Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
1554416
label
First Debate: Suggestions from Robert Hartmann
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
1554416
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
First Debate: Suggestions from Robert Hartmann
citationUrl
collections
White House Special Files Unit Files
Ford - Carter Debates Files
subjects
Campaign debates
Federal aid
Housing
Old age
Presidential campaign, 1976
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
1554416
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1976-09-30
month
9
year
1976
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1976-09-01
month
9
year
1976
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
443adb0c1a0d5ad4
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box 1, folder "First Debate: Suggestions from
Robert Hartmann" of the White House Special Files Unit 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 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States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.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.
Digitized from Box 1 of the White House Special Files Unit Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Sept. 25, 1976
TO: Trudy Fry
From Presidential
out box.
Cristy
THE PRESIDENT HAS SERN
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
September 23, 1976
MEMORANDUM TO THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
ROBERT T. HARTMANN
PSA
SUBJECT:
Debates
A number of friends have sent me suggestions and
material for your use in the debates. The most sig-
nificant of these materials are attached and are
self-explanatory.
Bud Brown called to remind you that no conference has
yet been called on revenue sharing extension which passed
the House, June 10, and the Senate, September 14. With-
out a bill all revenue sharing will expire December 31st.
States like Carter's depend on it and in many instances
their fiscal years have already begun and their budgets
are based on it. Bud says Democratic leaders in the
Congress like Phil Burton and Jack Brooks are blocking
it, and you should challenge the new champion of the
Democratic party to compel his Congress to act.
Bud also said that Democrats on his committee have urged
Carter to attack FEA for an administrative error which
permitted oil companies to overcharge consumers. I am
not completely clear about this, but he says FEA proposes
to forgive this rip-off and your position should be to
let the courts decide rather than FEA.
THE president HAS SEEN
September 22, 1976
4:30 p.m.
Mr. Hartmann:
Congressman Bob Wilson called with the following figures from
Rick Devins at the Department of Labor phone: 523-1944.
July 1966 total employed 72,860,000
total unemployed 2,876,000
unemployment rate: 3.8%
July 1976
total employed 87,907,000
total unemployed 7,426,000
unemployment rate: 7.8%
July 1966
total active duty military and civilian: 4,355,000
July 1976
total active duty military and civilian: 3,126,000
reduction in total military civilian defense department: 1,229,000
Cong. Wilson also asked about the answer to the Ford solicitation
letter.
Gail
THE PRESIDENT HAS SEEN
JOHN B. MARTIN
7607 GLENDALE ROAD
CHEVY CHASE, MARYLAND 20015
A. C. 301 652-6629
September 16, 1976
Mr. Robert T. Hartmann
Counselor to the President
The White House
Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear Bob:
I am writing to you in hope that I may be able to be
helpful to the President in this way.
The Republican platform provisions regarding older
Americans are the best we have ever had. The platform
contains a number of positions which should be of real
value to the President in attracting the attention and
support of our older population. As you know, these
number some 22 million persons 65 years of age and
older. They are all registered, and they all vote.
They are, in addition, well informed about the issues
and policies which affect them. If these issues could
be alluded to in remarks which the President makes
on an informal basis in the Rose Garden or informal
press conferences, I think they would have a great im-
pact around the country.
My comments on the part of the platform directly aimed
toward older Americans (which is attached) are as fol-
lows:
1) Inflation is unquestionably the greatest hardship
for older Americans. The basic necessities of life--
food, shelter, clothing and health care--have risen to
astronomic heights and older persons who live on fixed
incomes and spend a large part of their limited resources
on these items are, of course, most affected. This is
a subject which can be brought into almost any press
conference and can be dwelt on with great effect. The
President's efforts to curb inflation are, of course,
known but I think it is important to his comments that
he specifically point out the especially severe effect
which inflation has on the elderly, more than three
million of whom actually are living today below the
poverty line.
2
2) The platform devotes attention to the fact that,
although a gift to a charitable institution can be made
with beneficial deductions for the taxpayer, there has
been little or no incentive for younger people to help
care for their older relatives. It would certainly be
most helpful to many younger people if they were able
to obtain some income deduction or tax credit for caring
for their older family members. Such care may be costly
and a heavy burden on low budget families. They would
find it a desirable and useful thing to do if they
could afford such care. This would enable many older
people to remain in friendly home surroundings rather
than be forced into a nursing home.
3) Another matter which causes great dissatisfaction
among many older people is the fact that they cannot
draw social security benefits and develop small earn-
ings without being penalized for such work. After
earnings of $2,760 are reached, their social security
benefits are reduced $1 for each $2 of earnings. The
Republican platform is specific on this and indicates
that the party will work for an increase in the earned
income ceiling or its complete elimination so that, as
people live longer, there will not be the present
penalty on work. Many older people would welcome the
opportunity to contribute their talent and know-how
to the economy in exchange for a small increase in
income which most of them badly need. There is some-
thing morally wrong in putting obstacles in their way
to prevent them from working and earning additional
income to supplement their Social Security pensions
and, thus, maintain their standard of living.
4) Our Associations have for some time urged the
abolition of arbitrary mandatory retirement age
levels. The Age Discrimination in Employment Act
prohibits discrimination in government and private
employment between ages 40 and 65. By implication,
therefore, it permits discrimination at and over age
65. We have urged that the 65-year limit be removed
and that retirement be only on a case-by-case basis,
the test being the ability of the individual to carry
on the job in a satisfactory manner. The federal
government has a mandatory retirement age of 70, which
is much more realistic than the 65-year age limit
common in many corporations and other organizations.
The study which Louis Harris has done of the elderly
shows clearly that 85 percent of all people questioned
feel strongly that retirement should not be forced on
3
an arbitrary basis of chronological age, but should be
determined by the ability and willingness to do a com-
petent job. The present practice of forcing people
out of the labor force at age 65 stems from passage of
the Social Security Act, which sought to encourage
retirement to make more jobs for younger workers.
Mandatory retirement at 65 today recognizes neither
modern life expectancy nor continued ability to per-
form adequately.
Finally, the platform specifically refers to other
areas of concern in connection with the elderly and
stresses the need for increased attention to home health
care and outpatient care. This is a tremendously
attractive position because all tests have shown that
an overwhelming majority of older people want to remain
in their own homes, if it is in any way possible for
them to do SO. In order to enable them to do this,
provision needs to be made in the states and communi-
ties to enable them to be adequately fed and to have a
minimum of services, including doctor and nurse visits,
and assistance in household tasks, shopping, transpor-
tation and medical supplies and appliances. The
President would be touching upon a very sensitive
nerve in stressing his belief that home health care,
including social services as well as direct health
services, is the direction we should be moving in for
older people who would otherwise have to go to a
nursing home.
All of these matters are dealt with in the Republican
platform in very specific terms and would lend them-
selves to a repetition or reiteration by the President
with an indication of support which, I am sure from my
long experience with the older people of the country,
would have great appeal.
The polls have also shown that the portion of the
population over 50 years of age is inclined to lean
in the President's direction. This is an area where
the President has an initial advantage but where the
Democrats are now preparing to exercise a great deal
of pressure in an attempt to bring the older voter
over to their side. It is vitally important that the
President's interest in this very large group of
citizens be expressed in positive and specific terms.
4
If I can help in any way to clarify the issues in
this area, Bob, please give me a call.
Sincerely,
Jahn John B. Waster Martin
Enclosure
LIBRARY AFD
OLDER N BRICANS
EP: Our tax laws permit a deducti n to the taxpayer who gives a con-
tribution to a charitable institution that might care for an
elderly parent but offer little or no incentive to provide care
in the home. Incentives must be written into law to encourage
families to care for their older members.
We will work to make the Social Security system actuarially sound
The Social Security program must not be turned into a welfare
system based on need rather than contributions. The cost to
employers for Social Security contributions must not be raised
to the point where they will be unable to afford contributions
to employee private pension programs.
We will work for an increase in the earned income ceiling or
its elimination so that, as people live longer, there will not
be the present penalty on work. We will also seek to correct
those provisions of the system that now discriminate against
women and married couples.
We favor the abolition of arbitrary age levels for mandatory
retirement.
The Medicare program must be improved to control inflation and
health care costs triggered by present regulations.
Other areas of concern to the elderly that need increased atten-
tion are home and out-patient care, adequate transportation,
nutrition, day care, and homemaker care as an alternative to
costly institutional treatment.
DEM:
adequate income and health care for senior citizens are
basic federal government responsibilities.
health costs paid by senior citizens under the present
system must be reduced.
We believe that Medicare should be made available to Americans
abroad who are eligible for Social Security.
Democrats strongly support employment programs and the
liberalization of the allowable earnings limitation under Social
Security for older Americans who wish to continue working and
living as productive citizens. We will put an end to delay in
implementation of nutrition programs for the elderly and give
high priority to a transportation policy for senior citizens
under the Older Americans Act.
We pledge to enforce vigorously health and safety standards
for nursing homes and seek alternatives which allow senior citizens
where possible to remain in their own homes.
INFLATION
REP:
The number one destroyer of jobs is inflation.
It is above
all else deficit spending by the Federal Government which erodes
the purchasing power of the dollar.
2
Wage and price controls.
re always been a dismal failure.
The Republican Party strongl opposes any reimposition of such
controls.
The independence of the Federal System must be preserved.
DEM: Americans on fixed incomes, such as the elderly, are often
pushed into poverty by this cruel tax.
A comprehensive anti-inflation policy must be established to
assure relative price stability.
the Federal Reserve must be made a full partner in national
economic decisions and become responsive to the economic goals
of Congress and to the President.
EMPLOYMENT
REP: Massive federally funded public employment programs, such as
the Humphrey-Hawkins Bill.
will cost billions and can only
be financed either through very large tax increases or through
ever increasing levels of deficit spending. Sound job creation
can only be accomplished in the private sector of the economy.
Increased part-time and flexible-hour work should be encouraged
wherever feasible. In keeping with our belief in family life
we want to expand more opportunities for men and women to com-
bine family responsibilities and employment.
DEM: The Democratic Party is committed to the right of all adult
Americans willing, able and seeking work to have opportunities
for useful jobs at living wages
we pledge ourselves to the
support of legislation that will make every responsible effort
to reduce adult unemployment to 3 percent within 4 years.
Raising the pay standard for overtime work, additional hiring
of part-time persons and flexible work schedules will increase
the independence of workers and create additional job oppor-
tunities, especially for women.
HEALTH
REP: The Republican Party opposes compulsory national health insur-
ance [which] will increase federal government spending by more
than $70 billion in its first full year [and] require a per-
sonal income tax increase of approximately 20 percent.
We support extension of catastrophic illness protection to all
who cannot obtain it.
A coordinated effort should be mounted immediately to contain
the rapid increase in health care costs by all available means,
such as development of healthier life styles through education,
improved preventive care, better distribution of medical man-
power, emphasis on out-of-hospital services and elimination
of wasteful duplication of medical services.
DEM: We should experiment with new forms of medical care delivery
to mold a national health policy that will meet our needs in
a fiscally responsible manner.
We must shift our emphasis in both private and public health
care away from hospitalization and acute-care services to
preventive medicine and the early detection of the major
cripplers and killers of the American people.
We must have national health insurance with strong built-in
cost and quality controls.
Alternative approaches to health care delivery, based on pre-
payment financing, should be encouraged and developed.
CRIME AND LAW ENFORCEMENT
REP: The Federal Criminal Code should include automatic and manda-
tory minimum sentences for persons committing offenses under
Federal jurisdiction that involve the use of a dangerous weapon.
We support the right of citizens to keep and bear arms. We
oppose federal registration of fire arms.
DEM: We pledge equally vigorous prosecution and punishment for cor-
porate crime, consumer fraud and deception; programs to combat
child abuse and crimes against the élderly.
establishing adequate victim compensation programs.
Ways must be found to curtail the availability of [handguns].
The Democratic Party must provide the leadership for a coor-
dinated federal and state effort to strengthen the presently
inadequate controls over the manufacture assembly, distribu-
tion and posession of handguns and to ban Saturday night special
we support mandatory sentencing for individuals convicted
of committing a felony with a gun.
TAX REFORM
REP: As in 1972, we urge prompt passage of the Republican sponsored
legislation now pending in Congress which will increase the
estate tax exemption to $200,000, allow valuation of farm pro-
perty on a current use basis and provide for extension of the
time of payment in the case of farms and small businesses.
This overdue estate and gift tax legislation must be approved
this year. We favor a liberalized marital deduction and oppose
capital gains tax at death.
We support economic and tax policies to insure the necessary
job-producing expansion of our economy. These include hastening
capital recovery through new systems of accelerated depreciation,
removing the tax burden on equity financing to encourage more
capital investment, ending the unfair double taxation of divi-
dends, and supporting proposals to enhance the ability of our
working and other citizens to own 'a piece of the action' through
4
stock ownership. When balanced by expenditure reductions, the
personal exemption should be raised to $1,000.
DEM: We pledge the Democratic Party to a complete overhaul of the
present tax system, which will review all special tax provisions
to ensure that they are justified and distributed equitably
among our citizens.
We will overhaul federal estate and gift taxes to provide an
effective and equitable structure to promote tax justice and
alleviate some of the legitimate problems faced by farmers,
small business men and women and others who would otherwise
be forced to liquidate assets in order to pay the tax.
the Democratic Party's goal of redistributing the burden
of the social security tax by raising the wage base for earnings
subject to the tax with effective exemptions and deductions to
ease the impact on low income workers and two-earner families.
Further revision in the Social Security program will be required
so that women are treated as individuals.
WELFARE REFORM
REP: We oppose federalizing the welfare system.
We also oppose
the guaranteed annual income concept or any programs that
reduce the incentive to work.
DEM: We should move toward replacement of our existing inadequate
and wasteful system with a simplified system of income main-
tenance, substantially financed by the federal government, which
includes a requirement that those able to work be provided
with appropriate available jobs or job training opportunities.
ENERGY
REP: We must immediately eliminate price controls on oil and newly
discovered natural gas in order to increase supply.
We support accelerated use of nuclear energy through processes
that have been proven safe. Government research should be ex-
panded 'to perfect a long-term solution to the problems of nu-
clear waste.
We vigorously oppose.
divestiture of oil companies -- a move
which would surely result in higher energy costs, inefficiency
and under-capitalization of the industry.
DEM: We should narrow the gap between oil and natural gas prices with
new natural gas ceiling prices that maximize production and in-
vestment while protecting the economy and the consumer. Any
reforms in the pricing of new natural gas should not be at the
cost of severe economic dislocations that would accelerate in-
flation and increase unemployment.
We will provide new incentives for aiding individual homeowners,
particularly average income families and the poor in under-
taking conservation investments. We will support the reform of
utility rate structures and egulatory rules to encourage con-
servation and ease the utility rate burden on residential users,
farmers and other consumers who can least afford it; make more
efficient use of electrical generating capacity; and we will
aggressively pursue implementation of automobile efficiency
standards and appliance labeling programs already established
by Democratic initiative in the Energy Policy and Conservation Ac
ENVIRONMENT
REP: A clean and healthy natural environment is the rightful heritage
of every American. In order to preserve this heritage, we will
provide for proper development of resources, safeguards for
clean air and water, and protection and enhancement of our re-
creation and scenic areas.
Emphasis on environmental concerns must be brought into balance
with the needs for industrial and economic growth.
DEM:
the Democratic Party believes that a concern for the en-
vironment need not and must not stand in the way of a much-
needed policy of high economic growth.
We pledge to continue to work for additional laws to protec
restore and preserve the environment while providing still more
jobs.
HOUSING
REP: All of our citizens should be given the opportunity to live in
decent, affordable housing.
To meet the housing needs of this country there must be a con-
tinuous, stable and adequate flow of funds for the purpose of
real estate mortgages at realistic interest rates.
To continue to encourage home ownership, we support the de-
ductibility of interest on home mortgages and property taxes.
We favor the concept of federal revenue sharing and block grant:
to reduce the excessive burden of the property tax in financing
local government.
We are concerned with the excessive reliance of financing welfar
and public school costs primarily with the property tax.
DEM: We support the expansion of the highly successful programs of
direct federal subsidies to provide housing for the elderly.
To assist further in relieving both the fiscal and service de-
livery problems of states and local governments, the Democratic
Party reaffirms its support for general revenue sharing as a
base for the fiscal health of all levels of government, acknowl-
edging that the civil rights and citizens' participation pro-
visions must be strengthened.
Women, the elderly, single persons and minorities are still ex-
cluded from exercising their right to select shelter in the
6
areas of their choice, and many "high risk" communities are
systematically denied access to the capital they require.
The Democratic Party pledges itself to the aggressive
enforcement of the Fair Housing Act; to the promotion and
enforcement of equal opportunity in housing; and to the pur-
suit of new regulatory and incentive policies aimed at pro-
viding minority groups and women with equal access to mortgage
credit.
TRANSPORTATION
REP:
We support the concept of a surface transportation block grant
which would include the various highway and mass transit pro-
grams now in existence. This will provide local elected of-
ficials maximum flexibility in selecting and implementing the
balanced tranportation systems best suited to each locality.
It will encompass both capital and operating subsidies for
urban mass transit. It will eliminate red tape and over-
regulation.
DEM:
we will work to expand substantially the discretion avail-
able to states and cities in the use of federal transportation
money, for either operating expenses or capital programs, on
the modes of transportation which they choose.
We will change further the current restrictive limits on the
use of mass transit funds by urban and rural localities SO
that greater amounts can be used as operating subsidies.
CONSUMER PROTECTION
REP: We continue to support farmer cooperatives, including rural
electric and telephone cooperatives, in their efforts to
improve services to their members.
We need a comprehensive approach to plan, develop and imple-
ment a variety of programs which take into account the many
diverse needs of each neighborhood. The establishment of a
National Neighborhood Policy will signal a commitment in
the improvement of the quality of life in our neighborhoods.
DEM: We shall encourage consumer groups to establish and operate
consumer cooperatives that will enable consumers to provide
themselves market-place alternatives and to provide a competi-
tive spur to profit-oriented enterprises.
We support
federal standards for state no-fault insurance
programs.
We
support
full funding of neighborhood legal services
for the poor.
The Democratic Party is committed to
strengthening the
knowledge and bargaining power of consumers through government-
supported systems for developing objective product performance
standards; advertising and Tal eling requirements for the dis-
closure of essential consumer information; and efficient and
low-cost redress of consumer complaints including strengthened
small claims courts, informal dispute settlement mechanisms,
and consumer class actions.
EDUCATION
REP: We propose consolidating federal categorical grant programs
into block grants and turning the money over to the states
to use in accordance with their own needs and priorities and
with minimum bureaucratic controls.
DEM: The Party commits itself to support of adult education and
training which will provide skills upgrading.
In higher education, our Party is strongly committed to ex-
tending postsecondary opportunities for students from low-
and middle-income families, including older students and student
who can attend only part-time.
CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS
REP:
Major changes
are needed to maintain the confidentiality
of tax returns and Social Security records.
There must be vigorous enforcement of laws to assure equal
treatment in job recruitment, hiring, promotion, pay, credit,
mortgage access and housing.
Women, who comprise a numerical majority of the population,
have been denied a just portion of our nation's rights and
opportunities. We reaffirm our pledge to work to eliminate
discrimination in all areas for reason of race, color, national
origin, age, creed or sex and to enforce vigorously laws guar-
anteeing women equal rights.
DEM:
We must insure that all citizens are treated equally be-
fore the law and given the opportunity regardless of race, color
sex, religion, age, language or national origin, to participate
fully in the economic, social and political processes and to
vindicate their legal and constitutional rights.
We are committed to full implementation and enforcement of
the Equal Credit Opportunity Act.
RURAL AMERICA
REP: Rural America must be maintained as a rewarding place to live.
To accomplish this, our rural areas are entitled to services
comparable to their urban neighbors, such as water and sewage
systems, improved electricity and telephone service, adequate
transportation, available and adequate financial credit, and
employment opportunities which will allow small farmers to
supplement their incomes.
DEM: - While it is bad enough to be I or, or old, or alone in the
city, it is worse in the count cy. We are therefore committed
to overcome the problems of rural as well as urban isolation
and poverty by insuring the existence of adequate educational
opportunity and needed transportation throughout rural America.
We believe that transportation dollars should be available
in a manner to permit their flexible use. In rural areas this
means they could be used for such needs as secondary road im-
provement, taxi systems, buses, or other systems to overcome
the problems of widely dispersed populations, to facilitate
provisions of social services and to assure access of citizens
to meet human needs.
THE PRESIDENT HAS SEEN
DEPARTMENT
%
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
U.S.
*
HOUSING
THE SECRETARY
AND
September 21, 1976
www.n
Robert Hartman
TO
:
Counselor to the President
FROM: Carla A. Hills
Attached are two additional questions
and answers which concern allegations
recently made by Mr. Carter.
They may be useful to the President
in preparing for the upcoming debate.
LICRARY
Q.
Isn't the home ownership proposal you made at Ann Arbor,
Michigan, similar to the bill you vetoed last year to provide
subsidies for homeowners?
Background. Carter has charged the proposal offered by "Candidate"
Ford is like the one vetoed earlier by "President" Ford. The
lead editorial in the Sunday New York Times picked up the charge
as follows:
The President's most specific proposal was for legislation
to aid "every American family that wants to own a home and
is willing to work and save for it." To that end, Mr. Ford
called for subsidies that would substantially reduce the
required down payments on homes. But as was the case with
his earlier promise to expand the nation's public parkland,
the new proposal by candidate Ford seemed to ignore President
Ford's negative action in the very area in which he now
promised positive movement. Specifically, the President last
year vetoed a measure to reduce home-buyers' mortgage rates,
subsequently giving his approval only after Congress came
back with a less generous subsidy.
1.
My homeownership proposal does not call for new subsidies.
It lowers the FHA downpayment and permits graduated mortgage
payments which would allow lower monthly payments in the
early mortgage years when the earnings of homebuyers,
particularly the young, are not as great as can be expected
later. When statutory changes are obtained, these proposals
should expand opportunities for home ownership.
2.
The Emergency Housing bill which I vetoed in 1975 would have
required taxpayers to subsidize mortgage interest payments
above 6%.
FORD LIBRARY is
3.
That bill, which Mr. Carter now says I should have signed,
was labeled "a turkey that won't fly" by Lud Ashley, the
Democratic Congressman who subsequently was named by his
colleagues as Chairman of the Housing Subcommittee of the
House Committee on Banking, Currency and Housing. He voted
to sustain the veto. That veto was also supported by the
most distinguished member of the Subcommittee, Bob Stephens,
from Mr. Carter's home State of Georgia, and it was supported
by many other Democrats including Congressman Tom Rees of
California, another member of the Housing Subcommittee.
4.
If the bill which Mr. Carter now says I should have signed,
had become law, families who bought a home prior to its
enactment of that bill at a higher interest rate, say 9%,
would now be subsidizing their neighbor's montly payment
even though their neighbor's income was identical or even
higher.
5.
What happened after that veto was sustained? Within 24 hours
a new bill incorporating my suggestions for expanding the
Ginnie Mae Tandem program was introduced and passed before
the week was over. It had the added benefit of avoiding the
certain delays inherent in developing and implementing new
regulations, and adding yet another layer of bureaucracy.
6.
What has happened since? The rate of inflation has been
halved for which at least some credit must be given to
vetoing that "turkey that wouldn't fly," and the rate of
new home starts has risen dramatically.
Q.
Carter, both in his Housing Issues Paper and in a prepared
speech given in Brooklyn in early September, charged that
more than 200 officials of HUD have been convicted for
bribing or corruption. Is this true?
A.
There have been a total of 57 convictions of HUD employees
since HUD's formation ten years ago, and only one was for
an infraction that occurred after August 9, 1974, the date
I took office.
I am not happy with one conviction, and I have demanded
integrity of our Federal employees.
I believe that the vast majority have responded with earnest
hard work.
It is unfair to them to use false statistics and gross
exaggerations.
UNIVERSITY
or
MOUSING
*
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
!
OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20410
September 21, 1976
PHONE
FROM: Sm Sol Mosher
755-7380
TO:
Bob Hartmann
Bob,
The attached is being furnished by the
Secretary's Office through usual White House
channels for Debate use. I hope you can take
time to read it, because I believe it can be
used in discussions of vetoes even if this
particular question is never asked. It should
afford Mr. Carter a great deal of embarrassment.
Attachment
"The Turkey That Won't Fly"
Q. Isn't the home ownership proposal you made at Ann Arbor, Michigan,
similar to the bill you vetoed last year to provide subsidies for
homeowners?
Background. Carter has charged the proposal offered by "Candidate" Ford
is like the one vetoed earlier by "President" Ford. The lead editorial
in the Sunday New York Times picked up the charge as follows:
The President's most specific proposal was for legislation
to aid "every American family that wants to own a home and
is willing to work and save for it." To that end, Mr. Ford
called for subsidies that would substantially reduce the
required down payments on homes. But as was the case with
his earlier promise to expand the nation's public parkland,
the new proposal by candidate Ford seemed to ignore President
Ford's negative action in the very area in which he now
promised positive movement. Specifically, the President last
year vetoed a measure to reduce home-buyers' mortgage rates,
subsequently giving his approval only after Congress came
back with a less generous subsidy.
1. Homeownership proposal does not call for new subsidies as portrayed by
Carter. Provides lowering of FHA downpayment, and graduated mortgage
payments which would permit lower monthly payments in first years of
young homebuyers when their earnings are not as great as can be
expected later. When statutory changes are obtained these proposals
should give a boost to both the goal of home ownership and annual housing
starts which are already trending upwards in dramatic fashion.
2. The Emergency Housing bill which I vetoed in 1975 would have required
taxpayers to subsidize mortgage interest payments above 6%, a rate
below the rate at which some of our strongest homebuilding years occurred.
- 2 -
3. The bill which Mr. Carter now says I should have signed in 1975 was
Lud Ashley
labeled "a turkey that won't fly" by the Democratic Congressman who
subsequently was named by his colleagues as Chairman of the Housing
Subcommittee of the House Committee on Banking, Currency and Housing.
He voted to sustain the veto. That veto was also supported by the
most distinguished member of the Subcommittee, Bob Stephens, from
Mr. Carter's home State of Georgia, and indeed by many members of the
Georgia delegation. It was supported by many other Democrats includ-
ing Congressman Tom Rees of California, another member of the Housing
Subcommittee. I think it took great courage on the part of these
members and others to vote their convictions on a bad bill and not
follow the advice of their party leadership in seeking out a needless
confrontation.
4. If the bill which Mr. Carter now says I should have signed, had become
law, you would have a situation today where families who bought a home
prior to enactment of that bill at a higher interest rate, say 7%, would
be subsidizing his neighbor's monthly payment even though their income
was identical. He might even be earning more money than his neighbor
who was getting no subsidy.
5. Now what happened after that veto was sustained? Within 24 hours
a new bill incorporating my suggestions for expanding the Ginnie Mae
Tandem program was introduced and passed before the week was over.
- 3 -
It had the added benefit of avoiding the certain delays inherent in
developing and implementing new regulations, and adding yet another
layer of bureaucracy.
6. What has happened since? The rate of inflation has been halved for
which at least some credit must be given to vetoing that "turkey that
wouldn't fly," and the rate of new home starts has risen dramatically.
7. Perhaps when this debate is over, Mr. Carter ought to consider
debating some of the members of his party who supported the veto and
learn from them why it was bad legislation.
THE PRESIDENT HAS SKEN
JOHN REAGAN McCRARY
161 EAST 61st STREET
NEW YORK 21, NEW YORK
N McCRARY
Dear Bob
hastily.
nobody but you seems to understand how
important words are in this boob-tube age. As I once explained
to Bill Safire, "the only time Nixon ever got a quote in a banner
line was when be said, 'I am not a crook'."
And Nixon is the only President who never made "Bartlett's
Familian Quotations".
Your guy has scored with "Truth is the glue" - but he's
had to use it three times, and each time it sounds better.
but
how about using this one in the wake of Jimmy Carter wallowing
in FOR's Warm Springs:
"The only thing we have to fear.
is
the
Rean.
of being
fooled. again."
That takes care of Carten, and Nixan, and underscored their
similarities.
One more suggestion: How dong since you Read Lillian
Hellman's Little Foxes"? Read it again. you'll recognize Jimmy
Carten in Ben Hubband.
Send all your Media friends, and foes, copies.
And stay well, stay winner.
Tex