Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Source Description
This file contains:
To: Patrick J. Buchanan From: Ken Khachigian RE: Requested plan between June 28, 1972 and the Democratic National Convention to "nail McGovern to the wall" on his welfare scheme." 3pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/28/1972
To: Pat Buchanan From: Ken Khachigian RE: Letter in the NEW YORK TIMES from Social Michael Harrington and Irving Howe about how McGovern is not a socialist. 1pg [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/20/1972
To: H.R. Haldeman From: Pat Buchanan RE: Ideas in the Rose memorandum. 2pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/18/1972
To: Pat Buchanan From: Ken Khachigian RE: Minor sample of the apprehension over the "McGovern Market." 2pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/13/1972
To: H.R. Haldeman From: Pat Buchanan RE: McGovern's drop of fifteen points. 1pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/8/1972
To: Ken Khachigian From: Pat Buchanan RE: McGovern's pro-abortion statements. 1pg [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/9/1972
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
26146480
label
WHSF: Contested, 48-4
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
26146480
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
WHSF: Contested, 48-4
description
This file contains:
To: Patrick J. Buchanan From: Ken Khachigian RE: Requested plan between June 28, 1972 and the Democratic National Convention to "nail McGovern to the wall" on his welfare scheme." 3pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/28/1972
To: Pat Buchanan From: Ken Khachigian RE: Letter in the NEW YORK TIMES from Social Michael Harrington and Irving Howe about how McGovern is not a socialist. 1pg [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/20/1972
To: H.R. Haldeman From: Pat Buchanan RE: Ideas in the Rose memorandum. 2pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/18/1972
To: Pat Buchanan From: Ken Khachigian RE: Minor sample of the apprehension over the "McGovern Market." 2pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/13/1972
To: H.R. Haldeman From: Pat Buchanan RE: McGovern's drop of fifteen points. 1pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/8/1972
To: Ken Khachigian From: Pat Buchanan RE: McGovern's pro-abortion statements. 1pg [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 5/9/1972
citationUrl
collections
Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection
Contested Materials Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
26146480
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
a036e7294318009e
ocrText
Richard Nixon Presidential Library
Contested Materials Collection
Folder List
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
48
4
6/28/1972
Campaign
Memo
To: Patrick J. Buchanan From: Ken
Khachigian RE: Requested plan between
June 28, 1972 and the Democratic National
Convention to "nail McGovern to the wall"
on his welfare scheme." 3pgs
48
4
6/20/1972
Campaign
Memo
To: Pat Buchanan From: Ken Khachigian
RE: Letter in the NEW YORK TIMES from
Social Michael Harrington and Irving Howe
about how McGovern is not a socialist. 1pg
48
4
6/18/1972
Campaign
Memo
To: H.R. Haldeman From: Pat Buchanan
RE: Ideas in the Rose memorandum. 2pgs
48
4
6/13/1972
Campaign
Memo
To: Pat Buchanan From: Ken Khachigian
RE: Minor sample of the apprehension over
the "McGovern Market." 2pgs
48
4
6/8/1972
Campaign
Memo
To: H.R. Haldeman From: Pat Buchanan
RE: McGovern's drop of fifteen points. 1pgs
48
4
5/9/1972
Campaign
Memo
To: Ken Khachigian From: Pat Buchanan
RE: McGovern's pro-abortion statements.
1pg
Thursday, March 22, 2012
Page 1 of 1
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
June 28, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
PATRICK J. BUCHANAN
FROM:
KEN KHACHIGIAN
It was requested that we come up with a plan between now
and the Democratic National Convention to nail McGovern to
the wall on his welfare scheme. What follows is the outline of
that plan -- specifics will come later.
The important point is that McGovern is going to change his
plan right after the Democratic National Convention. We know he
is planning it, and he has already laid the groundwork. Thus, our
immediate strategy is to tar him every conceivable way on his
$1000 bonus so that his manner of rehabilitation is not in the least
bit comfortable. Moreover, we should also predict that he is
going to change his plan and that he will do so after the convention.
These points should be uppermost in the criticism of the
McGovern proposal:
There is a $1000 cash grant to every man, woman, and
child in the country, regardless of need and with no work incentive
at all.
-- This plan will expand the budget by $210 billion.
M
-- This plan will put 210 billion people on "welfare. "
This plan is an assault on the work ethic and removes from
the American culture the idea that people should work for a living, not
live on the largesse of the taxpayer.
-- This plan will cost exhorbitant sums, will require a massive
increase in taxes (or cause confiscatory taxation), will directly harm
middle income people and will harm the families where man and wife
are each holding jobs to help make ends meet.
Page 2
-- Finally, it should be pointed out that McGovern himself
does not know what his program would cost, has been totally
irresponsible in trying to sell this to the public, and if this
is any indication of a McGovern presidency, then God help us all.
Suggest that Javits be asked to be one of those on the warpath
regarding the McGovern welfare giveaway. He did a good job
during the Joint Economic Committee hearings, and he might
be willing to do SO again in a public forum. If he does, we should
make our P.R. facilities available to him at 1701. Javits is also
ranking minority member on Senate Labor and Public Welfare
Committee.
Rockefeller would also be a good one to attack the plan. He
could stick in his speech a classic line: "Ladies and gentlemen,
Nelson Rockefeller appreciates the offer, but I don't think I need
a $1000 bill from George McGovern. 11
Richardson would be a credible source as HEW secretary,
but it is thought that he would not receive very much press.
Nevertheless, he should have our materials and be primed for
response at press conferences. A hard-hitting speech insert
should be prepared for him.
Governor Reagan, who is known for his opposition to welfare
waste, would also be a good source. He should have the information
with a Lyn Nofziger speech.
Ehrlichman is supposed to be 0 it on the hustings next week, and
he can be briefed to get out the line. All surrogates should have this
information with appropriate suggested inserts provided for them.
Finally, the Veep should be asked to focus a major section
of one of his speeches on diculing the McGovern plan. Emphasis
on the wage-earner being taken to the cleaners to give $1000 to
every breathing person in the country.
Beginning Monday, the whole week must be orchestrated
towards one goal, and that goal is to totally discredit the McGovern
welfare plan. We should not have all our wad shot on one day it
should dribble out each day with each spokesman making some news.
If done correctly, by the end of the week, there will have been
widespread coverage on the plan.
The following points are the ones we have to target in order to
get the press to focus on them:
Page 3
The plan means higher taxes for hard-pressed wage-earners.
- It is a giveaway which will discourage work and create greater
class conflict.
- McGovern doesn't know how much it will cost and is being
irresponsible in presenting it as he has.
In one of the greatest acts of political expediency in our
history, McGovern is going to make a wholesale revision of his
plan to trick the American people into thinking it is some panacea
for their ills. He will do it after the Dem convention as a cynical
gesture to get him out from under a subject that was over his head
to begin with.
Our entire effort next week must be well-coordinated There
has got to be a press release handed out for every spokesman we
have speaking on the subject. Efforts should be made to get on
network television; radio actualities should be made available; the
wire services should get copies of everything; columns should be
planted.
Other points which can be made. People on Social Security
would get less money than they are getting now because McGovern
has not said what he would do with the present system. McGovern
is going to do away with tax exemptions -- $3,000 for a family of
four without proving how this helps the taxpayer. People with
higher incomes are going to suffer confiscatory taxation.
A fact sheet which extracts all the various versions of the
McGovern welfare giveaway is now being prepared and should be
ready by Friday. This will go out as a supplement for this outline,
and will become the basis for our charges. The idea will be to
show that the McGo ern plan is so totally confused and misshapen that
it will be the biggest fiscal and social disaster of any program that
has ever come down the chutes. The plan, alternately, should be
held up to derision and alarm. Without doing it explicitly, McGovern
ought to be portrayed as a decent humane, nut.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
June 20, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
PAT BUCHANAN
FROM:
KEN KHACHIGIAN
d
You might not have seen this letter in the New York Times
from the pre-eminent Socialist Michael Harrington and his fellow
traveler Irving Howe. Though they make clear that McGovern
is not a socialist, they go on to express great pleasure at
"a significant extension of the welfare state. " And, "That is
where McGovern has taken a series of excellent, if sometimes
not sufficiently precise, stands
"
"That is why we,
support his candidacy. 11
Come this fall, it will be nice to send out the headlines --
"Socialist Leaders Endorse McGovern -- Believe his Plans for
"Significant Extension" of Welfare State "Excellent." If McGovern
is making the socialists happy, he must be doing something wrong.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
June 18, 1972
MEMORANDUM TO:
H. R. HALDEMAN
(Per Higby)
FROM:
PAT BUCHANAN
Some of the ideas in the Rose memorandum are good ones; others, in
my judgment, are not.
First, Packard and his friends will be with us anyway. They have a
"vested interest" in arms production; their group will be viewed in
the press as the "Military-Industrial Comples -- West. " Having
millions in profits tied up in military spending, they are hardly the
ones to make the case for us.
Second, the union folks should be gotten the message; and the ideas of
the UCLA computers running out a print of jobs to be lost under the
McGovern budget is excellent but keep the Captains of Industry away
from it. We have them. We want the workers. As for the UCLA thing,
Rose should get in touch with Ken, as we already have defense cranking
out something -- and this could be used as the basis to be run through
the computer.
Third, am not too concerned about the Post-Convention thing here -- as
McGovern has already been hurt in Southern California. The arguments
have already been made we can expand on them credibly since HHH
did the spadework.
Fourth, any analysis should not be restricted to Southern California.
But should include defense plants all over the United States, name them
and the number of workers, etc. Rose should get together with Ken
Khachigian on this -- this is one of the ideas we had in our original
memorandum.
Fifth, am against the "transition colloquium" idea. All this says is
that we agree with McGovern -- but he is going too far. Our case ought
to be that "no jobs" are going to be lost under RN; we don't need any
conferences to indicate that just a few will bechanged. Our argument is
-2-
that McGovern is a madman on defense, would strip us naked, and
throw thousands out on the street in the process -- and this chatter
about us being against defense spending, too, at this point in time does
not strengthen, but weaken, our presentation and makes George look
less rather than more radical.
Buchanan
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
June 13, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
PAT BUCHANAN
le
FROM:
KEN KHACHIGIAN
Herewith a minor sample of the apprehension over the
"McGovern Market. " The stock market downturn of the week of
the California primary has been attributed directly to McGovern
in many quarters. It is likely that, should McGovern be nom-
inated on July 12, the market is going to drop on July 13.
Your idea about getting Pierre Rinfret to allude to this in one
of his newsletters is one approach. Also, as you suggested, the
Kiplinger letter ought to pick this thing up. We should have 1701
watch for all these kinds of newsletters coming out of Wall Street,
and at the appropriate time we should paste them up (with a classic
Frank Leonard job) and get them out to the entire financial community
in a direct mail operation. I would think that Maurice Stans would
love to have this in his hand when he goes out looking for contributors.
The idea of stock market crash should McGovern be elected is
something that should be freely talked about. Millions of voters are
investors, directly or indirectly, and nothing would scare them more
than the thought of a financial community collapse should George get in.
Attachment
6/13/72
MEMORANDUM FOR PAT BUCHANAN
FROM: KEN KHACHIGIAN
Herewith a minor sample of the am R aprehension over
the "McGovern Market." The stock market downturn of the
week of the Calfforniai primary has been attributed
directly to McGovern in many quarters. It is likely that
should McGovern be nominated on July 12, the market is
going to drop on July 13.
Your idea about getting Pierre Rxx Rinfret to allude
to this in one of his newsleeters is one approach. Also,
as you suggested, the Kiplinger letter ought to pick this
thing up. We should have 1701 watch for all these kinds of
newsletters coming out of Wall Streets, and at the appropriate
time we should paste them up (with a classic XR *** Frank
Leonard job) and get them out to the entire financial community
in a direct mail operation. I would think that Maurice Stans
would love to have this in his had hand when he XXX goes
out looking for contributers.
The idea of stock market crash should McGovern be elected
is something that should be freely talked about. Millions
of voters are investors, directly or indirectly, and nothing
would scare them more than the thought of a financial community
collapse WM should George get in.
June 8, 1972
MEMORANDUM TO:
H. R. HALDEMAN
FROM:
PAT BUCHANAN
From my knowledge only these can explain the precipitate McGovern
drop of fifteen points:
a) The Field Poll was wrong; I discount this -- as I have it from a
source that the Field Poll actually played down the McGovern spread,
which was larger than twenty points.
b) Humphrey attacks begin to pay off -- his attacks primarily on
defense cuts and jobs in California, on the welfare giveaways of
McGovern, on Israel and POWs. Despite the Humphrey stridency,
and panicky approach -- he must have sufficiently frightened many
people to convince 300, 000 to come his way. This I believe explains
it coupled with:
1. The Jackson and Yorty endorsements of HHH, which tended
to reinforce the Humphrey attackso on McGovern as a radical;
and
2. The surfacing in the California press of increasing numbers
of national Democrats calling GM and extremist, a guy who
will sink the whole ticket, etc.
What needs to be remembered is that for most of the nation, George
McGovern is someone they have become aware of for two weeks at
least, two months at most. First impressions are favorable -- but they
are not firm impressions.
What seems interesting is that McGovern who was 46-26 over Humphrey
got just about that: 46%. But Humphrey was who went from 26% to 40%
in a week -- So, did McGovern really lose any votes? Or did HHH
simply pick up from all the other Democrats, and pick up all the
undecideds as well -- by scaring the hell out of them.
Buchanan
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
May 9, 1972
MEMORANDUM TO:
KEN KHACHIGIAN
FROM:
PAT BUCHANAN
Thimmesch has the pro-abortion statements of McGovern--
and can we get that ad that was run in the Catholic papers
of Nebraska on abortion, McGovern's position.
Fruthe r, I understand that in Nebraska McGovern indicated
that he would name Ramsey Clark, the Berrigan Defender,
as the FBI Chief: Can we check this out and get it -- if
possible. Can you give my brother Bill a call and ask him
where he heard it, if you can't get it from the Nebraska
press.
Finally, understand from the News Summary that Alger Hiss
has endorsed George McGovern. Can we get that one nailed
down also.
Buchanan