Museado / NARA Collection rn-smof — Collection rn-smof
Recent Folios
Login Register
English (inglés) español magyar (húngaro) हिन्दी (hindi)

Survos folio page chat

1971 WH Correspondence To/From Others Part 1: Jan – June 1971 [4 of 5]

Ask the Scholar

Page 1 of 1
I can add historical knowledge about this page.

Page image

Page 1

OCR

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

Page data

Page
1
Source index
0
Type
document
Media ID
4703eff400321dca
Size
unknown

Document data

ID
242845613
Core
doc
Type
document
DTO data 
{
    "id": "242845613",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/242845613",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "1971 WH Correspondence To/From Others Part 1: Jan – June 1971 [4 of 5]",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/242845613",
    "collections": [
        "White House Staff Member and Office Files (Nixon Administration)",
        "Alexander P. Butterfield's Files"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/nixon/rn-smof/6124468/242845613.pdf",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/nixon/rn-smof/6124468/242845613.pdf",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/nixon/rn-smof/6124468/242845613.pdf",
    "imageCount": 1,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

Context sent to Scholar

Document identity 
{
    "localId": "242845613",
    "label": "1971 WH Correspondence To/From Others Part 1: Jan – June 1971 [4 of 5]",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/242845613"
}
Document source metadata 
{
    "id": "242845613",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/242845613",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "1971 WH Correspondence To/From Others Part 1: Jan – June 1971 [4 of 5]",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/242845613",
    "collections": [
        "White House Staff Member and Office Files (Nixon Administration)",
        "Alexander P. Butterfield's Files"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/nixon/rn-smof/6124468/242845613.pdf",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/nixon/rn-smof/6124468/242845613.pdf",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/nixon/rn-smof/6124468/242845613.pdf",
    "imageCount": 1,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras 
{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/242845613",
    "naId": 242845613,
    "levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}
Page context 
{
    "seq": 1,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "document",
    "url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/nixon/rn-smof/6124468/242845613.pdf",
    "mediaId": "4703eff400321dca",
    "ocrText": "THE WHITE House\nWASHINGTON\nold\nSet 1 samples\nReproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum\nUNITED STATES OF AMERICA\n4\n*\n*\n*\nGENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION\n*\n73\nWASHINGTON, D.C. 20405\n7\n*\nGENERAL SERVICES\n*\nADMINIS TRATION\n= * *\nFEB 17 1971\nMEMORANDUM FOR HONORABLE JOHN R. BROWN, III\nStaff Secretary of the White House Office\nSUBJECT: Government Building Signs\nI am indeed pleased to submit to you the top eight entries from the\nFederal building signs competition, which was participated in by our\nin-house architects and other GSA employees all over the United States.\nIn selecting these eight, the GSA jury recommends that certain modifica-\ntions and refinements would be necessary to all entries in an effort\nto achieve the best possible design.\nIn this light, a ninth solution entitled \"Sample Composite Design\" is\nenclosed for the purpose of showing possible supplements within the\nyoung designers solutions. The samples shown depict possible combina-\ntions between solutions 1. and 4 and 2 and 4. Perhaps the President\nhimself might suggest other modifications.\nIt might be well, should you SO desire, for our Chief Architect to\nexplain or assist in any matters during your review of the designs.\nWe are hopeful that the President may be able to make a final selection\nof the design from this group. If not, we will immediately bring in\nnew suggestions for your consideration.\nAs soon as the preferred design is selected, we will proceed as\nexpeditiously as possible to install the new signs at all Federal\nbuildings in the Washington, D.C., area.\nRobert L. Kunzig\nAdministrator\nKeep Freedom in Your Future With U.S. Savings Bonds\nReproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum\nUNITED STATES OF AMERICA\nis\n*\n7\nGENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION\n7\n*\nWASHINGTON, D.C. 20405\n7\n*\nGENERAL SERVICES\n*\nADMINISTRATION\nis\n*\n*\nFEB 17 1971\nMEMORANDUM FOR HONORABLE JOHN R. BROWN, III\nStaff Secretary of the White House Office\nSUBJECT: Government Building Signs\nI am indeed pleased to submit to you the top eight entries from the\nFederal building signs competition, which was participated in by our\nin-house architects and other GSA employees all over the United States.\nIn selecting these eight, the GSA jury recommends that certain modifica-\ntions and refinements would be necessary to all entries in an effort\nto achieve the best possible design.\nIn this light, a ninth solution entitled \"Sample Composite Design\" is\nenclosed for the purpose of showing possible supplements within the\nyoung designers solutions. The samples shown depict possible combina-\ntions between solutions 1 and 4 and 2 and 4. Perhaps the President\nhimself might suggest other modifications.\nIt might be well, should you so desire, for our Chief Architect to\nexplain or assist in any matters during your review of the designs.\nWe are hopeful that the President may be able to make a final selection\nof the design from this group. If not, we will immediately bring in\nnew suggestions for your consideration.\nAs soon as the preferred design is selected, we will proceed as\nexpeditiously as possible to install the new signs at all Federal\nbuildings in the Washington, D.C., area.\nRobert L. Kunzig\nAdministrator\nKeep Freedom in Your Future With U.S. Savings Bonds\nReproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum\nMEMORANDUM\nDetermined to be an\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nAdministrative Marking\nWASHINGTON\nNot National Security Information\nBy\nJus\nNARA Date 5/16/2016\nFebruary 20, 1971\nCONFIDENTIAL\nMEMORANDUM FOR MR. H. R. HALDEMAN\nVIA:\nMR. DWIGHT L. CHAPIN\nIt\nFROM:\nRONALD H. WALKER\nRE:\nSTATE FUNERAL FOR FORMER PRESIDENT HARRY S.\nTRUMAN\n1.\nFormer President Truman will be buried on the fourth day follow-\ning his death unless that is a Sunday, in which case the funeral\nwill be on Monday. If he does not die in Independence, the first\nday will be counted when the body arrives there.\nOn the third day the body will be taken to the Truman Library,\nand lie in State; on the following day Masonic funeral services\nwill be conducted (20 minutes).\n2. The following is the recommended Presidential participation:\nA. Arrive at approximately 1:45pm for the funeral services on\nthe fourth or fifth day.\nB. Be ushered from the holding room to the auditorium for the\nservices at about 2:00pm. The President will be the last to\narrive and the first to depart (the family will not be seated\nin the auditorium).\nC. Return to the holding room to await the formation of the\nprocession.\nD. Proceed to the grave site (approximately 35 yards from the\ncourtyard of the Library) with the procession.\nE. Prior to the benediction, lay the Presidential wreath.\nF.\nAfter the presentation of the flag ceremony, pay respects\nto the family and depart.\nReproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum\nDON H. CLAUSEN\nCOMMITTEE:\nREPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS\nPUBLIC WORKS\n1ST DISTRICT, CALIFORNIA\nSUBCOMMITTEES:\n\"THE REDWOOD EMPIRE DISTRICT\"\nRIVERS AND HARBORS\nWASHINGTON OFFICE:\nCongress of the United States\nFLOOD CONTROL\nROADS\n1035 HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING\nFEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS\nWASHINGTON, D.C. 20515\nPHONE: 225-3311\nhouse of Representatives\nECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT\nAREA CODE 202\nCOMMITTEE:\nWashington, D. C.\nINTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS\nDISTRICT OFFICE:\n206 ROSENBERG BUILDING\nMarch 10, 1971\nSUBCOMMITTEES:\n306 MENDOCINO AVENUE\nIRRIGATION AND RECLAMATION\nSANTA ROSA, CALIFORNIA 95401\nNATIONAL PARKS AND RECREATION\nPHONE: 545-8844\nPUBLIC LANDS\nPresident Richard M. Nixon\nThe White House\nWashington, D.C.\nDear Mr. President:\nAs a fellow Californian and Representative in Congress of the North Coast\nregion known as \"Wine Country\", I am taking the liberty of writing you\nregarding questions and expressions of concern from our California wine\ngrowing constituency relating to the serving of wines from other countries\nat certain White House and State Department functions.\nMy concern, Mr. President, is over the press clippings to the effect that\nforeign wines are being served in greater proportion than our American\nwines.\nAt the outset, let me say that I fully appreciate and respect the fact\nthat the serving of wines is your prerogative and yours alone - whether\nit be in the White House or anywhere else.\nFurther, I am fully aware of the important role wines can play in enhanc-\ning our diplomatic posture under certain circumstances. Obviously, when\nGeneral DeGaulle visited our country or President Pompidou from France\nis being honored at a White House Dinner, it is most appropriate to serve\nFrench wines as a gesture of courtesy and recognition of their quality\nwines. The same would be true of high officials from Germany or any\nother wine producing country.\nAs you recognized and indicated at the cellar book presentation, the pro-\nducts of our California wineries are now ranked with the truly great wines\nof the world; an opinion frequently affirmed by knowledgable wine experts\neverywhere.\nIn our respective travels abroad, I'm sure we have both observed the tra-\ndition and pride of host countries that goes into the serving of local\nbeverages and products - especially at State dinners and receptions.\nBy the same token, it is often considered a courteous gesture and \"good\ndiplomacy\" to include on the menu something \"American\". With recent\nReproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum\nPresident Richard M. Nixon\nMarch 10, 1971\nPage 2, Cont'd\nadvances made by our domestic wines and a growing national trend toward\nwine, I believe the issue at stake, Mr. President, is not so much one of\nexcluding foreign wines, rather a desire to put America first in this\nfield.\nOur plea, therefore, is to ask that more emphasis be given to serving\nCalifornia and other fine American wines at the White House functions\nbecause of the added prestige it could offer to the high quality of our\ndomestic wines. We would hope that, where possible, a minimum ratio of\ntwo American to one foreign wine serving be the policy unless, of course,\nthere are some unusual or extenuating diplomatic circumstances.\nIt is certainly not my intent to be presumptuous in this matter because\nyou have always been most gracious in accepting constructive suggestions\nthat are brought to our attention by our respective and mutual constitu-\nencies.\nRespectfully\nDON H. CLAUSIN\nRepresentative in Congress\nDHC:sb\nReproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nMarch 15, 1971\nDear Senator Scott:\nAs you know, both Senator Symington and Senator Hollings have\nindicated that there has been an enormous increase in the size of\nthe White House staff. This is not so.\nSenator Hollings was quoted as saying the White House staff has grown\nfrom 250 persons last year to 533 thus far this year. In point of fact,\nthe size of the White House staff has not increased in the last two years,\nand the Senator's reference to 250 persons is simply incorrect.\nUntil President Nixon came to office, the White House Office budget\ncategory \"salaries and expenses\" never truly reflected the actual size\nof White House operations. For years, in addition to the White House\nOffice budget, employees were detailed to the White House from the\ndepartments and agencies at a cost never reflected by the White House\nOffice budget. Moreover, funds for special projects were allocated for\nWhite House activities.\nWhen preparing the budget for fiscal 1971, the President decided to\ndiscontinue the use of the special projects fund and permanent personnel\ndetails from other agencies to augment funds available for the regular\nWhite House Office staff. He has thereby adopted a policy of bringing\nall regular employees of the White House directly on to the White House\nOffice payrolls. This is, of course, a more candid way of presenting\nthe full cost of the White House Office operation.\nIn terms of figures you will find the following:\nFor fiscal year 1970 (in fact, the last Johnson Administration budget) the\nappropriation for the White House Office was $3, 940, 000 with another\n$2, 500, 000 appropriated for special projects. In addition, personnel\ndetailed to the White House Office from the departments and agencies\nunder authority of law resulted in basic compensation costs to those\ndepartments and agencies at the rate of $2, 820, 000. Thus, the total\nauthorization for FY 1970 was in excess of $9, 200, 000, involving 576\nemployees.\nReproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum\n- 2 -\nMarch 15, 1971\nAs I noted above, the change in presenting the White House Office budget\ntook place in FY 1971, the first budget presented by this Administration.\nThus the budget request for FY 1971 of 548 employees and funds in the\namount of $8, 550, 000 for the White House Office represented a substantial\ndecrease of $650, 000 in funds and 28 personnel from the year before.\nFor fiscal year 1972, the budget calls for setting the number of employees\nin the White House Office at 540, a decrease of 8 from FY 1971.\nTherefore, the authorized strength of the White House Office has\ndeclined in the last two years, far different from the impression left by\nyour colleagues.\nIt might also be noted that since 1968 there have been statutory salary\nincreases in the neighborhood of 25%. Moreover, the volume of corres-\npondence coming to the President has more than doubled since the 1968\nperiod. Taking these additional factors into consideration, there is\nlittle question but that the White House budget has been very well\nand prudently managed. The criticism is simply not supported by the\nfacts.\nSincerely,\nWilliam E. Timmons\nAssistant to the President\nThe Honorable Hugh Scott\nUnited States Senate\nWashington, D. C.\nReproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum\nMarch 23, 1971\nMEMORANDUM FOR :\nJON HUNTSMAN\nFROM:\nL. HIGBY\nBob does not have objections or see any problem with\nthe attached providing all White House expenses will be\ntaken care of and that we make sure that we spend the\nentire White House budget plus any of the Special Projects\nbudget necessary to cover any items, equipment, etc.\nneeded here at the White House for this fiscal year. If\nall these considerations can be satisfactorily answered\nin your mind, proceed with making the necessary arrange-\nments for the $172, 000 for the Commission on Financial\nStructure and Regulation. If there are problems, please\nsee me.\nLHipm\nAttachment\ncc: Alex Butterfield\nReproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum\nL\nTHE SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY\nOk\nWASHINGTON\nbudget allow register\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT\nSubject: Financing of Commission on Financial Structure\nand Regulation\nIn June 1970, you established a commission to study\nand report on appropriate changes in financial structure\nand regulation. The Commission, under its chairman,\nMr. Reed O. Hunt, is making good progress, and the final\nreport is expected to be submitted to you before the end\nof 1971.\nThe Commission has, however, been plagued with\ndifficulties in its own financing. In February you\nauthorized a $100,000 advance to the Commission from your\nSpecial Projects fund to keep the Commission going. This\nwas a stop-gap action, and I hereby recommend an approach\nwhich will fully solve the Commission's problems.\nUp to this time, the Comptroller of the Currency, the\nFederal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and the Federal\nHome Loan Bank Board have contributed $50,000 each. TI\nbelieve that each agency would agree to an additional\nHave\ncontribution of $122,000 if an additional $172,00 from\nWhite House funds could be obtained. This would bring\nagreed\nthe total White House contribution to $272,000, or less\nthan 30 percent of the total projected expenditure of\n$888,000.\nA contribution from your funds of $86,000 now and\nan additional $86,000 in July, to fall in fiscal year\n1972, would adequately meet the Commission's needs.\nReproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum\n:\n- 2 -\nRecommendation: That you authorize a contribution\nof $172,000 in White House funds for the Commission on\nFinancial Structure and Regulation, $86,000 to be paid\nnow and the remainder in July 1972.\nJohn B. Connally Connolly\nApprove\nDisapprove\ncc: The Honorable\nCaspar Weinberger\nDeputy Director\nOffice of Management and Budget\nReproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum\nSend their\nTHE WHITE house\nWASHINGTON\nto Alexfor Action\nMarch 31, 1971\nhi\nMEMORANDUM FOR H. R. HALDEMAN\nFROM THE PRESIDENT\nBr\nOn as urgent a basis as is possible, consistent\nwith our budget limitations, I want you to find an\narea in the EOB where you can clean out three or four\noffices and set up an adequate briefing room which\nwill seat approximately 150 to 200 people.\nWhen I went to the White House Theater for the\nmeeting with the religious leaders and also on the\noccasion when I went there for the briefing of the\nCongressmen and Senators on Cambodia I realized how\ntotally inadequate that facility is. It just wasn't\nconstructed for that purpose and people sit there\nfeeling uncomfortable and looking uncomfortable.\nI know that the Indian Treaty Room is inadequate, but\npossibly an architect could come in and make it over -\nlower the ceiling, etc. SO that we have an adequate\nbriefing room.\nWhen we consider the fact that virtually every\ndepartment in town has an auditorium of some type for\nthis purpose which is much better than anything we\nhave we can see what our problem is. I know you will\nget opposition to this from some who say that people\ndon't want to be briefed any place except in the White\nHouse proper, either in the Residence or in the West\nWing. Just forget that. The EOB is part of the\nWhite House proper and I think we should be able to\nfind an adequate facility there. As far as people\nthat are in offices there, move them to another\nbuilding.\nReproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum\nPriched\nReproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum\nA.B.\nMEMORANDUM\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nDetermined to be an\nWASHINGTON\nAdministrative Marking\nCONFIDENTIAL\nApril 6, 1971\nNot National Security Information\nBy J45\nNARA Date 3/16/2016\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nLARRY HIGBY\nFROM:\nJON HUNTSMAN\nSUBJECT:\nBill Hopkins\nFollowing up our conversation today here are a few of the responses\nI gained from a 45-minute visit I had with Bill Hopkins in my office\nimmediately following the receipt of his letter of resignation (attached\nhereto).\n1. He has had serious problems with his eyes --primarily\nhis cataracts and feels that an operation should take place\nwithin the next 8-12 months. He stated, that with this in\nmind, it may require absences as long as six months while\nthe eyes are healing before he would be able to return to\nwork. This seemed to concern him a great deal as most\nof his work is engaged in one form or another of reading.\n2. If he retires after May 31, 1971, he will receive less\nretirement pay than if he retired prior to that date. The\nreason for this is the esculation clause in the Civil Service\nRetirement program, which states that after three consecutive\nmonths of cost of living index increases there will be an\nautomatic 3% increase in retirement up to May 31st, after\nwhich the base will return once again to normal. Since\nboth March and April showed cost of living increases, it is\nalmost a certainity that May will also. And, should he not\nretire prior to May 31st, he would loose this additional 3%\npay plus 1% bonus or a total of 4% additional income. Bill\nstated, that if he would have retired last July, he would\nhave received considerably more than he would receive\nthis May -- and this May he will receive considerably more\nthan he will receive thereafter. He stated that this was one\nof the unusual quirks in the Retirement Civil Service law\nthat perhaps, should be revised.\nReproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum\n3. His predecessor who spent some 47 or 48 years in the job\ndied while he was still \"in the saddle\" and this seems to have\nbothered Bill. With his wife's promptings over the last several\nyears there is some strong desire on his part to be able to get\naway from the vigorous six-day a week schedule and to travel or\nspend sometime with her before the same fate should happen to him.\n4. In asking Bill his thoughts relative to a replacement he felt\nthe strongest characteristic one should process is a flexibility\nof dealing with administrations who vary the nature and respon-\nsibilities of his role. He particularly stated, that the Truman\nAdministration utilized his talents, energies better than any\nother Administration and one of the reasons for this was that\nPresident Truman held a daily coordination meeting each\nmorning at which Bill participated and of course, this gave him\nfirst-hand observations and dealings with the President. Although\nnot directly mentioned there was inference toward the importance\nof increased staffing and the staffs role with both the Eisenshower\nand Nixon Administrations. This unique ability to adjust for each\nAdministration and to continue to perform with energy and total\ndedication is very important to Bill, and the key ingredient he\nforsees in his successor. He feels he has displayed these traits\nover the last seven President's whom he has served.\nI have detected absolutely no bitterness, or feeling of resentment, because\nof a decreasing role in my two discussions (another one again today) with\nBill. In addition to the above observations, it should be noted that he\nis concerned that his support staff is being squeezed into smaller and\nsmaller quarters and is not keeping up with the ratio of the non-support\nstaff.\nIn my own personal observations I conclude that this is a logical time\nfor Bill to retire. He is very aware that next year is an election year\nand according to him the \"old school training\" says that one does not\nleave during an election year, which means, he would have to be here\ntwo full years before he retires. I believe he has thought out his decision\nwell and is most desirous of helping us any way possible in order to\nbring his replacement aboard. He has stated that he would stay on after\nMay 31st in a consulting capacity while we are training a replacement.\nReproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum\nI have discussed paying him some consulting fee in addition to his\nretirement to bring his total salary up to what he is currently making,\nand he felt this would be equitable and would certainly be agreeable\nwith him. I sense another key concern with Bill's departure that\nof the role of the Civil Servant. Bill represents all Civil Servant's in\nhis close proximity to the President, and needless to say, many\nthroughout government will be observing how Bill's situation is handled\nand what responses and attention is given to him by the President and\nkey staff members here at the White House. We should insure that\nproper ceremonies and recognition are forthcoming after his long\nservice and dedication to seven Presidents. He is currently developing\na list of potential replacement candidates, some of whom we discussed\nin my office, in order that we may have some recommendations that\nare logical and well thought out. This will be the first time, in Bill's\nopinion, that his position has not been filled by a long-time understudy\nor assistant. I have told him that in my own opinion, John Ratchford,\nhas not displayed those leadership qualities that make him the prime\ncontender for the position although he certainly must be considered to\nbe a candidate. This Bill seems to totally agree with.\nI will keep you posted regarding any further meetings or information\nI receive.\nThank you.\nCC: Alex Butterfield\nCONFIDENTIAL\nReproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum\nMarch 29 1971\nDear Mr. Butterfield:\nAs I informed Mr. Brown, and subsequently indicated to Mr. Huntsman,\nI have found it necessary to give thought to retirement from Government\nservice. Having been a Federal employee since 1929, with nearly 40\nyears in the White House Office, I have now concluded that, for personal\nreasons, this is the prudent course to follow. Accordingly I am making\napplication for retirement, effective the last week in May 1971, and seek\nacquiescence in this decision.\nOver the years it has been my steadfast purpose, and that of the other\ncivil servants with whom I have worked, to serve the President and\nmembers of his Staff, irrespective of Party, loyally and to the best of our\nability. That is a spirit inherent in the guidance we received from our\npredecessors and represents a tradition which I trust will long continue.\nService in the White House Office during the Administration of seven\nPresidents of the United States, and the opportunity to work with and\nfor their Staffs, has for the most part given me great personal satis-\nfaction, and I am truly appreciative. Such an experience cannot help\nbut instill in one the greatest respect for the Office of the Chief Executive\nand for the man chosen by all the people of this great Nation to be their\nPresident.\nI am deeply grateful to the President and to everyone on his Staff for\ntheir kindness and consideration. My heartfelt best wishes go with the\nPresident as he strives to fulfill his aspirations for the American people\nand for just and lasting peace in the world.\nSincerely,\nWilliam J. Hopkins\nHonorable Alexander P. Butterfield\nDeputy Assistant to the President\nThe White House\nCC: Mr. Huntsman\nReproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum\nMEMORANDUM\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nApril 22, 1971\nMEMORANDUM FOR MR. HUNTSMAN:\nWhile discussing my letter of March 29 to Mr. Butterfield, you suggested\nthat some comment as to a successor would be welcome.\nIn my opinion, providing intelligent continuity in the White House Office\nis among the greatest contributions the incumbent of the position can make.\nThis requires (1) ability and the willingness to expend the necessary effort\nto provide leadership of the Support Units in furnishing services to the satis-\nfaction of the President and the members of his Staff and (2) a non-partisan\nbackground of Government experience with the necessary knowledge and flexibility\nto stand a reasonable chance of surviving a change of Administration. Training\nin the law is helpful. If the incumbent is to provide knowledgeable counseling\non the basis of precedents and past procedures, nothing takes the place of\non-the-job training in the White House Office, and I know of no shortcuts.\nAlthough I do not deem it appropriate that I make recommendations, I have\nalways advocated promotion from within if a qualified prospect is available.\nI think the fact that I chose John Ratchford as my Assistant speaks for itself.\nHe is a graduate of Georgetown Law School, a member of the Bar, and his long-\ntime experience in the White House Office has been diversified. When my\npredecessor died years ago, the technique used was to keep me, who had been\nhis Assistant, on the job in an acting capacity for a matter of months before\nI was finally elevated as the senior Executive Clerk on a so-called \"permanent\"\nbasis.\nShould it be decided to give consideration to other career personnel, one\npossibility would be to ask the appropriate people in the Office of Management\nand Budget and the Chairman of the Civil Service Commission for recommendations.\nBut again I stress that, in my opinion, there is no adequate substitute for\nexperience in the White House Office.\nTime is marching on and, as the law now stands, unless my family and I\nare to lose the benefit of the cost of living increment I must proceed with\nmy application to the Civil Service Commission so that retirement will be\neffective by the end of May. In good conscience I would also like to feel\nfree before the end of April to apprise the supervisors of the Support Units,\nwith whom I have worked closely over the years, of my plans.\nAs I indicated earlier, in response to your query, should there be desire\nafter my retirement for me on occasion to serve part time in a consulting\ncapacity, I shall be glad to be helpful in any way I can.\nWilliam NJH Hopkins\nReproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum\nSunday, May 9, 1971\nR <<<\nMEMORANDUM FOR H. R. HALDEMAN\nFROM:\nTHE PRESIDENT\nOne question which we should have included on the poll which would\nhave answered my concern was whether those polled thought the President\nwas too firm, too soft, or just about right in his handling of demonstrators.\nIn other words, get the same question with regard to the President that\nwe have with regard to the police forces.\nAt this time I want to reiterate my suggestions at our meeting this\nmorning:\n1. We must search for a way and not just through backgrounders,\nfor identification WATH of RN of a very hard line against discuption\ndisruptive demonstrators. This can be accomplished through\nstatements by Mitchell, Agnew, a/h/d/ as well as Congressmen\nand Senators.\n2. I think we have tended to be somewhat gun-shy on this issue\nbecause of our seeing it so closely through the eyes of the\nWashington press corps. As a result, we tend to get the worst\nof both worlds. We make rather strange statements which\ninfuriate the liberals who support the demonstrators and which\ndo not come out strong enough to mobilize our own forces.\n3. This is one of those issues where people see it pretty\nmuch in black and white terms. It is a good guy, bad guy\nReproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum\n2\nissue. I think the press particularly TV, have acutally muted\nthe statements of strong support for the police made by Ziegler\nbecause they were quite aware that the worst position we could be\nin would be to appear right in the middle.\n4. In a larger context this is the problem we have on\na number of issues. The press knows very well where\nI stand, but they realize that in some cases my position\nmay be publicly popular. Consequently, they treat the\nstories in a way that my position does not appear to be\nstrong one way or another. What it really gets down to\nis the craving of people for strong leadership in situations\nlike this. As a matter of fact, the support Agnew had some\nmonths ago and much of which he has retained up until this\ntime, is due to the fact that he appeared firm and outspoken\neven though some may not have agreed with all of his positions.\nI tend to come off too bland - except in those instances when\nI get to hit the question head on in a press conference which\ncannot be more than once a month. We tried to correctthis\non the welfare issue. It was interesting to note that the press\nplayed it up the first time I made the point at Williamsburg -\nthinking it would probably hurt us - but then realizing that it\nwas having the opposite effect, almost totally ignored the point\nwhen I repeated it again at the Chamber of Commerce.\nReproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum\n3\nWhat our opponents in the media will try to do whenever possible,\nis to make it appear that RN is vacillating on an issue, that he will\nnot take a strong position one way or another, that he is dodging a\npublic position, etc. They know this is not true, but they also know\nthat this is the best way to hurt us.\nI want you to have a meeting with Colson on this and then perhaps bring\nin Moore L, Ziegler, and Scali (use your judgment as to the extent you\nwant to discuss this matter with Scali in view of the need to take the\ngloves off on the attitude of the press). It is a major PR problem - we\nsimply have not been effectively handling and the re al concern for us\nis that we have not adequately recognized the problem.\nIn sum, let us begin with the demonstrator issue and see what we can\ndo to get across a strong and true impression of RN's leadership and\nfirmness on this issue. Then after that, consider the problem in general\nas related to other issues, and see what we can do to come through with\na more clear and/decisive ilmagel and strong image wherever possible.\nHave in mind in these discussions that all of the cleaver clever people\nin the press who may be our opponents, will try desperately not to fight\nus straight out on an issue where our position may prove popular but\nthat they will try to blurf the discussion in such a way that they can\npresent to the public an image of indecisiveness and weak leadership.\nIt gets back again and again to Connally's point that the nation wants\nstrong, what we have\n4\nbeen providing in both foreign and domestic policy, and that due to\nour own PR failures, coupled with a very skillful operation on the\npart of the pre ss, we are not getting this across. You will remember\na year ago, we were surprised to note that despite everything I had\nsaid on law and order, that polls indicated the people thought that\nTeddy Kennedy was stronger on law and order than I was. This is\nexactly the kind of problem we have today in virtually every area with\nthe possible exception of the handling of Vietnam - where, of course,\nthe issue so closely divides the country that being strong can have\nalmost as many negatives as it can positives, although, even on this\none, weldre our greatest mistake is not to be wrong as far as public\nopinion is concerned, but to be weak.\nReproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum\nSupreme Court of the United States\nWashington, D. 4. 20543\nCHAMBERS OF\nTHE CHIEF JUSTICE\nMay 10, 1971\nDear Mr. President:\nI was tempted to phone you Saturday night after\nthe dinner but feared I might disturb your household.\nYour fortitude and forbearance in the face of gross\nrudeness by your hosts will always have my unbounded\nadmiration. In my many personal observations of the\npress corps over the past 18 years this was one of their\nworst performances. To respond as you did with dignity\nand charity is a mark of your qualities and I suspect it\nwas not lost on all those present.\nIt is no comfort but it is perhaps instructive to\nremember how the press treated your predecessors,\nand particularly Washington and Lincoln. Having been\nreading closely some of the events from 1789 to 1800,\nfairness to the present day press corps compels ac-\nknowledgment that they are now slightly less savage,\nless sadistic and less cruel than 150 to 200 years ago.\nSo viewed, this is progress of sorts.\nI repeat that Saturday night marked a new\nmeasure of your capacities that will in time be recog-\nnized, and enlarged my respect and esteem.\nUnion Name Sincerely, S Burges\nThe President\nThe White House\nReproduced at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum"
}