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 Price to Nixon RE: "Debates" 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/7/1972
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
26147109
label
WHSF: Contested, 53-43
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
26147109
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
WHSF: Contested, 53-43
description
This file contains:
From Price to Nixon RE: "Debates" 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/7/1972
citationUrl
collections
Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection
Contested Materials Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
26147109
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
1e22102ad9389ab6
ocrText
Richard Nixon Presidential Library
Contested Materials Collection
Folder List
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
53
43
6/7/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Price to Nixon RE: "Debates" 2pg
Monday, June 25, 2012
Page 1 of 1
-
DOCUMENT WITHDRAWAL RECORD [NIXON PROJECT]
DOCUMENT
DOCUMENT
SUBJECT/TITLE OR CORRESPONDENTS
TYPE
DATE
RESTRICTION
NUMBER
N-1
Memo
Price to RN re: "Debates".
6/7/72
C
[DUC#141]
FILE GROUP TITLE
STAFF SECRETARY
BOX NUMBER
135
FOLDER TITLE
Presidential Speeches April - June 1972 [I]
RESTRICTION 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G. Withdrawn and return private and personal material.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H. Withdrawn and returned non-historical material.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:
Staff Secretary
Box Number:
135
Folder:
Presidential Speeches April - June 1972 [I]
Document
Disposition
141
Return Private/Political
[ItemN.,]
MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
June 7, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
RAY PRICE
Ruly
SUBJECT:
Debates
You asked for my recommendation on how to handle the
question of debates.
First, on timing: If you were going to debate, I would
recommend letting it be known as soon as possible, so as not
to seem later to have been backed into it. Assuming you will
not, however (and I see no reason why you should), I would
urge not answering the question publicly now; to do SO would
simply give the opposition a new political horse to ride at your
expense, and allow it to build up pressure. For the present,
you can simply say that you won't discuss campaign matters
until after the convention.
As for rationale, there are three basic arguments that I
think have powerful logic behind them -- the first two of which
you could make publicly, and the third of which could be made
in a background manner on your behalf:
1) It's unwise. A President, in the ultimate sense,
cannot and should not engage in free "debate. 11 His comments
must always be somewhat limited, according to a President's
sense of their potential impact around the world and according
to his private knowledges about sensitive, tentative situations
in stages of delicate development here and abroad. The national
policies of the United States should not be directly risked because
-2-
of domestic politics (they are indirectly risked, of course).
Even a no-comment or a decline-to-discuss posture by a
President could have major ramifications of an undesirable nature.
If it were possible to separate the incumbent as candidate
from the office of the Presidency, it would be another kettle of
fish; but this is not possible, and the office shouldn't be subjected
to it. Even though speaking as a candidate, you would be heard
as President not only in the U. S., but around the world -- and
people abroad might not be able to draw the distinctions.
2) It's unnecessary. There is no need for a debate to
clarify the details of a President's positions. His views, unlike
those of a non-incumbent, are already spread out in exact detail
on the public record of his actions in the office he seeks. It is
the challenger's views, and his differences with the President's
record, that the public needs to learn and the challenger can
educate the public on these points better or just as well by himself.
3) It's silly. A debate is a bit of campaign theatrics that
clarifies nothing and does not contribute to public education on
the issues; in fact, it can do the opposite according to the trend
and emphases of the subject matter covered or not covered by the
debate. The only real purpose is to give a good forum to the
non-incumbent and any serious challenger should be well-financed
enough to purchase that forum himself. There is no requirement
or precedent anywhere that a President should help his opponent
campaign.
As for your 1964 insistence that LBJ should debate, I'd
answer that quite straightforwardly by saying that now that you
view it from the perspective of the Presidency, you think LBJ
was right.