used\nment on busing.\nwith common sense.'\nPro funding schools\nand integration of\njobs and housing.\n5. Older\nProposed program of housing\nUnchanged.\nCitizens\nsecurity to provide regular\nmonthly payments to meet\nincreased property taxes.\n6. Taxes\nProposed 9 point tax reform\nUnchanged.\nplan. Also pledged to close\na total of $14 billion in\nFederal tax loopholes.\n7. Education\nProposed $7.2 billion program\nUnchanged.\nto help provide all elementary\nand secondary pupils with\nequal instruction.\n8. Defense\nPro elimination of five\nUnchanged.\nspecified defense programs.\nMUSKIE (con't.)\n-9-\nISSUE\nEARLY PRIMARY POSITION\nCURRENT POSITION\n9. Space Shuttle\nAgainst space shuttle program.\nUnchanged.\nProgram\n10. Pollution\nPro more federal programs to\nUnchanged.\nsolve polution.\n11. Drugs\nPro stopping drugs at their\nUnchanged.\nsource of supply; also pro\neducating youth to conse-\nquences of drugs.\nII. CAMPAIGN STRATEGY\nMuskie entered the 1972 primaries as the frontrunning Democratic\ncandidate. His going-in strategy was apparently to enter and\nto win as many primaries as possible, gathering delegates along\nthe way, and to arrive at the July convention as the pre-ordained\ncandidate. His poor showings in New Hampshire and Florida caused\nhim to attempt to sharpen his campaign promises in both advertising\nand public appearances as he entered Illinois.\nAfter Illinois, as his funds and personnel began to fade, Muskie\nbegan to concentrate on the primary states with large delegate\ncounts (Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, California and New York)\nand to focus on only three or four issues.\nThen, following his poor performance in Wisconsin, Muskie insisted\nthe preference contests were unimportant and indicated he would\nconcentrate on collecting convention delegates. He tried to\ncollect convention delegates by campaigning simultaneously in\nboth the Pennsylvania and Massachusetts primaries, once again\nspread himself too thin, and lost both.\nAfter these two defeats, Muskie withdrew from all future primary\nraces but contended he was still a candidate for the Democratic\nnomination.\nLast week Muskie announced he would (money permitting) make a\nseries of national TV appearances as a means of keeping his\nname and ideas before the delegates. Meanwhile, Muskie is\nspeaking on the issues from the Senate floor in the hope that,\nin a convention deadlock, the party will turn to him.\nIII. ADVERTISING STRATEGY\nCopy - Muskie has evidenced three major changes in advertising\ncopy strategy\nMUSKIE (con't.)\n-10-\nPhase I - New Hampshire through Florida - Using the slogan\n\"Muskie for the Country,\" the first series of Muskie commercials\nwere low key in approach. Although voter concerns were voiced,\nin many cases using man-in-the-street interviews, there was little\nattempt to establish a specific Muskie position with regard to\nthe problems.\nPhase II - Following Muskies poor showing in Florida, a new group\nof commercials were hastily produced to make the candidate appear\nmore forceful, more decisive. Two basic TV executions were used -\n1) Muskie speaking, in profile, to an unseen interviewer 2) endorse-\nments by public figures such as Birch Bayh and Adlai Stevenson Jr.\nPhase III- - Finally came Massachusetts and Pennsylvania. Here\nMuskie limited his campaign issues and, speaking directly to the\ncamera, presented better defined campaign positions. The campaign\nslogan became \"Vote for Muskie because you're not just voting\nin a primary, you're voting for President \" in an obvious attempt\nto stop disenchanted voter moves to McGovern in Massachusetts\nand Wallace in Pennsylvania.\nMedia - Muskie spent over $100M for media in each of his losing\nprimaries in Florida and Wisconsin. When he entered the\nMassachusetts and Pennsylvania primaries - which he also lost -\nhis expenditure by state had dropped by more than half - $40-50M\nper state. And although he continued to invest heavily in spot\nTV in Massachusetts (60-70% as in Florida and Wisconsin) in\nPennsylvania he moved to the cheaper mediums of radio and news-\npapers.\n-11-\nGEORGE WALLACE\nI. ISSUES/POSITION\nISSUE\nEARLY PRIMARY POSITION\nCURRENT POSITION\n1. Busing\nAgainst busing children to\nUnchanged.\nachieve racial balance.\n2. Taxes\nPro tax reform to eliminate\nUnchanged.\nexemptions to foundations,\nchurches, endowment funds.\n3. Welfare\nAgainst paying hard earned\nUnchanged.\nmoney to \"welfare loafers.\n4. Crime\nPro policemen and firemen;\nUnchanged.\nlaw and order-no specific\nproposals.\n5. Foreign aid\nAgainst giving money to\nUnchanged.\nforeign countries, especially\nthose who fought against us\nin Vietnam; voted against us\nin the U.N.\n6. Vietnam\nPro whatever action necessary\nUnchanged.\nto insure safe withdrawal\nof American personnel.\n7. Older Citizens\nPro increased social security,\nUnchanged.\nhigher old age pensions, tax\nexemptions on medicine, im-\nproved medical facilities.\n8. Big Government\n1) Against government inter-\nUnchanged.\nference in peoples lives.\n2) Pro Senate review of\nSupreme Court every six yrs.\nII. CAMPAIGN STRATEGY\nWallace's theme \"send them a message,\" quite accurately describes\nthe thrust of his campaign. He has been saying a vote for\nWallace will send Washington a message to take action on busing,\ntax reform, etc.\nWALLACE (con't.)\n-12-\nWallace apparently entered the Presidential primary race this\nyear to gain sufficient delegate strength to ensure his anti-\nbusing, protest policies would be written into the party's\nplatform. Today, however, he has broadened his appeals and\nappears to be seeking popular strength in the hopes that, if\nthe convention deadlocks, the party will be forced to turn\nto the candidate who has demonstrated he can win the popular\nvote. Or failing a convention endorsement, he may run again\nas a third party candidate.\nWallace's third party candidacy continues a question. He opened\nhis campaign by denying he would run as a third party candidate\nunless treated \"cavalierly\" at the convention. On April 19th,\nin Indiana, he disavowed any plans for a third party candidacy\neven if he were treated badly at the convention. However, on\nApril 28th, in North Carolina, he returned to his original\nposition of a possible third party candidacy.\nSupporters in several states already have filed petitions placing\nWallace on the American Party ticket in November. However, having\nentered the primaries as a Democratic' candidate he cannot be\nlisted as a third party candidate in the General Election in\nseveral states, including Michigan, Indiana, Pennsylvania and\nMaryland.\nWallace has used, throughout the campaign, giant rallies as his\nprimary political platform. Reminiscent of old time Southern\npolitiking, rallies include entertainment by selected country\nand Western stars - Hank Snow, Billy Grammer, etc.\nIII. ADVERTISING STRATEGY\nCopy - Wallace's broadcast commercials and programs have, through-\nout his campaign, featured excerpts from Wallace rallies or the\ncandidate talking directly to the voters via the television camera.\nIn both situations he talks to the voters in everyday language -\nusing words like \"asinine\" and refering to \"welfare loafers\",\n\"intellectual snobs, etc. Most commercials end with a plea for\nsupport via campaign contributions.\nMedia - In the primary states audited (Florida, Wisconsin and\nPennsylvania) Wallace has consistently spent nearly 75% of his\nadvertising monies in spot television. Wallace's total dollars\nby state ($40-50M) have ranked third or fourth among the four\nmajor contenders. However, in spite of this spending deficit,\nthe man has placed first or second in all major primaries he\nhas entered.\nH\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nFU\nWASHINGTON\nADMINISTRATIVELY CONFIDENTIAL\nMay 15, 1972\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nLARRY HIGBY\nFROM:\nGORDON STRACHAN\nG\nSUBJECT:\nStans' Dinner\nIn follow-up, the attached memorandum from you regarding\nchecking with Maurice Stans' request for a quiet dinner\nfor eight new people in June appeared. Have you heard\nanything from Stans? Or should we wait to hear from him?\nOr should I contact his office directly?\nat feast antil\nwe getlachy bachfrom Russia\nL\nH\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nFU F U\nWASHINGTON\n5/10\nApril 4, 1972\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nFOLLOW-UP\nFROM:\nL. HIGBY L\nFollow-up at the middle of May with Maurice Stans' request for a\nquiet dinner for eight new people in June with the President.\n8 \"new\" people,\nnot the group to c'D\n,\nFINANCE COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT\nMEMORANDUM\nMay 31, 1972\nCONFIDENTIAL\nMEMORANDUM FOR GORDON STRACHAN\nSUBJECT: White House Support List\nThe results of our mailing to the White House Support List\nare as follows:\npieces mailed\n5,300\npieces received\n103\ntotal dollars received\n$1,973.\naverage contribution\n$19.15\npercent response\n1.9\ndollars received per letter mailed\n.37\nThis response is more than double our break-even point and is\nconsidered a very successful mailing. The greatest profit, however,\nwill be derived from additional follow up mailings to the 103\ncontributors.\nIt is recommended that future mailings be held until after the\nDemocratic National Convention in July. The decision on what\ncopy to use should be determined from tests and experience with\nother lists during the next 30 - 50 days.\nHowever, in order to mail this list, it would be helpful for\nus to have additional names so that they may be key punched,\nverified and transferred to magnetic tape\nLee Lee Nunn\nX\nNews\nfrom\nthe Committee\nfor the Re-election\nof the President\n1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006 (202) 333-0920\nFOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE\nWESTERN REGIONAL FINANCE CHAIRMAN FOR NIXON\nCONTACT: DeVan L. Shumway\n(202) 333-7060\n#5-40(25)\nWASHINGTON -- Darius N. Keaton, Jr. of Pebble Beach,\nCalifornia, will direct fund-raising activities for President\nNixon's re-election campaign in a seven-state western area,\naccording to Maurice Stans, chairman of the national Finance\n.\nCommittee to Re-elect the President.\nThe newly named chairman's Region IX includes Alaska, Arizona,\nCalifornia, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon and Washington.\nMr. Keaton is chairman of the board of the Charter Oil Company,\na subsidiary of the Charter Company, and is president of the\nCharter Trading Company.\nA native of Georgia, he entered college at the age of 16\nbut left after one year to work in shipyards, becoming general\nforeman of the Kaiser Yards in Vancouver at 18. Following service\nwith the U.S. Army in Germany, he entered the University of\nCalifornia, Berkeley, in 1946 and received his B.S. degree\nin 1948. Since that time he has been in the petroleum business.\n-30-\nCommittee for the Re-election of the President\nMEMORANDUM\nMay 30, 1972\nCONFIDENTIAL\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE HONORABLE JOHN N. MITCHELL\nTHROUGH:\nJEB S. MAGRUDER\nSUBJECT:\nFinancial Report\nI met with Secretary Stans last week to discuss the release of\nour first financial report on June 10. Subject, of course, to\nyour approval, we plan to issue a brief statement on the\ndate of release quoting Mr. Stans and then make the report\navailable to the press.\nWe will not have a press conference with the Secretary or anyone\nelse although I will be prepared to answer, or not answer as the\ncase may be, any specific questions. Generally, I will not go\nbeyond the report except to point out that it complies with the\nlaw as passed by a Democratic-controlled Congress.\nThe press release as suggested by Secretary Stans will be along\nthe general lines of the attached.\nEnclosure\nDEVAN L. SHUMWAY\nThe four national finance committees raising funds\nfor the re-election of President Nixon today filed their\nreports with the Comptroller General as required by law.\nVarious state committees similarly engaged are filing\nseparate accountings.\nMaurice H. Stans, Chairman of the National Finance\nCommittee for the Re-election of the President, said the filings\nmeet every requirement of the law enacted by the Congress\nearlier this year.\nThe four committees received\ncontributions\nin the period between April 7 and May 31 for an average of\nper contribution. Contributions totaled\n.\nStans has previously indicated that his goal is to\nsecure close to one million contributions for the Nixon re-election\nthis year.\nCommittee for the Re-election of the President\nMEMORANDUM\nMay 24, 1972\nCONFIDENTIAL\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE HONORABLE JOHN N. MITCHELL\nSUBJECT:\nPolitical Issues Group Meeting\nThursday, May 18, 1972\nThose invited to attend the meeting were:\nAnne Armstrong\nRita Hauser\nBuehl Brentsen\nPat Hutar\nRobert J. Brown\nHerbert Klein\nKen Cole\nFred LaRue\nCharles Colson\nJohn Lehman\nSenator Bob Dole\nClark MacGregor\nSenator Peter H. Dominick\nFred Malek\nThomas B. Evans\nBob Marik\nRobert Finch\nRay Price\nBarbara Franklin\nDonald Rumsfeld\nJames Galbraith\nWilliam Safire\nLeonard Garment\nGordon Strachan\nRoy Goodearle\nVan Shumway\nBryce Harlow\nRobert Teeter\nEdwin Harper\nWilliam Timmons\nRose Mary Woods\nThose in attendance were:\nBuehl Brentsen\nRay Hanzlek\nHarry Dent\nBob Marik\nJames Galbraith\nRay Price\nLeonard Garment\nVan Shumway\nFollowing a short discussion by Harry Dent of the Wallace shooting\nand speculation concerning the Governor's likely actions, Ken\nRietz discussed issues affecting youth during the campaign. In\nCONFIDENTIAL\nCONFIDENTIAL\n-2-\naddition, he described the campaign's strategy in appealing to the\n18-24 year old voter.\nFrom the research conducted publicly and within the campaign Ken\ndrew a picture of the young voter which is significantly different\nfrom the conventional wisdom contained in the national news media.\nIt would appear, he asserted, that there is presently no \"youth\"\ncandidate, only candidates who are more associated with youth than\nothers. To him, the influence of peer group pressures are more\nsignificant than the impact of charismatic media figures. What\nappeals to young voters is a candidate's straightforward presenta-\ntion of his beliefs, not 100% conformity on all \"youth issues.'\nSeveral times the youth staff has found individuals who supported\nthe President, but have not told their friends about it since they\nwere afraid of being censured. Youth may be supportive of the\nPresident because of some of his stands or because of his experi-\nence, and yet frequently be afraid to admit it for fear of not\nbeing \"in.\"\nIn light of this picture, the strategy of the youth campaign for\nthe President has been to concentrate on breaking down these group\npressures by encouraging involvement in organizational activity.\nWherever possible the campaign is trying to organize youth to par-\nticipate in canvassing and in other activities requested by the\nState Chairmen. The concept of the campaign is to approach young\npeople individually with the request that they support the Presi-\ndent. Gallop has stated that only 3# of the electorate is asked to\nparticipate in political campaigns and Ken has found that simply by\nasking them, it is possible to involve large quantities of people\nwith the President's campaign. Rather than concentrate merely on\ncollege campuses where many of the group pressures are the strong-\nest, the campaign has gone door-to-door concentrating on the\n18,000,000 18-24 year old voters who are living at home.\nKen's program, therefore, has concentrated on canvasses, individual\ncontact, and speakers in small groups who work at asking people to\nparticipate. The concept of the \"floating precinct\" has been used\nextensively to identify leaders who may not cover a conventional\nprecinct but belong to affinity groups such as bowling leagues and\nsororities. These floating leaders are able to ask a large cross\nsection of youth to participate in supporting the President.\nCONFIDENTIAL\nCONFIDENTIAL\n-3-\nA major obstacle to Ken's efforts thus far has come from getting\nthe word of these achievements out through the media. He pointed\nto two cases where there were clear and dramatic instances of\nsupport for the President which, nevertheless, went unreported.\nIn New Hampshire the largest youth campaign in the state was\nmounted in support of the President though contenders shared press\nrecognition as the candidates of youth. And, in one instance in\nConnecticut, the President won a high school poll though the head-\nlines on the article indicated that Kennedy was the preferred\nchoice of youth (see attachment).\nPerhaps more difficult have been the problems that have been\nposed by surrogate candidates and other spokesmen in support of\nthe President who have either found it impossible to attend impor-\ntant youth events or have spoken to the issues rather than for the\nPresident. Ken explained that invitations for no less than 25\nseparate state vocational conferences were turned down for lack\nof any speaker in support of the President. In many of these\ncases, the event might have been covered if the youth vote were a\nhigher priority. By reordering priorities and identifying the\nPresident with young people, by creating a campaign that involves\nyoung people and that explicitly asks for the support of the 18-24\nyear old voter, Ken hopes to turn in a significantly different\nperformance than that which is expected by many. Ken is certain\nthat there can be a major showing of youth support for the\nPresident.\nJEB S. MAGRUDER\nHARRY S. DENT\nAttachment\nCommittee\nfor the Re-election\nof the President 1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006 (202) 333-0920\nMay 16, 1972\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nJEB MAGRUDER\nFRED MALEK\nFROM:\nKEN RIETZ KR\nI thought you would be interested in the attached\narticle regarding a nationwide poll of 200,000 high\nschool students. While the headline indicates Ken-\nnedy won, a careful reading of the news story shows\nthe President won with 31.4%.\nComeract\n100\n100\nly\nT- r- Kenne 5/14/75 Wins Poll\nof\nly\nin\n1-\nOf High Benoolers\n).\na\nSen. Edward M. Kennedy of Maine, who received 21,515\nT\nMassachus its, who repeatedly\nvotes.\nYoung People\ne\nhas said he does not seek the\nGeorge S. McGovern, the\nII\nnomination for president,\nSouth Daketa schator consi-\nr\nCireninte-Petil\nC\nemerged the favorite Democrat-\ndered the front-runner for the\n3\nic candidate in a nationwide poll\nDemocratic nomination, pelled\nBacking Nixon\n1\nof some 200,000 high school siu-\n18,631 and Sen. Hubert H. Hum-\nC\ndents.\nphrey, his closest rival, had\nResults of the T II, announced\nMore than 200 young pcm\n16,933. They placed fifth and\nlast week. had Kennedy with 15\nthe state went out onto\nsixih in the balloting.\nper cent of the total vote. Gov.\nstreets Saturday to gather\n1,\nGeorge Wellace of Alabama fol-\nA surprisingly strong showing\nsignatures for a polition sup\n57\nlowed him among Democrats.\nwas made by New York U.S.\nparting President Nixen's policy\nis\nPresident Ninen I-! the entire\nRep. Shirky Chisholm, the first\n31\nfield with 50.90 VOICE, or 31.4\nblack woman from it major par-\nin Vietnam.\nnote\nin\nper cent.\nty to seek the presidency. Mrs.\nAccording to 18-year-old Rober-\n].\nThe pull, known as the Fifth\nChisholm received 13.048 votes.\nta Bryant, of Bloomfield, one of\nNational Student's Presidential\nThe editors of Current Events\nthose gathering names, the Vict-\nto\nPreference Poll, was conducted\nT Ned that the total vote for all\nnam Action Phone WAS sponsor-\n:!-\nby American Education Publi-\nDemocratic candidates outsen\ning the drive and hoped to send\n:s\ncations of Middlet will.\nbered the Nixon vote by 2 to 1.\nDr\nThe balloting gave Kennedy\nIf the Democrats could unite Lc-\na group of youths to Washing-\ned\n27.038 votes- less than half Nix-\nhind a candidate before Novem-\nton, D.C. sometime next week\n11-\non's tally-and Wallace, 23.013.\nher. they state they have a Road\nto present the signatures to the\nà\nNext in line was Sen. Edmund\nchance of victory over the lie-\nPresident.\n11.\nS. Muskie. the Democrat (non\npublicans.\nThe potition praised Nixon's\nComedian Pat Paulsen led the\n\"effort to eshieve posice in Viet-\nwrite-in votes with 407 while Ar-\nchie Dunker received 131.\nnam, pertect the remaining\nAmericans there and have the\nAmerican prisoners of war re-\nturned.'\nHeattord\n3\nCorrect\n5/11/72\n1\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nDate : May 26, 1972\nTo:\nGORDON STRACHAN\nFROM:\nHARRY DENT\nPlease handle\nFor your information\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nMay 25, 1972\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nHARRY DENT\nFROM:\nMAX FRIEDERSDORF\nSUBJECT:\nCongressman McCloskey\nBurt Talcott and Charlie Gubser report that polls in California\nshow Barry 31%, McCloskey 270 and Cole 17%. Gubser believes\nMcCloskey is gaining and probably will win if Cole stays in the\nrace.\nCC: Clark MacGregor\nBill Timmons\nDick Cook\nChuck Colson\nWARREN G. MAGNUSON. WASH., CHAIRMAN\nJOHN D. PASTORE, R.I.\nNORRIS COTTON. N.H.\nVANCE HARTKE, IND.\nJAMES B. PEARSON, KANS.\nPHILIP A. HART, MICH.\nRCBERT P. GRIFFIN, MICH.\nHOWARD W. CANNON. NEV.\nHOWARD H. BAKER, JR., TENN.\nRUSSELL B. LONG. LA.\nMARLOW W. COOK. KY,\nFRANK E. MOSS, UTAH\nTED STEVENS. ALASKA\nUnited States Senate\nERNEST F. HOLLINGS, S.C.\nJ. GLENN BEALL JR., MD.\nDANIEL K. INDUYE. HAWAII\nLOWELL P. WEICKER, JR., CONN.\nWILLIAM B. SPONG, JR., VA,\nCOMMITTEE ON COMMERCE\nFREDERICK J. LORDAN, STAFF DIRECTOR\nWASHINGTON, D.C. 20510\nMICHAEL PERTSCHUK, CHIEF COUNSEL\nMay 23, 1972\nHonorable Harry S. Dent\nSpecial Counsel to the President\nThe White House\nWashington, D. C.\nDear Harry:\nI want to confirm and reiterate my expressions of gratitude\nto you for going to New Hampshire and speaking at the annual May\nluncheon of the Federation of Republican Women's Clubs at Wentworth-\nby-the-Sea.\nI am not \"polishing the apple\" but speaking in complete\nsincerity when I tell you that in all the years of my campaigning\nI have not heard a more effective speech. You need not take my\njudgment alone because since our return I have had occasion to talk\nwith the Governor, the State Chairman, and have received letters\nfrom many of the officers of the Women's Clubs. They were all most\ncomplimentary to you and indicated that you said just the things\nthat stirred them up to fight for the President and gave them the\nammunition with which to do SO.\nI hope that you will be exposed to as many groups around\nthis country between now and November as possible.\nThank you again.\nYours sincerely,\nNorris Cotton\nU. S. Senator\nNC:eb\nCalifornia Committee\nfor the Re-election\nof the President\n1670 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017 (213) 484-1330\nMay 22, 1972\nMEMORANDUM FOR RONALD REAGAN\nFROM LYN NOFZIGER in\nRE: California Campaign (Week Ending 20 May 1972)\nRelations with Put Livermore seem to have hit an all-time low as he\nrefuses to cooperate in any way. He is rewriting a contract on the use\nof Compass Systems, the data company, that was drawn by Bob Morgan of the\nnational re-election committee, and I am fearful that if he does not stall\nindefinitely he will redraw it so as to make it difficult for the campaign\nto get access to necessary data.\nAs you know, the data is controlled by a board of trustees made up of you,\nBob Monagan and Put. It may be necessary for you and Monagan to insist on\ntaking direct control. This situation is going to have to be straightened\nout very soon if we are to get maximum use of Compass data.\nRon, I frankly don't believe we can continue putting up with Put's obstruc-\ntionism, even if it means demanding his resignation. He is hurting the\nState Central Committee, and he is hurting the campaign. He seems to have\nno concept of the seriousness of the situation; he is certainly more\ninterested in controlling his own little domain than he is in re-electing\nthe President.\nThe phone and mail programs are now in full swing. If nothing else, we\nare learning that you can't treat California the same way you treat New\nHampshire or even Florida.\nThe phone banks, although there have been a couple that have lagged, have\ngenerally performed well. The mail program is forcing county organization\nalong, and this will be its main benefit. However, there have been some\nbad breakdowns and mistakes in both programs due largely to initial delays\nby Compass Systems and then because of errors and misunderstandings by the\nReuben H. Donnelly Company that provides much of the material and does the\nmailings, and also because it is difficult for many of those involved to\nunderstand the size and complexity of California. Another problem has been\nthe fact that about 40 percent of all telephones in California are unlisted.\n2\nWe have been in constant touch with Washington on this matter, and they are\nconfident that the bugs can be ironed out by the general election. I concur.\nThis is one reason that I have been so insistent that we use the primary as\na time for organizing and for getting out the bugs. Incidentally, our staff\nis performing well in handling these crises as they occur.\nRegistration proceeds on target. The Los Angeles County staff is a great\naddition and is working in nicely. Our problem is a shortage of competent\nstaff, which makes even more incomprehensible Put's refusal to lend us any\nstaff.\nWe expect to be able to utilize the volunteers the mail and phone programs\nare turning up for registration purposes, especially during our three blitz\ndays this summer.\nOther segments of the campaign seem to be progressing satisfactorily. Our\nSpanish-speaking and black efforts are doing well, and the senior citizens\nprogram is getting organized.\nI believe our communications/press effort is the best in the country. We\nare the only campaign feeding film to television. In addition, we are\nactively soliciting radio actualities and are working hard to maximize the\nimpact of surrogates and others who either are already in the state or who\ncome to the state.\nLikewise, our speakers bureau is functioning effectively.\nAll in all, things are going well. However, we need to (1) get our budgets\napproved, (2) straighten Mr. Livermore out, (3) make sure we get the kinks\nin the mail and phone programs ironed out during this primary election. I\nthink Livemore presents the only serious problem at this time.\nCC: John Mitchell\nBob Haldeman\nBob Mardian\nJeb Magruder\nGordon Luce\nEd Meese\nCOMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT\nMay 17, 1972\nMEMORANDUM FOR MR. H. R \\HALDEMAN\nFROM:\nJEB S. MAGINDER\nFor your information.\nCalifornia Committee\nBob Haldeman\nfor the Re-election\nof the President\n1670 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017 (213) 484-1330\nMay 15, 1972\nMEMORANDUM FROM LYN NOFZIGER FOR RONALD REAN REAGAN\nRE: California Campaign (Week Ending 13 May 1972)\nLast week was a week of some accomplishment and some disappointment.\nThe chief disappointment is the failure of Put Livermore to offer more\nthan lipservice on behalf of this campaign.\n1. He stands alone among the State Central Committee officers in\nrefusing to provide us any staff help in our registration efforts.\nDespite repeated requests on my part for at least token staff support\nby the Republican State Central Committee for registration, he has\nnot provided any help.\n2. At the state meeting last Friday he ordered the Youth for Nixon to\ntake down a table that was distributing literature and soliciting\nsignatures on petitions supporting the President. This was done\nover my personal protests and despite my willingness to allow the\nAshbrook people to put up a table, also.\n3. His inability to get satisfactory performance out of Compass Systems\nwhich is supposed to provide the California campaign with demographic,\ncensus and historical data.\nAside from the area of Compass Systems, where we seemingly have no choice,\nI see no percentage in attempting to work with Mr. Livermore any further.\nWe will continue to maintain good relations but will not look to him for\nmaterial aid because I do not think he will deliver.\nIn effect this means we will literally take over registration in the\nstate, although we will work with county central committees, since they\ndo not come under his authority. This means we will work within the\nCal-Plan districts, which we initially had hoped would be registered\nthrough state committee efforts.\nDespite our problems at the RSCC meeting, the Nixon Youth picked up\nmore than 600 names on petitions supporting the President in Vietnam.\nThere was no visible sign of Ashbrook support.\n2\nTuesday Region III opens its headquarters in San Mateo and on Wednesday\nSacramento opens its headquarters. Both will be low keyed because of the\nshooting of George Wallace.\nAs you know, we meet with John Mitchell Tuesday afternoon on budgets,\nincluding county budgets. I will report to you on the results at our\nThursday meeting.\nWe have scheduled a Steering Committee meeting May 24 and will add a few\nnames to take in some of our new leadership.\nOur phone banks--we have nine in operation--are picking up although\nrunning behind the quota given us by national. Part of the problem has\nbeen a breakdown in the data processing, which is not our area. Out of\nsomething over 46,000 calls made through last Saturday, the President is\ngetting 78 percent approval with Ashbrook getting 7 percent and the\nremainder undecided. This compares with a Field poll which shows Ashbrook\nat three percent and my own very broad prediction that he'll get between\n10 and 20 percent.\nI believe the Wallace assassination attempt, unfortunate as it may be,\nwill trigger a conservative trend and will hurt those, such as McGovern\nand Kennedy, who have been at least tacitly supporting the peace mobs.\nRegistration: As you know, we are in the process of putting together\nfour major \"blitz\" days this summer.\nWe have run into a rather pleasant problem: Because of our constant\nharping on registration, our Nixon chairmen are all planning registration\non their own. This means we must meld Bruce Nestande's efforts, which\nhave been funnelling through the county central committees, into the Nixon\ncampaign.\nThis will increase our volunteers and broaden our efforts.\nPrimarily, we must work to coordinate all segments of the party into one\nunified registration effort. I do not see any major problem in this.\nOrganization. Organization is now about complete. Our task is to make\nour organizations operate effectively. We are pushing this now. The\nprimary will tell us where our weak spots are. As I have said before,\none of the problems is the fact that they are not involved in money-\nraising nor in raising money for their campaigns. This takes away some\nof the zest. Hopefully, we can add to that with registration.\nSupport for the President has been heavy, and we have turned must effort\nto make it vocal and to letting Congress and the White House know it.\nIndications are that thousands of letters and wires have been sent.\n6/5\nColsen J8M J m, mae G, Harlout\n-on mc Govern\n- Concerned Dem's\n- 5/6 - 430 andersen\nMinn - Dwayne\nType of Comm, who\nont etc\n-Get to me G now three\nDems before nom\nDoestair nomen\nLocked,\nH mtg ul J.M.\nTal Pap to Pcl mats\nTelephone -\nTol Pap for H mty w/up?\nStatus.\nH.G K- - LP agnew chosen\n- sen E mk on the Dem Twat\npersonal opinion\ncal, nJ, J, nm, S.D- - Dem Cancer\nHGK H\nto\nFU TUESDAY MORNING\nFIRST THING - April 4\nMarch 31, 1972\nMet H\nthe\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nJEB MAGRUDER\nFROM:\nGORDON STRACHAN\nSUBJECT:\nRNC Registration\ndeport,\n2\ntoo\ntoppy\nThe agreement of last fall between the Committee to Re-\nElect the President and the RNC that voter registration\nwould be almost entirely an RNC function may have to be\nreviewed. I just read Ed DeBolt's March 29 memorandum\nentitled \"Spring Registration Activity Report #4\". (Copy\nattached.) I think it represents a dismal failure. All\ncommitments, programs, and activities are projected rather\nthan accomplished. It would be interesting to know what\nin fact has been done in some of these cases.\nof particular concern to me is the statement on page #2\nthat \"California, for example, is still having difficulty\ngetting their ambitious registration project off the ground\".\nMy recollection of the amount of money under the direction\nof Ken Rietz is very substantial. Yet, your comments\nyesterday about Nofziger's shaky implementation increases\nmy concern. I would enjoy discussing this entire matter with\nyou 30 that we could prepare a recommendation for John Mitchell.\nLet's try to get together on Tuesday.\n4/4 H/A G Tal Pap\nGS:1m\nFU Tuesday, Ap. 4\nCommittee for the Re-election of the President\nMay 18, 1972\nMEMORANDUM\nCONFIDENTIAL\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE HONORABLE JOHN N. MITCHELL\nTHROUGH:\nJEB S. MAGRUDER\nFROM:\nJ. CURTIS HERGE\nSUBJECT:\nProposal for Campaign Kick-Off Event\nin San Diego and San Clemente\nSeptember 14 and 15, 1972\nIt has been proposed that the President and Mrs. Nixon host a two\nday gathering of Republican leaders in San Diego, California, during\nthe period September 14 and 15, 1972. The purpose of the gathering\nwould be (1) to provide an opportunity for discussions and meetings\nabout campaign strategy and plans and (2) to provide an attractive\nand suitable forum for the initial campaign address by the President.\nIn that connection, consideration is being given to a proposal that\nthe President deliver his formal acceptance speech during this two\nday period in California, rather than at the Convention in Miami.\nThe purpose of this memorandum is to set forth the points which\nshould be considered in connection with this proposal and to describe\na proposed agenda.\n1. Participants. In addition to the President and\nMrs. Nixon and the candidate for Vice President and his wife, the\nfollowing groups of individuals might be invited to the gathering:\nApproximate Number of\nGroup\nIndividuals in the Group\na. The surrogate candidates\n32\nb. Members of the Cabinet who\nare not surregate candidates\n(Laird, Rogers, Shultz)\n3\nC. Republican Senators who are\nnot surrogate candidates\n35\nd. Republican Governors who are\nnot surrogate candidates\n17\nPage Two\ne. Republican Congressmen who\nare not surrogate candidates\n(Not including Congressmen\nAshbrook, McCloskey, Schmitz\nand Riegle)\n171\nf. Officers of the Republican\nNational Committee\n12\ng. National Committeemen and\nCommitteewomen\n100\nh. State GOP Chairmen\n50\ni. State Committee for the Re-\nelection of the President\nChairmen\n50\nj. State Finance Committee to\nRe-elect the President\nChairmen\n50\nk. State Committee for the Re-\nelection of the President\nExecutive Directors\n50\n1. Under Secretaries, Assistant\nSecretaries and Agency Heads\n70\nm. Senior members of the White\nHouse staff\n15\nn. Senior members of the 1701\nstaff and voting bloc\ncoordinators\n20\nO. Celebrities for the President\n10\np. Athletes for the President\n10\nq. Elected Republican State\nOfficeholders from California\n4\nr. Non-incumbent Republican\ncandidates for Congress from\nCalifornia\n31\nS. Republican leaders not listed\nabove, e.g. Mayor Lugar, Dr.\nArthur Flemming and substantial\ncontributors\n60\nSub-Total\n790\nSpouses\n790\nTOTAL\n1,580\nPage Three\nThe number of participants could be reduced, if deemed advisable,\nby not inviting (a) the Republican Congressmen who are not surrogate\ncandidates, (b) the Assistant Secretaries, and (c) selected Agency\nHeads. This question becomes relevant in connection with cost\nconsiderations and the proposed barbecue (or fish fry) at the\nresidence in San Clemente. We have been advised that the areas\navailable for that event are either the golf course, or the area\nimmediately to the east. Both areas at the residence could handle\n\"1,000 plus,\" but 1,580 might exceed the comfortable limit unless\nthe areas were combined.\nWe recommend that consideration continue to be given to inviting all\nthe listed groups, plus their spouses (a total of approximately\n1,580 pcople), subject to a more definitive determination of the\ncosts involved and the numbers that can be accommodated at San\nClemente. If reductions are then indicated, consideration would be\ngiven to not inviting, in the order listed, (a) the Republican\nCongressmen who are not surrogate candidates (the leadership and\nthe California Congressmen should nevertheless be invited), (b)\nthe Assistant Secretaries, and (c) selected Agency Heads.\nApprove\nDisapprove\nComment\n2. Dates. The dates proposed are Thursday, September\n14, and Friday, September 15.\nIt should be noted that there will be the following other activities\nin San Diego during that period:\na. The Inland Empire Credit Union will be holding a convention\nat the Town and Country Hotel. Expected attendance: 900;\nb. The U.S.S. Saratoga Reunion will commence on September 15th\nat the Sheraton Inn. Expected attendance: 300;\nC. Provident Mutual Life Insurance Company will be holding a\nconvention at the Notel Del Cornado from September 7th\nthrough September 14th. Expected attendance: 700;\nd.\nThe Humble Oil and Refining Company will be holding\nmeetings at the Town and Country Hotel from September 10th\nthrough September 14th. The expected attendance is not\nknown at this time;\nPage Four\ne. The U.S. Pro Tennis Association will hold a convention\nat the Hotel Del Cornado from September 14th through\nSeptember 17th. Expected attendance: 400;\nf. California Affiliate Representatives, Inc. will be\nmeeting at the Bi-hia Hotel from September 14th through\nSeptember 17th. Expected attendance: 400.\nIt does not appear that these activities would cause any media or\naccommodation conflict. It should be noted, however, that the San\nDiego Padres are scheduled to play in Houston on September 14 and\n15. Those games may be televised locally in San Diego.\n3. Format. As noted, consideration is being given\nto a proposal that the President deliver his acceptance speech\nduring this period. It is our understanding that Messrs. Bryan\nand Willkie, as well as a number of other nominees, delivered their\nacceptance addresses at a time considerably later than the Convention.\nThe thought in this instance is that there would be some obvious\nadvantages in getting some major attention and television coverage\nin September when the audiences would be larger than in late August.\nAn inherent problem is that the three television networks would\nhave to be convinced that (1) the speech is, in fact, the acceptance\nspeech and (2) free time should be provided. The networks probably\ncannot be convinced that the acceptance speech will be delivered in\nCalifornia until the conclusion of the Convention in Miami. Even\nthen, the networks might want to hear, or read the advance text of,\nthe California speech before deciding if free time should be granted.\nA more remote problem is that the networks may decide, after the\nConvention, that we have locked ourselves in and, as a consequence,\nforce us to buy time to have the speech covered.\nMike Duval, at the White House, has presented the following options:\na. If the address is the President's acceptance speech\nand it is carried live (video tape) on a national or\nselected cities hook-up, it should be held on Thursday,\nSeptember 14, 1972, at 7:00 p.m., before a \"canned\"\naudience of about 5,000, including the key participants\nsuggested above. The place selected should be inside,\ne.g. at the Convention Hall, but not in a dinner setting.\nIn order to create campaign excitement, a rally atmosphere\nwas suggested.\nPage Five\nb. If the address were not the President's acceptance\nspeech and there is only film coverage, it should also\nbe held on Thursday, September 14, but in Charger\nStadium (capacity 50,000). Admission would be by\nticket and there would be pre-program entertainment\nand post-speech fireworks.\nIn view of the tenuous situation with the television networks, we\nrecommend that the President deliver his acceptance speech at the\nConvention in Miami and that the speech in San Diego be considered\nas his initial campaign address. We also recommend that this\naddress be delivered indoors on Thursday, September 14, 1972, at\n7:00 p.m. The program would be developed in a rally type atmos-\nphere and the President's address should be preceded with a\nprocession of celebrities and entertainment. The site selected,\nsuch as the Convention Hall, might accommodate 5,000 people.\nNegotiations should be undertaken with one network to buy thirty\nminutes of time to broadcast the President's address.\nApprove\nDisapprove\nComment\nThe major event on Friday, September 15, 1972, might be to have the\nPresident host a barbecue (or fish fry) at the residence in San\nClemente either on the golf course or the area immediately to the\neast. Mike Duval has noted that \"both areas at the residence could\neasily handle 1,000 plus. \"\nMike Duval has recommended that this event be held at noon, or in\nmid-afternoon, to permit the participants to fly home that evening.\nOur view is that the event should be held from 5:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.\nas the conclusion of a series of working sessions that would also\nbe scheduled. (Our proposed agenda for the two days' activities,\nincluding the working sessions, is attached at Tab A.)\nFor our guidance, we would appreciate receiving your recommendation\nwhether the event should be held at:\na. Noon or mid-afternoon\nb. From 5:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.\nPage Six\n4. Cost, It is estimated that, if all the proposed\nparticipants were invited, the two day program would cost approxi-\nmately $403,460. That estimate was based upon the following\nassumptions:\na. Transportation. It was assumed that charter\naircraft would be utilized to transport the\nsurrogate candidates; the other members of\nthe Cabinet; the other Republican Senators;\nthe other Republican Congressmen; the Under\nSecretaries, Assistant Secretaries and Agency\nHeads; the 1701 staff members; and, their\nspouses between Washington, D.C. and San\nDiego. That includes approximately 660\npeople, which would require five aircraft\nat approximately $22,000 each.\n$110,000\nIt was also assumed that we would pay the\ncost of coach class, round trip transporta-\ntion for the 300 campaign chairmen,\ncampaign finance chairmen, campaign execu-\ntive directors and their spouses, from\ntheir home states to San Diego\n88,500\nb. Television Time. Thirty minutes of time\nfor a network broadcast of the President's\naddress on September 14, 1972, would cost\nbetween $65,000 and $85,000, depending\nupon the network and the number of\naffiliate feeds.\n80,000\nC. Rooms. It was assumed that one-half the\nparticipants might arrive in San Diego\non Wednesday evening and that the\nbalance would arrive on the chartered\naircraft on Thursday morning. It was\nalso assumed that all the participants\nwould overnight in San Diego on Thursday\nand Friday nights. The assumed room\ncost per person per night was $20 for\na single and $25 for a double.\n49,500\nPage Seven\nd. Food. It was assumed that lunch would\nbe provided on Thursday; and, that break-\nfast and lunch would be provided on\nFriday. Other food costs would be borne\nby the individual participants.\n31,600\ne. Barbecue. It was assumed that the\nbarbecue at the residence would cost\napproximately $15.00 per person.\n23,700\nf. Buses. It was assumed that forty-\nthree charter buses would be required\nto bus the participants between San\nDiego and San Clemente on Friday,\nSeptember 15, 1972. The cost per bus\nfor the six hour charter would be\napproximately $120.\n5,160\n8. Rally. The cost of the rally on\nThursday, September 14, 1972, was\nestimated at $15,000.\n15,000\nTOTAL\n$403,460\nIt should be noted that the cost of the \"Spirit of '76\" and the cost\nof landscaping at the residence have not been included in the fore-\ngoing estimate.\nIf it were decided not to invite all the Republican Congressmen, the\nAssistant Secretaries, the Agency Heads and their spouses, the total\nnumber of participants would be reduced to approximately 1,120\nparticipants. Accordingly, the cost of the program would be reduced\nand would amount to approximately $309,000.\nIf the concept of the program is approved, it should be noted that\nplanning should be commenced as promptly as possible. This is par-\nticularly true in connection with chartering the aircraft and buses\nand in negotiating for the television time.\nCC: Mr. Herbert L. Porter\nTAB A\nPROPOSED AGENDA\nThursday, September 14, 1972\n9:00 a.m. - 12:00 noon\nArrival and check-in\n12:00 noon - 2:00 p.m.\nLuncheon, with address by Gov. Reagan\n(Host Governor)\n2:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.\nWorking sessions, with addresses by\nMr. Mitchell, Mr. Stans and Sen. Dole\n6:00 p.m. - 7:00 p.m.\nIndoor rally, with celebrities and\nentertainment\n7:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m.\nAddress by the President\n7:30 p.m. -\nStaff time\nFriday, September 15, 1972\n7:30 a.m. - 9:00 a.m.\nBreakfast buffet\n9:30 a.m. - 12:00 noon\nWorking sessions with addresses by\nGov. Rockefeller, Sen. Goldwater,\nSen. Scott and Cong. Ford\n12:30 p.m. - 2:00 p.m.\nLuncheon, with address by the Vice\nPresidential candidate\n3:30 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.\nBus participants to San Clemente\n5:00 p.m. - 8:00 p.m.\nBarbecue (or fish fry) at San Clemente\n8:00 p.m. - 9:30 p.m.\nReturn to San Diego\nCommittee for the Re-election of the President\nMay 1, 1972\nMEMORANDUM\nCONT IDENT TAL\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nTHE HONORABLE JOIN N. MITCHELL\nTHROUGH:\nJEB S. MAGRUDER\nFROM:\nJ. CURTIS HERGE\nSUBJECT:\nProposal for Major Republican\nConference in San Diego in\nSeptember\nIt has been proposed that the President and Mrs. Nixon host\na two day gathering of Republican leaders in San Diego,\nCalifornia, during the week after Labor Day. The purpose of\nthe gathering would be (1) to provide an opportunity for\ninformal discussions and meetings about campaign strategy\nand plans, (2) to provide an attractive and suitable forum\nfor the initial campaign address by the President, and (3)\nto placate, if such is necessary, those residents of San\nDiego who may be disturbed over the loss of the Republican\nNational Convention. The purpose of this memorandum is to\nset forth the points which should be considered in connection\nwith this proposal.\n1. Participants. In addition to the President and\nMrs. Nixon and the candidate for Vice President and his wife,\nthe following groups of individuals might be invited to the\ngathering:\nApproximate Number of\nGroup\nIndividuals in the Group\na. The surrogate candidates\n32\nb. Members of Cabinet who are\nnot surrogate candidates\n(Connally, Laird and Rogers)\n3\nC. State campaign chairmen\n50\n2\nd. State GOP chairmen\n50\ne. Republican Senators who are\nnot surrogate candidates\n35\nf. Republican Congressmen who\nare not surrogate candidates\n(Not including Congressmen\nAshbrook, McCloskey, Schmitz\nand Riegle)\n171\ng. Republican Governors who are\nnot surrogate candidates\n17\nh.\nOfficers, Executive Committee\nand Members of the Republican\nNational Committee, not\nincluding State Chairmen who\nare listed above\n112\ni. Under Secretaries, Assistant\nSecretaries and Agency Heads\n70\nj. State campaign finance chairmen\n50\nk. State campaign executive\ndirectors\n50\n1.\nSenior members of the White\nHouse staff\n15\nm. Senior members of the 1701\nstaff\n15\nn.\nCelebrities for the President\n10\nO. Athletes for the President\n10\np. Republican leaders not listed\nabove, such as Mayor Lugar,\nDr. Arthur Flemming, etc.\n10\nSub-Total\n700\nSpouses\n700\nTOTAL\n1,400\n2. Dates. The dates proposed are Thursday, September 7,\nand Friday, September 8.\n3. Location. It has been proposed that the meeting\nbe held in San Diego, which would be a convenient locale\nfor the President. It is known that adequate hotel accommodations\nare available and that facilities such as the Civic Center are\navailable for the proposed dinner.\n3\n4.\nFormat. The program might be developed, as\nfollows:\nThursday, September 7\n9:00 a.m. - 12:00 noon\nCheck in\n12:00 noon - 2:00 p.m.\nReception and Buffet\n2:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.\nWorking sessions\n6:00\np.m.\n-\n7:00\np.m.\nBanquet (Black tie)\n?\n7:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m.\nAddress by the President\nFriday, September 8\n9:00 a.m. -- 10:00 a.m.\nBreakfast\n10:00 a.m.\n--\n1:00 p.m.\nWorking sessions\n1:00 p.m.\n-\n2:00 p.m.\nLunch\n2:00 p.m.\n-\n2:30 p.m.\nAddress by the Vice President\n3:00 p.m.\n-\n4:30 p.m.\nWorking sessions\n6:30 p.m.\n-\n8:00 p.m.\nBarbecue at the golf course\nat San Clemente\n8:00\np.m.\n-\n9:30\np.m.\nEntertainment and fireworks\ndisplay at the golf course\nat San Clemente\nThe tenor of the weekend might be that of the \"team\" gathering\ntogether 1.0 discuss how they are going to win. The working\nsessions should be made known to the press to give the weekend\ncredibility, but emphasis should be placed on the unity of\nspirit, the unanimity of support and the anticipated importance\nof the President's address Thursday night.\nIt will be recalled that President Eisenhower held a similar\ngathering in Gettysburg after the Republican National Conven-\ntion in 1956. That precedent might be referred to when faced\nwith the question: \"Why is this meeting being held in San\nDiego. 11 It could be pointed out that the President (who might\narrive in San Clemente several days ahead of time) could not\naccommodate 1,400 people in the Western White House, so San\nDiego was the natural locale for the meeting.\n4\n5. Costs. The cost of the program could range\nbetween $115,000 and $163,000.\nIt was estimated that, with the exception of air travel\nand the banquet, the weekend would cost $60 per couple per\nday. The banquet would cost approximately $35 per person.\n[State dinners cost approximately $40 per person. That\nprice includes the printing and mailing of invitations. ]\nThe projected cost could reach the upper end of the scale\nif we were to pay for the air travel expenses of the key\nparticipants. If we were to bear that expense, it would be\nless expensive to charter an aircraft. A chartered DC-8,\nwhich holds 141 people, would cost $24,000. The round trip\ncost per capita on a chartered plane would be $170, as com-\npared with a cost per capita of $310 on a commercial flight.\nIt appears that two aircraft would be required to transport\nthe surrogate candidates, the Members of the Cabinet, the\nUnder Secretaries, Assistant Secretaries, Agency Heads and\n1701 staff. It is assumed that the White House staff would\ntravel on the \"Spirit of '76.\"\n6. Other activities in San Diego on September 7-8.\na. U.S. Travel Service Convention, Town and Country llotel,\nSeptember 4-9\nb. California Police 01ympics, Hilton Inn, September 5-9\nC. Provident Mutual Life Insurance Convention, Hotel Del\nCornado, September 5-9.\nCC: JSM working\nJSM chron\nJSM subject\nHLP chron\nHLP subject\nJCH\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nMay 11, 1972\nADMINISTRATIVELY CONFIDENTIAL\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nGORDON STRACHAN\nFROM:\nL. HIGBY\nNow that Haldeman is locked into the Ehrlichman Monday/Thursday\npolitical meetings, we should make sure there is a Talking Paper\nprepared for him for each one of these meetings that raises, or\ngives him the opportunity to raise those subjects regarding the\nCampaign operation that need to be settled.\nWill you please take this on as an assignment. Make sure that we\nhave the Talking Paper by Wednesday at noon to review and that\nhe has it in his Wednesday evening material each time.\nAlso, Magruder was supposed to be sending over to me a letter\nor memorandum of understanding on how the surrogate program\nwas to work. Would you please make sure we get this from\nMagruder before the week is out.\nThank you.\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nMay 2, 19'\nMale MS 1 mally\nhave\nADMINISTRATIVELY CONFIDENTIAL\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nH. R. HALDEMAN\nthere\nFROM:\nL. Daily HIGBY Political L Meetings\nSUBJECT:\nUwak Doort\nIn his memorandum to you, April 29, (attached) the President\nraised with you the importance of meeting with the political\ngroup and developing the strategies with regard to the key\nThus\nDemocratic candidates. This also raises once again the need\nyou have expressed to establish a daily political meeting.\nI would be my recommendation that you begin this meeting as\nsoon as possible so that it is an operational fact, prior to the\ndeparture for Russia. Also, the meeting could be a convenient\nvehicle for making some long-term assignments that could be\nworked on during the Russian period.\nThree immediate issues come to mind:\n1. Strategy for all key candidates -- The meeting would\ncomply with the President's request for our coordinated\nstrategies on McGovern, Humphrey and Kennedy.\n2. Our stance on the key issues -- Ehrlichman, for the\npast three weeks, I believe, was supposed to be developing\nthese, but so far nothing has come about. The meeting would\nbe a good vehicle to use to press Ehrlichman into action.\n2\n3. Political line -- The meeting could be used to set\nthe appropriate political line on the issues raised in\nthe morning News Summary that may be in doubt. It\nwould act as a guidance vehicle, a check on Colson,\nand give Mitchell the feeling that this area is being\npulled together.\nPer your earlier instruction, the participants in the meeting\nwould be Mitchell, Colson, Ehrlichman and MacGregor. If\nthis is still the case, I would suggest that you hold the first\nmeeting on Wednesday, May 3, immediately following the\n8:15 a.m. staff meeting.\nGordon Strachan should sit in on these daily meetings as note-\ntaker (although I'd sure like to do so).\nAttachment\nApril 29, 1972\nSet Up\nMtybere\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nH. R. HALDEMAN\nFROM:\nTHE PRESIDENT\nI think it is important that you meet with the political group,\nincluding, of course, Mitchell and try to develop a strategy\nwith regard to McGovern, Humphrey, and Teddy Kennedy.\nI want to be sure that we don't go off in all directions. By\nthe end of next week I think we should pretty well have in\nmind what we expect is going to develop, and by that time,\nwe should synchronize our own efforts to attempt to contri-\nbute to the kind of result we want. I would like to see a report\non this by the end of next week.\nMitchell\nMa & Hregor.\nColson\nEhrlichmane\nRN:kb\n1\nj\nMalel\nNews\nfrom\nthe Committee\nfor the Re-election\nof the President\n1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006 (202) 333-0920\nFOR RELEASE, AM, MONDAY, JUNE 5\nCONTACT: DeVan L. Shumway\n202/333-7060\nNIXON CAMPAIGN STAFF\n#5-41\nWASHINGTON -- John N. Mitchell, Campaign Director of the Committee for the\nRe-election of the President, today announced the positions held by certain\nkey personnel of that committee.\nJeb S. Magruder of Los Angeles, former Deputy Director of Communications\nfor the Executive Branch who has been serving as campaign coordinator since\nthe Committee was formed in May, 1971, was named Chief of Staff.\nFred C. LaRue of Jackson, Miss. was appointed Special Assistant to\nthe Campaign Director. He held the same post in the 1968 campaign and has also\nserved as a Special Consultant to the President.\nHarry S. Flemming of Alexandria, Va., and Robert C. Mardian of Pasadena,\nCalif., were named Special Assistants to the Campaign Director for Political\nAffairs.\nFlemming, formerly a Special Assistant to the President and vice president\nof an electronics manufacturing firm, also published four weekly newspapers\nin Virginia.\nMardian is a former Vice President and General Counsel of Wesco Financial\nCorporation and its principal subsidiary, Mutual Savings and Loan Association.\nHe recently resigned as an Assistant Attorney General of the United States.\nMr. Mitchell also appointed three political coordinators.\nAllan G. Kaupinen -- former executive with Procter and Gamble Co. in\nCincinnati, Cleveland, Philadelphia and New York City. Now lives in Alexandria\nVirginia.\n(more)\n2-2-2-2\nNIXON CAMPAIGN STAFF\nDonald M. Mosiman of Indianapolis, Ind. -- former Deputy and Assistant\nAttorney General for the State of Indiana and an Assistant Administrator of the\nEnvironmental Protection Agency in 1971 and early 1972.\nClayton Yeutter of Lincoln, Nebraska -- formerly an Executive Assistant\nto the Governor of Nebraska and past Chairman of the Board, Platte Valley\nPacking Co., Cozad, Neb.\nClifford A. Miller, a Los Angeles-based business and public relations\nconsultant, will serve as Consultant to the Campaign Director.\nMurray M. Chotiner of Springfield, Va., will serve as Director of\nBallot Security. He is an experienced political organizer and lawyer in\nWashington, who has served as Special Counsel to the President.\nPeter H. Dailey, President of Dailey and Associates, Los Angeles, is\nDirector of Advertising, heading a campaign advertising task force in New\nYork City known as the November Group.\nJon Foust of Hammond, Ind., Director of Surrogate Services, was formerly\naccounting manager of the Sacramento Regional Office of All State Insurance Co.\nMrs. Pat Hutar of Chicago, former Co-Chairman of the Young Republican\nNational Federation (1961-63) and Assistant Chairman of the Republican\nNational Committee (1963064), is Director of Volunteers. She is presently\nSecond Vice President of the National Federation of Republican Women.\nDr. Robert H. Marik of Agoura, Calif., Director of Planning and Research,\nholds a Ph.D. in chemical engineering from Carnegie Mellon University and a\nmasters degree in Industrial Management from the University of Southern\nCalifornia. He has held several top management posts in research-oriented\ncorporations.\nRobert C. Odle, Jr. of Port Huron, Mich. is Director of Administration\nwith responsibility for staffing and maintaining the campaign headquarters. A\n(more)\n3-3-3-3\nNIXON CAMPAIGN STAFF\nveteran of the 1968 campaign, he holds a law degree from The Detroit College of\nLaw.\nHerbert L. (Bart) Porter of Monrovia, Calif., Scheduling Director,\nis a former Vice President and Director of National Computing Industries, Phoenix.\nGlenn J. Sedam, Jr. of Great Falls, Virginia, the Committee's General\nCounsel, was formerly with the Washington law firm of Steptoe and Johnson.\nDeVan L. Shumway of Salt Lake City was appointed Director of Public Affairs.\nHe was Western Political Editor of United Press International from 1963 to 1969,\nserving with UPI for 19 years.\nRobert M. Teeter, Vice President of Market Opinion Research, Detroit,\nand former Field Representative for the Michigan Republican State Central Committee,\nwill serve as Director of Polling.\nIn addition, Mr. Mitchell announced that Mrs. Nancy Brataas of Rochester,\nMinn. will serve as Director of Telephone Operations and L. Robert Morgan\nof Houston as Director of Direct Mail Operations assisting the Director of\nPlanning and Research.\nMrs. Brataas was Minnesota Republican State Chairwoman for three terms\n(1963-69) and a delegate to the last three Republican National Conventions.\nMorgan joined the Committee from the Reuben H. Donnelley Corporation\nwhere he was Southwest Regional Sales Manager.\n30\nCommittee for the Re-election of the President\nMEMORANDUM\nApril 13, 1972\nCONFIDENTIAL\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nTHE HONORABLE JOHN N. MITCHELL\nTHROUGH:\nJEB S. MAGRUDER\nFROM:\nROBERT MORGAN\nSUBJECT:\nVoter Registration Test\nIn a recent meeting, Herman Bloom, Executive Director of\nthe Pennsylvania Committee for the Re-election of the President,\npresented a voter registration proposal. Ed DeBolt was of the\nopinion that the RNC \"target\" method produced more effective\nresults. The meeting adjourned with the agreement that we\ntest both methods and closely follow costs per new voter. The\nevaluation should be on cost per new voter and the number of\nnew voters per volunteer.\nThe DeBolt voter registration technique is well known:\n1. Volunteers gather on a Saturday.\n2. Streets are assigned.\n3. Volunteers knock on all doors and check\non registration.\n4. Volunteers meet back at the starting spot.\n5. The names of the Republican leaning non-\nregistered voters are given to the local\norganization to register.\nThe Bloom method works this way:\n1. A list of registered voters is acquired on\nmagnetic tape for a city.\n2. This registration list is passed by a list\nof all households in the same area.\n3. The non-registered voters are then printed\nout in two groups --\n-households with telephones\n--households with cars but no\ntelephones or have unlisted\ntelephones.\nCONF IDENTIAL\n4. Volunteers now call all non-registered voter\nhouseholds on the phone to determine their\nparty preference. Then they have them\nregistered by the local organization.\n5. Volunteers go door to door only to those\nhouseholds without telephones to determine\ntheir party preference and then give the\nnames to the local organization to register.\nWe are initiating this request instead of the field organization\nbecause the development of the registered voter list and the\nlist of the other non-registered households come under the\ndirect mail responsibility. The feasibility and techniques\nhave been discussed with Harry Flemming's S people and they look\nforward to a test as described. Herman Bloom has been dis-\ncussing this with us and we in turn have been keeping Harry\nFlemming's people informed.\nThe budget to accomplish these tests will be spent on software,\nregistered list acquisition, computer time to identify the\nnon-registered households, putting the telephone numbers on\nthe tape by computer and developing the computer printouts\nnecessary to technically accomplish the test as designed.\nRecommendation\nThat you approve a test in Pennsylvania that will evaluate both\nmethods of voter registration. This test will not exceed\n$4,500 in direct costs.\nApprove\nDisapprove\nComments\nX\nCONFIDENTIAL\n6/1\nFm\nPersonnell - biggest prol\n- J8m area - no attack man\nmeechan- - turned deen\n- no adeq PR for cat's -\nMilleis a mistalle\nOnly angela Harris Parmisgup\nneed new person\ncwc proj nans terrible\nexcept for Relation in\npr area\nPR\n- when - worthless Yould\n- Evans - older\"om\n- Balzano 7 \"\nEllnnics\n- mahu /Conde - OK\n- Scott - Blades - Pain\n- Uets - Rhat - supere\n- Laber + Don Rodgers -\nnepr r but OK\nSolution:\n1\nRhatican oversee\nHire PT types at 1701\n2\nDr consult Consteter\nEthnics - Brips De F alco learny\nJohn Worth - begins men\nPub pushing aRis Rx avon -\nFM- Ethnics memo Pa JM.\nall Const Grp Plans resolvedu/Tm\nindustry holor —\nCits Pean\nIransient /5m Come neat\nmeet cel\nDill ncadoo week\nChullSheared - Cets w/ LaTendre\nas assis\nPol Coordinators\nal Koup - the best\nbehind Flemm - open time feel\nMonths Mosimon - pretty good\nrest of\ncompleel under had\n(dring! Lahue maRue\ndrinks disclosing w Jerry Jenes\nguy for\nJerry Jones to Cal cel Romer &\nlong time\nmandion time peon. wore\nwasted - all derec's\n- shoots On / hip\nJON deeping him in line\n- jumps in + out of projs\nDomes Cerenul - CD - 20 mins\non pol over- Most on Cegenda Rol 73 Lears\n6/6\ncuc\nIt There appeal\non Blair use Dinness\nPoe Mtg- - men e IE\nH/JM mtg this\nGeorgeCoble- - Family in MB.\nConven Hang No family w/ Hat KB\nConern mtg - yesterday Chapen\nProe w/Fm him poot\nElee scothing\nApril 30, 1972\nF\nFU\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nJOHN MITCHELL\n5/10\nA-M\nFROM:\nH. R. HALDEMAN\nFollowing up on some of the things we covered on the\nphone over the weekend, and some I amy not have raised\nwith you --\nCan't we get Ashbrook to pull out now by working through\nLee Kaieser and Bill Buckley and then try to build some\nparty unity? This would be a dramatic move on his part,\nof course. and would make Asabrook a big man. Can we\nwork on Parkinson to turn 066 his deal in this regard?\nThe President is concerned that nothing has been done on\narrangements with Manny Garcia. It was supposed to have\nbeen set up to have someone give him a retainer and\napparently Bebe has talked with the President about the\nfact that nothing has been done on this and the President\nis very much concerned.\nMath\nOn Ray Bliss, I will wait until you say we should bring\nhim in to see the President and then we will set something\nup on your recommendation.\nAs I mentioned, the President wants you to consider the\nuse 06 Walker's Cay for meetings with high-level people\nand select groups. 16 you want to have a strategy session\nwith the Rockefellers and Reagan types or with your state\nleaders or something of that sort, this is the place that\ncan be used for that purpose. It can accomodate 200 people\nat the present time.\n2\nThe President wants us to start some very basic\nplanning on the California kick-off deal that\nI discussed with you on the phone. This, in his\nmind, would be a two-day operation with a big night\ntime gathering 06 all the people in the San Diego\nConvention Hall for a major speech by the President.\nIt would be barbecues or picnics at the President's\nresidence in San Clemente, with maybe the candidates\non one day and the Campaign leadership on the sedond\nday. This would also provide the opportunity for the\nPresident to meet with the Campaign wheels from time\nto time during the sessions while they are out there.\nIt should be made a big deal with all the GOP State\nChairmen, National Committeemen, and so forth, and\nthey should all stay in San Diego for obvious reasons.\nThe question was raised as to whether we are putting\nenough young people in positions of major responsibility\nin the Campaign.\nHRH:\nI\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nJune 5th\nNote for Bob Haldeman - -\nI thought you would be interested\nin the attached.\n7m\nFred Malek\nAttachment\nCommittee\nfor the Re-election\nof the President\n1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006 (202) 333-0920\nMay 30, 1972\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nJEB S. MAGRUDER\nPRED MALEK\nFROM:\nKEN RIETZ\n. I thought you would be interested in the attached\narticles from the student leaders press conference\nin Los Angeles Monday. A full report on press cov-\nerage is coming from Jack Easton.\nCAMPUS BACKING FOR CHIEF EXECUTIVE TOLD IN CONFERENCE HERE\n\"Strong support by more than 100 student leaders claimed by group\nStudents Tell\nOf Support\nFor Nixon\nEleven college student body\nleaders from across the nation\ntoday declared their support for\nPresident Richard Nixon's re-ei-\nection. adding that there is\nmuch more backing for him on\nthe nation's campuses than most\nA-12 Los Angeles Herald-Examiner, Monday, May 22, 1772\npeople realize.\nThe students, who said they\nhave the backing of over 100\nstudent leaders across the coun-\ntry. outlined their reasons for\nsupporting Nixon at a news con-\nference at the Lns Angeles\nPress Club.\nKent Clemence. 22. student\nbody president at the University\nof Southern California. said\nclaims that \"all the students\"\nwere against Nixon's policies\nwere \"hogwash,\" and that there\nwas \"strong\" support for the\nPresident at USC.\nJohn Ramey. 22. student body\npresident at South Dakota State\nUniversity, said a recent mock\nelection on his campus in the\nhome state of Sen. George Mc-\nGovern was won by Nixon.\nRalph Anderson. 21. student\nbody president at the University\nof Washington, said he is im-\npressed with Nixon's foreign\nand domestic expertise.\nGregg Adams. 20. of Wabash\nUniversity in Indiana, said he\nstrongly agrees with Nixon's\nforeign policies. while Jeff Wis-\nwell, 21, of the University of\nWisconsin. sees the trip 10\nChina as a stroke of \"diplomat-\nic genius.\"\nMark Tults. 21. of Brandeis\nUniversity. said the President ist\n\"responsive to the needs of\nAmericans,\" and Inc Phasta. 20.\nof the University of San Fran-\ncisen, landed Nixon's foreign\nand domestre policies.\nA-Las Angeles Herald-Examiner, Tuesday, May 23, 1972\nA-11\nHerald-Ex-miner\nPRESIDENT NIXON'S RE-CLECTION BOOSTED BY 11 COLLEGE STUDENT BODY LEADERS\nClaim that all the students' were against the President's policies is labeled 'hogwash'\nSTUDENT LIADERS BOOST NIXON\nPresident Richard Nixon's cody president at the University Nixon is \"moving to meal our tens to them.\"\nre-election has been gard 2 of Washington, said be 15 im- domestic needs.' and Roger. L. Patrick Mosher. 2. of\nboost by 11 college student body presed with Necon's domestic Lee. 22. of the University of Al- University of Texas. said :\nleaders from across the coun- and fore gn policies.\ntry. who said there is much Greez Adams. 20, of Wabash\nabama, said the people of the President's stands on econo\nSouth realize the President \"listeontrols impress him.\nmore backing for the Chief Ex- University in Indiana. said he\necutive on the nation's campus- agrees with the President's for.\nCS than most people 103L20. cogn policies. while Jeff Wis-\nThe young leaders. who said well. 21. of the University of\nthey have the backing of mere; Wisconsin, saw the trip to China\nthan 100 student leaders acrossies a stroke of adiplematic gen-\nthe nation, outlined their\nsons for supporting the Presi- Mark Tulis, 21. of Brandeis\ndent during a news conference University, said the President is\nyesterday at the Los Angeles \"responsive to the needs of\nPress Ciub.\nAmericans.\" and The Plasta. 20.\nKent Clemence. 22. studenting the University of San Fran-\nbody president at the University CISCO. lauded the President's\nof Southern California. said foreign and domestic stands.\nclaims that \"all the students\" Bruce Bishop, 20, of Old Do.\nwere against Mr. Nicon's poll- minion College in Virginia, said\nof\ncies were \"hogwash\" and That\nthere was \"stronz\" support for\nthe President at USC.\nJohn Ramay. 22, student body\npresident at South Dakota State\nUniversity, said a recent mock\nelection on his campus in the\nhome state of Sen. George Mc-\nGovern was win by President\nNixon.\nRalph Anderson, 21, student\nSTUDENTS FOR NIXON-USC student body president Kent Clemence,\nleaders from 11 colleges across country. Clemence anrounced formotion\nsecond from right, speaks of news conference held here by student\nof group to organize students backing reelection of President Nixon.\nTimes photo b5 Joe Kennedy\nStudent Leaders\nLaunch Drive for\nNixon Reelection\nA drive to organize students who\nsupport President Nixon's bid for\nreelection was launched Monday by\nstudent body presidents from 11 col-\nleges across the country\nKent Clemence, student body\npresident at USC. announced the\nformation of the Student Leaders\nfor the President Committee and\nsaid the group would attempt to dis-\n2* Los Singsles Times\nTues. May 23, 1972-Partl\n3\nprove that most students are op-\nposed to President Nixon's policies\neni favor Sen. George S. McGovern\n(D-S.D.) for President.\nIn news conference at the Great-\ner Los Angeles Press Club. 11 stu-\ndent leaders said the President's\nsupport on college campuses would\nbecome evident as the campaign\nstarts\nSpeaking of students who have\ndemonstrated to protest U.S. in-\nvolvement in Vietnam, Clemence\nsaid:\n\"All students want peace. But the\ngreat balk still want to show their\novn political leanings through the\nballot box and not by rock throwing,\nburning ROTC buildings and seizing\nclassrooms.\"\n100 Return Pledges\nIn January, Clemence sent a letter\nseeking support for the President to\nthe student body governments of\nabout 500 schools. The result so far,\nhe said, 13 more than 100 student\nleaders who have pledged their sup-\nport About 30 are student body\npresidents at junior colleges, col-\nlegos or universities.\nThe students attending the press\nconference tepresented 10 georra-\nphic parts of tite country. Those\nfrom out of the Los Angeles area\nwere Bown here by the Committee\nto Reelect the President\nThey indicated that support for\nMr. Nixon already has surfaced in\nsome mock elections held on college\ncampuses that have resulted in the\nPresident defeating McGovern.\nThe home states of both McGovern\nand Gov. George Wallace were rep-\nrescured at the news conference.\nRoter Lee. student body pic ident\nat the University of Airhama, said\nbe visited the Prr prient in\nthe state\" unless Wallace 12 the\nDemocrate presidential nominee\nJohn Berev. student bely PTAS\nIdent a* the unders of Smith Dr.\nc'= of 1'1' MeGn on\nVPIN, and emport among st's CAST\nin tis Mare\nMEMORANDUM\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nJune 1, 1972\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nH. R. HALDEMAN\nFROM:\nFRED MALEK 7um\nSUBJECT:\nWeekly Activity Reports\nEach of the Voting Bloc Directors submits a weekly activity report to\nme in addition to the regular meetings we hold. I thought the attached\nreport outlined a sufficiently interesting activity to forward it to you.\nAttachment\n5/22\nCommittee for the Re-election of the President\nMEMORANDUM\nMay 22, 1972\nCONFIDENTIAL\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nFRED MALEK\nFROM:\nFRANK NAYLOR\nSUBJECT:\nWeekly Activity Report\n1. Summary of Past Week\nThe veterans continued work with organized veteran groups\nto generate congressional mail in support of the\nPresident's Vietnam action. Efforts were concentrated\nat selected Senators during the latter part of the\nweek.\nFriday, Saturday and part of Sunday were spent in\nWichita working with the Gold Star Mothers, the Jaycees\nand the American Legion. Plans were finalized for\nparades which were held to support the President's\nrecent actions and petition efforts were developed\nwhich took place over the weekend. A large 39' X 72'\nflag, manufactured by the Gold Star Mothers, was\nerected on a major downtown building in Wichita and\nthis activity received good regional press coverage.\nThree Gold Star Mothers who lost sons in Vietnam will\ntravel to Washington from Wichita, Kansas, to present\na petition at the White House on Tuesday, the 23rd.\nOn Thursday a meeting was held in Kansas City, Missouri,\nwith the Executive heads of the VFW, Julian Dickson\nand Curt Jewell, and the head of the ladies auxiliary.\nAppreciation for their support and work on behalf of\nthe President was expressed and upcoming campaign\nactivities were reviewed.\nState chairmen for the Veterans Committee were named in\nIllinois and California.\nCONFIDENTIAL\nMemo to Fred Malek\n-2-\nMay 22, 1972\n2. Problems - None\n3. Major Activities Planned for Coming Week\n- Presentation of petition by Gold Star Mothers and\nKansas State American Legion Commander on Tuesday,\nthe 23rd, at the White House. Arrangements for\npress coverage of event are being made.\n- Selection of balance of veterans chairmen in key states.\n- Development of veterans chairmen handbook.\n- Setting up of schedule for field meetings with\nthe veterans state chairmen who have been\nappointed.\n4. Travel - None\n5. Personnel\nLaughlin Waters - California Veterans Chairman\nA1 Keller - Illinois Veterans Chairman\nCONFIDENTIAL"
}