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.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
242845613
label
1971 WH Correspondence To/From Others Part 1: Jan – June 1971 [4 of 5]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
242845613
contentType
document
title
1971 WH Correspondence To/From Others Part 1: Jan – June 1971 [4 of 5]
citationUrl
collections
White House Staff Member and Office Files (Nixon Administration)
Alexander P. Butterfield's Files
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
242845613
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
4703eff400321dca
ocrText
THE WHITE House
WASHINGTON
old
Set 1 samples
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
4
*
*
*
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
*
73
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20405
7
*
GENERAL SERVICES
*
ADMINIS TRATION
= * *
FEB 17 1971
MEMORANDUM FOR HONORABLE JOHN R. BROWN, III
Staff Secretary of the White House Office
SUBJECT: Government Building Signs
I am indeed pleased to submit to you the top eight entries from the
Federal building signs competition, which was participated in by our
in-house architects and other GSA employees all over the United States.
In selecting these eight, the GSA jury recommends that certain modifica-
tions and refinements would be necessary to all entries in an effort
to achieve the best possible design.
In this light, a ninth solution entitled "Sample Composite Design" is
enclosed for the purpose of showing possible supplements within the
young designers solutions. The samples shown depict possible combina-
tions between solutions 1. and 4 and 2 and 4. Perhaps the President
himself might suggest other modifications.
It might be well, should you SO desire, for our Chief Architect to
explain or assist in any matters during your review of the designs.
We are hopeful that the President may be able to make a final selection
of the design from this group. If not, we will immediately bring in
new suggestions for your consideration.
As soon as the preferred design is selected, we will proceed as
expeditiously as possible to install the new signs at all Federal
buildings in the Washington, D.C., area.
Robert L. Kunzig
Administrator
Keep Freedom in Your Future With U.S. Savings Bonds
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
is
*
7
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
7
*
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20405
7
*
GENERAL SERVICES
*
ADMINISTRATION
is
*
*
FEB 17 1971
MEMORANDUM FOR HONORABLE JOHN R. BROWN, III
Staff Secretary of the White House Office
SUBJECT: Government Building Signs
I am indeed pleased to submit to you the top eight entries from the
Federal building signs competition, which was participated in by our
in-house architects and other GSA employees all over the United States.
In selecting these eight, the GSA jury recommends that certain modifica-
tions and refinements would be necessary to all entries in an effort
to achieve the best possible design.
In this light, a ninth solution entitled "Sample Composite Design" is
enclosed for the purpose of showing possible supplements within the
young designers solutions. The samples shown depict possible combina-
tions between solutions 1 and 4 and 2 and 4. Perhaps the President
himself might suggest other modifications.
It might be well, should you so desire, for our Chief Architect to
explain or assist in any matters during your review of the designs.
We are hopeful that the President may be able to make a final selection
of the design from this group. If not, we will immediately bring in
new suggestions for your consideration.
As soon as the preferred design is selected, we will proceed as
expeditiously as possible to install the new signs at all Federal
buildings in the Washington, D.C., area.
Robert L. Kunzig
Administrator
Keep Freedom in Your Future With U.S. Savings Bonds
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum
MEMORANDUM
Determined to be an
THE WHITE HOUSE
Administrative Marking
WASHINGTON
Not National Security Information
By
Jus
NARA Date 5/16/2016
February 20, 1971
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR MR. H. R. HALDEMAN
VIA:
MR. DWIGHT L. CHAPIN
It
FROM:
RONALD H. WALKER
RE:
STATE FUNERAL FOR FORMER PRESIDENT HARRY S.
TRUMAN
1.
Former President Truman will be buried on the fourth day follow-
ing his death unless that is a Sunday, in which case the funeral
will be on Monday. If he does not die in Independence, the first
day will be counted when the body arrives there.
On the third day the body will be taken to the Truman Library,
and lie in State; on the following day Masonic funeral services
will be conducted (20 minutes).
2. The following is the recommended Presidential participation:
A. Arrive at approximately 1:45pm for the funeral services on
the fourth or fifth day.
B. Be ushered from the holding room to the auditorium for the
services at about 2:00pm. The President will be the last to
arrive and the first to depart (the family will not be seated
in the auditorium).
C. Return to the holding room to await the formation of the
procession.
D. Proceed to the grave site (approximately 35 yards from the
courtyard of the Library) with the procession.
E. Prior to the benediction, lay the Presidential wreath.
F.
After the presentation of the flag ceremony, pay respects
to the family and depart.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum
DON H. CLAUSEN
COMMITTEE:
REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
PUBLIC WORKS
1ST DISTRICT, CALIFORNIA
SUBCOMMITTEES:
"THE REDWOOD EMPIRE DISTRICT"
RIVERS AND HARBORS
WASHINGTON OFFICE:
Congress of the United States
FLOOD CONTROL
ROADS
1035 HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING
FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20515
PHONE: 225-3311
house of Representatives
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
AREA CODE 202
COMMITTEE:
Washington, D. C.
INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS
DISTRICT OFFICE:
206 ROSENBERG BUILDING
March 10, 1971
SUBCOMMITTEES:
306 MENDOCINO AVENUE
IRRIGATION AND RECLAMATION
SANTA ROSA, CALIFORNIA 95401
NATIONAL PARKS AND RECREATION
PHONE: 545-8844
PUBLIC LANDS
President Richard M. Nixon
The White House
Washington, D.C.
Dear Mr. President:
As a fellow Californian and Representative in Congress of the North Coast
region known as "Wine Country", I am taking the liberty of writing you
regarding questions and expressions of concern from our California wine
growing constituency relating to the serving of wines from other countries
at certain White House and State Department functions.
My concern, Mr. President, is over the press clippings to the effect that
foreign wines are being served in greater proportion than our American
wines.
At the outset, let me say that I fully appreciate and respect the fact
that the serving of wines is your prerogative and yours alone - whether
it be in the White House or anywhere else.
Further, I am fully aware of the important role wines can play in enhanc-
ing our diplomatic posture under certain circumstances. Obviously, when
General DeGaulle visited our country or President Pompidou from France
is being honored at a White House Dinner, it is most appropriate to serve
French wines as a gesture of courtesy and recognition of their quality
wines. The same would be true of high officials from Germany or any
other wine producing country.
As you recognized and indicated at the cellar book presentation, the pro-
ducts of our California wineries are now ranked with the truly great wines
of the world; an opinion frequently affirmed by knowledgable wine experts
everywhere.
In our respective travels abroad, I'm sure we have both observed the tra-
dition and pride of host countries that goes into the serving of local
beverages and products - especially at State dinners and receptions.
By the same token, it is often considered a courteous gesture and "good
diplomacy" to include on the menu something "American". With recent
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum
President Richard M. Nixon
March 10, 1971
Page 2, Cont'd
advances made by our domestic wines and a growing national trend toward
wine, I believe the issue at stake, Mr. President, is not so much one of
excluding foreign wines, rather a desire to put America first in this
field.
Our plea, therefore, is to ask that more emphasis be given to serving
California and other fine American wines at the White House functions
because of the added prestige it could offer to the high quality of our
domestic wines. We would hope that, where possible, a minimum ratio of
two American to one foreign wine serving be the policy unless, of course,
there are some unusual or extenuating diplomatic circumstances.
It is certainly not my intent to be presumptuous in this matter because
you have always been most gracious in accepting constructive suggestions
that are brought to our attention by our respective and mutual constitu-
encies.
Respectfully
DON H. CLAUSIN
Representative in Congress
DHC:sb
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 15, 1971
Dear Senator Scott:
As you know, both Senator Symington and Senator Hollings have
indicated that there has been an enormous increase in the size of
the White House staff. This is not so.
Senator Hollings was quoted as saying the White House staff has grown
from 250 persons last year to 533 thus far this year. In point of fact,
the size of the White House staff has not increased in the last two years,
and the Senator's reference to 250 persons is simply incorrect.
Until President Nixon came to office, the White House Office budget
category "salaries and expenses" never truly reflected the actual size
of White House operations. For years, in addition to the White House
Office budget, employees were detailed to the White House from the
departments and agencies at a cost never reflected by the White House
Office budget. Moreover, funds for special projects were allocated for
White House activities.
When preparing the budget for fiscal 1971, the President decided to
discontinue the use of the special projects fund and permanent personnel
details from other agencies to augment funds available for the regular
White House Office staff. He has thereby adopted a policy of bringing
all regular employees of the White House directly on to the White House
Office payrolls. This is, of course, a more candid way of presenting
the full cost of the White House Office operation.
In terms of figures you will find the following:
For fiscal year 1970 (in fact, the last Johnson Administration budget) the
appropriation for the White House Office was $3, 940, 000 with another
$2, 500, 000 appropriated for special projects. In addition, personnel
detailed to the White House Office from the departments and agencies
under authority of law resulted in basic compensation costs to those
departments and agencies at the rate of $2, 820, 000. Thus, the total
authorization for FY 1970 was in excess of $9, 200, 000, involving 576
employees.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum
- 2 -
March 15, 1971
As I noted above, the change in presenting the White House Office budget
took place in FY 1971, the first budget presented by this Administration.
Thus the budget request for FY 1971 of 548 employees and funds in the
amount of $8, 550, 000 for the White House Office represented a substantial
decrease of $650, 000 in funds and 28 personnel from the year before.
For fiscal year 1972, the budget calls for setting the number of employees
in the White House Office at 540, a decrease of 8 from FY 1971.
Therefore, the authorized strength of the White House Office has
declined in the last two years, far different from the impression left by
your colleagues.
It might also be noted that since 1968 there have been statutory salary
increases in the neighborhood of 25%. Moreover, the volume of corres-
pondence coming to the President has more than doubled since the 1968
period. Taking these additional factors into consideration, there is
little question but that the White House budget has been very well
and prudently managed. The criticism is simply not supported by the
facts.
Sincerely,
William E. Timmons
Assistant to the President
The Honorable Hugh Scott
United States Senate
Washington, D. C.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum
March 23, 1971
MEMORANDUM FOR :
JON HUNTSMAN
FROM:
L. HIGBY
Bob does not have objections or see any problem with
the attached providing all White House expenses will be
taken care of and that we make sure that we spend the
entire White House budget plus any of the Special Projects
budget necessary to cover any items, equipment, etc.
needed here at the White House for this fiscal year. If
all these considerations can be satisfactorily answered
in your mind, proceed with making the necessary arrange-
ments for the $172, 000 for the Commission on Financial
Structure and Regulation. If there are problems, please
see me.
LHipm
Attachment
cc: Alex Butterfield
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum
L
THE SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY
Ok
WASHINGTON
budget allow register
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
Subject: Financing of Commission on Financial Structure
and Regulation
In June 1970, you established a commission to study
and report on appropriate changes in financial structure
and regulation. The Commission, under its chairman,
Mr. Reed O. Hunt, is making good progress, and the final
report is expected to be submitted to you before the end
of 1971.
The Commission has, however, been plagued with
difficulties in its own financing. In February you
authorized a $100,000 advance to the Commission from your
Special Projects fund to keep the Commission going. This
was a stop-gap action, and I hereby recommend an approach
which will fully solve the Commission's problems.
Up to this time, the Comptroller of the Currency, the
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and the Federal
Home Loan Bank Board have contributed $50,000 each. TI
believe that each agency would agree to an additional
Have
contribution of $122,000 if an additional $172,00 from
White House funds could be obtained. This would bring
agreed
the total White House contribution to $272,000, or less
than 30 percent of the total projected expenditure of
$888,000.
A contribution from your funds of $86,000 now and
an additional $86,000 in July, to fall in fiscal year
1972, would adequately meet the Commission's needs.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum
:
- 2 -
Recommendation: That you authorize a contribution
of $172,000 in White House funds for the Commission on
Financial Structure and Regulation, $86,000 to be paid
now and the remainder in July 1972.
John B. Connally Connolly
Approve
Disapprove
cc: The Honorable
Caspar Weinberger
Deputy Director
Office of Management and Budget
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum
Send their
THE WHITE house
WASHINGTON
to Alexfor Action
March 31, 1971
hi
MEMORANDUM FOR H. R. HALDEMAN
FROM THE PRESIDENT
Br
On as urgent a basis as is possible, consistent
with our budget limitations, I want you to find an
area in the EOB where you can clean out three or four
offices and set up an adequate briefing room which
will seat approximately 150 to 200 people.
When I went to the White House Theater for the
meeting with the religious leaders and also on the
occasion when I went there for the briefing of the
Congressmen and Senators on Cambodia I realized how
totally inadequate that facility is. It just wasn't
constructed for that purpose and people sit there
feeling uncomfortable and looking uncomfortable.
I know that the Indian Treaty Room is inadequate, but
possibly an architect could come in and make it over -
lower the ceiling, etc. SO that we have an adequate
briefing room.
When we consider the fact that virtually every
department in town has an auditorium of some type for
this purpose which is much better than anything we
have we can see what our problem is. I know you will
get opposition to this from some who say that people
don't want to be briefed any place except in the White
House proper, either in the Residence or in the West
Wing. Just forget that. The EOB is part of the
White House proper and I think we should be able to
find an adequate facility there. As far as people
that are in offices there, move them to another
building.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum
Priched
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum
A.B.
MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
Determined to be an
WASHINGTON
Administrative Marking
CONFIDENTIAL
April 6, 1971
Not National Security Information
By J45
NARA Date 3/16/2016
MEMORANDUM FOR:
LARRY HIGBY
FROM:
JON HUNTSMAN
SUBJECT:
Bill Hopkins
Following up our conversation today here are a few of the responses
I gained from a 45-minute visit I had with Bill Hopkins in my office
immediately following the receipt of his letter of resignation (attached
hereto).
1. He has had serious problems with his eyes --primarily
his cataracts and feels that an operation should take place
within the next 8-12 months. He stated, that with this in
mind, it may require absences as long as six months while
the eyes are healing before he would be able to return to
work. This seemed to concern him a great deal as most
of his work is engaged in one form or another of reading.
2. If he retires after May 31, 1971, he will receive less
retirement pay than if he retired prior to that date. The
reason for this is the esculation clause in the Civil Service
Retirement program, which states that after three consecutive
months of cost of living index increases there will be an
automatic 3% increase in retirement up to May 31st, after
which the base will return once again to normal. Since
both March and April showed cost of living increases, it is
almost a certainity that May will also. And, should he not
retire prior to May 31st, he would loose this additional 3%
pay plus 1% bonus or a total of 4% additional income. Bill
stated, that if he would have retired last July, he would
have received considerably more than he would receive
this May -- and this May he will receive considerably more
than he will receive thereafter. He stated that this was one
of the unusual quirks in the Retirement Civil Service law
that perhaps, should be revised.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum
3. His predecessor who spent some 47 or 48 years in the job
died while he was still "in the saddle" and this seems to have
bothered Bill. With his wife's promptings over the last several
years there is some strong desire on his part to be able to get
away from the vigorous six-day a week schedule and to travel or
spend sometime with her before the same fate should happen to him.
4. In asking Bill his thoughts relative to a replacement he felt
the strongest characteristic one should process is a flexibility
of dealing with administrations who vary the nature and respon-
sibilities of his role. He particularly stated, that the Truman
Administration utilized his talents, energies better than any
other Administration and one of the reasons for this was that
President Truman held a daily coordination meeting each
morning at which Bill participated and of course, this gave him
first-hand observations and dealings with the President. Although
not directly mentioned there was inference toward the importance
of increased staffing and the staffs role with both the Eisenshower
and Nixon Administrations. This unique ability to adjust for each
Administration and to continue to perform with energy and total
dedication is very important to Bill, and the key ingredient he
forsees in his successor. He feels he has displayed these traits
over the last seven President's whom he has served.
I have detected absolutely no bitterness, or feeling of resentment, because
of a decreasing role in my two discussions (another one again today) with
Bill. In addition to the above observations, it should be noted that he
is concerned that his support staff is being squeezed into smaller and
smaller quarters and is not keeping up with the ratio of the non-support
staff.
In my own personal observations I conclude that this is a logical time
for Bill to retire. He is very aware that next year is an election year
and according to him the "old school training" says that one does not
leave during an election year, which means, he would have to be here
two full years before he retires. I believe he has thought out his decision
well and is most desirous of helping us any way possible in order to
bring his replacement aboard. He has stated that he would stay on after
May 31st in a consulting capacity while we are training a replacement.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum
I have discussed paying him some consulting fee in addition to his
retirement to bring his total salary up to what he is currently making,
and he felt this would be equitable and would certainly be agreeable
with him. I sense another key concern with Bill's departure that
of the role of the Civil Servant. Bill represents all Civil Servant's in
his close proximity to the President, and needless to say, many
throughout government will be observing how Bill's situation is handled
and what responses and attention is given to him by the President and
key staff members here at the White House. We should insure that
proper ceremonies and recognition are forthcoming after his long
service and dedication to seven Presidents. He is currently developing
a list of potential replacement candidates, some of whom we discussed
in my office, in order that we may have some recommendations that
are logical and well thought out. This will be the first time, in Bill's
opinion, that his position has not been filled by a long-time understudy
or assistant. I have told him that in my own opinion, John Ratchford,
has not displayed those leadership qualities that make him the prime
contender for the position although he certainly must be considered to
be a candidate. This Bill seems to totally agree with.
I will keep you posted regarding any further meetings or information
I receive.
Thank you.
CC: Alex Butterfield
CONFIDENTIAL
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum
March 29 1971
Dear Mr. Butterfield:
As I informed Mr. Brown, and subsequently indicated to Mr. Huntsman,
I have found it necessary to give thought to retirement from Government
service. Having been a Federal employee since 1929, with nearly 40
years in the White House Office, I have now concluded that, for personal
reasons, this is the prudent course to follow. Accordingly I am making
application for retirement, effective the last week in May 1971, and seek
acquiescence in this decision.
Over the years it has been my steadfast purpose, and that of the other
civil servants with whom I have worked, to serve the President and
members of his Staff, irrespective of Party, loyally and to the best of our
ability. That is a spirit inherent in the guidance we received from our
predecessors and represents a tradition which I trust will long continue.
Service in the White House Office during the Administration of seven
Presidents of the United States, and the opportunity to work with and
for their Staffs, has for the most part given me great personal satis-
faction, and I am truly appreciative. Such an experience cannot help
but instill in one the greatest respect for the Office of the Chief Executive
and for the man chosen by all the people of this great Nation to be their
President.
I am deeply grateful to the President and to everyone on his Staff for
their kindness and consideration. My heartfelt best wishes go with the
President as he strives to fulfill his aspirations for the American people
and for just and lasting peace in the world.
Sincerely,
William J. Hopkins
Honorable Alexander P. Butterfield
Deputy Assistant to the President
The White House
CC: Mr. Huntsman
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum
MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April 22, 1971
MEMORANDUM FOR MR. HUNTSMAN:
While discussing my letter of March 29 to Mr. Butterfield, you suggested
that some comment as to a successor would be welcome.
In my opinion, providing intelligent continuity in the White House Office
is among the greatest contributions the incumbent of the position can make.
This requires (1) ability and the willingness to expend the necessary effort
to provide leadership of the Support Units in furnishing services to the satis-
faction of the President and the members of his Staff and (2) a non-partisan
background of Government experience with the necessary knowledge and flexibility
to stand a reasonable chance of surviving a change of Administration. Training
in the law is helpful. If the incumbent is to provide knowledgeable counseling
on the basis of precedents and past procedures, nothing takes the place of
on-the-job training in the White House Office, and I know of no shortcuts.
Although I do not deem it appropriate that I make recommendations, I have
always advocated promotion from within if a qualified prospect is available.
I think the fact that I chose John Ratchford as my Assistant speaks for itself.
He is a graduate of Georgetown Law School, a member of the Bar, and his long-
time experience in the White House Office has been diversified. When my
predecessor died years ago, the technique used was to keep me, who had been
his Assistant, on the job in an acting capacity for a matter of months before
I was finally elevated as the senior Executive Clerk on a so-called "permanent"
basis.
Should it be decided to give consideration to other career personnel, one
possibility would be to ask the appropriate people in the Office of Management
and Budget and the Chairman of the Civil Service Commission for recommendations.
But again I stress that, in my opinion, there is no adequate substitute for
experience in the White House Office.
Time is marching on and, as the law now stands, unless my family and I
are to lose the benefit of the cost of living increment I must proceed with
my application to the Civil Service Commission so that retirement will be
effective by the end of May. In good conscience I would also like to feel
free before the end of April to apprise the supervisors of the Support Units,
with whom I have worked closely over the years, of my plans.
As I indicated earlier, in response to your query, should there be desire
after my retirement for me on occasion to serve part time in a consulting
capacity, I shall be glad to be helpful in any way I can.
William NJH Hopkins
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum
Sunday, May 9, 1971
R <<<
MEMORANDUM FOR H. R. HALDEMAN
FROM:
THE PRESIDENT
One question which we should have included on the poll which would
have answered my concern was whether those polled thought the President
was too firm, too soft, or just about right in his handling of demonstrators.
In other words, get the same question with regard to the President that
we have with regard to the police forces.
At this time I want to reiterate my suggestions at our meeting this
morning:
1. We must search for a way and not just through backgrounders,
for identification WATH of RN of a very hard line against discuption
disruptive demonstrators. This can be accomplished through
statements by Mitchell, Agnew, a/h/d/ as well as Congressmen
and Senators.
2. I think we have tended to be somewhat gun-shy on this issue
because of our seeing it so closely through the eyes of the
Washington press corps. As a result, we tend to get the worst
of both worlds. We make rather strange statements which
infuriate the liberals who support the demonstrators and which
do not come out strong enough to mobilize our own forces.
3. This is one of those issues where people see it pretty
much in black and white terms. It is a good guy, bad guy
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum
2
issue. I think the press particularly TV, have acutally muted
the statements of strong support for the police made by Ziegler
because they were quite aware that the worst position we could be
in would be to appear right in the middle.
4. In a larger context this is the problem we have on
a number of issues. The press knows very well where
I stand, but they realize that in some cases my position
may be publicly popular. Consequently, they treat the
stories in a way that my position does not appear to be
strong one way or another. What it really gets down to
is the craving of people for strong leadership in situations
like this. As a matter of fact, the support Agnew had some
months ago and much of which he has retained up until this
time, is due to the fact that he appeared firm and outspoken
even though some may not have agreed with all of his positions.
I tend to come off too bland - except in those instances when
I get to hit the question head on in a press conference which
cannot be more than once a month. We tried to correctthis
on the welfare issue. It was interesting to note that the press
played it up the first time I made the point at Williamsburg -
thinking it would probably hurt us - but then realizing that it
was having the opposite effect, almost totally ignored the point
when I repeated it again at the Chamber of Commerce.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum
3
What our opponents in the media will try to do whenever possible,
is to make it appear that RN is vacillating on an issue, that he will
not take a strong position one way or another, that he is dodging a
public position, etc. They know this is not true, but they also know
that this is the best way to hurt us.
I want you to have a meeting with Colson on this and then perhaps bring
in Moore L, Ziegler, and Scali (use your judgment as to the extent you
want to discuss this matter with Scali in view of the need to take the
gloves off on the attitude of the press). It is a major PR problem - we
simply have not been effectively handling and the re al concern for us
is that we have not adequately recognized the problem.
In sum, let us begin with the demonstrator issue and see what we can
do to get across a strong and true impression of RN's leadership and
firmness on this issue. Then after that, consider the problem in general
as related to other issues, and see what we can do to come through with
a more clear and/decisive ilmagel and strong image wherever possible.
Have in mind in these discussions that all of the cleaver clever people
in the press who may be our opponents, will try desperately not to fight
us straight out on an issue where our position may prove popular but
that they will try to blurf the discussion in such a way that they can
present to the public an image of indecisiveness and weak leadership.
It gets back again and again to Connally's point that the nation wants
strong, what we have
4
been providing in both foreign and domestic policy, and that due to
our own PR failures, coupled with a very skillful operation on the
part of the pre ss, we are not getting this across. You will remember
a year ago, we were surprised to note that despite everything I had
said on law and order, that polls indicated the people thought that
Teddy Kennedy was stronger on law and order than I was. This is
exactly the kind of problem we have today in virtually every area with
the possible exception of the handling of Vietnam - where, of course,
the issue so closely divides the country that being strong can have
almost as many negatives as it can positives, although, even on this
one, weldre our greatest mistake is not to be wrong as far as public
opinion is concerned, but to be weak.
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum
Supreme Court of the United States
Washington, D. 4. 20543
CHAMBERS OF
THE CHIEF JUSTICE
May 10, 1971
Dear Mr. President:
I was tempted to phone you Saturday night after
the dinner but feared I might disturb your household.
Your fortitude and forbearance in the face of gross
rudeness by your hosts will always have my unbounded
admiration. In my many personal observations of the
press corps over the past 18 years this was one of their
worst performances. To respond as you did with dignity
and charity is a mark of your qualities and I suspect it
was not lost on all those present.
It is no comfort but it is perhaps instructive to
remember how the press treated your predecessors,
and particularly Washington and Lincoln. Having been
reading closely some of the events from 1789 to 1800,
fairness to the present day press corps compels ac-
knowledgment that they are now slightly less savage,
less sadistic and less cruel than 150 to 200 years ago.
So viewed, this is progress of sorts.
I repeat that Saturday night marked a new
measure of your capacities that will in time be recog-
nized, and enlarged my respect and esteem.
Union Name Sincerely, S Burges
The President
The White House
Reproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum