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
4526362
label
West Coast Purchasing Management Association, Tampa, FL, May 8, 1971
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
4526362
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
West Coast Purchasing Management Association, Tampa, FL, May 8, 1971
citationUrl
collections
Gerald R. Ford Congressional Papers
Speeches
subjects
Economics
Middle East conflicts
Revenue sharing
Vietnam War, 1961-1975
iiifBase
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
4526362
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1971-05-31
month
5
year
1971
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1971-05-01
month
5
year
1971
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
url
mediaId
6c8d2e4da5f4ff48
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box D31, folder "West Coast Purchasing
Management Association, Tampa, FL, May 8, 1971" of the Ford Congressional Papers:
Press Secretary and Speech File 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. The Council 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States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.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 D31 of the Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech File at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
WEST COAST PURCHASING MANAGEMENT ASSOC.
TAMPA, FLORIDA, 5:30 P.M. SATURDAY,
MAY 8, 1971.
IT IS A PLEASURE TO BE HERE WITH
YOU. TODAY I WOULD LIKE TO TALK WITH YOU
ABOUT CHANGE -- THE CHALLENGES OF CHANGE
IN THE SEVENTIES.
WE ALL KNOW THAT MEN MUST BE
CHALLENGED TO STRIVE MIGHTILY AND TO ACHIEVE
LOFTY GOALS. WE KNOW THAT CHANGE IS THE
ESSENCE OF PROGRESS, THAT CHANGE REQUIRES
CHALLENGE, AND THAT CHALLENGE INVOLVES THE
CLASH OF DIFFERING IDEAS.
THIS IS THE KIND OF TIME WE ARE
LIVING IN -- A TIME OF CHALLENGE, A TIME OF
CHANGE, A TIME WHEN DIFFERENT IDEAS ARE
COLLIDING.
WE MEET IN EXCITING -- AND TRYING
TIMES. THESE ARE TIMES WHEN MOMENTOUS
-2-
DECISIONS MUST BE MADE -- DECISIONS TODAY
WHICH WILL DETERMINE THE QUALITY OF OUR
LIVES TOMORROW.
IT IS A TIME FOR A REALISTIC
ASSESSMENT OF OUR PROBLEMS -- A TIME FOR A
RESOLVE TO SOLVE THOSE PROBLEMS AS QUICKLY
AND EXPERTLY AS CIRCUMSTANCE WILL PERMIT.
IT IS A TIME FOR POSITIVE ACTION,
FOR LEADERSHIP, FOR CREATIVITY, AND FOR
BOLDNESS.
THE CHALLENGE OF OUR TIMES IS TO
CONFRONT THE GREAT PROBLEMS AND TO EMPLOY
THE AMERICAN GENIUS AND THE SPIRIT OF
ENTHUSIASM NEEDED TO OVERCOME THEM.
HOW ARE WE TO DO THIS? THERE
MUST BE CREATED WITHIN OUR COUNTRY A NEW
FEELING OF COMMON PURPOSE -- A RESOLVE WHICH
WILL PRODUCE TWO-WAY COOPERATION BETWEEN
GOVERNMENT AND THE PEOPLE, A WORKING TOGETHER
-3-
OF ONE WITH THE OTHER TOWARD NEEDED
SOLUTIONS.
I WILL TALK WITH YOU TODAY ABOUT
A NUMBER OF CHALLENGES -- THE CHALLENGE OF
MILITANT COMMUNISM IN THE MIDDLE EAST AND
INDOCHINA AND THE SEARCH FOR PEACE, THE
CHALLENGE POSED BY THE ECONOMY, WHERE WE
MUST WRESTLE WITH THE HANGOVER FROM THE
INFLATIONARY BINGE OF THE LATE 1960's WHILE
MAKING A TRANSITION FROM WARTIME TO
PEACETIME, AND THE CHALLENGE OF GOVERNMENTAL
REFORM, WHERE WE MUST RESTRUCTURE THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SO IT BECOMES THE
SERVANT AND NOT THE MASTER OF THE PEOPLE.
I SPEAK FIRST ABOUT THE MIDDLE
EAST -- BECAUSE WHILE IT IS VIETNAM WHICH
HAS TORN THIS NATION APART AND RAVAGED ITS
SOUL IT IS IN THE MIDDLE EAST THAT THE
DANGER OF WORLD WAR III IS THE GREATEST.
-4-
IT IS THERE THAT WE HAVE MOST TO FEAR A
HEAD-ON COLLISION WITH THE OTHER NUCLEAR
SUPER-POWER, THE SOVIET UNION.
WE WORK CEASELESSLY FOR PEACE IN
THE MIDDLE EAST, BUT ALL THE TIME WE MUST
BE AWARE THAT THE SOVIET UNION HAS EMBARKED
ON A DRIVE TO TURN THE MEDITERRANEAN INTO
A RED SEA, UNDERMINE THE SOUTHERN FLANK
OF NATO, AND EXPAND RUSSIAN INFLUENCE ACROSS
AFRICA FROM THE INDIAN OCEAN TO THE SOUTH
ATLANTIC.
IF WE WERE TO ALLOW THE SOVIET
UNION TO CRUSH ISRAEL INDIRECTLY., THROUGH
THE WEAPONS THE SOVIETS HAVE PLACED IN
EGYPTIAN HANDS, THIS WOULD MEAN THE END OF
HOPE FOR ALL FREE NATIONS OF THE
MEDITERRANEAN AND EVEN WESTERN EUROPE. IT
WOULD GIVE THE SOVIET UNION DOMINANCE
THROUGHOUT THE MIDDLE EAST -- THROUGHOUT
-5-
THE ENTIRE MEDITERRANEAN AREA. WE WILL NOT
LET THAT HAPPEN.
THE SITUATION IN THE MIDDLE EAST
IS MOST COMPLEX. THERE WILL BE NO
SETTLEMENT UNTIL BOTH SIDES ARE PREPARED
TO MAKE SOME SACRIFICES.
THE ADMINISTRATION LAST AUGUST
PUT FORWARD THE INITIATIVE WHICH RESULTED
IN A CEASE-FIRE -- NOW ONLY A DE FACTO
CEASE FIRE. SOME PROGRESS HAS BEEN MADE
THROUGH INDIRECT NEGOTIATIONS. THIS GIVES
US REASON TO HOPE.
THERE ARE THOSE WHO ARE INCLINED
TO CONDEMN THE ISRAELIS FOR REFUSING TO
PULL BACK TO THEIR PREWAR BOUNDARIES.
PERSONALLY, IN VIEW OF PAST HISTORY, I
FIND ISRAEL'S ATTITUDE COMPLETELY
UNDERSTANDABLE. A NATION WHICH IS
CONFRONTED BY HOSTILE POWERS BACKED BY
-6-
THE MILITARY MIGHT OF THE SOVIET UNION
CANNOT BE BLAMED FOR SEEKING SECURE AND
DEFENSIBLE BORDERS.
WHILE WE SEEK TO ACHIEVE A
SETTLEMENT OF THE MIDDLE EAST CONFLICT,
WE CONTINUE TO RESIST COMMUNIST
AGGRESSION IN SOUTHEAST ASIA AND TO WORK
FOR PEACE IN THAT WAR-TORN REGION OF THE
WORLD.
WE HAVE DRAWN OUR FORCES IN
VIETNAM DOWN FROM AN AUTHORIZED STRENGTH
OF 549,500 MEN TO 270,000 -- AND WE WILL
BE DOWN TO 184,000 OR LESS BY NEXT
DECEMBER 1.
OUR GOAL IN VIETNAM IS TO MAKE
IT POSSIBLE FOR THE SOUTH VIETNAMESE TO
DETERMINE THEIR OWN FUTURE.
WE HAVE MOVED CONSIDERABLY CLOSER
TO THAT GOAL. PROSPECTS ARE GOOD THAT WE
-7-
WILL ACHIEVE IT.
ANYONE WHO WANTS TO SEE THE SOUTH
VIETNAMESE GOVERNMENT GAIN THE UPPER HAND
AGAINST THE COMMUNISTS CANNOT HELP BUT BE
HEARTENED BY THE PROGRESS WE HAVE MADE.
AS FOR THOSE WHO SHOUT "PULLOUT
NOW, THEY WOULD WRITE OFF COMPLETELY THE
INVESTMENT WE HAVE MADE IN SOUTHEAST ASIA
TOWARD A FULL GENERATION OF PEACE. THEY
WOULD THROW IN THE TOWEL AT THE VERY MOMENT
WHEN SUCCESS IS IN SIGHT. THEY WOULD
CAPITULATE JUST WHEN OUR OBJECTIVE IS
NEAR AT HAND.
WE ARE WITHDRAWING FROM VIETNAM
IN ACCORDANCE WITH A CAREFULLY THOUGHT OUT
PLAN. THE PRESIDENT HAS DRAWN OUR FORCES
IN VIETNAM DOWN BY 270,000 MEN -- AND THE
WITHDRAWALS WILL CONTINUE AT A FASTER PACE.
IT MATTERS VERY MUCH HOW WE END
-8-
OUR INVOLVEMENT IN THE VIETNAM WAR. IT IS
EASY TO HAVE PEACE SIMPLY BY SAYING TO THE
ENEMY, "IT'S ALL YOURS." I SAY WE SHOULD
END OUR INVOLVEMENT IN VIETNAM IN A WAY
THAT STEMS THE COMMUNIST TIDE IN SOUTHEAST
ASIA. AND THAT IS WHAT WE ARE DOING
I LOOK FORWARD TO SALUTING A
VIABLE AND INDEPENDENT SOUTH VIETNAM.
OUR WITHDRAWAL FROM VIETNAM IS,
OF COURSE, HAVING A TREMENDOUS IMPACT ON
OUR ECONOMY.
WE HAVE CUT VIETNAM SPENDING IN
HALF -- AND WE HAVE DELIBERATELY COOLED OFF
THE ECONOMY TO BRING INFLATION UNDER CONTROL.
NOW THE NEED IS TO STIMULATE
THE ECONOMY. UNEMPLOYMENT IS TOO HIGH.
HOWEVER, LET ME POINT OUT THAT IT WAS LOWER
IN 1970 AT 4.9 PER CENT THAN FOR ANY OF THE
YEARS 1960 THROUGH 1964. IT WAS NOT UNTIL
-9-
1965 WHEN THE PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATION SHARPLY
ESCALATED OUR COMMITMENT TO THE VIETNAM
WAR AND CONTINUED TO ESCALATE IT THAT
UNEMPLOYMENT FELL BELOW 5 PER CENT.
THE NIXON ADMINISTRATION IS
GETTING OUT OF VIETNAM AND MAKING A
TRANSITION TO A PEACETIME ECONOMY.
UNEMPLOYMENT HAS RESULTED AS WE
HAVE FOUGHT INFLATION AND MOVED FROM A
WARTIME TO A PEACETIME ECONOMY. THE
PROBLEMS WERE EVEN TOUGHER THAN THE
ADMINISTRATION ANTICIPATED. BUT NOW THE
ECONOMY IS IMPROVING. THERE ARE MOST
ENCOURAGING SIGNS OF AN ECONOMIC UPTURN.
ALL WE NEED NOW TO GIVE THE ECONOMY
A STRONG PUSH IS AN UPSURGE OF CONSUMER
CONFIDENCE
IT IS ONLY A MATTER OF TIME BEFORE
THE ECONOMY PICKS UP APPRECIABLY. THIS IS
-10-
BOUND TO OCCUR BECAUSE BOTH OUR FISCAL AND
MONETARY POLICIES ARE EXPANSIONARY. THE
MONEY SUPPLY, INCLUDING TIME DEPOSITS, IS
EXPANDING AT A RATE UNPRECEDENTED IN
20 YEARS. AND WHILE FEDERAL SPENDING IS
RISING ONLY MODERATELY, THE PRESIDENT HAS
PROPOSED AN EXPANSIONARY BUDGET FOR FISCAL
1972 WHICH CALLS FOR FEDERAL SPENDING BASED
ON FULL EMPLOYMENT REVENUE LEVELS.
I PREDICT THE ECONOMY WILL GROW
BY 8 PER CENT IN 1971, WITH ABOUT 4 PER CENT
OF THIS IN REAL GROWTH AND THE REST ACCOUNTED
FOR BY PRICE INFLATION.
I FURTHER PREDICT THAT AUTO SALES
WILL RUN CLOSE TO 10 MILLION THIS YEAR AND
THAT HOUSING STARTS WILL TOTAL AT LEAST
1.8 MILLION NATIONALLY.
THERE IS ANOTHER GREAT CHALLENGE
IN ADDITION TO REVITALIZING OUR ECONOMY --
-11-
ONE THAT IS PERHAPS MORE DIFFICULT TO MEET.
I SPEAK OF PROVIDING ALL OF OUR
CITIZENS WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO
PARTICIPATE IN AMERICAN SOCIETY AND IN
THE SHAPING OF GOVERNMENTAL DECISIONS
AFFECTING THEIR LIVES.
THIS IS A CHALLENGE WHICH
ECLIPSES ALL OTHERS.
IT IS CENTRAL TO OUR
FUTURE AS A NATION.
IT IS BASIC TO OUR
GROWTH AS A PEOPLE. IT GOES TO OUR
PHILOSOPHY OF GOVERNMENT AND TOUCHES THE
LIVES OF EVERY ONE OF US.
THE CHALLENGE IS WHETHER ANY MAN,
WOMAN OR CHILD REALLY COUNTS IN AMERICA
ANYMORE -- WHETHER THE SYSTEM HAS BECOME
MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE INDIVIDUAL -- WHETHER
WE HAVE ALL BECOME JUST DIGITS CRANKED INTO
A COMPUTER OPERATED BY A FACELESS
BUREAUCRACY.
-12-
THERE IS A WAY TO CONTROL THE VAST
FEDERAL BUREAUCRACY.
THE ANSWER IS "FEDERAL REVENUE
SHARING." IT IS AN IDEA WHOSE TIME HAS
COME.
I TALK ABOUT REVENUE SHARING NOT
IN A PARTISAN VEIN. THERE ARE DEMOCRATS WHO
SUPPORT IT, AS WELL AS SOME WHO OPPOSE IT.
LET'S LOOK AT REVENUE SHARING FROM
THE STANDPOINT OF POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY.
REVENUE SHARING IS BASED ON THE
CONCEPT THAT THAT GOVERNMENT IS BEST WHICH
IS CLOSEST TO THE PEOPLE.
WHAT IS THE PRESIDENT ASKING?
HE IS ASKING THE CONGRESS TO APPROPRIATE
$5 BILLION TO BE SHARED BY THE STATES AND
CITIES WITH NO STRINGS ATTACHED. THIS
COMES UNDER THE HEADING OF GENERAL REVENUE
SHARING. HE IS ALSO ASKING THE CONGRESS
-13-
TO TAKE ABOUT 130 CATEGORICAL GRANT-IN-AID
PROGRAMS, LUMP THEM TOGETHER UNDER SIX
GENERAL PURPOSE HEADINGS OF EDUCATION,
URBAN DEVELOPMENT, RURAL DEVELOPMENT,
TRANSPORTATION, JOB TRAINING AND LAW
ENFORCEMENT AND LET THE STATES AND CITIES
DECIDE HOW TO PURSUE THEIR PRIORITIES UNDER
THOSE BROAD PURPOSES.
WHAT THE PRESIDENT IS SAYING
IS GIVE STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT A
CHANCE. LET'S TRANSFER TO THE LOCAL
POLITICAL ARENA HUNDREDS OF DECISIONS NOW
BEING MADE IN WASHINGTON OR THE
ADMINISTRATION'S REGIONAL OFFICES.
TODAY WE ARE LIVING THROUGH A
CRISIS WHICH HAS SO SLOWED THE WHEELS OF
SOCIAL PROGRESS AS TO CREATE A KIND OF
PARALYSIS, A PARALYSIS OF MUSCLEBOUND
-14-
GOVERNMENT WITH TOO MUCH POWER AND MONEY
IN THE HANDS OF THE FEDERAL BUREAUCRACY.
PRESIDENT NIXON HAS POINTED TO A
WAY OUT OF THIS CRISIS -- A WAY TO PROVE
THAT GOVERNMENT CAN WORK
IT CAN BE DONE BY BRINGING
GOVERNMENT BACK TO THE PEOPLE -- BY MAKING
AN INVESTMENT IN THE LOCAL POLITICAL
PROCESS THROUGH FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING.
STATUS QUO GOVERNMENT CANNOT BE ACCEPTED.
AS TIMES CHANGE, WE MUST REFORM GOVERNMENT --
SO THAT INSTEAD OF SLIDING FURTHER INTO
MUSCLEBOUND INEFFECTIVENESS IT AT LAST CAN
DELIVER THE SERVICES IT PROMISES AND BRIDGE
THEGAP BETWEEN PROMISE AND PERFORMANCE.
WHILE THE GOVERNMENT IN WASHINGTON
HAS BECOME MUSCLEBOUND, STATE AND LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS HAVE BEEN STRUGGLING WITH
PROBLEMS THE BUREAUCRATS CAN'T SOLVE.
-15-
AND THE COST OF STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT
HAS SKYROCKETED.
STATE AND LOCAL SPENDING HAS
JUMPED 372 PER CENT FROM 1950 THROUGH
1969 -- FROM $28 BILLION TO $132 BILLION.
STATE AND LOCAL TAXES,
PER CAPITA, HAVE SPIRALED FROM $105 IN 1950
TO $380 IN 1969, AN INCREASE OF 262 PER CENT.
STATES HAVE INCREASED MAJOR TAXES
300 TIMES DURING THE LAST DECADE.
IN THE LAST TWO DECADES FEDERAL
AID TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS HAS
RISEN FROM $2.5 BILLION TO OVER $30 BILLION.
AT THE SAME TIME THE FEDERAL
CATEGORICAL GRANTS-IN-AID SYSTEM HAS
DEVELOPED MORE THAN 500 DIFFERENT SPIGOTS,
MANNED BY THOUSANDS OF ADMINISTRATORS
OPERATING IN A JUNGLE OF REGULATIONS.
HOW DO WE ESCAPE FROM THIS
JUNGLE? HOW DO WE PUT THE MONEY WHERE THE
-16-
PROBLEMS ARE? HOW DO WE HOLD DOWN THE
PRESSURES FOR STATE AND LOCAL TAX
INCREASES?
THE ANSWER IS THE PRESIDENT'S
PROGRAM OF FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING.
THERE IS OPPOSITION TO REVENUE
SHARING. BUT WHAT MAN HAS MADE, MAN CAN
CHANGE AND WE MUST HAVE THE COURAGE TO
CHANGE WHAT SHOULD BE CHANGED.
MONEY IS POWER. MOVING MONEY BACK
TO THE STATES AND CITIES MEANS A FLOW OF
POWER BACK TO THE PEOPLE. THIS IS WHERE
THE POWER BELONGS.
EVERY INDIVIDUAL WANTS TO COUNT
FOR SOMETHING. UNDER THE REVENUE - SHARING
PHILOSOPHY OF GOVERNMENT, HE CAN
WE MUST THINK IN TERMS OF PEOPLE,
NOT JUST PROGRAMS. WE MUST REPLACE
COMPUTERS WITH COMPASSION.
-17-
ABRAHAM LINCOLN SAID, "THIS
COUNTRY, WITH ITS INSTITUTIONS, BELONGS TO
THE PEOPLE WHO INHABIT IT."
LET'S MAKE THIS COUNTRY BELONG TO
THE PEOPLE AGAIN. LET'S GIVE THE INDIVIDUAL
THE FEELING OF DETERMINING HIS OWN DESTINY,
OF BEING ABLE TO MAKE THINGS HAPPEN.
THIS IS OLD POLITICS. THIS IS
NEW POLITICS. THIS IS THE SHAPE OF
THINGS TO COME. THIS IS THE RIGHT RESPONSE
TO THE GREATEST CHALLENGE OF THE SEVENTIES.
THIS IS THE WAY TO BUILD A NEW AND GREATER
AMERICA.
--END--
Distribution 20 copus of mr. Ford
office Copy
AN ADDRESS BY REP. GERA.D R. FORD, R-MICH.
REPUBLICAN LEADER, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
BEFORE THE WEST COAST PURCHASING MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION
TAMPA, FLORIDA
5:30 P.M. SATURDAY, MAY 8, 1971
FOR RELEASE ON DELIVERY
It is a pleasure to be here with you. Today I would like to talk with you
about change--the Challenges of Change in the Seventies.
We all know that men must be challenged to strive mightily and to achieve
lofty goals. We know that change is the essence of progress, that change requires
challenge, and that challenge involves the clash of differing ideas.
This is the kind of time we are living in--a time of challenge, a time of
change, a time when different ideas are colliding.
We meet in exciting--and trying times. These are times when momentous
decisions must be made--decisions today which will determine the quality of our
lives tomorrow.
It is a time for a realistic assessment of our problems--a time for a
resolve to solve those problems as quickly and expertly as circumstance will permit.
It is a time for positive action, for leadership, for creativity, and for
boldness.
The challenge of our times is to confront the great problems and to employ
the American genius and the spirit of enthusiasm needed to overcome them.
How are we to do this? There must be created within our country a new
feeling of common purpose--a resolve which will produce two-way cooperation
between government and the people, a working together of one with the other toward
needed solutions.
I will talk with you today about a number of challenges--the challenge of
militant Communism in the Middle East and Indochina and the search for peace; the
challenge posed by the economy, where we must wrestle with the hangover from the
inflationary binge of the late 1960s while making a transition from wartime to
peacetime; and the challenge of governmental reform, where we must restructure the
Federal government so it becomes the servant and not the master of the people.
I speak first about the Middle East--because while it is Vietnam which has
torn this Nation apart and ravaged its soul it is in the Middle East that the danger
(more)
GERALD LIBRARY
-2-
of World War III is the greatest. It is there that we have most to fear a head-on
collision with the other nuclear super-power, the Soviet Union.
We work ceaselessly for peace in the Middle East, but all the time we must
be aware that the Soviet Union has embarked on a drive to turn the Mediterranean into
a red sea, undermine the southern flank of NATO, and expand Russian influence across
Africa from the Indian Ocean to the South Atlantic.
If we were to allow the Soviet Union to crush Israel indirectly, through
the weapons the Soviets have placed in Egyptian hands, this would mean the end of
hope for all free nations of the Mediterranean and even western Europe. It would
give the Soviet Union dominance throughout the Middle East throughout the entire
Mediterranean area. We will not let that happen.
The situation in the Middle East is most complex. There will be no settle-
ment until both sides are prepared to make some sacrifices.
The Administration last August put forward the initiative which resulted in
a cease-fire--now only a de facto cease fire. Some progress has been made through
indirect negotiations. This gives us reason to hope.
There are those who are inclined to condemn the Israelis for refusing to pull
back to their prewar boundaries. Personally, in view of past history, I find
Israel's attitude completely understandable. A nation which is confronted by
hostile powers backed by the military might of the Soviet Union cannot be blamed
for seeking secure and defensible borders.
While we seek to achieve a settlement of the Middle East conflict, we
continue to resist Communist aggression in Southeast Asia and to work for peace in
that war-torn region of the world.
We have drawn our forces in Vietnam down from an authorized strength of
549,500 men to 270,000--and we will be down to 184,000 or less by next Dec. 1.
Our goal in Vietnam is to make it possible for the South Vietnamese to
determine their own future.
We have moved considerably closer to that goal. Prospects are good that
we will achieve it.
Anyone who wants to see the South Vietnamese government gain the upper hand
against the Communists cannot help but be heartened by the progress we have made.
As for those who shout "pullout now," they would write off completely the
investment we have made in Southeast Asia toward a full generation of peace. They
would throw in the towel at the very moment when success is in sight. They would
(more)
-3-
capitulate just when our objective is near at hand.
We are withdrawing from Vietnam in accordance with a carefully thought out
plan. The President has drawn our forces in Vietnam down by 270,000 men--and the
withdrawals will continue at a faster pace.
It matters very much how we end our involvement in the Vietnam War. It is
easy to have peace simply by saying to the enemy, "It's all yours." I say we should
end our involvement in Vietnam in a way that stems the Communist tide in Southeast
Asia. And that is what we are doing.
I look forward to saluting a viable and independent South Vietnam.
Our withdrawal from Vietnam is, of course, having a tremendous impact on
our economy.
We have cut Vietnam spending in half--and we have deliberately cooled off
the economy to bring inflation under control.
Now the need is to stimulate the economy. Unemployment is too high. However,
let me point out that it was lower in 1970 at 4.9 per cent than for any of the years
1960 through 1964. It was not until 1965 when the previous Administration sharply
escalated our commitment to the Vietnam War and continued to escalate it that
unemployment fell below 5 per cent.
The Nixon Administration is getting out of Vietnam and making a transition to
a peacetime economy.
Unemployment has resulted as we have fought inflation and moved from a
wartime to a peacetime economy. The problems were even tougher than the
Administration anticipated. But now the economy is improving. There are most
encouraging signs of an economic upturn.
All we need now to give the economy a strong push is an upsurge of consumer
confidence.
It is only a matter of time before the economy picks up appreciably. This is
bound to occur because both our fiscal and monetary policies are expansionary. The
money supply, including time deposits, is expanding at a rate unprecedented in
20 years. And while Federal spending is rising only moderately, the President has
proposed an expansionary budget for fiscal 1972 which calls for Federal spending
based on full employment revenue levels.
I predict the economy will grow by 8 per cent in 1971, with about 4 per cent
of this in real growth and the rest accounted for by price inflation.
I further predict that auto sales will run close to 10 million this year and
that housing starts will total at least 1.8 million nationally.
(more)
-4-
There is another great challenge in addition to revitalizing our economy--one
that is perhaps more difficult to meet.
I speak of providing all of our citizens with an opportunity to participate
in American society and in the shaping of governmental decisions affecting their
lives.
This is a challenge which eclipses all others. It is central to our future
as a Nation. It is basic to our growth as a people. It goes to our philosophy
of government and touches the lives of every one of us.
The challenge is whether any man, woman or child really counts in America
anymore whether the system has become more important than the individual whether
we have all become just digits cranked into a computer operated by a faceless
bureaucracy.
There is a way to control the vast federal bureaucracy.
The answer is "Federal Revenue Sharing." It is an idea whose time has come.
I talk about revenue sharing not in a partisan vein. There are Democrats
who support it, as well as some who oppose it.
Let's look at revenue sharing from the standpoint of political philosophy.
Revenue sharing is based on the concept that that government is best which
is closest to the people.
What is the President asking? He is asking the Congress to appropriate
$5 billion to be shared by the states and cities with no strings attached. This
comes under the heading of general revenue sharing. He is also asking the Congress
to take about 130 categorical grant-in-aid programs, lump them together under six
general purpose headings of education, urban development, rural development,
transportation, job training and law enforcement and let the states and cities
decide how to pursue their priorities under those broad purposes.
What the President is saying is
give State and local government a chance.
Let's transfer to the local political arena hundreds of decisions now being made
in Washington or the Administration's regional offices.
Today we are living through a crisis which has so slowed the wheels of social
progress as to create a kind of paralysis, a paralysis of musclebound government
with too much power and money in the hands of the federal bureaucracy.
President Nixon has pointed to a way out of this crisis--a way to prove that
government can work.
It can be done by bringing government back to the people--by making an
(more)
-5-
investment in the local political process through Federal revenue sharing. Status
quo government cannot be accepted. As times change, we must reform government--so
that instead of sliding further into musclebound ineffectiveness it at last can
deliver the services it promises and bridge the gap between promise and performance.
While the government in Washington has become musclebound, State and local
governments have been struggling with problems the bureaucrats can't solve. And
the cost of State and local government has skyrocketed.
State and local spending has jumped 372 per cent from 1950 through 1969--from
$28 billion to $132 billion.
State and local taxes, per capita, have spiraled from $105 in 1950 to
$380 in 1969, an increase of 262 per cent.
States have increased major taxes 300 times during the last decade.
In the last two decades Federal aid to state and local governments has risen
from $2.5 billion to over $30 billion.
At the same time the Federal categorical grants-in-aid system has developed
more than 500 different spigots, manned by thousands of administrators operating in
a jungle of regulations.
How do we escape from this jungle? How do we put the money where the problems
are? How do we hold down the pressures for state and local tax increases?
The answer is the President's program of Federal revenue sharing.
There is opposition to revenue sharing. But what man has made, man can
change. And we must have the courage to change what should be changed.
Money is power. Moving money back to the states and cities means a flow
of power back to the people. This is where the power belongs.
Every individual wants to count for something. Under the revenue-sharing
philosophy of government, he can.
We must think in terms of people, not just programs. We must replace
computers with compassion.
Abraham Lincoln said: "This country, with its institutions, belongs to the
people who inhabit it."
Let's make this country belong to the people again. Let's give the individual
the feeling of determining his own destiny, of being able to make things happen.
This is old politics. This is new politics. This is the shape of things to
come. This is the right response to the greatest challenge of the Seventies. This
is the way to build a new and greater America.
###
AN ADDRESS BY REP. GERA.D R. FORD, R-MICH.
REPUBLICAN LEADER, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
BEFORE THE WEST COAST PURCHASING MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION
TAMPA, FLORIDA
5:30 P.M. SATURDAY, MAY 8, 1971
FOR RELEASE ON DELIVERY
It is a pleasure to be here with you. Today I would like to talk with you
about change--the Challenges of Change in the Seventies.
We all know that men must be challenged to strive mightily and to achieve
lofty goals. We know that change is the essence of progress, that change requires
challenge, and that challenge involves the clash of differing ideas.
This is the kind of time we are living in--a time of challenge, a time of
change, a time when different ideas are colliding.
We meet in exciting--and trying times. These are times when momentous
decisions must be made--decisions today which will determine the quality of our
lives tomorrow.
It is a time for a realistic assessment of our problems--a time for a
resolve to solve those problems as quickly and expertly as circumstance will permit.
It is a time for positive action, for leadership, for creativity, and for
boldness.
The challenge of our times is to confront the great problems and to employ
the American genius and the spirit of enthusiasm needed to overcome them.
How are we to do this? There must be created within our country a new
feeling of common purpose--a resolve which will produce two-way cooperation
between government and the people, a working together of one with the other toward
needed solutions.
I will talk with you today about a number of challenges--the challenge of
militant Communism in the Middle East and Indochina and the search for peace; the
challenge posed by the economy, where we must wrestle with the hangover from the
inflationary binge of the late 1960s while making a transition from wartime to
peacetime; and the challenge of governmental reform, where we must restructure the
Federal government so it becomes the servant and not the master of the people.
I speak first about the Middle East--because while it is Vietnam which has
torn this Nation apart and ravaged its soul it is in the Middle East that the danger
(more)
-2-
of World War III is the greatest. It is there that we have most to fear a head-on
collision with the other nuclear super-power, the Soviet Union.
We work ceaselessly for peace in the Middle East, but all the time we must
be aware that the Soviet Union has embarked on a drive to turn the Mediterranean into
a red sea, undermine the southern flank of NATO, and expand Russian influence across
Africa from the Indian Ocean to the South Atlantic.
If we were to allow the Soviet Union to crush Israel indirectly, through
the weapons the Soviets have placed in Egyptian hands, this would mean the end of
hope for all free nations of the Mediterranean and even western Europe. It would
give the Soviet Union dominance throughout the Middle throughout the entire
Mediterranean area. We will not let that happen.
The situation in the Middle East is most complex. There will be no settle-
ment until both sides are prepared to make some sacrifices.
The Administration last August put forward the initiative which resulted in
a cease-fire--now only a de facto cease fire. Some progress has been made through
indirect negotiations. This gives us reason to hope.
There are those who are inclined to condemn the Israelis for refusing to pull
back to their prewar boundaries. Personally, in view of past history, I find
Israel's attitude completely understandable. A nation which is confronted by
hostile powers backed by the military might of the Soviet Union cannot be blamed
for seeking secure and defensible borders.
While we seek to achieve a settlement of the Middle East conflict, we
continue to resist Communist aggression in Southeast Asia and to work for peace in
that war-torn region of the world.
We have drawn our forces in Vietnam down from an authorized strength of
549,500 men to 270,000--and we will be down to 184,000 or less by next Dec. 1.
Our goal in Vietnam is to make it possible for the South Vietnamese to
determine their own future.
We have moved considerably closer to that goal. Prospects are good that
we will achieve it.
Anyone who wants to see the South Vietnamese government gain the upper hand
against the Communists cannot help but be heartened by the progress we have made.
As for those who shout "pullout now," they would write off completely the
investment we have made in Southeast Asia toward a full generation of peace. They
would throw in the towel at the very moment when success is in sight. They would
(more)
-3-
capitulate just when our objective is near at hand.
We are withdrawing from Vietnam in accordance with a carefully thought out
plan. The President has drawn our forces in Vietnam down by 270,000 men--and the
withdrawals will continue at a faster pace.
It matters very much how we end our involvement in the Vietnam War. It is
easy to have peace simply by saying to the enemy, "It's all yours." I say we should
end our involvement in Vietnam in a way that stems the Communist tide in Southeast
Asia. And that is what we are doing.
I look forward to saluting a viable and independent South Vietnam.
Our withdrawal from Vietnam is, of course, having a tremendous impact on
our economy.
We have cut Vietnam spending in half--and we have deliberately cooled off
the economy to bring inflation under control.
Now the need is to stimulate the economy. Unemployment is too high. However,
let me point out that it was lower in 1970 at 4.9 per cent than for any of the years
1960 through 1964. It was not until 1965 when the previous Administration sharply
escalated our commitment to the Vietnam War and continued to escalate it that
unemployment fell below 5 per cent.
The Nixon Administration is getting out of Vietnam and making a transition to
a peacetime economy.
Unemployment has resulted as we have fought inflation and moved from a
wartime to a peacetime economy. The problems were even tougher than the
Administration anticipated. But now the economy is improving. There are most
encouraging signs of an economic upturn.
All we need now to give the economy a strong push is an upsurge of consumer
confidence.
It is only a matter of time before the economy picks up appreciably. This is
bound to occur because both our fiscal and monetary policies are expansionary. The
money supply, including time deposits, is expanding at a rate unprecedented in
20 years. And while Federal spending is rising only moderately, the President has
proposed an expansionary budget for fiscal 1972 which calls for Federal spending
based on full employment revenue levels.
I predict the economy will grow by 8 per cent in 1971, with about 4 per cent
of this in real growth and the rest accounted for by price inflation.
I further predict that auto sales will run close to 10 million this year and
that housing starts will total at least 1.8 million nationally.
(more)
-4-
There is another great challenge in addition to revitalizing our economy--one
that is perhaps more difficult to meet.
I speak of providing all of our citizens with an opportunity to participate
in American society and in the shaping of governmental decisions affecting their
lives.
This is a challenge which eclipses all others. It is central to our future
as a Nation. It is basic to our growth as a people. It goes to our philosophy
of government and touches the lives of every one of us.
The challenge is whether any man, woman or child really counts in America
anymore--whether the system has become more important than the individual whether
we have all become just digits cranked into a computer operated by a faceless
bureaucracy.
There is a way to control the vast federal bureaucracy.
The answer is "Federal Revenue Sharing." It is an idea whose time has come.
I talk about revenue sharing not in a partisan vein. There are Democrats
who support it, as well as some who oppose it.
Let's look at revenue sharing from the standpoint of political philosophy.
Revenue sharing is based on the concept that that government is best which
is closest to the people.
What is the President asking? He is asking the Congress to appropriate
$5 billion to be shared by the states and cities with no strings attached. This
comes under the heading of general revenue sharing. He is also asking the Congress
to take about 130 categorical grant-in-aid programs, lump them together under six
general purpose headings of education, urban development, rural development,
transportation, job training and law enforcement and let the states and cities
decide how to pursue their priorities under those broad purposes.
What the President is saying is give State and local government a chance.
Let's transfer to the local political arena hundreds of decisions now being made
in Washington or the Administration's regional offices.
Today we are living through a crisis which has so slowed the wheels of social
progress as to create a kind of paralysis, a paralysis of musclebound government
with too much power and money in the hands of the federal bureaucracy.
President Nixon has pointed to a way out of this crisis--a way to prove that
government can work.
It can be done by bringing government back to the people--by making an
(more)
-5-
investment in the local political process through Federal revenue sharing. Status
quo government cannot be accepted. As times change, we must reform government--so
that instead of sliding further into musclebound ineffectiveness it at last can
deliver the services it promises and bridge the gap between promise and performance.
While the government in Washington has become musclebound, State and local
governments have been struggling with problems the bureaucrats can't solve. And
the cost of State and local government has skyrocketed.
State and local spending has jumped 372 per cent from 1950 through 1969--from
$28 billion to $132 billion.
State and local taxes, per capita, have spiraled from $105 in 1950 to
$380 in 1969, an increase of 262 per cent.
States have increased major taxes 300 times during the last decade.
In the last two decades Federal aid to state and local governments has risen
from $2.5 billion to over $30 billion.
At the same time the Federal categorical grants-in-aid system has developed
more than 500 different spigots, manned by thousands of administrators operating in
a jungle of regulations.
How do we escape from this jungle? How do we put the money where the problems
are? How do we hold down the pressures for state and local tax increases?
The answer is the President's program of Federal revenue sharing.
There is opposition to revenue sharing. But what man has made, man can
change. And we must have the courage to change what should be changed.
Money is power. Moving money back to the states and cities means a flow
of power back to the people. This is where the power belongs.
Every individual wants to count for something. Under the revenue-sharing
philosophy of government, he can.
We must think in terms of people, not just programs. We must replace
computers with compassion.
Abraham Lincoln said: "This country, with its institutions, belongs to the
people who inhabit it."
Let's make this country belong to the people again. Let's give the individual
the feeling of determining his own destiny, of being able to make things happen.
This is old politics. This is new politics. This is the shape of things to
come. This is the right response to the greatest challenge of the Seventies. This
is the way to build a new and greater America.
###