Ask the Scholar

Document scope · 1 page
doc
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
1562985
label
Energy - Oil Decontrol: General (1)
core
doc
dtoType
document
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
1562985
contentType
document
title
Energy - Oil Decontrol: General (1)
collections
John O. Marsh Files (Ford Administration)
John Marsh's General Subject Files
subjects
Petroleum
Regulatory reform
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
1562985
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1975-08-31
month
8
year
1975
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1975-05-01
month
5
year
1975
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
20ed4a65b1ec2e91
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box 16, folder "Energy - Oil Decontrol: General (4)" of the John Marsh Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. Copyright Notice The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald R. Ford donated to the United States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections. Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. JIM COLLINS, CAPITAL ENERGY LETTER/ZAUSNER Q's & A's August 25, 1975 Q. Mr. Zarb, do you think immediate oil price decontrol Sept. 1 will have a "catastrophic" effect on the economy, as Congressman Dingell has said it will? A. No, I do not. Immediate decontrol coupled with removal of the supplemental fees on petroleum imports, a wind- fall profits tax and consumer rebates will have no significant economic impact -- for the simple reason that petroleum price increases will be moderate and the consumer rebates will assure that there will be no loss of consumer purchasing power. Q. Mr. Dingell predicted that gasoline prices, under decontrol, would rise quickly to 75¢ a gallon and might go as high as 90¢ a gallon by year-end. How do you answer those assertions? A. I do not believe that gasoline prices will rise to 90¢ or even 75¢. Our analysis indicates that immediate decontrol alone will increase product prices by about 6¢ a gallon at most. However, the President has an- nounced his intentions to remove all supplemental fees on petroleum imports if his veto of the extension of the allocation act is sustained. This would reduce the net impact by approximately 3¢ per gallon. Higher prices than this could only occur if the market could justify it and, as we have seen, demand today is slightly below 1974 levels, making an additional 10¢ to 30¢ increase highly unlikely. Q. Mobil Oil Co. is now advocating phased decontrol of oil prices, instead of immediate decontrol, warning that immediate decontrol would "stimulate higher prices, higher wages, and an inflationary spiral". How do you respond to those fears? A. All I can say is that the Federal Energy Administration does not recommend policy on the basis of what the major oil companies prefer. I have seen Mr. Warner's letter to Members of Congress and frankly, I just don't see immediate decontrol stimulating prices to the extent he indicates. Most important, however, is that we have proposed phased decontrol and the Congress has twice rejected our proposals. Consequently, the choice we face now is another six months of delay or immediate decontrol. Digitized from Box 16 of the John Marsh Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library -2- Q. Mobil makes the point that a windfall tax and tax rebates to consumers would, in themselves, stimulate higher prices, wages and spur inflation. How do you answer that? A. Immediate decontrol without a windfall profits tax will mean unwarranted windfall profits for the oil industry. A windfall profits tax would allow the Federal Government to recoup these profits and recycle them back to energy consumers. Higher prices will result but this assures that purchasing power is maintained and adverse economic impact minimized. If the tax is properly structured, it will not be a disincentive to increasing domestic production. Q. The Administration has failed to spell out its proposals for a "windfall profits tax" and a tax credit for "plowback" into eligible domestic investments. What do you believe should be the base for the tax on old oil, how fast should the base rise, how long should it last, and what percentage of the tax should be permitted as a credit for plowback? A. As you know, Senator Long has proposed a windfall profits tax, which, with minor modifications, would probably be acceptable to the Administration. I hope that we will be able to work with him, other members of the Senate Finance Committee and the House Ways and Means Committee to come up with an acceptable windfall profits tax and consumer rebate proposal. And I hope we can do it quickly. Q. Mobil recommends a phased decontrol of oil prices over a period of "several years", without a windfall tax and without tax rebates to consumers--with 50% of the phase- out occurring in the first year. What is wrong with that, in your opinion? A. Mobil's suggestion resembles the Administration's phased decontrol proposal sent to Congress in July. However, the Congress turned down this proposal. -3- Q. You have said that crude oil prices will rise close to the price for foreign oil, but that removal of the $2 fee on oil imports will substantially mitigate the effect of higher oil prices. Do you have any idea how rapidly domestic old oil prices would rise--and to what level domestic old oil prices might rise? A. As I've stated before, the net effect of decontrol, with removal of the supplemental fees, in our estimate will cause a price increase of about 3¢ a gallon. With re- gard to old oil prices, I think we might well see the $5.25 price of old oil rise relatively rapidly to slightly below world prices, or equivalent to new oil prices. At the same time, we might also see new oil prices being somewhat depressed, depending on market conditions and consumer response to higher prices. This overall adjust- ment process will probably occur in a matter of months. Q. Do you see any indication at all that the Administration is now willing to again seek a phased decontrol of oil prices over several years, and to accept a temporaty extension of the Emergency Petroleum Allocation Act to accomplish that? A. As you know, the President has indicated that he will veto the extension of the EPAA bill. Obviously, therefore, he is not willing to accept a six month extension of current controls. With respect to further compromise, I am not very encouraged, given the House actions just prior to recess -- disapproval of the President's very gradual phase out plan and the price roll back provision which was added to H.R. 7014 on the House floor. Q. Do you have any more hope now than a month ago that Congress would adopt a phased decontrol program, with a windfall tax and tax rebates to consumers? A. I continue to hope that Congress will adopt a windfall profits tax and rebate the proceeds to American consumers. I do have some hope that this will occur more rapidly than I had imagined a month ago since Senator Long has reported such a bill out of the Finance Committee. With regard to phased decontrol, the President twice offered decontrol compromises to the Congress and was twice re- jected. We think the final decontrol plan went more than halfway toward meeting the concerns raised by the Congress. And even more gradual plan just wouldn't come close to meeting the conservation goals the President wants to achieve over the next few years. -4- Q. Assuming oil price controls are not re-imposed within the next few months, and that OPEC should raise prices by $2 a barrel, raising the domestic uncontrolled crude oil price to about $14 a barrel after removal of the $2 import fee-what then would be the effect on gasoline prices, heating oil prices, residual fuel oil prices, natural gas prices, coal prices? A. We are in the middle of assessing that possibility right now and should have some definite answers within a few weeks. One thing to keep in mind is that any OPEC price increase would have quite significant effects on domestic energy prices whether controls were in place or not. A rough estimate is that without any controls, every dollar of OPEC price increase would translate into about 2.5 cents of increased petroleum product cost. Q. But, isn't it true that about half of the residual fuel oil consumed in the U.S. is refined domestically and that about 60% of that comes from $5.25 old oil? With old oil rising to $12 or $14 a barrel, would it not be inevitable that residual prices would rise? A. While we do produce significant residual fuel oil domestically, on the East Coast where coal and residual oil compete, the market price is set by the world import price. Therefore, even though domestic refiner's crude oil costs will increase, they would not be able to pass on these cost increases to residual oil users. Because residual oil prices won't rise, I don't expect any increase in coal prices. Q. Assuming a $14 per barrel domestic oil price, how much would that increase domestic oil prices, over a year, in billions of dollars at the wellhead? A. If price controls were to continue in their present form and the price of uncontrolled domestic oil were $14 per barrel, domestic crude oil costs would be about $28.8 billion in 1976. Removing price controls on old oil would increase 1976 domestic crude oil costs by $14.4 billion to $43.2 billion. (continued on next page) -5- A. (continued) - However, the President has announced his intention to remove the supplemental fees on imported crude and petroleum products, which would result in domestic oil being about $12.00 per barrel. This would reduce the price of domestic uncontrolled oil and im- ported crude by $2.00 per barrel and imported products by 60 cents per barrel. Under these conditions, FEA estimates that the total net increase in annual pe- troleum and NGL costs would be $5.3 billion. Q. How could independent refiners and marketers, forced to buy and market oil and oil products costing $14 a barrel, compete with the major companies who have most of the old, low-cost oil, which they would run in their own refineries, or sell at a large profit? A. FEA does not expect crude-rich refiners to impose a profit squeeze on other refiners. With decontrol and a winfall profits tax, all domestic oil will sell at about the same price and major oil companies will not have exorbitant profits from crude production with which to subsidize refinery operations, even if such subsidization were advantageous to refiners. Q: Do you believe some type of special relief, with or without new legislation, should be considered to help the independents during the transition period to free markets? If so, what form could this take? A. Obviously, we are very concerned with the health of the independent sector of the petroleum industry and we are currently monitoring and assessing their situation to see what, if any, forms of relief would be appropriate. Q. If oil price controls are not renewed, do you believe that the Administration might favor imposing a price ceiling of say, $11.50, on domestic oil, permitting the price of old oil to gradually escalate over the next couple of years up to the ceiling and recommend such a program to Congress? A. If price controls are not renewed, the Administration would not have the authority to impose a cap on domestic oil prices. I might add, however, that such a cap and gradual decontrol was included as part of the 39 month plan which was rejected by the Congress. -6- Q. The Administration has argued forcefully that lacking adequate domestic supplies of oil, the only practical method to spur conservation of petroleum is to permit prices to rise and the President imposed the $2 in oil import fees for this reason--in order to hold down oil imports. What do you believe imports would average in 1976 and in 1977 if oil prices do rise to free market levels after Sept. 1 and controls are not renewed? And how would these levels compare with present import levels? A. The answer to this question depends on whether the current supplemental import fees are retained or not. If they are removed and decontrol occurs imports will be approximately 150,000 barrels per day less in 1975 and about 200,000 less per day by 1977 than without any program. If the Congress acts on Elk Hill, coal conversion and the insulation tax credit, savings would reach 1.5 million by 1977. These figures can be compared with current imports of about 6.0 million B/D in 1975 and an expected 7.5-8.0 million by 1977. Q. If oil price controls are not renewed by Sept. 1, but a windfall tax is imposed and, say, a 50% credit for plowback is allowed, what effect would that have on domestic oil supply? Would you expect oil supply to increase? How much? By when? Why? A. The effect of a windfall profits tax on oil production will depend largely upon the specific provisions of the tax. In general, however, it is my belief that whatever tax is enacted it should contain some automatic phase out provision, and it should provide an ultimate realization to producers sufficient to stimulate new exploration, production and investment in more sophisticated enhanced recovery techniques. Of almost equal importance is the overwhelming necessity for the government to provide an environment of relative certainty so that investments may be contemplated in a rational business fashion. If these objectives are met I would expect a few hundred thousand barrels per day extra supply within the first few years and an increase of as much as 1.4 million barrels per day or more by 1985. -7- Q. What impact on GNP, unemployment and the CPI would you expect from free market prices for crude oil and petroleum products, assuming crude oil average about $12 a barrel after price controls end? A. Our macroeconomic simulations indicate that decontrolling oil and removing the supplemental import fees will not hinder our economic recovery. Relative to the the case where controls and the import fees are retained we expect the Consumer Price Index to rise by about one-half of a percent by 1977; real output, GNP, falls by about 2 to 3 billion dollars on an annual basis for 1976 and 1977; and the unemployment rate increases insignificantly during the same period. These effects are well within the forecasting error of our models and most importantly, are small compared to the economic consequences if our vulnerability continues to grow due to inaction and we experience another embargo. Q. Cities Service Co. announced last week that it intends to cut the price it now pays for uncontrolled oil by about $2 a barrel and raise its price posting for old oil by about $5 a barrel. Do you think Cities Service will be able to maintain its crude purchases at such a price level if other purchasers do not follow Cities Service and do the same thing? A. The President has announced that he will remove the $2 per barrel import fee if the Congress sustains his veto of the bill extending price controls. Consequently, the price of uncontrolled domestic oil will drop by as much as $2. At the same time, old oil will tend to rise to parity with the other domestic crudes. The total extent of that increase will depend upon the quality of the oil, location and other factors which normally influence the price of goods and services. If Cities Service undertakes even further drops in new oil prices, they will be subject to normal market forces. To the extent that others may bid a higher price for the decontrolled oil, CITCO must make a decision of whether or not to meet the new price or lose the supply. -8- Q. What special problems do you believe might arise with price decontrol and the end of allocations? Do they involve propane, heating oil, other products? What is the Ad- ministration considering to deal with those problems? A. In general, no shortages of any petroleum products will occur as a result of price decontrol and the end of allo- cations. However, we are expecting a natural gas shortage this winter which could create unexpected demands for substitute fuels, such as propane. We are now developing options for the President to deal with the overall natural gas problem including special petroleum problems associated with a natural gas shortage. Q. Some 14 states will have more or less severe shortages of natural gas next winter for industrial consumers. What is the Administration considering to deal with that problem? Might it be necessary to allocate intrastate gas to inter- state markets? A. The Administration is considering legislation and administra- tive actions to deal with the expected increase in natural gas shortages. With respect to specific recommendations, the President has made no final decisions, although I might add that in general we do not believe allocation can solve our natural gas problems and that ultimately deregulation of natural gas prices is the only way to increase supply and bring the situation back into balance. MGMWSHI MSA. 8-038786C237002 08/25/75 TWX MOBIL OIL NYK western union Mailgram UNITED SERVICE us 061 NEW YORK NEW YORK AUG 25 ZIP 20500 RON call MR, JOHN VICKERMAN EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT give after me you've a read If THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON, D.C, 20500 This BILL Baroody YU5770 IN CONNECTION WITH THE RECENT NEW YORK TIMES ARTICLE COMMENTING ON MR, RAWLEIGH WARNER, JR. 'S LETTER TO CONGRESS ON DECONTROL, THE FOLLOWING LETTER, SIGNED BY MR. HERMAN J. SCHMIDT, VICE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF MOBIL OIL CORPORATION, HAS THIS DATE BEEN HAND DELIVERED TO MR. 1, M. ROSENTHAL, MANAGING EDITOR OF THE NEW YORK TIMES: : MR. A. M. ROSENTHAL MANAGING EDITOR NEW YORK TIMES 229 WEST 43 STREET NEW YORK, NEW YORK GERALD FORD LIBRAST DEAR MR. ROSENTHAL: IN TODAY'S NEW YORK TIMES FRONT-PAGE STORY, MR. MAIDENBERG EDITORIALIZAED JUST ENOUGH TO DISTORT MOBIL'S POSITION ON THE DECONTROL OF OIL PRICING. THIS OCCURS IN THE SECOND PARAGRAPH OF THE STORY WHERE HE SAID THAT RAWLEIGH WARNER, JR., 'URGED CONGRESS, IN EFFECT, TO OVERRIDE THE PRESIDENT'S PROPOSED VETO OF A CONGRESSIONAL BILL THAT WOULD EXTEND SUCH CONTROLS BEYOND AUGUST 31', STATES POSTA PAGE 2 11 westem union Mailgram UNITED * SERVICE U.S.MAIL THIS WAS NEVER SAID IN OUR LETTER TO CONGRESS OR IN OUR NEWS RELEASE, NOR WAS IT INTENDED IN ANY WAY. MR. MAIDENBERG'S INTERPRETATION WAS WHOLLY HIS OWN, WE DO NOT BELIEVE THAT A FURTHER SIX- MONTH DELAY IN FACING THE ISSUE OF DECONTROL IS IN THE NATIONAL INTEREST, AND THIS IS WHAT WOULD RESULT FROM AN OVERRIDE, THE SOLE INTENT OF OUR LETTER TO CONGRESS WAS TO URGE IMMEDIATE ACTION TO ESTABLISH A PROGRAM OF GRADUAL DECONTROL OF OIL PRICES -- A PROGRAM WHICH WE STRONGLY BELIEVE WOULD BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE ECONOMY. IF SUSTAINING THE PRESIDENT'S VETO WOULD ACHIEVE THAT GOAL, WE WOULD FAVOR CONGRESS TAKING SUCH ACTION, RATHER THAN OVERRIDING THE VETO A.S YOUR REPORTER SUGGESTED. SINCERELY, HERMAN J. SCHMIDT'' SIGNED: EDMUND P, HENNELLY GENERAL MANAGER, GOVERNMENT RELATIONS 18:14 EST MGMWSHT HSA FORD GERALD LIBRARY Thes, THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON August 29, 1975 MEMORANDUM FOR: JACK MARSH MAX FRIEDERSDORF FROM: PATRICK O'DONNELL SUBJECT: Senators Cotton, Hatfield, and Packwood Walter Mote's statement on Hatfield and Packwood is incorrect. I double-checked ; both are firmly with us and as a matter of fact, Senator Packwood is willing to work targets and make speeches in support of the President. Senator Cotton said he had no intention of making a statement on voting to override the veto. That rumor obviously is also incorrect. He is aware that he would be the only member from New England to vote to sustain but is not frightened by the prospect. He wants to help the President, but must be armed to take the heat. I told him that Frank Zarb would go up to see him on Tuesday or Wednesday. cc: Frank Zarb FORDO i LIBRARY 07V820 AUG 30 1975 THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON August 29, 1975 MEMORANDUM FOR: JACK MARSH and MAX FRIEDERSDORF FROM: PATRICK O'DONNELL SUBJECT: S. 1849 -- override attempt Contact with selected Senators on S. 1849 override attempt: TAFT "Want to re-examine issue. Have Zarb meet with me after my return on September 3. Will meet with the President on Wednesday, September 3, with the Wednesday Group -- will no doubt discuss at that time. " BUCKLEY "Will vote to sustain, notwithstanding Mobil Oil. " HATFIELD "I voted against S1849 and will vote to sustain the veto. 11 LONG Out of the country. STEVENS Will be with the President. Not back until around September 9. GRAVEL Will work Bentsen for us and coordinate with Fannin. Involved in meetings at the U.N. until September 15 but will be back for vote and debate. -2- SCOTT (Penna.) Send back promptly -- put burden on Democrats for any politically motivated delay. FANNIN "Am working on selected targets and am inclined to recommend that the President send the veto back to the Hill quickly. 11 Sees no advantages in delay and some political opportunities by taking advantage of any attempt by the Democrats to delay. Also confirmed Johnston's statement that he will vote to sustain. JOHNSTON In Tokyo but he told POD and Senator Fannin on separate occasions that he would vote to sustain the veto. COTTON When he met with the President recently he told the President he did not see any way a New England member could vote to sustain the veto of S. 1849. The President told him there would be special steps taken to alleviate the New England situation and that he would see to it that Cotton was fully educated on matter. He stands available to be persuaded. I'll arrange a Zarb briefing. YOUNG Will vote to sustain but strongly urges a reiteration in the veto message of the President's desire for phased-in decontrol. He also suggests some statement on how the President will handle the allocation problems facing the mid-West. GOLDWATER "Don't worry about me; I'll be there whenever needed. Tell the President -3- to use some muscle on this one in the fashion of Harry Truman and Lyndon Johnson. " Speaking of muscle, the Senator ruptured a calf muscle in late July. It hemorrhaged and he spent a week or so in Bethesda Hospital. He's now on crutches but very much on the mend. HRUSKA Will support the President. Took a few targets to call before returning to Washington. He will focus on Dole whom we understand is wavering in his support. GARN Will support the President. SCOTT (Va.) "Will support the President. 11 Was pleased that we called (interrupted a meeting with constituents). BELLMON "Don't worry about me. 11 CURTIS Will support. Preparing speech highlighting proposal that we must face higher oil prices as a fact of life. THURMOND Due to pressures he received in South Carolina during the recess, the Senator feels he cannot commit to supporting the President at this point. I feel it might take a Presidential call to bring him around and so recommend. He will be at 803/ 236-7311 during the Labor Day weekend. -4- - BROCK Will support the President FONG "I'm with the President. What about my candidate for the Postal Rates Commission Board of Governors (? ). " PACKWOOD Will support the President. GRIFFIN Will support the President and is anxious to compare notes. DOMENICI Not in favor of immediate decontrol but recognizes the limited options available to the President. Will vote to sustain the veto but still encourages a compromise if possible. UNABLE TO REACH THE FOLLOWING SENATORS: JOHNSTON As stated earlier, he is in Tokyo and will return to Washington Tuesday. DOLE En route from Kansas to Washington by automobile -- will probably arrive late Friday, August 29. BAKER Expected to be available approximately 11:00 p.m. Friday, August 29. SPARKMAN Not reachable by telephone. DIRECT CONTACT BY OTHERS: BARTLETT Will support the President HANSEN Will support the President - -5- HELMS Will support the President McCLURE Will support the President PEARSON Will support the President THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON August 29, 1975 Handy The Honorable Mike Mansfield The Honorable Carl Albert Minority Leader Speaker of the House United States Senate House of Representatives Washington, D. C. Washington, D. C. Dear Senator Mansfield and Speaker Albert: SUBJECT: Summary of our discussions with the President earlier today concerning oil decontrol The following, I believe, represents a fair summary of our discussion with the President: 1) The President has indicated that he will veto the six-month extension, but withhold the actual veto message until Thurs- day, September 4, 1975. 2) The President would not veto a 30-day extension of the Emergency Petroleum Allocation Acct (Messrs. Mansfield and Albert suggested 45 days) if the Congress will move to- ward the approval of a phase-out decontrol program. 3) The details of the compromise phase-out program would be as follows: a. Decontrol would take place over a 39-month period, at a monthly rate of; 1 1/2 percent first year, 2 1/2 percent second year, 3 1/2 percent last fifteen months. This pro- gram would not increase prices during the first year. b. A ceiling of $11. 50 will be placed on new and released oil escalating at the rate of 5 ¢ per barrel per month during the 39-month period. c. Price control and allocation authorities required to support this program would be enacted for the 39-month period. An appropriate windfall tax program with plow back and consumer rebate provisions would also be enacted. Senator Mansfield -2- August 29, 1975 and Speaker Albert d. The 60 ¢ per barrel fee on imported products would be withdrawn by the President. 4) It was agreed that this compromise does not affect the Presi- dent's authority to retain the existing $2 per barrel import fee on crude oil. It is clear that it would be in the best interest to clarify whether or not this compromise will be accepted by the Congress at the earliest possible date. Sincerely, Frank G. Zarb FGZ:cb THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON M August 29, 1975 The Honorable Mike Mansfield The Honorable Carl Albert Minority Leader Speaker of the House United States Senate Hous e of Representatives Washington, D. C. Washington, D. C. Dear Senator Mansfield and Speaker Albert: SUBJECT: Summary of our discussions with the President earlier today concerning oil decontrol The following, I believe, represents a fair summary of our discussion with the President: 1) The President would not veto a 30-day extension of the Emergency Petroleum Allocation Act (Messrs. Mansfield and Albert suggested 45 days) if he is confident that the Congress will act favorably on a "phase-out" decontrol program. 2) The details of the compromise phase-out program would be as follows: a. Decontrol would take place over a 39-month period, at a monthly rate of; 11/2 percent first year, 2 1/2 percent second year, 3 1/2 percent last fifteen months. This program would not increase prices during the first year. b. A ceiling of $11. 50 will be placed on new and released oil escalating at the rate of 5¢ per barrel per month during the 39-month period. C. Price control and allocation authorities required to support this program would be enacted for the 39-month period. An appropriate windfall tax program with plow back and consumer rebate provisions would also be enacted. Senator Mansfield -2- August 29, 1975 and Speaker Albert d. The 60¢ per barrel fee on imported products would be withdrawn by the President. 3) It was agreed that this compromise does not affect the President's authority to retain the existing $2 per barrel import fee on crude oil. 4) The President has indicated that he will veto the six-month extension, but withhold the actual veto message until after Thursday, September 4, 1975. It is clear that it would be in the best interest to clarify whether or not this compromise will be accepted by the Congress at the earliest possible date. Sincerely, Juh Jal Frank G. Zarb Administrator Federal Energ Administration FGZ:cb FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE August 29, 1975 Office of the White House Press Secretary THE WHITE HOUSE M STATEMENT BY THE PRESS SECRETARY The President met for one hour with Senate Majority Leader Mansfield and House Speaker Albert. Also attending were Frank Zarb, Alan Greenspan, Rogers C.B. Morton, Max Friedersdorf, and Jack Marsh. The President expressed his appreciation for the constructive way in which Senator Mansfield and Speaker Albert are seeking to resolve this difficult national energy problem. It was understood that the President will veto the six-month extension of oil price controls because he strongly believes the economic health and security of the United States permit no further delay in beginning a program to achieve independence from unreliable foreign energy sources which can set our oil prices at will. However, the President agreed to delay vetoing the bill until Senator Mansfield has discussed his compromise decontrol plan with Senate Democrats. Speaker Albert also will review the compromise plan with a number of House Democratic leaders. The President told Senator Mansfield and Speaker Albert that he would not veto a short extension of oil price controls if he is reasonably confident that Congress will act favorably within a matter of weeks on the phased decontrol plan offered by Senator Mansfield. # # # Some items in this folder were not digitized because it contains copyrighted materials. Please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library for access to these materials. AUG 30 1975 THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON August 29, 1975 MEMORANDUM FOR: JACK MARSH FROM: MARGITA WHITE maw SUBJECT: Oil Decontrol Editorials Attached are editorials on oil decontrol compiled from the newspapers the White House subscribes to, FEA's clip files and other sources. They are in order by date and all support the President's position and/or urge compromise action. Some of the more recent editorials appear to deal with the Appeals Court decision on the oil fee but have been included if they also involve the President's policy. I apologize for the poor quality of the xerox copies, but the FEA files xeroxes only and not the originals. CC: Alan Greenspan Ron Nessen Don Rumsfeld Frank Zarb YORD Fled 7/28/75 Compromise on oil pricing Wash. star President Ford and Congress both have more cost of search and drilling, domestic crude to gain than to lose, politically, by meeting mid- should be held to the neighborhood of $7.50 a way on the issue of domestic crude oil pricing. barrel, lest the oil cartel and OPEC drain the Finding that meeting point, somewhere between proceeds of higher prices out of our pockets. "free market" pricing and arbitrary legislated It shouldn't be beyond the wit of man - even ceilings, has not been easy. of Congress - to combine incentive to increase Detroit Dree Dress JUL 29 ANINDEPENDENT NEWSPAPER 12-A TUESDAY, JULY 29, 1975 As We See It Compromise in Congress Urgent on Oil Prices AS CONGRESS moves toward its expected had no energy policy at all. Almost every recess at the end of this week, the need for congressional effort at a conservation policy compromise to end the stalemate over energy has come to grief, and there has been almost policy is urgent no attention given to the need for stimulating the search for and production of domestic oil The alternative to compromise is to have the controls on the price of oil expire outright Therefore, what we have had has been stale- at the end of August. which would produce a mate, with the president thus far unwilling to strong inflationary joit to the economy. Thus, is to give up on the idea- of moving toward the Dallas Morning The News, olders business institution in Texas, was established in 1842 while Texas - 0 Republic Editorial Page Dick West, Editorial Director TUESDAY, JULY 29. 1975 VJ Energy: Ford's Loaded Proposal PRESIDENT FORD has re- of "new" all, that produced in shaped an energy plan following 1973 and after, and selling on the dongressional refusal of his origi- open market at about $12.50 per Bal model. and has sent It back barrel. would be rolled back 10 is" Capitol Hill for what he hopes $11.50 per barrel and allowed to rise slowly over the next three will be quick approval. years. This latest version comes Details of the consumer rebate equipped with Just about all of and windfall profit tax aspects of the accessories that are politically the proposal have not been spelled attractive to Congressmen, such out yes. JU D THE CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR For action on oil pg 20 The time has come for Congress to bite the price hike). Thereafter they should rise political bullet on energy. It can demonstrate modestly and have a tolerable impact on the this week that it is capable of responsible, economy. According to Data Resources, Inc., bipartisan action by adopting President a leading nonpartisan research firm, the rise ord S brogram to decontrol oil prices. in prices on domestically produced "old" oil Mr. Ford has walked another mile to make and resulting increases in other fuel costs bis second decontrol package more palatable would boost the rate of inflation by only 0.3 to the Democrats. This plan would stretch the percent in 1975 and by 0.3 percent in 1977. The Wednesday, July 30, 1975 The Seattle Times A II The Times' opinion and comment: Break the oil stalemate The monthe - sministratio be- the nation's dependence on im- and ported oil. The congressional Congress over energy policy has majority talks n great deal about reached the showdown stage the economic and strategic per. President Ford has offered Con- ils of continued dependence on gress a compromise that now the international oil cartel-but looks like the best way to break lacks the political fortitude to the impasse. take any of the hard measures The President and the con- needed to reduce that depen- gressional majority established dence. who Ann leng the nation has THE DALMS TIMES HEIMLD EDITORIALS 2-B Fri., Ack. 1, 1875 DALLAS, TX People the losers W THE ISSUE: The impasse much as 12 cents per gallon. Fur- reached by the President and Con- ther, the increased costs of other gress on decontrol of oil prices. petroleum products will have an inflationary impact throughout the CONGRESS AND the President economy. have reached a critical point in the Congress, and particularly the formulation of a national oil pric- Democratic membership, is bank- ing program, still at irreconcilable ing on President Ford's taking the loggerheads. And the losers sooner blame of the public for the in- THE PLAIN DEALER OHIO'S LARGEST NEWSPAPER THOMAS VAIL Publisher and Editor ROY O. KOPP THOMAS R. GUTHRIE Business Manager Executive Editor Net paid circulation for the year ended March 31, 1975 DAILY 395,826 SUNDAY 487,110 26 As filed with the Audit Bureau of Circulations, subject to audit Page 4-B Cleveland, Chio Friday, August 1, 1975 Congress bungles oil prices Congress has defeated itself as well as remodeling his decontrol proposal ever the American consumer by botching the since January and Congress has not shown oil price control system. It tried to hold the slightest give. If there is instant decon- the lid on domestic oil prices. Instead. the trol, Congress will be to blame for the lid almost certainly is going to blow off on unhappy consequences of its ill-advised po- Chicago Tribune FOUNDED June 10. 1347 STANTON R. Cook. Cusirman and Publisher ROBERT M. HUNT. President and General Manager CLAYTON KIBEPATRICK. Editor JOHN MCCUTCHEON. Editorial Page Editor MAXWELL McCROHON, Managing Editor WILLIAM H. JONES, Managing Editor News 00 12 Section 1 V Friday, August 1,1975 THE NEWSPAPER is an institution developed by modern civilization to present the news of the day, to foster commerce and industry, to inform and lead public opinion. and to turnish that check upon government. which no constitution has ever been able to provide. -THE TRIBUNE CREDO If oil price controls end In an astonishing display of obtuse- countries, which provide us. with some ness: or partisan brinkmanship or both, 30 per cent of our domestic oil require- the House has rejected President ments, from raising prices. The govern- Fled memphis Commercial appear 8/1/75 Oil Veto Is In Order PRESIDENT FORD should veto pro- while on vacation, and controls run out posed legislation to extend current price Aug. 31, oil prices would be free to begin controls on domestic oil for six months. A rising Sept. 1. Energy chief Frank Zarb price bill passed yesterday by the House predicted gasoline would be selling for 70 and by the Senate July 15 would continue cents a gallon by winter without any to leave the United States without an controls. energy policy and, as Ford warned recent- If Ford allowed an extension bill to ly, would cause the nation to "drift into become law, Congress would be less likely greater energy dependence." to try to put together some kind of energy package when it returns from vacation Crass politics appears to have swayed next month. Perhaps a sudden surge in THE KANSAS CITY TIMES) Vol. 107 Saturday, August 2. 1975 No. 282 Energy Deadlock Could Bring A Day of Reckoning Congress went into the final hours So long as the incipient energy crisis before its month-long August recess remains, in Frans Zarb's words, in- mired in an incredible mishmash of visible, then Congress can afford polit- conflicting energy legislation. Twice ically the luxury oi rejecting President in as many weeks the House killed Ford's plans for dealing with it while President Ford's proposal to phase out offering no effective counter proposals oil price controls gradually. his third of its own. But some ominous and inex- offer lengthening the period from 30 to orable trends are at work: As our old 39 months. domestic oil fields play out, without adequate price incentive to stimulate Meanwhile Congress has been strug- sufficient new exploration and produc- gling with a bill to extend price control tion. this country's reliance on im- to so-called new (post-1972) oil and on perted oil will increase. And that oil Thursday it sent Mr. Ford a measure promises to become increasingly 0- the purhority for controis dnt future Aven scandal of inaction We have struggled and struggled," Rep. B., another attempt to shift blame for the approach- F. Sisk told the House of Representatives. as it ing sudden lapse of price controls on "old" oil to went on running in circles on the oil-pricing Mr Ford - an extension of these controls that issue, "and haven't even brought forth a the President has all but sworn to veto mouse We do not contend that so-called "market It isn't necessary to sharpen this self indict- forces" are an ideal instrument of control of ment by one of the House's own. After all, Con- crude oil prices; but if the either-or choice has gress from the outset of its curious treatment of to be made because of congressional inaction the energy issue has conceded that President market regulation may be preferable to legislat- Ford is right in principle i. e.; that the Ameri ed ceilings that are manifestly too low. In the oil can dependency on imported crude oil is danger- market, whose mysteries certainly baffle us, ous, that the search for larger domestic produc- there are too many ways in which prices can be NY. Times 8/3/75 Congress Triumphant? Congress has quit for its traditional August recess on a note of institutional triumph, having successfully re- buffed President Ford on several foreign and domestic issues; but its sense of satisfaction is unjustified. After months. of public posturing and private nego tiating, Congress and - the President reached a critical showdown on oil policy last week, and Mri Ford lost. His final compromise plan for phasing out oil price controls gradualiv- over 39 months was reiscted in the 8/4/75 THE WALL STREET JOURNAL 8 REVIEW & OUTLOOK Nabbing the Pink Panther Like Inspector Clouseau, who but only $5.25 during August, there fumbles his way to solution of a is bound to be a brief and over- crime, the Democratic Congress whelming incentive to hold back do- and Republican President have been mestic production. Before the Fed- bungling and stumbling on energy eral Energy Administration bureau- legislation for months, yet in the and crais knew-what hit them, there the perfect solution-oil-price decon- would be a Doubts on Deregulation A Harris Survey in this newspaper sion bill voted by Congress before it yesterday recorded a stunning vote of recessed. confidence in two of the Ford Adminis- But there is more. Many poll respon- tration's energy policies The returns is dents agreed that "deregulation will were decisive, certainly, but it seems bring in more production at home and more than likely that many who took eventually will bring prices down. More part in the balloting may later demand production Perhaps, especially from a recount-or express themselves dif- wells that have been left idle while their ferently in coming elections. operators lobbied for decontrol. But The poll recorded thumping 54 to 22 lower prices? That is a dangerously ner cent majorities in favor of decontrol- speculative proposition. Oil, an increas- OTIS CHANDLER, Publisher flos Angeles Times ROBERT D. NELSON Executive Vice President and General Manager HARRISON GRAY OTIS, 1882-1917 WILLIAM F. THOMAS Executive Vice President and Editor HARRY CHANDLER, 1917-1944 NORMAN CHANDLER, 1944-1960 CHARLES C. CHASE, Vice President-Production ROBERT L FLANNES, Vice President and Assistant to the Publisher ROBERT C. LOBDELL, Vice President and General Counsel VANCE L STICKELL, Vice President-Saies JAMES BASSETT, Associate Editor ANTHONY DAY, Editor of the Editorial Pages ROBERT J. DONOVAN, Associate Editor FRANK P. HAVEN, Managing Editor JEAN SHARLEY TAYLOR, Associate Editor 4-Part II TUESDAY MORNING, AUGUST 5, 1975 Easing the Jolt at_the Pump Members of Congress found time to vote them- But critics in Congress and elsewhere rightly point- selves a pay raise last week before taking off for a ed out that the jolt to an already-depressed econo- vacation lasting until after Labor Day: But they my would be too dangerous. The President ulti- wouldn't stay in town long enough to work out a mately came in with a compromise with the Administration on tensing, MicH. Tuesday, August 5, 1975 The STATE Journal-Register Page & Democrats pay politics with energy problem B. A BRIEF REVIEW of recent price of all oil. Democrats in Con- history is in order for these gress, unsure whether they could Americans who wish to put the male a veto of the President's present dramatic showdown be- act stick, compromised by freez- tween Congress and the adminis- ing oil prices for 90 days -- prom- tration into focus. ising that they would have a com- The elements of the draina prehensive energy program in make very good headlines. Con- that time. Since then the Presi- gress has vetoed a President's dent has reminded them of their energy program in a period when promise by adding another $1 per many are assessing the relative barrel import tax on June 1. strengths of the presidency and the Congress. The legislative Coincidentally; the 90-day Res- branch in turn voted only to CX- lation period for the Democratic Ford THE Should DENVER Veto oft Oil Lid President Ford should veto the congressional As Congressman Wirth pointed 8/6/75 out last Week- price freeze on petroleum prices. The freeze was end nothing much is likely to happen to oil prices only a time-saving device by the Democratic Aug. 31 even if the President does exercise his leadership. And as Colorado Rep. Tim Wirth, a veto. Wirth predicted the oil companies will exer- Democrat. has pointed out there is not likely to be cise restraint on prices to insure a good climate any price impact resulting from the veto. for renewal of legislative negotiations on the During the crisis over oil prices two years ago subject in September. Congress enacted a price freeze on "old" oil in While Wirth disagrees with the position held the United States. This is oil presently being presently by Ford S negotiators he does. under- produced. This emergency control is to expire stand the necessity of having enough production Aug. 31. to keep the economy healthy. He has, thus, been Congress and the Ford energy experts have prominent among those congressmen working been working hard on a replacement legislative with the administration to try to find common package for price control. They've made some ground for a national oil policy. Such a policy progress. But when the chips were down last would protect the consumer but also recognize week-just before congressional adjournment- that such protection must not be allowed to de- the process stalled. Since Congress isn't coming stroy the incentive to explore and keep on pro- back until Sept. 3 the leadership hastily passed a ducing petroleum products for a healthy econ- e.v. month erdencion of the mene Indianapolis Star 8/8/75 cyure new tactics by boaru A tax that's done its job President Ford is thinking of remov- control will raise the price of a gallon of ing his 32-a-barrel duty on imported oil, gasoline by about 7 cents at the most- now that the remaining domestic price and probably not all at, once. controls are about to expire. He should In view of this projected increase and do so. The purpose of the duty, as he the dampening effect it could have on said himself when he imposed it-the the economy, there is no point continu- first $1 in February and the second in ing the import fee, which has raised the June-was to raise the price of oil and price of gasoline by perhaps 3 cents a thereby discourage consumption. He gallon. Removing this would reduce the The idlnn/Reporter-Celeguam THE BEST INVESTMENT " LABRERTISMS DOLLAR Dial 602-5311 P. O. Box 1630 Midland, Taxas 79701 MEMBER OF THE ASSOCIATED PRESS 6A-THE MIDLAND REPORTER-TELEGRAM, FRIDAY, AUG. 8, 1975 The Associated Press 15 entitled exclusively to the use for republication of all the lo- cal news printed in this newspaper, as well as all AP news dispatches. Rights of publication of all other matters herein also reserved. JAMES N. ALLISON (1902-1975) JIM ALLISON JR. PUBLISHER ADVERTISING RATES: Display advertising and legal notice rates on application. Any erroneous reflection upon the character, standing or reputation of any person, firm or corporation which may occur in, the columns of The Reporter-Telegram will be gladly corrected upon being brought to the attention of the editor. The publisher is not responsible for copy omissions or typographical errors which may occur other than to correct them in the next issue after it is brought to his attention and in no case does the publisher hold himself liable for damages further than the amount received by him for actual space covering the error. The right is reserved to reject or edit all advertising copy. Advertising orders are accepted on this basis only. EDITORIALS Special Session (?) Two Republicans - a senator were rejected by Congress. and a representative-have urged Existing controls expire Aug. President Ford to call Congress 31, at which time the price of oil back from its month-long recess to could advance to world levels. The deal with energy legislation. The President. it is understood free market actually A tax that's done its job President Ford is thinking of remov- control will raise the price of a gallon of ing his $2-a-barrel duty on imported oil, gasoline by about 7 cents at the most- now that the remaining domestic price and probably not all at once. controls are about to expire. He should In view of this projected increase and do so. The purpose of the duty, as he the dampening effect it could have on said himself when he imposed it-the the economy, there is no point continu- first $1 in February and the second in ing the import fee, which has raised the June-was to raise the price of oil and price of. gasoline by perhaps 3 cents a thereby discourage consumption, He gallon. Removing this would reduce A PAGE OF OPINION COLUMBUS The Dispatch AN INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPER FOUNDED JULY 1, 1871 - EVENING AND SUNDAY 8/10/75 Energy Supply Hit By Brinkmanship W HITE HOUSE assurance oil ing fact congressional leaders have price controls will expire yet to deal with such essentials as Aug. 31 means the American writing windfall profits legislation consumer's pocketbook may be in which will insure continued explo- for another jolt all because of ration as well as direct or indirect congressional brinkmanship in the relief to the consumer. field of energy supply. Nor is there any assurance this The White House not only said nation is ready to embark on a President Ford would veto the six- necessary program to procure the S Tuesday, August 12, 1975 THE MILWAUKEE JOURNAL LUCIUS W. NIEMAN, FOUNDER: 1882 HARRY J. GRANT. 1915-1963 IRWIN MAIER Chairman of the Board DONALD B. ABERT. Publisher RICHARD H. LEONARD. Edicor JOHN N. REDDIN, Editorial Page Editor - JOSEPH W. SHOQUIST. Managing Editor Published by Newspapers, Inc, a Division of The Journal Company. Milwaukee, Wis. 53201 Phone 224-2000 Court Curbs President on Energy Once again it is shown that The Wall Street Journal, on the President Ford lacks sufficient other hand, surveyed a wide vari- authority to lead the nation out of ety of sources- inside and out of its mounting energy problems un- less Congress co-operates. The the energy industry. It found gen- A ming that erally that they expected fuel Bangor Daily News 12 Friday, August 15, 1975 F/Ed IN OUR OPINION Going cold turkey on energy addiction Energy IS a lot like heroin. It's addicting. Many experts are saying that unless the Its use leads to irrational behavior. And every United States changes the way it uses energy, it fix is more expensive than the last. is likely to become a second or third rate nation Unfortunately, most of the energy addicts by the end of this century. in the United States are also voters or powerful corporations. So not many politicians are The indications Energy Consumption willing to advocate a course of "cold turkey" to are all around us: Per Person solve our energy problems. inefficient use of Expressed AS guilons of oil That's why so many congressmen and materials and resour- governors (including Sen. Edmund S. Muskie ces, lowest produc- 2,520 . Fled, THE ATLANTA- CONSTITUTION For 107 Years the South's Standard Newspaper James M. Cox, Chairman 1950-1957-James M. Cox Jr., Chairman 1957-1974 DEPARTMENT STANDARD KW JACK TARVER, Publisher REG MURPHY, Editor PAGE 4-A, MONDAY, AUGUST 17, 1975 Still No Program President Ford and Congress are to allow the controls to expire over a butting heads again about oil-price period of time were rejected by Con- policies. Meanwhile, the nation contin- gress. It chose to pass an extension of ues with no energy program because the current controls for six months. Congress has refused to make the But Ford is vetoing it because ap- tough decisions and compromises. proving it would "mean only more necessary. months of delay without the critically Because Congress has failed to needed incentives to promote conser- and sour new domestic oil The Piitsburgh Press (A Scripps-Howard Newspaper) Established June 23, 1884-Published Daily and Sunday JOHN TROAN BARNEY G. CAMERON Editor Business Manager LEO KOEBERLEIN, Executive Editor Offices. 34 Boulevard of the Allies, Pittsburgh, Pa. 15230 P.O. Box $66-Telephone 263-1100; Want Ads 263-1201 SCRIPPS HOW ARD Give Light and the Prople Will Find Their Own Way PAGE 2 SECTION B SUNDAY, AUGUST 17, 1975 Ford's Oil Plans FlEd President Ford has made Congress an offer promote conservation, and higher prices do it should not refuse. produce increased efficiency in the use of His offer is to lift price controls from the petroleum products. oil industry and find out if a free market can "Cheap energy encourages waste and pre- lead to more domestic oil production and con- serves inefficient energy technology. When the servation-and less dependence on the foreign price of energy reflects its value to societv. oil cartel. 28 THE COMMERCIAL APPEAL A Scripps-Howard Newspaper GORDON HANNA, Editor Published by The Memphis Publishing Co., 495 Union, Memphis, Tenn. 38101 JOSEPH R. WILLIAMS, Business Manager The Memphis Commercial Established 1889 Consolidated July 1, 1894 The Appeal Extablished 1840 The Avalanche Establishes 1807 Page 6 Monday, August 18, 1975 Ford On Oil The present law Pled in addition PRESIDENT FORD now has made it official. He will veto the six-month exten- trolling prices on old oil - that fr sion of petroleum price controls which are wells which had been in operation prior ) to expire at the end of this month. And if 1973 - also gave the Federal Ener Congress upholds his veto he will remove Administration the power to allocate the the $2 per barrel import fee on crude oil. supply of crude and oil products. His program for action was outlined If a price scramble should occur a a again in his speech Friday to the Vail result of decontrol, the major producer 32-Rocky Mountain News Mon., Aug. 18, 1975, Denver, Colo. Ford's oil plans PRESIDENT FORD has made Congress Ford's first step will be to veto the six-" an offer we hope it can't refuse. month extension of controls past Aug. 31, His offer is to lift price controls from the which Congress passed hurriedly before oil industry and find out if a free market going on vacation. can lead to more domestic oil production and conservation. - and less dependence Then, if Congress upholds the veto, Ford on the foreign oil cartel. will remove his $2-a-barrel tariff on im- The President, his advisers and free- ported oil. That move, according to admin- enterprise economists are convinced the istration energy experts, should limit the test will work out well. We think Ford's rise in gasoline prices caused by decontrol plan is worth a try, especially since Con- to three cents a gallon over the next few.' gress couldn't come up with an oil policy months in months of flailing about. ) We would have preferred a gradual end- ing of controls over a 39-month period to sudden decontrol. But that Ford proposal was a bullet Congress proved incapable of A-6 Monday, August 18, 1975 THE ARIZONA REPUBLIC Editorials After decontrol, what? Democratic congressmen are nation independent of OPEC making dire forecasts of how much the price of gasoline and fuel oil Decontrol also should encourage will rise if President Ford vetoes what oil experts call secondary an extension of price controls on recovery. This means getting the domestic oil and his veto is sus- oil still left in the ground after the tained. use of conventional techniques. Some have predicted an immedi- Decontrol also should encourage The Philadelphia Inquires AUG 19 1975 The oil veto: no choice President Ford has now made it of- domestic oil prices which are con- ficial: "To help reduce dependence on trolled and, for the first time, a ceiling imports and stem the outflow of Amer- on those which were not. ican dollars and jobs; I will veto the Even that proved unacceptable on six-month extension of price controls Capitol Hill, where any sense of ur- P/Goled THE DENVER POST Wed., Aug. 20, 1975 Congress: Uphold Oil Veto cate such industries to return to the burning of President Ford's economic advisers expect an Increase of about three cents a gallon in gasoline coal. We cannot avoid scarcities in domestic crude prices over the next few months if price controls are killed. This is a small price to pay in return for production. We already have them-this country produces only about 65 per cent of its present getting increased domestic production. While a price freeze made sense following the supply. But the shortfall will be a lot worse if Arab oil boycott two years ago-as a means of Congress unwisely tries to keep prices unrealis- stabilizing the U.S. economy-federal action to tically low. Congress, therefore, should go along with keep prices unrealistically low is bad long-term President Ford's veto of the extension of price in Laty Editorials a Charleston Gas: W.Va. 8/20/75 New Economic Policy Nation's Only Salvation As an integral part of his energy pro- fair of Tristan and Isolde resemble a child- gram. President Ford will remove price hood romance. is forced to fuel the light controls on domestic oil. of his life with the lion's share of a twenty Congressional Democratic leaders are dollar bill. Mr. Ford's election bid next upset and predict that gasoline prices will year could be in terrible trouble. no mat- climb to 90 cents and higher a gallon. (Of ter how much bloodietting occurs among course. Democrats in Congress have had Democrats. seven months to develop an energy pro- The economy isn't bounding back Infla- gram. but vacations keep THE COLRIER-JOURNAL, WEDNESDAY, ALGUST 27, 1975 I AUG 29 Opinion U Oil veto would force Congress to act AS ECONOMICALLY RISKY and misunder- stood as it may be, President Ford should veto the congressional bill extending oil-price con- trols for another six months. Those controls, on two-thirds of the nation's domestic oil pro- duction, are now due to expire at midnight Sunday. To recommend that Mr. Ford veto extension August 30, 1975 MEMORANDUM FOR: MAX FRIEDERSDORF FRANK ZARB FROM: JACK MARSH I believe we should pull together as quickly as possible some information that will be helpful for our use and those who support the President's position on the Hill to discuss and explain the present situation, particularly the facts to support sustaining the President's vete. I realize there may be some changes on how the issue might develop because of the Mans- field/Albert meeting, but nevertheless I think it would serve a two-fold purpose. First, to be ready to sustain the veto if the proposal suggested by Mike goes sour. Secondly, to have the information available to support the decontrol plan that might be offered pursuant to the Mansfield offer. I would envision an information package that would consist of four separate parts: Part One -- background which would be both a history and chronology of the energy and the President's effort to address it. Part Two -- talking points which would be key, hard- sell, information bullets that support our position. Part Three -- questions about decontrol you wanted to know but were afraid to ask. This would be a Q&A section of the 25 questions that nearly always reoccur. Part Four -- collection of editorial comments on a nation- wide basis which supports the President's energy program. Margita White has pulled this material together. JOM/dl FORD & LIBRARY GRAVID decontrol August 30, 1975 MEMORANDUM FOR: MAX FRIEDERSDORF FROM: JACK MARSH Early on Tuesday I think it would be most helpful if Kendall and O'Donnell could firm up those question mark Senators we had such 88 Brock, Taft, Dole, Demenici, Thurmond, Baker, etc. JOM/dl FORD & LIBRARY decontrol August 30, 1975 MEMORANDUM FOR: MAX FRIEDERSDORF FRANK ZARB FROM: JACK MARSH I believe we should pull together as quickly as possible some information that will be helpful for our use and those who support the President's position on the Hill to discuss and explain the present situation, particularly the facts to support sustaining the President's vete. 1 realize there may be some changes on how the issue might develop because of the Mans- field/Albert meeting, but nevertheless 1 think it would serve a two-fold purpose. First, to be ready to sustain the veto if the proposal suggested by Mike goes sour. Secondly, to have the information available to support the decontrol plan that might be offered pursuant to the Mansfield effer. 1 would envision an information package that would consist of four separate parts: Part One -- background which would be both a history and chronology of the energy and the President's effort to address it. Part Two -- talking points which would be key, hard- sell, information bullets that support our position. Part Three -- questions about decontrol you wanted to know but were afraid to ask. This would be a Q&A section of the 25 questions that nearly always reoccur. Part Four -- collection of editorial comments on a nation- wide basis which supports the President's energy program. Margita White has pulled this material together. JOM/dl GERALD R. LIBBARY FORD August 30, 1975 MEMORANDUM FOR: MAX FRIEDERSDORF FROM: JACK MARSH In reference to the decontrol matter, I think it's very important that the President personally talk by phone with Russell Long. I think we can wait a day or so on his calling McClellan or East- land or other Democrats because they will want to wait to see what comes out of the meating Mike Mansfield is going to have Thursday. However, I think we should discuss with the President the possibility of having a meeting with John Rhodes and Hugh Scott in order to counter-part the meeting he had with Mansfield and Albert. You might feel it would be helpful to enlarge that meeting to include Griffin, Michel and perhaps one or two other Republicans. I think we should chat about that. JOM/dl FORD is LIBRARY 9.17839 Rowland Evans and Robert Novak WASH POST 8/31/25 Overriding an Oil Veto President Ford's unexpected delay asked Republican state chairman Rich- of his oil price control veto must be "Senators were inundated by constituent ard Richards of Utah to suggest a read against the background of a state fundraiser, he replied that his grass roots debacle for him during the August congressional recess: key sen- complaints-particularly among farmers-about conservative state was not Ford coun- try in the wake of the First Lady's re- ators defecting on oil price decontrol after talking to angry, inflation-con- any new gasoline price hikes." marks. scious constituents. Needless discourtesy by Gov. Ed- Calls from congressional head- conservative Republican Sen, Norris Ford's CBS interview Aug. 13 is re- mund G. Brown Jr. of California counters at the White House and the Cotton, who came out of retirement to flected in tabulated results of Albert toward a fellow governor may have Federal Energy Administration placed temporarily fill the vacancy created by Sindlinger's authoritative nationwide decided last Wednesday's 11 to 9 vote