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:
From Robert Finch to Charles Colson. RE: 18 year old vote in 1972. 6 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 12/9/1970
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
26146679
label
WHSF: Contested, 49-44
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
26146679
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
WHSF: Contested, 49-44
description
This file contains:
From Robert Finch to Charles Colson. RE: 18 year old vote in 1972. 6 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 12/9/1970
citationUrl
collections
Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection
Contested Materials Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
26146679
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
6de1fef88df250bc
ocrText
Richard Nixon Presidential Library
Contested Materials Collection
Folder List
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
49
44
12/9/1970
Campaign
Memo
From Robert Finch to Charles Colson. RE:
18 year old vote in 1972. 6 pages.
Monday, June 04, 2012
Page 1 of 1
DOCUMENT WITHDRAWAL RECORD [NIXON PROJECT]
DOCUMENT
DOCUMENT
NUMBER
TYPE
SUBJECT/TITLE OR CORRESPONDENTS
DATE
RESTRICTION
NI
MEMO
from Finch X Cabson to Haldsman
12/9/70
C(NIXOR
[126]
Re: 18 resea old vote in 1972
N2
MEMO
from Cale to Campbell
[127]
Re: Unsigned mamo fourn
3/9/70
C(NIXOR
N3
MEMD
from Butterfield to RN
3/24/71
C(NIXON
[128]
Re: VIPs at white House
Worship Services
N4
MEMO
From Stein Seming to unk.
[129]
Re: next Steps in Onti-
3/24/71
Inflationary Policy
FILE GROUP TITLE
BOX NUMBER
POF
10
FOLDER TITLE
President's Handwriting RESTRICTION March 16-31, 1971 CODES
A. Release would violate a Federal statute or Agency Policy.
E. Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
B. National security classified information.
financial information.
C. Pending or approved claim that release would violate an individual's
F. Release would disclose investigatory information compiled for law
rights.
enforcement purposes.
D. Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy
G. Withdrawn and return private and personal material.
or a libel of a living person.
H. Withdrawn and returned non-historical material.
NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION
NA FORM 1421 (4-85)
Presidential Materials Review Board
Review on Contested Documents
Collection: President's Office Files
Box Number:
10
Folder:
President's Handwriting March 16 thru 31, 1971
Document
Disposition
126
Return Private/Political
127
Retain Open
128
Retain Open
129
Retain Open
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASH NGTON
December 9, 1970
MEMORANDUM FOR:
H.R. HALDEMAN
FROM:
ROBERT FINCH
CHARLES COLSON
SUBJECT:
18 year old vote in 1972
Before any effort can be made to organize what in 1972 will be the 18-21
year old vote, we need a much better understanding than we have now
of the concerns and attitudes of what is today the 16 to 19 year old.
There have been many attempts to analyze the youth problem. While
there are scores of theories on the subject, there is unanimity on only
one thing: that each age bracket is very different. The things which
affected college freshmen three years ago are completely different
than things which affect college freshmen today. In short, it is very
difficult to draw conclusions on last year's experience and even riskier
to project what may lie ahead a year hence.
It is obvious, however, that this is and will continue to be a highly volatile,
very emotional group. What is significant about the latest Harris survey
is not that we do poorly with the kids (which we might expect) but rather
that we declined so dramatically between September and November.
Against Muskie we were 50% better off in September than we are today
and were 100% better off against Humphrey. Interestingly, two years
ago, Humphrey did very badly in this group which merely underscores
its volatility.
We have talked with Harris about the underlying data for his latest poll.
While he is totally unreliable (and his poll concentrates on the student
group), some of his points are worthy of note. Harris believes that all
kids tend to identify with each other; they stick together. More than any
other previous generation, they resent being talked down to by their elders;
hence, it is almost impossible to attack one without attacking all. In
Harris' view when we even refer to the violent radicals, even the moderates
take some offense. The wide spread belief among youth is that the Presi-
dent and, even more so, the Vice President are hostile to them.
-2-
Harris believes that prior to this campaign we were doing relatively
well with the 18-20 year old vote. We were credited with ending the
war, reforming the draft and our credibility was fairly good. The
feeling developed in the campaign that we were "exploiting" student
dissent, using the student issue for political gain and scolding the
youth. This in Harris' view caused the dramatic shift downward.
He believes that the single most important issue with this age group
is credibility. Humphrey was badly hurt by the credibility gap of the
Johnson Administration and we, in turn, benefited during the first 18
months of this Administration. This is now, however, shifting on
to us -- in part a natural consequence of being in power -- in part,
a result of the campaign.
It is significant in analyzing the underlying poll data that Muskie's
strength and Humphrey's results largely from the kids being against
us. Neither one spark any genuine enthusiasm. Kennedy's support,
however, is very strong and enthusiastic. He identifies very well with
youth.
The conventional pollster wisdom has been that young people follow
parental voting patterns; this is still somewhat valid but much less SO
than ever before. There is increasing independence and in many instances
defiance and rebellion against parental behavior patterns.
The following ideas should be explored. Some are obviously desirable;
other may well run counter to other more important political objectives.
It is clear that we must walk a very fine line in appealing to this age
group. Overplaying our hand could damage our support with large
voting blocks which are resentful of students and student dissent.
1.
Attitude of the President and the Administration. A1 Capp who has spent
a great deal of time on college campuses (he is about as hard line on the
issue as anyone) believes that we have created the impression of rejecting
the younger generation. This is something that a Capp, of course, can
get away with but a President cannot. His view is that we should talk
about what is good about this generation, speaking to the kids ostensible
but really appealing to their parents. We should talk about the extremists
with sadness, not contempt. We should never attack their peculiar life
styles and habits. For example, we should not talk about "long haired,
shabbily dressed, bomb throwers" -- while most kids don't regard them-
selves as bomb throwers, a lot of modern youth like to dress shabbily
and have long hair. They do not make the critical distinctions. They
might identify with the long haired bomb thrower but not a bomb thrower
with a crew cut.
-3-
Secondly, we must show that we do care and are concerned about those
things which concern youth. (Harris and others believe that this is the
single most critical ingredient that the vouth not feel that they are
being "written off" that they feel that their viewpoints are being
listened to An obvious thought in this area would be for the President
to speak very pointedly to youth in an appropriate forum early in the
coming year on a subject or combination of subjects near and dear to
their hearts -- elimination of the draft, ending of the war, ecology,
the racial question (Harris says it is one of the biggest issues) and
the right of dissent.
The biggest political fallout will not be with the kids but with middle
America parents who are concerned about the future of their children --
witness the fact that throughout the campaign the President got his
greatest response to his uplifting theme that the vast majority of kids
are good and are going to be responsible leaders. Speeches what
we say generally -- aren't going to change many attitudes unless they
are coupled with other positive steps that can be taken. This is so
because of the point which follows.
2. Protect against a credibility gap. This is obviously of importance
broadly speaking but of special impact on youth who are much more
sensitive to this issue than even adults. Youth tend to think that we
are kidding them even when we aren't: hence, if we get caught in a
credibility squeeze, it would merely prove what we are thinking any-
way. What we do must not appear to be contrived or merely political.
3. Counter the myth of anti-intellectualism in this Administration.
a. the White House lecture series is an excellent start
b. we might consider a dinner for academicians (as we did with labor)
c. have the President personally make greater use of the contemporary
works of respected intellectuals in mailingsand speeches (not just the
Sidney Hook kind of thing but more diverse kinds of material as well)
4. The Vice President's image is one that requires repair with youth. His
rhetoric, much more than the President's is resented -- rightly or
wrongly. As various changes come to pass in the Administration in the
normal course, some appointments should be looked at with a view to
their impact on youth. There are certain Administration officials who
have a particular symbolic impact on youth -- FBI Director Hoover is
an obvious illustration.
-4-
We need a much more active speaking program. Youthful, attractive
dministration speakers should seek campus youth forums not to
talk about foreign policy, except to point out that we are ending the
war, but rather to talk about those domestic issues as to which we
have done a vastly better job than most voung people think we have
Finch and Rumsfeld are two prime candidates for this kind of assign-
ment but we can also use lesser figures much more than we have.
Stanley Thomas at HEW is an extremely articulate black; Ray Price
in the White House comes through very well. We need a good inven-
tory for use in this area. Someone should have the assignment of
organizing a major peaking effort, employing our best resources.
This should not be directed simply to the campuses. There are
countless other youth forums which, in many respects, are even
better -- Future Famers of America, Junior Achievement, 4H and
youth opportunity groups which reach both the non-student sector as
well as the more moderate students.
6
The White House youth office apparently did not succeed; it was basic-
ally a one-to-one effort which is simply unmanageable and unproductive.
We might consider bringing into the White House a coordinator for these
activities (not a youth office). He could manage the speaking program
in (5) above, maintain active liaison with youth groups, program the
efforts of a Charles Stephens, for example, and oversee political organ-
izing activities as described above.
7. We need to develop better materials on issues of interest to vouth and
then see that they are Idely dissenninated on campuses and to other
groups. This could be another function of a youth office. Some of the
topics might be governmental reform (kids are turned off by govern-
ment because they haven't learned enough about it and because they
believe that it does not respond to the problems they think are impor-
tant); obviously, the 18 year old vote (why not take credit for it, if we
are stuck with it); draft reform, the all-volunteer army, the generation
of peace and ecology are very saleable issues.
8. Young people tend to identify with individuals much more than with
political parties but it is wrong to assume that they cannot be sold a
philosophy. They are very ideolistic) When you really think about it,
we have a much better case on philosophical grounds than do the Demo-
crats; hence, a very well written paper about some of the basic princi-
ples of Republicanism could have great appeal to youth. We stand for
the individual, his ability to meet his own responsibilities, determine
his own future, individual rights and the protection of individual liber-
ties as against the dominance of "repressive" big government. This is
something that has not been done in a long while; it could not be just
-5-
another propaganda piece filled with political platitudes. We should
commission a very respected Republican intellectual to write it, or
perhaps a series of papers on New Federalism. This could be widely
circulated on campuses. If nothing else, it would give our troops
something to rally around and at least make the moderates think.
9,
The most difficult task of all will be to put together a nationwide Nixon
organization. If LeTendre does well in recruiting key men types around
the country, one of the tasks the key men could be assigned would be
recruiting teenagers in their communities. It is very difficult to get a
handle on this until the campaign organization is structured. The big
man on campus today may be nothing next year.
The only feasible way to do this is on a community to community,
campus to campus basis. It would fit perfectly into a citizens-type
operation. One of the targets of a citizens committee recruitment
program would be teenagers, making this a special assignment of
each citizens committee in each locality. We should, perhaps, have
Le Tendre's men and also our party organization start submitting
names in 1971 of promising teenagers who would then be put on a
master mailing list to begin receiving materials from us from time
to time and later be recruited as part of the citizens effort.
10. On the domestic policy front, we should consider whether the all-
volunteer army can be made a serious and major Administration
objective in 1971 and 1972. As noted above, this one is right on target.
11. Another issue of great concern to youth is ecology. We have an excellent
vehicle available both substantively and from an organizational stand-
point in the Environmental Education Act which the President signed
last month. An analysis of the Act is attached as Tab A. The admin-
istration of this is under the Commissioner of Education but if the
following idea has merit, we should seek to get control of it at once.
There is a $5 million kitty in fiscal 1971. The authorization reaches
$25 million in fiscal 1973. Many of us recommended that the bill be
vetoed because it appears to be a real boondoggle just another
Federal handout program which would probably have very little
measurable impact.
It provides for such things as developing curricula relating to the
environment, training of teachers, business and labor, setting up
ecology study centers, distribution of material to the mass media and
grants to non-profit organizations.
H
-6-
Not inconsistent with the purposes of the Act, we could use this to
create an Ecology Corps, something akin on a very modest scale to
the Peace Corps. Teenagers (basically high school students) would
"join" the corps for a combination of education and on the job training.
Anyone "joining" would be required to spend a certain number of hours
each month both in courses and, for example, in neighborhood clean-up
projects. At the end of six months the student would receive a certi-
ficate evidencing his, successful service; this might be signed by
Richardson. Competitions could be arranged with Presidential cita-
tions for particularly effective accomplishments. Teenagers who
made outstanding contributions could from time to time be invited
to the White House for personal presentations of their certificates.
All of this could be promoted through individual school systems,
which would readily cooperate.
This idea could be greatly expanded upon and the modest expense
involved, very legitimately, funded out of the Environmental Education
Act. One of its virtues is that it could be implemented almost imme-
diately and be in full operation by next fall. If we had a real organizer
running this program at HEW our man it could become a very
effective political tool. It would demonstrate to teenagers that Govern-
ment can accomplish something and that we want their help. They would
earn recognition by working. It would identify the President with an
issue of great appeal to youth. It would probably help us recruit teen-
agers for other political activities and it would spread the Presidential
Seal around to a lot of schools and communities. If this has merit, it
should be pursued very quickly.
12. We should and will encourage youth programs on the part of other organ-
izations that are sympathetic to us, the American Legion essay contest,
for example. We are trying to get Freedoms Foundation involved in
basic patriotism education at the high school level. We have some
similar ideas circulating with the Jaycee's which will be a project that
LeTendre will assume. Other veterans groups could take on similar
projects. The Future Farmers of America already have a very good
program in this area which has had Presidential recognition each year.