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.
Source Description
This file contains material relating to Lyndon B. Johnson, Robert McNamara.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
4529683
label
Ford Interviews, March - December 1966
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
4529683
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Ford Interviews, March - December 1966
description
This file contains material relating to Lyndon B. Johnson, Robert McNamara.
citationUrl
collections
Gerald R. Ford Congressional Papers
Interview Transcripts
subjects
Great Society
Vietnam War, 1961-1975
Unidentified flying objects
Congressional elections
Inflation (Finance)
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
4529683
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1966-12-31
month
12
year
1966
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1966-03-01
month
3
year
1966
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
c881ce8dcda4cb78
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box D37, folder "Interviews, March - December
1966" 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. Gerald R. Ford donated to the
University of Michigan his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives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.
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.
CBS NEWS
Mills
2020 M Street
Washington, D.C. 20036
FACE THE NATION
as broadcast over the
CBS Television Network
and the
CBS Radio Network
Sunday, March 27, 1966 -- - 12:30 - 1:00 PM EST
GUEST: THE HONORABLE GERALD R. FORD (Michigan)
Republican Leader of the
House of Representatives
NEWS CORRESPONDENTS: Martin Agronsky
CBS News
Robert Novak
Columnist, New York Herald Tribune Syndicate
David Schoumacher
CBS News
PRODUCERS: Ellen Wadley
Prentiss Childs
DIRECTOR: Robert Vitarelli
FORD LIBRARY & GERALD
2
MR. AGRONSKY: Congressman Ford, did former Vice-President
Nixon speak for the Republican Party yesterday when he called
for bombing military targets in the port of Haiphong?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I do not think he spoke for the
Republican Coordinating Committee, which is the group of
Republican leaders that was put together about a year ago for the
purpose of coordinating our policies on the domestic front and
on international politics.
This is a view that an individual can have. I think
it would be said to be his, not the party as a whole, at the
present time.
ANNOUNCER: Live, from CBS, Washington, FACE THE NATION,
a spontaneous and unrehearsed news interview with the
Republican leader of the House, Representative Gerald Ford
of Michigan. Representative Ford will be questioned by CBS
News Correspondent David Schoumacher; Robert Novak, Columnist
for the New York Herald Tribune Syndicate. CBS News
Correspondent Martin Agronsky will lead the questioning.
We shall resume the interview with Congressman Ford in
just a moment.
-
MR. AGRONSKY: Congressman Ford, if Mr. Nixon's call
for the bombing of military targets in the port of Haiphong
FORD
does not agree with the opinion of the Republican Coordinating
GERALD
LIBRARY
Committee, does it reflect your personal opinion?
3
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, Martin, at this particular
time, with the President committing 220,000 to 235,000 military
personnel to Vietnam, it seems to me that these delicate
military decisions should be made by the elected Commander
in Chief of the United States, Lyndon B. Johnson, based on the
recommendations of the Joint Chiefs of staff GRVE the people
who are experienced, who are knowledgeable. I think these
technical decisions of a militarynature rest with the President
of the United States. And I think we should stand forthrightly
for a policy of strength against Communist aggression. But
the execution, the implementation on a day to day basis in a
military way is the responsibility of the President of the
United States.
MR. NOVAK: Well, Congressman Ford, the Republican
Congressional Committee News Letter, which is due out
tomorrow, gets rather deeply into the day to day execution of
Vietnam policy, and it suggests that "The American serviceman
is fighting a war with one hand tied behind his back", due
to the policies of the Administration. Isn't this the view of
the House Republican leadership?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I would say that this is not an
illustration of where we are telling the President that he
ought to do one particular thing or another militarily.
We are saying that the Administration is not using the
full potential of our military forces, our Army, Navy and Air Force.
4
I have heard that quotation actually in the White House
itself, where discussions were held, where the indication was
given that particularly during the pause of the bombing, that
our military forces were in effect fighting a war, a very
serious one, with one of their hands tied behind them.
I repeat again that the technical military decisions,
how we use our air power, our sea power, these are decisions
that must be made by the elected Commander in Chief, a man who
was elected in November 1964.
We as Republicans can call for a policy of strength, a
posture of determination. But these day to day executions,
implementations of policy, mus be made by the President with
the help and assistance of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
MR. SCHOUMACHER: Congressman Ford, not too many months
ago Republicans were saying that Vietnam was going to be an
issue. Then they apparently decided to hedge their bet a
little bit and we heard it was going to be Vietnam and
inflation, and yesterday Mr. Nixon said it is going to be
inflation, the only issue.
Is there much difference in the Party on just how to
talk about Vietnam?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Dave, I don't think we ever said
at least the leadership never said, that Vietnam would be the CIBRARY major
Y
policy issue.
GERALD
As a matter of fact, Senator Dirksen and myself have
5
repeatedly urged all Republicans to not make Vietnam a political
issue. The consequences are too great and the crisis is too
serious for us, from the point of view of the national interest,
to make this a political issue.
MR. SCHOUMACHER: But, Mr. Ford, don't you have to make it
a political issue? If you have to pick up votes, you have an
obligation to talk about it.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Dave, I don't think we should. I
don't think we have an obligation.to.
I might add as a postscipt some of the President's
Democrats in the Senate are the ones who are making it a political
issue. Senator Wayne Morse is making it a very serious political
issue, and others in the Senate in the President's own Democratic
Party, are the ones who are making all the charges, all the
allegations.
I suspect with these kind of charges made against the
President by Senator Morse and others, the American people, not
the Republicans, will make Vietnam a political issue in 1966.
MR. AGRONSKY: Do you think the Democrats should not be
doing this?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: No - I think, Martin, that they
have a right to speak I think they have an obligation, if their
conscience tells them to talk about it in the Senate.
FORD
But, on the other hand, I do look with some disgust and,
LIBRARY
I think, dismay at the kind of demonstrations that took place
6
yesterday in many of our major cities in this country. I
believe that these kind of attempts to discredit our policy, to
display a lack of unity among the American people, could have
the effect of prolonging the war, undermining the morale of
our American troops, and in effect leading the enemy to a
miscalculation as to the power and the unity of the American
people.
MR. SCHOUMACHER: If the Republican Party, though, expects
to pick up votes on the basis of disenchantment with the
President's policy in Vietnam - don't you have a responsibility
to tell them this is what the Republicans think about Vietnam,
what should be done about Vietnam, so that when they do express
that disenchantment in the polling place, they know what they are
voting for?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Yes, Dave, I think we have to point
out what our position is. And the position today is that we
support a policy of a posture of determination against
Communist aggression and terror in Vietnam.
But I add very quickly that we are not in a position in
the Republican Party, in the legislative branch, to make
military decisions. And these decisions have to be made by
the Commander in Chief.
MR. AGRONSKY: Congressman Ford, some critics of the
Republican Party have indicated that you are not fulfilling
LISEARY
the role of the loyal opposition in promoting debate; that you
7
are leaving that task to the Democrats.
In January of 1950, Senator Arthur Vandenberg, of your
State, the late Senator -
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: From my home town.
MR. AGRONSKY: From your home town wrote in a letter to
a constituent that every foreign policy must be totally
debated, and the loyal opposition is under special obligation
to see this occurs.
Do you feel you are fulfilling the function of the loyal
opposition as Senator Vandenberg says?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Yes, I think we are, Martin, because
in effect we are debating those Democrats in the House and the
Senate who want to withdraw, the Democrats who want to turn
tail and run.
As a matter of fact, we in the Republican Party today are
more effectively helping the Chief Executive, the Commander
in Chief, by telling him "We stand with you as long as you are
willing to face up to Communist terror and aggression".
We, as Republicans, are debating the weak-kneed Democrats
who want to turn tail and run and duck the responsibility of the
leadership of the free world on the part of the United States.
MR. AGRONSKY: Which ones want to turn tail and run?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, there are those who in effect
FORD
have said we ought to go back and abandon all of Southeast
Asia and come back to Pearl Harbor. This is what some people
LIBRARY
16
8
have said.
MR. AGRONSKY: I don't know of any who said that. What
responsible Democrats have said that?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, hasn't Senator Wayne Morse
said that we ought to withdraw, we ought to end the war? What
he means under the theory of those such as Secretary Rusk, who
as I understand it believes in the dominoe theory Given means
that in a relatively short period of time you are going to
end up defending Pearl Harbor, and that is not a very good
prospect.
MR. NOVAK: Mr. Ford, I did not quite understand your
answer to my question.
Do you feel that Given do you personally feel that we are
fighting the war in Vietnam with an arm behind our back, or
is that just political propaganda by the Congressional Campaign
Committee?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: When you look at all the military
power that the United States has, in the Air Force, in the Navy,
and in the Army, and when you realize that we are not fully
utilizing that military power, and when you understand that
we have 220,000, 235,000 American military personnel fighting a
war in Vietnam today, and probably 300,000 in a few months, and
you see that they are not getting the full support of all of
this military power that we have, the argument can be made
GERA - LIBRARY
MR. NOVAK: But do you make it?
9
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: - that the soldiers, sailors and
airmen out there are fighting with one hand tied behind them.
MR. NOVAK: But do you make the argument, Mr. Ford?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I think there is a great deal of
credence to the argument But just how you use this power on a
day to day basis, the power that we are not using, I think is
the responsibility of the Commander in Chief, President Lyndon B.
Johnson.
MR. NOVAK: On that position of the power, you and the
other Republican leaders, and Mr. Nixon last night, repeatedly
have advised against getting into a land war on the Asian
continent. Now, what does a land war consist of - 200,000
troops, 300,000? Do you think we are in a land war now?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: When you get up to 235,000, 300,000
or 400,000, and there are plans and programs in the Pentagon
today to increase our commitment to those figures, I believe
we are getting to the point where we are fighting a rather
large-scale ground war in Southeast Asia.
I think it is well to point out that at the height of the
Korean War, where we had our greatest military commitment in
that conflict, there were only 325,000 U.S. military personnel
stationed in South Korea.
It seems to me that very shortly President Johnson will have
committed almost that number.
LIBRARY
MR. NOVAK: And you are opposed to that?
10
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: And I think when we get to that
figure without using more of our military power in the air
and on that sea, that we are getting ourselves into a very bad
military situation.
MR. NOVAK: Are you opposed to that?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Yes, I would be.
MR. AGRONSKY: You are opposed to it. You would have a
ceiling, then, on the American commitment in Vietnam.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I would not have a ceiling as to
MR. AGRONSKY: What do you mean, then?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I think you have got to have a
limitation on your commitment in ground forces unless and
until we have more fully utilized our air and sea power. And
we are not doing that today.
MR. ÁGRONSKY: Don't you regard that as a significant
military criticism, that you said you were reluctant to make?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: No, because what you really intended,
I think, was to indicate that we believe that we should bomb
Haiphong, that we should do other specific military targeting.
MR. AGRONSKY: No. We are talking about something else now.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, if you are talking in the
broad sense -
MR. AGRONSKY: We are talking about a ceiling on American
commitment in Vietnam. Are you for it or not?
FORD LIBRAR is RAILD
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I believe there should be a manpower
11
ceiling on our ground forces, unless and until we have more
fully utilized our military power in the air and on the sea.
MR. NOVAK: In other words, Mr. Ford, you are saying we should
use the air power more than we are using it, but you would not
say exactly how.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Yes, I think that is a fair analysis
of it.
MR. AGRONSKY: Don't you regard that as a military
proposal, an interference with the President, who is the
Commander in Chief, and you said before we should not criticize.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: No, I don't think this is a military
recommendation in the sense of what the Joint Chiefs do on a
day to day basis, as far as the President is concerned.
MR. AGRONSKY: It seems about asmilitary as you could
get, to put a ceiling on how many troops you would put in there
and say that we should not put any more in unless we do thus and
so in a military way.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, let me say this. There are a
great many Americans, Martin, who are very unhappy with the way
in which the conflict is being run in Vietnam today. Many
Americans who support the policy of meeting the challenge of
Communist aggression are saying that unless we do more with the
power we have, we either ought to do it or get out. And I
FORD
believe that the American people, and all of the polls support
LIBRARY
this, indicate that the President as Commander in Chief ought to
12
follow this course of action before committing another 100,000
U.S. military personnel to Vietnam.
MR. AGRONSKY: Do you agree with those people who feel we
ought to do this or get out?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I would not go quite that far. I
would not be quite that categorical. But I can assure you this
is the attitude of a great many Americans in this country today.
MR. SCHOUMACHER : Mr. Ford, what about flying saucers?
You have had some in Michigan in the past week. Do you really
believe in flying saucers? You called for a Congressional
investigation.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Dave, we have had several incidents
in Michigan in the last week, incidents that many reliable,
good citizens felt were suffi ient 1:0 justify some action by
our government, and not the kind of flippant answer that was
given by the Air Force where they passed it off as swamp gas.
In addition there are other incidents that have happened
from time to time, reportings by people who basically, I think,
are fully sincere and who are honest.
It seems to me that this mystery that has been around the
country with all of these various sightings does require that
the Congress take a good look at it; bring up these vitnesses
from the Air Force and the National Aeronautics and Space
Agency, have them interrogated by members of a House or Senate
Committee, let them put their records on the line, and let the
13
people who have allegedly seen these unidentified flying objects
come and testify.
I think the American people would be more assured that
there were or were not if such a public hearing was held.
MR. NOVAK: Congressman Ford, how many seats do you think
the Republican Party can pick up in the South this year?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: In the South?
MR. NOVAK: In the South.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I think we will pick up, oh, from
five to six. But I am more encouraged, Bob, by the possibilities
of picking up seats elsewhere in the United States. As a total
I would say our prospects at the moment appear good, to pick up
between 40 and 50.
MR. NOVAK: On the questionof the South, how do you feel
about the segregationists in the Republican Party in the South?
For example, Congressman Jim Martin in Alabama has just announced
for Governor. Would you go down and campaign for him, or for
Senator Strom Thurmond in South Carolina, seeking re-election?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Let me say this. The segregationists
in the Republican Party are minimal compared to those that
have been in the past in the Democratic Party in the South.
The record is crystal clear that the Democratic Party in the
past and I think at the present time in the South is totally
dominated by extreme segregationists.
Governor Wallace - now he is running his wife.
FORD LIBRARY j me
14
sure she shares, according to him, his views on matters involving
segregation.
It seems to me that the Republican Party in the South has
made a very good effort to broaden its base, to raise issues
other than segregation between the Democrats in the South and
the Republicans in the South.
MR. NOVAK: Would you campaign for an out-and-out
segregationist, like Strom Thurmond or Jim Martin?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I don't think you can categorize
these people as outright segregationists. I think this is an
unfair accusation. And I believe -
MR. SCHOUMACHER: Is it unfair to call Strom Thurmond a
segregationist?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Let me talk about Jim Martin,
because he serves with me in the House fRepresentative. I
know that Jim Martin and the other Republicans from the State
of Alabama worked very closely with me and others in the House
to develop a voting rights bill that even today, Dave, I think
it a better bill than the law that we have on the statute books.
These men worked very effectively and honestly to come up with a
voting rights bill that would be applicable in every one of the
fifty states. And any man or any group of men, such as Jim
Martin and the others, who take this approach, in no way, no
FORD
way, are the kind of segregationists that you are implying.
MR. NOVAK: There are different kinds of segregationists?
LIBRARY
15
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, there are all kinds of
liberals, there are all kinds of radicals.
MR. NOVAK: So you would campaign for them.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: If they follow the basic principles
of the Republican Party, and if they are willing to adhere to,
as we have, the philosophy of the Republican Party as I know it -
I think the burden is on them -I would campaign for a
Republican in Alabama or any other state of the Union.
MR. AGRONSKY: Would regard all of the Republican candidates
in the South as men for whom you could campaign no matter what
their position is on segregation?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, Martin, we hope to have a full
slate of candidates in all of the Southern states. I don't know
them all, so I cannot categorically answer that question. But
let me turn the coin over, if I may.
MR. AGRONSKY: Yes.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I go and campaign in some of our
large metropolitan areas for more or less liberal Republican
candidates, candidates who are more liberal than I. Should
I be criticized for doing that any more than I should be
critidzed for doing it in the South?
What I am trying to say is the Republican Party has to
elect more Republicans, and in some areas of the country liberal
Republicans will be elected, and in some areas of the country
conservative Republicans will be elected.
16
MR. NOVAK: Do you equite the liberal Republicans with
the segregationists, then?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I don't understand the question.
MR. NOVAK: You are putting the liberal Republicans and
the segregationists in the same basket.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, as long as the liberal
Republican and the conservative Republican believe in the basic
principles of the Republican Party, I believe they are Republicans,
and I think we ought to elect Republicans < period.
MR. AGRONSKY: Will you hold on for a second, Congressman.
We will follow up in a minute. There aremany more things
we would like to ask you.
We will resume the questioning in a moment.
MR. AGRONSKY: Congressman Ford, yesterday the
Republican Party in South Carolina held a convention. It was
lily white, not a single Negro was there. Do you approve of
that, sir?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I think the best answer to that,
Martin, is that last fall I was invited to speak to a Republican
luncheon in Natchez, Mississippi, and unfortunately that luncheon
in effect excluded any Negro participation. I had to cancel out,
and I think my decision was right.
FORD
I have appeared at luncheons and dinners on behalf of the
ALD
Republican Party in many Southern states where there were
BRARY
17
segregated Republican audiences.
I certainly believe that the Republican Party ought to include
in the South, as well as in the North, individuals from all
segments of our society, whites as well as Negroes, as long
as they believe in the philosophy of the Republican Party.
And where there is a deliberate exclusion of one segment of
our society, then I think the Republican Party ought to take a
hard look at whether they should participate.
MR. AGRONSKY: What's wrong in South Carolina?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: From what I know about it, I do not
know whether they specifically excluded them. But if they did,
if they precluded Negroes from participation, Negroes who
wanted to participate, then I think they made a mistake.
MR. SCHOUMACHER: Mr. Ford, the other day you said that you
did not play to be minority leader forever, that you hope to
become majority leader or step down. Have you set a date for
your retirement, or do you plan to become majority leader pretty
soon?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I: think the prospects, Dave, are
getting better and better for the Republicans to make significant
gains in the House of Representatives. At the moment I do not
think the prospects are such that we can look forward to a majority
in the House. But public opinion today is rapidly swinging away
from the Johnson-Humphrey Administration, and there is greater
and greater Republican support throughout the country.
GER And if
LIBRARY
18
the Administration's credibility erodes in the next few months
as it has in the last few months, there is a distinct possibility
the Republicans will gain control in the House.
I happen to think we are laying a good groundwork, we
are getting good candidates, we are better organized, we are more
unified, and the Democrats are losing credibility, they are
disorganized, and I think the American people are getting
sympathetic to the kind of a program and the candidates we are
dffering.
MR. SCHOUMACHER: You said once there you were going to pick
up 30 votes, and then it became 40 votes, and now it is almost
50 votes. What is happening? We don't see any evidence of it.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, let me tell you the evidence is
pretty clear if you just look at the various opinion polls
throughout the country. The President and the Democratic
Administration has lost 3 to 3.5 percent nationwide. The
Republicans have gained a corresponding amount of public support.
And as this pendulum swings away from the Johnson-Humphrey
Administration to the Republicans, it automatically means
that we are going to pick up more and more seats in the House
and in the Senate.
MR. SCHOUMACHER: Is it Vietnam that is making it swing?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I have not analyzed just what the
issue is, except that on the domestic scene the Administration's
failure to do anything about the increase in the cost of living,
19
the Administration's failure to recognize the dangers of
inflation and the distinct probability and possibility
if the inflation gets worse we are going to have a recession
is the one thing that on the domestic scene very much worries
the American people.
MR. AGRONSKY: Gentlemen, I am very sorry, but our time
is up. Thank you, Congressman Ford, for being here to FACE
THE NATION.
-
FORD LIBRARY & GERALD
Duplicate
CBS NEWS
Mills
2020 M Street
Washington, D.C. 20036
FACE THE NATION
as broadcast over the
CBS Television Network
and the
CBS Radio Network
Sunday, March 27, 1966 - - 12:30 - 1:00 PM EST
GUEST: THE HONORABLE GERALD R. FORD (Michigan)
Republican Leader of the
House of Representatives
NEWS CORRESPONDENTS: Martin Agronsky
CBS News
Robert Novak
Columnist, New York Herald Tribune Syndicate
David Schoumacher
CBS News
PRODUCERS: Ellen Wadley
Prentiss Childs
DIRECTOR: Robert Vitarelli
FORD LIBRARY & GERALD s
2
MR. AGRONSKY: Congressman Ford, did former Vice-President
Nixon speak for the Republican Party yesterday when he called
for bombing military targets in the port of Haiphong?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I do not think he spoke for the
Republican Coordinating Committee, which is the group of
Republican leaders that was put together about a year ago for the
purpose of coordinating our policies on the domestic front and
on international politics.
This is a view that an individual can have. I think
it would be said to be his, not the party as a whole, at the
present time.
ANNOUNCER: Live, from CBS, Washington, FACE THE NATION,
a spontaneous and unrehearsed news interview with the
Republican leader of the House, Representative Gerald Ford
of Michigan. Representative Ford will be questioned by CBS
News Correspondent David Schoumacher; Robert Novak, Columnist
for the New York Herald Tribune Syndicate. CBS News
Correspondent Martin Agronsky will lead the questioning.
We shall resume the interview with Congressman Ford in
just a moment.
MR. AGRONSKY: Congressman Ford, if Mr. Nixon's call
for the bombing of military targets in the port of Haiphong
RD
does not agree with the opinion of the Republican Coordinating GERAS
LIBRARY
Committee, does it reflect your personal opinion?
3
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, Martin, at this particular
time, with the President committing 220,000 to 235,000 military
personnel to Vietnam, it seems to me that these delicate
military decisions should be made by the elected Commander
in Chief of the United States, Lyndon B. Johnson, based on the
recommendations of the Joint Chiefs of staff GST the people
who are experienced, who are knowledgeable. I think these
technical decisions of a militarynature rest with the President
of the United States. And I think we should stand forthrightly
for a policy of strength against Communist aggression. But
the execution, the implementation on a day to day basis in a
military way is the responsibility of the President of the
United States.
MR. NOVAK: Well, Congressman Ford, the Republican
Congressional Committee News Letter, which is due out
tomorrow, gets rather deeply into the day to day execution of
Vietnam policy, and it suggests that "The American serviceman
is fighting a war with one hand tied behind his back", due
to the policies of the Administration. Isn't this the view of
the House Republican leadership?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I would say that this is not an
illustration of where we are telling the President that he
ought to do one particular thing or another militarily.
FORD
We are saying that the Administration is not using the
full potential of our military forces, our Army, Navy and Air Force.
4
I have heard that quotation actually in the White House
itself, where discussions were held, where the indication was
given that particularly during the pause of the bombing, that
our military forces were in effect fighting a war, a very
serious one, with one of their hands tied behind them.
I repeat again that the technical military decisions,
how we use our air power, our sea power, these are decisions
that must be made by the elected Commander in Chief, a man who
was elected in November 1964.
We as Republicans can call for a policy of strength, a
posture of determination. But these day to day executions,
implementations of policy, must be made by the President with
the help and assistance of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
MR. SCHOUMACHER: Congressman Ford, not too many months
ago Republicans were saying that Vietnam was going to be an
issue. Then they apparently decided to hedge their bet a
little bit and we heard it was going to be Vietnam and
inflation, and yesterday Mr. Nixon said it is going to be
inflation, the only issue.
Is there much difference in the Party on just how to
talk about Vietnam?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Dave, I don't think we ever said -
at least the leadership never said, that Vietnam would be the major
policy issue.
FORD LIBRARY &
As a matter of fact, Senator Dirksen and myself have
5
repeatedly urged all Republicans to not make Vietnam a political
issue. The consequences are too great and the crisis is too
serious for us, from the point of view of the national interest,
to make this a political issue.
MR. SCHOUMACHER: But, Mr. Ford, don't you have to make it
a political issue? If you have to pick up votes, you have an
obligation to talk about it.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Dave, I don't think we should. I
don't think we have an obligation.to.
I might add as a postscipt some of the President's
Democrats in the Senate are the ones who are making it a political
issue. Senator Wayne Morse is making it a very serious political
issue, and others in the Senate in the President's own Democratic
Party, are the ones who are making all the charges, all the
allegations.
I suspect with these kind of charges made against the
President by Senator Morse and others, the American people, not
the Republicans, will make Vietnam a political issue in 1966.
MR. AGRONSKY: Do you think the Democrats should not be
doing this?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: No - I think, Martin, that they
have a right to speak I think they have an obligation, if their
conscience tells them to talk about it in the Senate.
But, on the other hand, I do look with some disgust and,
LD
I think, dismay at the kind of demonstrations that took place
LIBRARI
6
yesterday in many of our major cities in this country. I
believe that these kind of attempts to discredit our policy, to
display a lack of unity among the American people, could have
the effect of prolonging the war, undermining the morale of
our American troops, and in effect leading the enemy to a
miscalculation as to the power and the unity of the American
people.
MR. SCHOUMACHER: If the Republican Party, though, expects
to pick up votes on the basis of disenchantment with the
President's policy in Vietnam don't you have a responsibility
to tell them this is what the Republicans think about Vietnam,
what should be done about Vietnam, so that when they do express
that disenchantment in the polling place, they know what they are
voting for?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Yes, Dave, I think we have to point
out what our position is. And the position today is that we
support a policy of a posture of determination against
Communist aggression and terror in Vietnam.
But I add very quickly that we are not in a position in
the Republican Party, in the legislative branch, to make
military decisions. And these decisions have to be made by
the Commander in Chief.
MR. AGRONSKY: Congressman Ford, some critics of the
Republican Party have indicated that you are not fulfilling
the role of the loyal opposition in promoting debate; that you
7
are leaving that task to the Democrats.
In January of 1950, Senator Arthur Vandenberg, of your
State, the late Senator -
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: From my home town.
MR. AGRONSKY: From your home town wrote in a letter to
a constituent that every foreign policy must be totally
debated, and the loyal opposition is under special obligation
to see this occurs.
Do you feel you are fulfilling the function of the loyal
opposition as Senator Vandenberg says?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Yes, I think we are, Martin, because
in effect we are debating those Democrats in the House and the
Senate who want to withdraw, the Democrats who want to turn
tail and run.
As a matter of fact, we in the Republican Party today are
more efféctively helping the Chief Executive, the Commander
in Chief, by telling him "We stand with you as long as you are
willing to face up to Communist terror and aggression".
We, as Republicans, are debating the weak-kneed Democrats
who want to turn tail and run and duck the responsibility of the
leadership of the free world on the part of the United States.
MR. AGRONSKY: Which ones want to turn tail and run?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, there are those who in effect
have said we ought to go back and abandon all of Southeast
Asia and come back to Pearl Harbor. This is what some
LIBRARY GERATO people
8
have said.
MR. AGRONSKY: I don't know of any who said that. What
responsible Democrats have said that?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, hasn't Senator Wayne Morse
said that we ought to withdraw, we ought to end the war? What
he means under the theory of those such as Secretary Rusk, who
as I understand it believes in the dominoe theory - means
that in a relatively short period of time you are going to
end up defending Pearl Harbor, and that is not a very good
prospect.
MR. NOVAK: Mr. Ford, I did not quite understand your
answer to my question.
Do you feel that General do you personally feel that we are
fighting the war in Vietnam with an arm behind our back, or
is that just political propaganda by the Congressional Campaign
Committee?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: When you look at all the military
power that the United States has, in the Air Force, in the Navy,
and in the Army, and when you realize that we are not fully
utilizing that military power, and when you understand that
we have 220,000, 235,000 American military personnel fighting a
war in Vietnam today, and probably 300,000 in a few months, and
you see that they are not getting the full support of all of
this military power that we have, the argument can be
MR. NOVAK: But do you make it?
GERALA made FORD BRARY
9
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: - that the soldiers, sailors and
airmen out there are fighting with one hand tied behind them.
MR. NOVAK: But do you make the argument, Mr. Ford?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I think there is a great deal of
credence to the argument. But just how you use this power on a
day to day basis, the power that we are not using, I think is
the responsibility of the Commander in Chief, President Lyndon B.
Johnson.
MR. NOVAK: On that position of the power, you and the
other Republican leaders, and Mr. Nixon last night, repeatedly
have advised against getting into a land war on the Asian
continent. Now, what does a land war consist of - 200,000
troops, 300,000? Do you think we are in a land war now?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: When you get up to 235,000, 300,000
or 400,000, and there are plans and programs in the Pentagon
today to increase our commitment to those figures, I believe
we are getting to the point where we are fighting a rather
large-scale ground war in Southeast Asia.
I think it is well to point out that at the height of the
Korean War, where we had our greatest military commitment in
that conflict, there were only 325,000 U.S. military personnel
stationed in South Korea.
It seems to me that very shortly President Johnson will have
committed almost that number.
MR. NOVAK: And you are opposed to that?
BERALS FORD LIBRARY
10
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: And I think when we get to that
figure without using more of our military power in the air
and on that sea, that we are getting ourselves into a very bad
military situation.
MR. NOVAK: Are you opposed to that?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Yes, I would be.
MR. AGRONSKY: You are opposed to it. You would have a
ceiling, then, on the American commitment in Vietnam.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I would not have a ceiling as to -
MR. AGRONSKY: What do you mean, then?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I think you have got to have a
limitation on your commitment in ground forces unless and
until we have more fully utilized our air and sea power. And
we are not doing that today.
MR. AGRONSKY: Don't you regard that as a significant
military criticism, that you said you were reluctant to make?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: No, because what you really intended,
I think, was to indicate that we believe that we should bomb
Haiphong, that we should do other specific military targeting.
MR. AGRONSKY: No. We are talking about something else now.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, if you are talking in the
broad sense -
MR. AGRONSKY: We are talking about a ceiling on American
commitment in Vietnam. Are you for it or not?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I believe there should be a er
BERRLD R. FORD manpow LIBROR
11
ceiling on our ground forces, unless and until we have more
fully utilized our military power in the air and on the sea.
MR. NOVAK: In other words, Mr. Ford, you are saying we should
use the air power more than we are using it, but you would not
say exactly how.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Yes, I think that is a fair analysis
of it.
MR. AGRONSKY: Don't you regard that as a military
proposal, an interference with the President, who is the
Commander in Chief, and you said before we should not criticize.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: No, I don't think this is a military
recommendation in the sense of what the Joint Chiefs do on a
day to day basis, as far as the President is concerned.
MR. AGRONSKY: It seems about asmilitary as you could
get, to put a ceiling on how many troops you would put in there
and say that we should not put any more in unless we do thus and
so in a military way.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, let me say this. There are a
great many Americans, Martin, who are very unhappy with the way
in which the conflict is being run in Vietnam today. Many
Americans who support the policy of meeting the challenge of
Communist aggression are saying that unless we do more with the
power we have, we either ought to do it or get out. And I
believe that the American people, and all of the polls support
FORD
this, indicate that the President as Commander in Chief ought to
GERAL
BRARY
12
follow this course of action before committing another 100,000
U.S. military personnel to Vietnam.
MR. AGRONSKY: Do you agree with those people who feel we
ought to do this or get out?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I would not go quite that far. I
would not be quite that categorical. But I can assure you this
is the attitude of a great many Americans in this country today.
MR. SCHOUMACHER: Mr. Ford, what about flying saucers?
You have had some in Michigan in the past week. Do you really
believe in flying saucers? You called for a Congressional
investigation.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Dave, we have had several incidents
in Michigan in the last week, incidents that many reliable,
good citizens felt were suffi ient 80 justify some action by
our government, and not the kind of flippant answer that was
given by the Air Force where they passed it off as swamp gas.
In addition there are other incidents that have happened
from time to time, reportings by people who basically, I think,
are fully sincere and who are honest.
It seems to me that this mystery that has been around the
country with all of these various sightings does require that
the Congress take a good look at it; bring up these witnesses
from the Air Force and the National Aeronautics and Space
Agency, have them interrogated by members of a House or Senate
Committee, let them put their records on the line, and let the
13
13
people who have allegedly seen these unidentified flying objects
come and testify.
I think the American people would be more assured that
there were or were not if such a public hearing was held.
MR. NOVAK: Congressman Ford, how many seats do you think
the Republican Party can pick up in the South this year?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: In the South?
MR. NOVAK: In the South.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I think we will pick up, oh, from
five to six. But I am more encouraged, Bob, by the possibilities
of picking up seats elsewhere in the United States. As a total
I would say our prospects at the moment appear good, to pick up
between 40 and 50.
MR. NOVAK: On the questionof the South, how do you feel
about the segregationists in the Republican Party in the South?
For example, Congressman Jim Martin in Alabama has just announced
for Governor. Would you go down and campaign for him, or for
Senator Strom Thurmond in South Carolina, seeking re-election?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Let me say this. The segregationists
in the Republican Party are minimal compared to those that
have been in the past in the Democratic Party in the South.
The record is crystal clear that the Democratic Party in the
past and I think at the present time in the South is totally
dominated by extreme segregationists.
Governor Wallace - now he is running his wife.
GERALD I FORD am LIBRARY
14
sure she shares, according to him, his views on matters involving
segregation.
It seems to me that the Republican Party in the South has
made a very good effort to broaden its base, to raise issues
other than segregation between the Democrats in the South and
the Republicans in the South.
MR. NOVAK: Would you campaign for an out-and-out
segregationist, like Stram Thurmond or Jim Martin?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I don't think you can categorize
these people as outright segregationists. I think this is an
unfair accusation. And I believe Law
MR. SCHOUMACHER : Is it unfair to call Strom Thurmond a
segregationist?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Let me talk about Jim Martin,
because he serves with me in the House of Representative. I
know that Jim Martin and the other Republicans from the State
of Alabama worked very closely with me and others in the House
to develop a voting rights bill that even today, Dave, I think
it a better bill than the law that we have on the statute books.
These men worked very effectively and honestly to come up with a
voting rights bill that would be applicable in every one of the
fifty states. And any man or any group of men, such as Jim
Martin and the others, who take this approach, in no way, no
way, are the kind of segregationists that you are implying.
MR. NOVAK: There are different kinds of segregat ionists
LIBRABY
39
15
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, there are all kinds of
liberals, there are all kinds of radicals.
MR. NOVAK: So you would campaign for them.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: If they follow the basic principles
of the Republican Party, and if they are willing to adhere to,
as we have, the philosophy of the Republican Party as I know it -
I think the burden is on them -I would campaign for a
Republican in Alabama or any other state of the Union.
MR. AGRONSKY: Would regard all of the Republican candidates
in the South as men for whom you could campaign no matter what
their position is on segregation?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, Martin, we hope to have a full
slate of candidates in all of the Southern states. I don't know
them all, so I cannot categorically answer that question. But
let me turn the coin over, if I may.
MR. AGRONSKY: Yes.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I go and campaign in some of our
large metropolitan areas for more or less liberal Republican
candidates, candidates who are more liberal than I. Should
I be criticized for doing that any more than I should be
critidzed for doing it in the South?
What I am trying to say is the Republican Party has to
elect more Republicans, and in some areas of the country liberal
Republicans will be elected, and in some areas of the country
conservative Republicans will be elected.
GERALD
IBRARY
16
MR. NOVAK: Do you equite the liberal Republicans with
the segregationists, then?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I don't understand the question.
MR. NOVAK: You are putting the liberal Republicans and
the segregationists in the same basket.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, as long as the liberal
Republican and the conservative Republican believe in the basic
principles of the Republican Party, I believe they are Republicans,
and I think we ought to elect Republicans - period.
MR. AGRONSKY: Will you hold on for a second, Congressman.
We will follow up in a minute. There aremany more things
we would like to ask you.
We will resume the questioning in a moment.
MR. AGRONSKY: Congressman Ford, yesterday the
Republican Party in South Carolina held a convention. It was
lily white, not a single Negro was there. Do you approve of
that, sir?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I think the best answer to that,
Martin, is that last fall I was invited to speak to a Republican
luncheon in Natchez, Mississippi, and unfortunately that luncheon
in effect excluded any Negro participation. I had to cancel out,
and I think my decision was right.
I have appeared at luncheons and dinners on behalf
DEPARTMENT of FORD the LIBRARY
Republican Party in many Southern states where there were
17
MM.segregated Republican audiences.
I certainly believe that the Republican Party ought to include
in the South, as well as in the North, individuals from all
segments of our society, whites as well as Negroes, as long
as they believe in the philosophy of the Republican Party.
And where there is a deliberate exclusion of one segment of
our society, then I think the Republican Party ought to take a
hard look at whether they should participate.
MR. AGRONSKY: What's wrong in South Carolina?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: From what I know about it, I do not
know whether they specifically excluded them. But if they did,
if they precluded Negroes from participation, Negroes who
wanted to participate, then I think they made a mistake.
MR. SCHOUMACHER: Mr. Ford, the other day you said that you
did not play to be minority leader forever, that you hope to
become majority leader or step down. Have you set a date for
your retirement, or do you plan to become majority leader pretty
soon?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: [ think the prospects, Dave, are
getting better and better for the Republicans to make significant
gains in the House of Representatives. At the moment I do not
think the prospects are such that we can look forward to a majority
in the House. But public opinion today is rapidly swinging away
from the JohnsonHumphrey Administration, and there is greater
and greater Republican support throughout the country. And if
LIBRARY
BER
18
the Administration's credibility erodes in the next few months
as it has in the last few months, there is a distinct possibility
the Republicans will gain control in the House.
I happen to think we are laying a good groundwork, we
are getting good candidates, we are better organized, we are more
unified, and the Democrats are losing credibility, they are
disorganized, and I think the American people are getting
sympathetic to the kind of a program and the candidates we are
offering.
MR. SCHOUMACHER: You said once there you were going to pick
up 30 votes, and then it became 40 votes, and now it is almost
50 votes. What is happening? We don't see any evidence of it.
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, let me tell you the evidence is
pretty clear if you just look at the various opinion polls
throughout the country. The President and the Democratic
Administration has lost 3 to 3.5 percent nationwide. The
Republicans have gained a corresponding amount of public support.
And as this pendulum swings away from the Johnson-Humphrey
Administration to the Republicans, it automatically means
that we are going to pick up more and more seats in the House
and in the Senate.
MR. SCHOUMACHER: Is it Vietnam that is making it swing?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I have not analyzed just what the
issue is, except that on the domestic scene the Administration's
failure to do anything about the increase in the cost of living,
GERA
19
the Administration's failure to recognize the dangers of
inflation and the distinct probability and possibility
if the inflation gets worse we are going to have a recession
is the one thing that on the domestic scene very much worries
the American people.
MR. AGRONSKY: Gentlemen, I am very sorry, but our time
is up. Thank you, Congressman Ford, for being here to FACE
THE NATION.
- - -
GERALD K FORD
UNITED PRESS INTERNATIONAL
AUDIO NETWORK
1017 New Jersey Avenue, Southeast
Washington, D. C.
Release for
MONDAY A.M.
"FROM THE PEOPLE"
April 1
Interview with: Gerald Ford, House of Representative Leader, (R., Mich.)
Moderator:
Herb Brubaker
Panelist:
John Chambers, Washington Bureau Chief of UPI Audio Network and
Frank Eleazer, UPI Chief Correspondent in the House of Representatives.
Brubaker: This election year, Republicans, pointing to rising consumer prices and heavy
spending for the war in Vietnam, believe inflation will be a key issue, the minority
is trying to out back Administration programs and if it fails it plans to complain to
the people about what it considers reckless Administration fiscal policies. Much of the
attention is focued on the House, where this week the GOP almost succeeded in killing
appropriations for the Administrations Teacher Corp and Rent Supplement Programs. This
weeks guest on From the People is the House of Representative Republican Leader, Gerald
Ford of Michigan.
Congressman Ford, how do you assess Repubsican chances to out back some of these
Administration programs?
FORD: Well we are always hopeful but this past week we were disappointed
because the Administration from the President on down did so much and made such a big
effort to twist arms and brow-beat Democrats that we got very, very little help from
Democratic members of the House in trying to stock eliminate a program that over a
period of years would cost almost 500 million dollars. The so called rent subsidy
program. We are going to keep trying because as Republicans we feel the best way to
fight inflation is to cut back on non military spending and if we can out back non
military spending We cansvbid war time taxes which the President undoubtedly will
recommend to the Congress in order to tackle the problem of inflation.
Chambers: Congressman Ford, do you see any excuse for the Administration raising taxes
again this year?
FORD: of course the White House feels that one way to tackle the problem of the
increase in the cost of living is to have another wartime tax increase. I don't see any
excuse for it at the present time, if the Congress, with the help of the President,
would make certain reductions the kind of reductions that would relieve the pressure
in the area of inflation. But unfortunately the President takes the other tack, he
wants to spend as much 8.8 he proposed and in order to do that the President apparently
feels that there should be additional taxes to finance these expenditures.
Chambers: Do you believe these suggestions the President made the other day of a 5-7%
Do you think it's a threat to the business community?
tax increase is merely an incentive for business men to voluntarily slow domn the economy ?
GERALD
LIBRARY
2
FORD: It certainly has that prospect. But it seems that we ought to try the
effort and make a big effort to reduce expenditures first. I think the White House is
taking the cart before the horse and it would seem to me that these threats of additional
taxes that come from President Johnson could have a very unfortunate reaction because
what it does is to unsettle our economy generally, it tends to upset the plans of
industry and communities to undertake projects and programs that are aimed at building @
solid economy for the future. I think it is unfortunate also that the President is
calling upon communities, business and individuals to out back on spending and the White
House, under his leadership, is expanding our non military expenditures to the extend of
about 3 billion 200 million dollars in the next fiscal year. This double standard
confuses me and I think the White House ought to be condemned for it.
Chambers: Do you think then that the voluntary cooling down of the economy 8.8 it's
called the "hite House makes sense.
FORD: I certainly do not.
Eleazer: Mr. Ford, is it the intention of the Republicans in the House to oppose spending
on other great society programs during the year as it did this past week on Rent
Subsidies and the Teacher Corps?
FORD: I think we will generally take that approach Frank. We were certainly
a little disappointed this past week when we didn't get much cooperation from the
Democrats in the House, very limited effort by the Democrate to out back non military
spending but this shouldn't prevent Republicans from making attacks when the opportunity
presents itself to hold the line or defer or to defeat proposals for some of the great
society programs in the months ahead.
Eleazer: Well how then do you answer the Democratic charge that Republicans in the House
are trying to load the cost of the war onto the people least able to afford it, the poor?
FORD: I don't think that S a legitimate charge by the Democrates, because if we
spend all that the President wants us to spend and the Democrate 8 in the House apparently
want us to spend for non military programs and projects, we are going to have worse and
worse inflation and certainly inflation hurts the poor more than anything else. And it
hurts the poor in big cities so our answer to them is, if you really want to help the
people least able to pay, we better make a maximum effort to out back on non military
expense, we'd better do something about inflation right away.
Eleazer: The President pointed out this past week that he himself had made sharp
reductions in the budget and pointed out that he had proposed about almost a billion
dollars in outs in various programs which X the Congress apparently intends to put back.
One of those cuts was in the aid to impacted school areas. Why was it this week that
the Republicans in the House did not support a move to support that out?
FORD: Well I'm sure you remember Frank that on the floor of the House it was
a Republican, Frank Bow, the senior Republican on the Committee of Appropriations, who
offered an amendment to support Presid ent Johnson's budget to hold the line on the impact
school aid program.
Eleazer' Very few of your members went along with Mr. Bow on that.
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
3
FORDS I supported that and I think the majority of support in this area came
from our side of the aisle. The only one who spoke against the program We.S a Democrat,
accusing the President of unfairly reducing the expenditures in this area. So I think
Republicans in this particular instance were consistent as I hope we'll be consistent
in the months ahead.
Brubaker' Congressman Ford, are we in inflation right now?
FORD: There is no doubt about it. Tendays or two weeks ago the bureau of
labor statistics announced that the wholesale price index went up .7% in the month of
February and if you analyse that increase it indicates that the wholesale price index
will go up over 6% in a 12 month period. In the last four nths it's gone up almost 5%
as I recall and this is unfortunate because over a period of 6 or 7 years the wholesale
price index had been relatively stable and then this past week the bureau of labor
statistics announced that the consumer price index went up .5% for the largest increase
since 1951 in the month of February and of course last year under the Johnson-Humphrey
administration the cost of living went up 2% and under their own forecast for the year of
1966 the cost of living will go up at least 8% and undoubte ly more. So we are in in-
flation, vartime inflation right now and unless the Administration does something
affirmatively and effectively more than they have done the people least able to get through
the problems ** of inflation will be hit the worst and I think the President has a major
responsibility right now to do something about inflation. He hasn't done much 80 far.
Brubaker: Well if the President has a major responsibility and if he doesn't take this
responsibility as you see it and if Republicans fear they won't be able to out back some
of these programs, why don't you introduce them some tax reduction legislation?
FORD: I don't think we should introduce tax reduction legislation
Brubaker Increase, excuse me....
FORD: The Republicans would prefer and I think rightly so, to reduce non
military xpense. We can concentrate our efforts in this area and we could achieve
results in this area if we got some cooperation and I underline some from the White House.
So far we have gotten little. Let's try the reduction of non military expenditures first
and do it right now. As a matter of fact, the President himself with the money that
Congress appropriated last year if he didn't want to spend it wouldn't have to spend it.
He can refuse to spend funds that Congress has appropriated If he really believes that some
of these programs can be held back, could be defereed. All I see is continuous spending
in non military area by the administration, by the President, by the White House and I
think it is unforgivable really that We aren't getting any cooperation from them in holding
the line in this area.
Chambers: Mr. Ford, the President hhas talked about civil rights at various times, but
he's been rather slow in getting his message up here. Do you think he sort of put civil
rights in the back of the bus?
FORD: Well it looks to me John as the they must be having some trouble down at
the White House and the Dept.of Justice in putting together a bill to carry out
what we understood was to be the administration program in area of civil rights. I think
it's appropriate to note that at least a month age 25 Republicans in the Hous e of Repre-
sentatives put together a proposed civil rights bill and it has been introduced, the White
House hasn't done anything about it, the Democratic Control Committee on the Judiciary
GERALD
4
has done nothing about it, I can't understand what the delay is. I think one of the
problems is, however, that after Congress passed the voting rights bill in 1965
and after we had passed the civil rightsa et of 1964 there is considerable concern
that the Dept. of Justice has relatively sat on its hands, that there has not been
the kind of administration of those two major laws that the Dept. of Justice should
have done more. Maybe they have a little guilty conscience, I don't know about the
lack of initiative on the basi of the tools they already have.
Brubakert Are you charging the Administration as dragging its feet in the area of
civil rights and this possibly may be an issue this election year?
FORD: It seems to many people on the Republican side of the aisle that the
Administration has dragged its feet in the administration of legislation which they
already have.
Chambers: Mr. Ford in that connection the Republican Party seems to be coming up with
quite a few congressional e andidates in southern states who are segregationists.
Some of them seem to have pretty good prospects of being elected. Is this going to
embarrass the Republican Party nationally?
FORD: Let me take the broad subject because I think it is very important
for us to discuss here as well as elsewhere. The Republican Party in three states in
1964 elected 7 very good members of the House in areas that had formerly been
represented by the Democratic Party. I em told that those Republican candidates
ran on basic issues, federal power, expansion of the federal govermment in Washington,
the areas of fiscal responsibility, they didn't run on the issue of race relation.
Now, it is approproate to point out and it W&B noted by one of the members of the
Alabama delegation from the Republican Party that two of the most avowed segregationists
in the state of Ala., one of the I think was Sherrif in some Ala. wanted to run as a
Republican and the Republican party in Ala. turned him down, another one of the men
who got into some difficulty last year or the year before with the Dept. of Justice
I think it was in Birmingham he wanted to run on the Republican ticket in Ala. and the
Republican party in Ala. turned him down. The Republican Party in Ala. and the other
southern states in my judgment from what I hear about it is trying to build up the
party with a rather broad base and they are getting good candidates who are not running
on their race issue but are running in these forth coming elections on broader
issues that involve our national security and on domestiv problems as a whole.
Chamners: Congressman Ford, do you believe in Flying Saucers and Little green men?
FORD: John, all I know is that a number of people throughout. the country
in 1966 and a number of people in years gone by have honestly believed that they have
sighted unidentified flying objects. There are enough of these reported sightings,
I believe, to justify B. full scale investigation by a congressional committee at such
a congressional investigation it would be possible for the air force or other federal
agencies to put on the record for the benefit of the public what they know about
these alledged sightings. And those people who have believed in all sincerity, they have
made these sightings they ought to come down to Washington before a congressional
hearing and tell the public what they know about it and then the public willhave an
opportunity to e valuate the position of the air force and other federal agencies and
the public willhave an opportunity to evaluate the people who contend and allège they
have sighted these ufos. ¹can assure you of this, that the American people are interested
GERALD
5
the American people are concerned and somebody owes the American people the
opportunity to get a fullinvestigation for the benefit of the nation as a whole.
Chambers. But aren't you going to get alot of eye witnesses down here then, little
old ladies who perhaps have saucers landing in their back garden and the men come out
and talk to them? We had an eye witness from Tulsa who said, yes, there was the man
in the khaki uniform with the chevrons on his sleeve who came out. Aren't you
going to get all these people down here?
FORD: I know John there are a number of people who have made some statements
that are 0 ertainly, border on the incredible. I've had some telephone calls in fact
I got one the other night, about 1:30 or 2 e'clock chen I was sound asleep this
individual called me and told me about his or her experience. I'm sure there are
those that would fall in to the area of some degree of unreliability but I add, there
are a number of people whose credibility I will not challenge until they have had an
opportunity to present their case before a congressional hearing. One of the major
nationwide magazines in the last week had quite a story and they made some finding or
they presented some pictures - let me assure the public that this isn't going to pass
out of existence and the sooner the Congress grabs the thing and tackels it and gives
the public the ortunity to get the facts the better off we'll all be.
Brubaljer: Congressman, why do you believe the Air Force is withholding this infor-
mation?
FORD: I've never saidt he Air Force is withholding information. I think the
Air Force has tended to give the impression that all of these sightings had no
credibility at all. Maybe the Air Force is right, I don't really know. But I think
the way to find out and the way for the American people to pass judgment is for
responsible fofficials and the Dept. of Defense to come up and giv e their interpretation
before the American people. If they do that then the American people themselves
will judge the credibility of the, of those who have seen the UFOs and those who say
they don't exist.
Eleazer: Mr. Ford, since your election last year as Republican leader of the House,
you have traveled so muchthst some of your members have complained that maybe you
ought to spend a little more time at home. What are you up to?
FORD: Frank, let me seti he record straight. I did travel a great deal in
1965 on behalf of the Republican Party but let me add this, I had an 89% attendance
record on the floor of the House for all role calls and I think that's a pretty good
batting B. verage and in 1966 I've been in 16 or 17 states but again I've had an
attendance record of about 86% and I'll match that record with almost anybodyn
the House of Representatives in 1965 or in 1966.
Eleazer: The last time I had checked you had made about 208 trips to speak to various
Republican organizations, I believ in almost every state in the union. The ast fellow
that travelled that much on behalf of he Republicans turned out to be southern himself
as well as the party and he wound up as a Republicanmndidate in 1964 - could you be
doing something like that?
FORD: Frank, that's the last objective I have in mind because I'm very
happy with my responsibility in the House, I enjoy being a congressmen from the 5th
Congressional Dist. in Michigan, my sole objective is to help us elect 208 Republican
GERALD
LIBRARY
6
members to the House of Representatives in 1966 and one way you do it is to go out
throughout the country to stimulate Republican activities, to get Reppblicans good
attractive young Republicans to run for public office and to help raise money 80 we can
appropriately and properly finance goodcandidates amix in the Republican Party.
Eleazer' What do you think your prospects are in electing those 218 Republicans?
FORD: They have improved dramatically in the last 60-90 days, the Republican Party
in my honest opinion will elect between 40 and 50 Republicans over the number We have
at the present time. Now there are others who think we'll elect 50 or more Republic ans
in 1966, it may be the case. If the present trend continues. There is a prospect that
we'll do better than 50 but as of the moment with the President's popularity dropping off
and the Democratic Party popularity falling off the Republican Party gaining in the polls
generally I think our prospects are improving almost daily.
Eleazer: Mr. Ford, if you haven't been talking about yourself as President at all these
meeting with Republicans around the country who have you beentalking about, or who have
you heard other Republicans talk a bout?
FORD: Frank I have been talking about the Republican Party and the need for the
Republican Party to gain congressional and senatorial seats in 1966 and when I'm asked the
question who my favorite is for Republican nomination in 1968 I say that unless we make
significant gains to restore some competitive balance in the House of Representatives
and the Senate We will have & hard time finding a good candidate in '68 but if we make t he
kind of gains that will restore this competitive balance in the Congress then we'llhaveno
difficulty in finding a Republican e andidate for the Presidency in 1968.
Brubaker: Congressman Ford while you hacen't expressed any favorite candidates for 1968
last week after the Republic an coordinating com ittes met in Washington Barry Gold water
said if the convention were held today Richard Nixon would get the nomination. Do you
agree with that?
FORD: I think there is a good prospect that this is an ao curate statement as of now,
but certainly there are two other very good c andidates who are well talked about and
well thought of suchas my own governor, Governor George Homney of Michigan and the Gov.
of Penna., B&11 Scranton. These three are certainly the ones that are discussed most
frequently at the present time. There may be others that will come forth after the elections
of 1966.
Brubaker: Last week a Senate sub-committee revealed that because of our military
committments there in Vietnam four U.S. Army divisions here in the United States were
suffering. Does it appear that we are committing ourselves too heavily and that we are
suffering elsewhere militarily?
FORD: Well the Republiana in both the House and the Senate have raised questions for
the last year whether the Pentagon or whether Sec. Machamara were cutting back the
militarycapability of some of our other military components in order to live up to the
committments the President Johnson had made in south Vietnam and now this Senate committee
which is both Democrat and Republican tends to confirm what a number of Republicans alledged
in 1965 and partly in 1966. There is no doubt that under the Presiden't committement of
235,000 U.S. military personell to Vietnam there has to be some drain on our military capabii
elsewhere and the senate committee report confirms that.
FORD
7
Brubaker: Well then Congressman Ford, what would be the answer to that, possibly
to increase the draft to activate the reserves or the national guard?
FORD: If the President is going to expand our military commitment in Vietnam
undoubtedly there willhave to be an increase in the military manpower in the army,
navy and air force. Until We know more about President Johnson's plans in Vietnam
I would hesitate to make any forecast of what our overall military man power needs
might be and if I can't do that, I ean't telll you whether we'll increase the draft
or whether we'll call upon the reserves.
Eleazer: Mr. Ford, has the time come at last whenwe must face up to the necessity
of admitting Red China to the United Nations?
FORD: I don't think 80 Frank. The Red Chinese have shown no change from their
belligerent, agressive terroristic attitude, they are still mainly supporting
aggression in Vietnam, they are distainful of the United Nations, they are trouble
makers all over the world. Under this, these circumstances with this attitude, I
don't see how the United Nations could possibly admit Red China into that organization.
If theyw ere to change heart, if theywere to prove by their actions that they were
a peace loving nation, then there might be some argument for a change by this country
and by others in the United Nations. But under current circumstances with the
belligerency, the terror, the aggression Red China certainly doesn't deserve to be a
member of the United Nation.
GERALD R. LISAARY FORD
UNITED PRESS INTERNATIONAL
AUDIO NETWORK
1017 New Jersey Avenue, Southeast
Washington, D. C.
Release for
MONDAY A.M.
"FROM THE PEOPLE"
April 1
Interview with: Gerald Ford, House of Representative Leader, (R., Mich.)
Moderator:
Herb Brubaker
Panelist:
John Chambers, Washington Bureau Chief of UPI Audio Network and
Frank Eleazer, UPI Chief Correspondent in the House of Representatives.
Brubaker: This election year, Republicans, pointing to rising consumer prices and heavy
spending for the war in Vietnam, believe inflation will be a key issue, the minority
is trying to cut back Administration programs and if it fails it plans to complain to
the people about what it considers reckless Administration fiscal policies. Much of the
attention is focued on the House, where this week the GOP almost succeeded in killing
appropriations for the Administrations Teacher Corp and Rent Supplement Programs. This
weeks guest on From the People is the House of Representative Republican Leader, Gerald
Ford of Michigan.
Congressman Ford, how do you assess Repuboican chances to cut back some of these
Administration programs?
FORD: Well We are always hopeful but this past week we Were disappointed
because the Administration from the President on down did SO much and made such a big
effort to twist arms and brow-beat Democrats that we got very, very little help from
Democratic members of the House in trying to akmi eliminate a program that over a
period of years would cost almost 500 million dollars. The so called rent subsidy
program. We are going to keep trying because as Republicans we feel the best way to
fight inflation is to cut back on non military spending and if we can out back non
military spending We canavbid war time taxes which the President undoubtedly will
recommend to the Congress in order to tackle the proglem of inflation.
Chambers: Congressman Ford, do you see any excuse for the Administration raising taxes
again this year?
FORD: Of course the White House feels that one way to tackle the problem of the
increase in the cost of living is to have another wartime tax increase. I don't see any
excuse for it at the present time, if the Congress, with the help of the President,
would make certain reductions the kind of reductions that would relieve the pressure
in the area of inflation. But unfortunately the President takes the other tack, he
wants to spend as much as he proposed and in order to do that the President apparently
feels that there should be additional taxes to finance these expenditures.
Chambers: Do you believe these suggestions the President made the other day of a 5-7%
tax increase is merely an incentive for business men to voluntarily slow down the economy ?
Do you think it's a threat to the business community?
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
2
FORD: It certainly has that prospect. But it seems that we ought to try the
effort and make a big effort to reduce expenditures first. I think the White House is
taking the cart before the horse and it would seem to me that these threats of additional
taxes that come from President Johnson could have a very unfortunate reaction because
what it does is to unsettle our economy generally, ittends to upset the plans of
industry and communities to undertake projects and programs that are aimed at building at
solid economy for the future. I think it is unfortunate also that the President is
calling upon communities, business and individuals to cut back on spending and the White
House, under his leadership, is expanding our non military expenditures to the extend of
about 3 billion 200 million dollars in the next fiscal year. This double standard
confuses me and I think the White House ought to be condemned for it.
Chambers: Do you think then that the voluntary cooling down of the economy as it's
called at the "hite House makes sense.
FORD: I certainly do not.
Eleazer: Mr. Ford, is it the intention of the Republicans in the House to appose spending
on other great society programs during the year as it did this past week on Rent
Subsidies and the Teacher Corps?
FORD: I think we will generally take that approach Frank. We were certainly
a little disappointed this past week when we didn't get much cooperation from the
Democrats in the House, very limited effort by the Democrats to cut back non military
spending but this shouldn prevent Republicans from making attacks when the opportunity
presents itself to hold the line or defer or to defeat proposals for some of the great
society programs in the months ahead.
Eleazer: Well how then do you answer the Democratic charge that Republicans in the House
are trying to load the cost of the war onto the people least able to afford it, the poor?
FORD: I don't think that S a legitimate charge by the Democrates, because if we
spend all that the President wants us to spend and the Democrate S in the House apparently
want us to spend for non military programs and projects, we are going to have wqrse and
worse inflation and certainly inflation hurts the poor more than anything else. And it
hurts the poor in big cities so our answer to them is, if you really want to help the
people least able to pay, we better make a maximum effort to out back on non military
expense, we'd better do something about inflation right away.
Eleazer: The President pointed out this past week that he himself had made sharp
reductions in the budget and pointed out that he had proposed about almost a billion
dollars in outs in various programs which X the Congress apparently intends to put back.
One of those cuts was in the aid to impacted school areas. Why was it this week that
the Republicans in the House did not support a move to support that out?
FORD: Well I'm sure you remember Frank that on the floor of the House it was
a Republican, Frank Bow, the senior Republican on the Committee of Appropriations, who
offered an amendment to support President Johnson's budget to hold the line on the impact
school aid program.
Eleazer: Very few of your members went along with Mr. Bow on that.
BERALO, FORD LIBRARY
3
FORDO I supported that and I think the majority of support in this area came
from our side of the aisle. The only one who spoke against the program was a Democrat,
accusing the President of unfairly reducing the expenditures in this area. So I think
Republicans in this particular instance were consistent as I hope we be consistent
in the months ahead.
Brubaker Congressman Ford, are We in inflation right now?
FORD: There is no doubt about it. Tendays or two weeks ago the bureau of
labor statistics announced that the wholesale price index went up .7% in the month of
February and if you analyse that increase it indicates that the wholesale pric e index
will go up over 6% in a 12 month period. In the last four months it's gone up almost 5%
as I recall and this is unfortunate because over a period of 6 or 7 years the wholesåle
price index had been relatively stable and then this past week the bureau of labor
statistics announced that the consumer price index went up 5% for the largest increase
since 1951 in the month of February and of course last year under the Johnson-Humphrey
administration the cost of living went up 2% and under their own forecast for the year of
1966 the cost of living will go up at least 3% and undoubte ly more. So We are in in-
flation, wartime inflation right now and unless the Administration does something
affirmatively and effectively more than they have done the people least able to get through
the problems in of inflation will be hit the worst and I think the President has a major
responsibility right now to do something about inflation. He hasn't done much so far.
Brubaker: Well if the President has a major responsibility and if he doesn't take this
responsibility as you see it and if Republicans fear they won't be able to out back some
of these programs, why don't you introduce them some tax reduction legislation?
FORD: I don't think we should introduce tax reduction legislation
Brubaker: Increase, excuse me
FORD: The Republicans would prefer and I think rightly so, to reduce non
military e xpense. We can doncentrate our efforts in this area and we could achieve
results in this area if We got some cooperation and I underline some from the White House.
So far we have gotten little. Let's try the reduction of non military expenditures first
and do it right now. As a matter of fact, the President himself with the money that
Congress appropriated last year if he didn't want to spend it wouldn't have to spend it.
He can refuse to spend funds that Congress has appropriated if he really believes that some
of these programs can be held back, could be defereed. All I see is continuous spending
in non military area by the administration, by the President, by the White House and I
think it is unforgivable really that We aren't getting any cooperation from them in holding
the line in this area.
Chambers: Mr. Ford, the President hhas talked about civil rights at various times, but
ge's been rather slow in getting his message up here. Do you think he sort of put civil
rights in the back of the bus?
FORD: Well it looks to me John as tho they must be having some trouble down at
the White House and the Dept. of Justice in putting together a bill to carry out
what we understood was to be the administration program in area of civil rights. I think
it's appropriate to note that at least a month ago 25 Republicans in the Hous e of Repre-
sentatives put together a proposed civil rights bill and it has been introduced, the White
House hasn't done anything about it, the Democratic Control Committee on the Judiciary FORD
GERALD
LIBRARY
4
has done nothing about it, I can't understand what the delay is. I think one of the
problems is, however, that after Congress passed the voting rights bill in 1965
and after we had passed the civil rights a ct of 1964 there is considerable concern
that the Dept. of Justice has relatively sat on its hands, that there has not been
the kind of administration of those two major laws that the Dept. of Justice should
have done more. Maybe they have a little guilty conscience, I don't know about the
lack of initiative on the basis of the tools they already have.
Brubaker: Are you charging the Administration as dragging its feet in the area of
civil rights and this possibly may be an issue this election year?
FORD: It seems to many people on the Republican side of the aisle that the
Administration has dragged its feet in the administration of legislation which hey
already have.
Chambers: Mr. Ford in that connection the Republican Party seems to be coming up with
quite a few congressional e andidates in southern states who are segregationists.
Some of them seem to have pretty good prospects of being elected. Is this going to
embarrass the Republican Party nationally?
FORD: Let me take the broad subject because I think it is very important
for us to discuss here as well as elsewhere. The Republican Party in three states in
1964 elected 7 very good members of the House in areas that had formerly been
represented by the Demcoratic Party. I am told that those Republican candidates
ran on basic issues, federal power, expansion of the federal government in Washington,
the areas of fiscal responsibility, they didn't run on the issue of race relation.
Now, it is approproate to point out and it was noted by one of the members of the
Alabama delegation from the Republican Party that two of the most avowed segregationists
in the state of Ala., one of the I think was Sherrif in some Ala. wanted to run as a
Republican and the Republican party in Ala. turned him down, another one of the men
who got into some difficulty last year or the year before with the Dept. of Justice
I think it was in Birmingham he wanted to run on the Republican ticket in Ala. and the
Republican party in Ala. turned him down. The Republican Party in Ala. and the other
southern states in my judgment from what I hear about it is trying to build up the
party with a rather broad base and they are getting good candidates who are not running
on their race issue but are running in these forth coming elections on broader
issues that involve our national security and on domestiv problems as a whole.
Chamners: Congressman Ford, do you believe in Flying Saucers and Little green men?
FORD: John, all I know is that a number of people throughout the country
in 1966 and a number of people in years gone by have honestly believed that they have
sighted unidentified flying objects. There are enough of these reported sightings,
I believe, to justify a full scale investigation by a congressional committee at such
a congressional investigation it would be possible for the air force or other federal
agencies to put on the record for the benefit of the public what they know about
these alledged sightings. And those people who have believed in all sincerity, they have
made these sightings they ought to come down to Washington before a congressional
hearing and tell the public what they know about it and then the public willhave an
opportunity to e valuate the position of the air force and other federal agencies and
the public willhave an opportunity to evaluate the people who contend and allège they
have sighted these ufos. ¹can assure you of this, that the American people are interested
FORD LIBRARY is GERALD
5
the American people are concerned and somebody owes the American people the
opportunity to get a fullinvestigation for the benefit of the nation as a whole.
Chambers. But aren't you going to get alot of eye witnesses down here then, little
old ladies who perhaps have saucers landing in their back garden and the men come out
and talk to them? We had an eye witness from Tulsa who said, yes, there was the man
in the kkaghix khaki uniform with the chevrons on his sleeve who came out. Aren't you
going to get all these people down here?
FORD: I know John there are a number of people who have made some statements
that are C ertainly, border on the incredible. I've had some telephone calls in fact
I got one the other night, about 1:30 or 2 o'clock chen I was sound asleep this
individual called me and told me about his or her experience. I'm sure there are
those that would fall in to the area of some degree of unreliability but I add, there
are a number of people whose credibility I will not challenge until they have had an
opportunity to present their case before a congressional hearing. One of the major
nationwide magazines in the last week had quite a story and they made some finding or
they presented some pictures - let me assure the public that this isn't going to pass
out of existence and the sooner the Congress grabs the thing and tackels it and gives
the public the opportunity to get the facts the better off we'll all be.
Brubaker: Congressman, why do you believe the Air Force is withholding this infor-
mation?
FORD: I've never saidthe Air Force is withholding information. I think the
Air Force has tended to give the impression that all of these sightings had no
credibility at all. Maybe the Air Force is right, I don't really know. But I think
the way to find out and the way for the American people to pass judgment is for
responsible fofficials and the Dept. of Defense to come up and giv their interpretation
before the American people. If they do that then the American people themselves
will judge the credibility of the, of those who have seen the UFOs and those who say
they don't exist.
Eleazer: Mr. Ford, since your election last year as Republican leader of the House,
you have traveled so muchthst some of your members have complained that maybe you
ought to spend a little more time at home. What are you up to?
FORD: Frank, let me setthe record straight. I did travel a great deal in
1965 on behalf of the Republican Party but let me add this, I had an 89% attendance
record on the floor of the House for all role calls and I think that's a pretty good
batting a verage and in 1966 I've been in 16 or 17 states but again I've had an
attendance record of about 86% and I'll match that record with almost anybodyin
the House of Representatives in 1965 or in 1966.
Eleazer: The last time I had checked you had made about 208 trips to speak to various
Republican organizations, I believ in almost every state in the union. The ast fellow
that travelled that much on behalf of he Republicans turned out to be southern himself
as well as the party and he wound up as a Republicancandidate in 1964 - could you be
doing something like that?
FORD: Frank, that's the last objective I have in mind because I'm very
happy with my responsibility in the House, I enjoy being a congressmen from the 5th
Congressional Dist. in Michigan, my sole objective is to help us elect 208 Republican
GERALD
BRARY
6
members to the House of Representatives in 1966 and one way you do it is to go out
throughout the country to stimulate Republican activities, to get Reppblicans good
attractive young Republicans to run for public office and to help raise money so we can
appropriately and properly finance goodcandidates andx in the Republican Party.
Eleazer: What do you think your prospects are in electing those 218 Republicans?
FORD: They have improved dramatically in the last 60-90 days, the Republican Party
in my honest opinion will elect between 40 and 50 Republicans over the number we have
at the present time. Now there are others who think we elect 50 or more Republic ans
in 1966, it may be the case. If the present trend continues. There is a prospect that
we do better than 50 but as of the moment with the President's popularity dropping off
and the Democratic Party popularity falling off the Republican Party gaining in the polls
generally I think our prospects are improving almost daily.
Eleazer: Mr. Ford, if you haven't been talking about yourself as President at all these
meeting with Republicans around the country who have you beentalking about, or who have
you heard other Republicans talk a bout?
FORD: Frank I have been talking about the Republican Party and the need for the
Republican Party to gain congressional a nd senatorial seats in 1966 and when I'm asked the
question who my favorite is for Republican nomination in 1968 I say that unless We make
significant gains to restore some competitive balance in the House of Representatives
and the Senate we will have a hard time finding a good candidate in '68 but if We make t he
kind of gains that will restore this competitive balance in the Congress then We 'llhaveno
difficulty in finding a Republican 0 andidate for the Presidency in 1968.
Brubaker: Congressman Ford while you hacen't expressed any favorite candidates for 1968
last week after the Republic an coordinating ittee met in Washington Barry Gold water
said if the convention were held today Richard Nixon would get the nomination. Do you
agree with that?
FORD: I think there is a good prospect that this is an ac curate statement as of now,
but certainly there are two other very good c andidates who are well talked about and
well thought of suchas my own governor, Governor George "omney of Michigan and the Gov.
of Penna., Bill Scranton. These three are certainly the ones that are discussed most
frequently at the present time. There may be others that will come forth after the elections
of 1966.
Brubaker: Last week a Senate sub-committee revealedthat because of our military
committents there in Vietnam four U.S. Army divisions here in the United States were
suffering. Does it appear that we are committing ourselves too heavily and that we are
suffering elsewhere militarily?
FORD: Well the Republians in both the House and the Senate have raised questions for
the last year whether the entagon or whether Sec. Mac amara were outting back the
military capability of some of our other military components in order to live up to the
committments the President Johnson had made in south Vietnam and now this Senate committee
which is both Democrat and Republican tends to confirm what a number of Republicans alledged
in 1965 and partly in 1966. There is no doubt that under the Presiden't committement of
235,000 U.S. military personell to Vietnam there has to be some drain on our military capabiilt
elsewhere and the senate committee report confirms that.
GERALOR FORD LIBRARY
7
Brubaker: Well then Congressman Ford, what would be the answer to that, possibly
to increase the draft to activate the reserves or the national guard?
FORD: If the President is going to expand our military committment in Vietnam
undoubtedly there willhave to be an increase in the military manpower in the army,
navy and air force. Until We know more about President Johnson's plans in Vietnam
I would hesitate to make any forecast of what our overall military man power needs
might be and if I can't do that, I can't telll you whether we 'll increase the draft
or whether we'll call upon the reserves.
Eleazer: Mr. Ford, has the time come at last when must face up to the necessity
of admitting Red China to the United Nations?
FORD: I don't think SO Frank. The Red Chinese have shown no change from their
belligerent, agressive terroristic attitude, they are still mainly supporting
aggression in Vietnam, they are distainful of the United Nations, they are trouble
makers all over the world. Under this, these circumstances with this attitude, I
don't see how the United Nations could possibly admit Red China into that organization.
If theyw ere to change heart, if theywere to prove by their actions that they were
a peace loving nation, then there might be some argument for a change by this country
and by others in the United Nations. But under current circumstances with the
belligerency, the terror, the aggression Red China certainly doesn't deserve to be a
member of the United Nation.
FORD LIBRARY is GERALD
FOR RELEASE SUNDAY 5/1/66 A.M.
TELECAST 5/1/66 10:30 P.M.
OPINION IN THE CAPITAL
A METROMEDIA TELEVISION PRESENTATION
EXECUTIVE PRODUCER
MARK EVANS
PRODUCER
FLORENCE LOWE
DIRECTOR
MICHAEL SEAGLY
GUEST:
REP. GERALD FORD (R) MICHIGAN
HOST:
HERB BRUBAKER UNITED PRESS RADIO
REPORTER:
WARREN ROGERS LOOK MAGAZINE
- WASHINGTON B UREAU
EDITOR
THIS PROGRAM IS ALSO TELECAST ON THE FOLLOWING STATIONS:
TV
RADIO
WNEW
NEW YORK, N.Y.
KLAC
LOS ANGELES, CALIF.
KCSD
KANSAS CITY, MO
KMBC
KANSAS CITY, MO.
KMBC
KANSAS CITY, MO.
WCBM
BALTIMORE, MD.
KQED
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF.
WHK
CLEVELAND, OHIO
KUED
SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
WIP
PHILA. PA.
KTTV
LOS ANGELES, CALIF.
WNEW
NEW YORK, N.Y.
W CBB
LEWISTON, ME.
ARMED FORCES RADIO NETWORK
WEDH
HARTFORD, CONN.
WGBH
BOSTON, MASS.
WMEB
ORONO, ME.
WMED
CALAIS, ME.
WHYY
PHILA. PA.
WMEM
PRESQUE ISLE, ME.
WMHT
SCHENECTADY, N.Y.
WNED
BUFFALO, N.Y.
WQED
PITTSBURGH, PA.
WTTG
WASHINGTON, D.C.
WIRL
PEORIA, ILL.
WTVP
DECATUR, ILL.
PLEASE CREDIT METROMEDIA IN ANY QUOTES OR EXCERPTS FROM THIS PROGRAM
FORD LIBRARY i GERALD
PAGE ONE
BRUBAKER: CONGRESSMAN FORD, AS REPUBLICAN LEADER IN THE HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES, DO YOU BELIVE THAT VIETNAM WILL BE THE NUMBER ONE
POLITICAL ISSUE IN THIS ELECTION YEAR?
FORD: IT WOULD APPEAR THAT THE PROBLEMS IN VIETNAM WILL BE MADE THE
MAJOR POLITICAL ISSUE BY THE AMERICAN PEOPLE BETWEEN NOW AND NOVEMBER
8TH. I FEEL THERE IS A GREAT DEAL OF UNCERTAINTY, DISSATISFACTION,
AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE DEEPLY CONCERNED. AS A RESULT, IT WILL
UNDOUBTEDLY BE THE MAJOR POLITICAL ISSUE ON THE INTERNATIONAL FRONT.
ROGERS: MR. FORD, YOU SAY YOU BELIEVE THE VOTERS WILL MAKE VIETNAM
THE MAJOR ISSUE IN THE UPCOMING ELECTION CAMPAIGN. LET ME ASK YOU,
DO YOU THINK THAT WHETHER THE REPUBLICANS WIN LARGE NUMBERS OF SEATS
OR NOT, WHETHER THIS DEPENDS PRIMARILY UPON THE ISSUE OF VIETNAM?
FORD: NO, I DON!T THINK THE VOTERS DECISIONS ON THE PROS AND CONS,
THE MANAGEMENT OR MISMANAGEMENT, OF THE CONFLICT IN VIETNAM WILL BE
THE DECIDING FACTOR. THERE ARE ENOUGH OTHER ISSUES WARREN, THAT WILL
CONCERN THE AMERICAN PEOPLE; THE INCREASE IN THE COST OF LIVING UNDER
THE JOHNSON-HUMPHREY ADMINISTRATION, THE LACK OF CREDIBILITY IN MANY
AREAS, THE NEED ON THE PART OF THE PUBLIC TO RESTORE TWO-PARTY GOV'T
IN AMERICA, THE OTHER AREAS OF MISMANAGEMENT AND LACK OF PROPER ADMIN-
ISTRATION THESE ARE THINGS THAT WILL ALSO HAVE SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
ON THE AMERICAN VOTERS.
ROGERS: LET ME ASK YOU A CRYSTAL BALL QUESTION
.WHAT DO YOU THINK IS
GOING TO HAPPEN IN VIETNAM BETWEEN NOW AND THE ELECTION?
FORD: WARREN, I WISH, AS AN AMERICAN, I COULD GIVE YOU AN ANSWER.
AN ANSWER THAT WOULD MEAN THAT THE U.S. WOULD HAVE ACHEIVED AN HONORAB LE
PEACE, A PERMANENT SOLUTION, WHICH WOULD PERMIT THE U.S. MILITARY
BRARY
PERSONNEL TO WITHDRAW, YET LEAVE OUR OVERALL POSITION IN SOUTHEAST ASIA
ONE OF STRENGTH. THIS IS WHAT I HOPE. I BELIEVE THAT OUR AMERICAN POLICY,
PAGE TWO
BOTH MILITARY AND DIPLOMATIC MUST BE AIMED AT THAT OBJECTIVE.
ROGERS: YOU'VE BEEN VERY CRITICAL OF THE MANAGEMENT OF THE WAR. YOU'VE
TALKED ABOUT SHORTAGES, ETC., BLAMED MR. MACNAMARA FOR DOING WHAT YOU
CONSIDER AN INADEQUATE JOB. GIVEN THIS CRITICISM, WHICH YOUVIOUSLY
BELIEVE, HOW CAN WE HOPE TO ACHEIVE ANY SORT OF SUCCESS TO THE POINT
WHERE WE COULD WITHDRAW FROM VIETNAM?
FORD: EVEN THOUGH I THINK THERE IS CONSIDERABLE EVIDENCE OF WHAT I
HAVE DESCRIBED AS MISMANAGEMENT, SENATOR DIRKSEN HAS DESCRIBED IT
SOMEWHAT DIFFERENTLY, BUT THE SUBSTANCE OF OUR QUESTIONS OR OUR ALLEGAT-
IONS ARE THE SAME. DESPITE THESE MISTAKES IN JUDGEMENT, WHEN YOU
CONSIDER THE FACT THAT SECRETARY MACNAMARA HAS HAD OVER 50 BILLION
DOLLARS A YEAR FOR THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS, AND WHEN YOU CONSIDER THE
FACT THAT WE HAVE ALL THE OTHER POWER IN THE ARMY, THE NAVY AND THE
AIR FORCE, WE'RE BOUND TO BE SUCCESSFUL IF THE PROPER MILITARY MEANS
ARE USED.
ROGERS: SINCE YOU BEGAN YOUR CRITICISM, SECRETARY MACNAMARA HAS COME
BACK AS HE ALWAYS DOES IN A DEBATE, WITH THOUSANDS UPON THOUSANDS OF
STATISTICS. HE TALKS ABOUT BILLIONS OF BULLETS BEING AVAILABLE
FORD: MOST OF THEM IRREVELANT TO THE G.I. OUT IN THE FIELD
ROGERS: NOW ARE YOU STILL FIRMLY CONVINCED THAT HE IS MISMANAGING
THIS WAR AND THE RESULTANT SHORTAGES? HAS HIS ARGUMENT IN ANY WAY
SWAYED YOU FROM YOUR ORIGINAL CRITICISM?
FORD: THE SNOW JOB THAT SECRETARY MACNAMARA GIVES TO THE CONGRESS
AND OTHERS WHEN HE'S QUESTIONED,
THIS TACTIC ON HIS PART HAS NOT
CONVINCED ME THAT THERE ARE NOT AREAS WHERE A BETTER JOB COULD BE DONE.
THE FINE REPORTER IN SAIGON FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES MADE ALLEGATIONS OF
MISMANAGEMENT WHEN HE SAID THERE WERE BOMB FUSE SHORTAGES.
THE NEW
LIBRARY
YORK TIMES WAS APPARENTLY CONVINCED OF THE ACCURACY OF THIS BECAUSE
THEY WROTE AN EDITORIAL SUPPORTING THEIR REPORTER AND CONTRADICTED
PAGE THREE
SECRETARY MACNAMARA. THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES WHICH IS
A DEMOCRATIC CONTROLLED COMMITTEE, RECENTLY CAME OUT WITH A REPORT,
VERY SEVERELY CRITICIZING SEC. MACNAMARA FOR HIS DECISIONS TO CUT BACK
B-52'S, TO REDUCE B-58'S AND NOT TO MOVE INTO A HIGH PERFORMANCE
STRATEGIC AIR COMMAND AIRCRAFT. I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO FIND AN
ACCUMMULATION OF INSTANCES WHERE THERE HAS BEEN MISMANAGEMENT. LET ME
ADD THIS, THOSE IN THE PRESS LIKE YOURSELF, THE AMERICAN CONGRESS,
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO KEEP THE SPOTLIGHT ON
SECRETARY MACNAMARA AND THE DEFENSE DEPT. FOR ONE SINGLE REASON. WE
HAVE NOW, 240,000 AMERICAN G.I.'S STATIONED IN VIETNAM, ORDERED BY THE
COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF, AND IT'S OUR RESPONSIBILITY, COLLECTIVELY, TO
MAKE SURE THEY GET THE WEAPONS THAT ARE NEEDED ON TIME.
ROGERS: DO YOU THINK THE MISMANAGEMENT OF THE WAR, AS YOU CALL IT,
HAS CAUSED UNNEEDED CASUALTIES AMONG THOSE AMERICANS?
FORD: I WOULD HESITATE TO MAKE THAT ALLEGATION BECAUSE THIS IS A VERY
SERIOUS CHARGE, BUT WHERE THERE ARE SHORTAGES OF NEEDED WEAPONS, I'M
SURE THAT THE MAN IN THE FIELD WHO GOES OUT WITH BOMBS THAT DON'T HAVE
FUSES, HAS MANY, MANY, APPREHENSIVE AS TO THE JOB HE'S AB LE TO DO ON
BEHALF OF OUR COUNTRY.
BRUBAKER: MR. FORD, HAVE YOU COME UP WITH ANY NEW EXAMPLES OF MIS-
MANAGEMENT?
FORD:+ SINCE MY ORIGINAL CHARGE, THERE HAS BEEN A NUMBER OF OTHERS
WHO HAVE JOINED IN, INCLUDING HOUSE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES. I
BELIEVE SENATOR STENNIS, ON A MAJOR NETWORK, WHEN ASKED A QUESTION
SAID "THERE IS, AND THERE HAS BEEN, MISMANAGEMENT BY THE DEPT. OF DEFENSE"
I'M CONVINCED THAT AS WE GO DOWN THE ROAD, AND MY MAIL REFLECTS IT WITH
MOTHERS WRITING SAYING THAT THEIR SON DIDN'T HAVE THIS, AND WIVES
WRITING AND SAYING THAT THEIR HUSBANDS DIDN'T HAVE THIS PARTICULAR
WEAPON, OR THIS PART OF A WEAPON,
THERE IS A GROWING ACCUMMULATION
IN AREAS WHERE THERE IS A LEGITIMATE REASON TO CHARGE MISMANAGEMENT.
PAGE FOUR
I JUST HOPE THEY'RE CORRECTIVE BECAUSE THIS INVOLVES LIVES OF 240,000
AMERICANS WHO PRESIDENT JOHNSON SENT TO VIETNAM LAST YEAR.
BRUBAKER: WHY HASN'T SENATOR DIRKSEN ASKED FOR YOUR INFORMATION ON
THESE MISMANAGEMENT CHARGES? WHY DOES HE CONTINUE TO INSIST THAT HE'LL
RELY ON THE SENATE'S INFORMATION? WHY ISN'T THERE REPUBLICAN UNITY OF
THOUGHT?
FORD: I CAN ASSURE YOU THAT SENATOR DIRKSEN AND MYSELF HAVE DISCUSSED
THIS MATTER ALONG WITH OTHER REPUBLICAN LEADERS AND IT'S MY FEELING
THAT EVEN THOUGH HE USES DIFFERENT WORDS, AND I WISH I COULD HAVE THE
FLOW OF LANGUAGE THAT HE HAS, THE SUBSTANCE OF OUR ALLEGATIONS AND
QUESTIONS ARE EXACTLY THE SAME. AS HE SAID A WEEK OR SO AGO, AT A
PRESS CONFERENCE, WHERE, I SUSPECT, BOTH OF YOU WERE THERE, HE IN
EFFECT, JOINED WITH ME, AND I STAYED WITH HIM.
BRUBAKER: WHEN YOU WENT BACK HOME DURING THE EASTER RECESS YOU MUST
DETECTED GROWING UNREST AMONG THE PEOPLE ON VIETNAM POLICIES.
FORD: I THINK THAT'S AN ACCURATE APPRAISAL OF MY OBSERVATIONS IN TALKING
WITH PEOPLE AT HOME DURING THE RECESS . WHEN YOU TALK TO EITHER
DEMOCRATS OR REPUBLICANS, WHO WERE HOME AT THAT TIME, AND YOU ASK THEM
WHAT THE QUESTIONS WERE THAT THEY WERE ASKED BY THEIR CONSTITUENTS, ALL
OF THEM, OR VIRTUALLY ALL, WERE CONCERNED WITH PROBLEMS OF VIETNAM
BRUBAKER: ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THIS ISSUE, SENATOR ROBERT KENNEDY
FEARS GROWING ESCALATION OF THE WAR BECAUSE OF THE INVOLVEMENT OF MIG 21'S
DOG FIGHTS OVER NORTH VIETNAM. DO YOU HAVE ANY EVIDENCE THAT COMMUNIST
CHINA'S AIRCRAFT HAS BEEN INVOLVED IN THESE AIR BATTLES AND DO YOU FEAR
THE POSSIBILITY OF A DIRECT CONFRONTATION BETWEEN THE U.S. AND COMMUNIST
CHINA?
FORD: THERE APPEARS TO BE EVIDENCE OF COMMUNIST AIRCRAFT. I DON'T KNOW
WHETHER THEY ARE CHINESE BUILT OR SOVIET BUILT. I DON'T KNOW WHETHER
THE PILOTS HAVE BEEN TRAINED IN THE SOVIET UNION OR RED CHINA. THEY ARE
PAGE FIVE
CERTAINLY AIRCRAFT THAT NORTH VIETNAM COULDN'T BUILD. CERTAINLY THE
PILOTS COULDN'T HAVE BEEN TRAINED IN NORTH VIETNAM. SO THERE IS SOME
INVOLVEMENT FROM EITHER THE SOVIET UNION OR RED CHINA. A VAST MAJORITY
OF GOV'T EXPERTS DO THINK THERE IS NOT A GREA PROBABILITY THAT RED
CHINA WOULD NOT GET INVOLVED IN THIS CONFLICT DIRECTLY. THIS IS WHAT
WE'RE TOLD BY PEOPLE WHO TESTIFY BEFORE THE VARIOUS COMMITTEES.
ROGERS: SINCE THE GULF OF TONKIN INCIDENT A YEAR AND A HALF AGO, THE
RED CHINESE HAVE BUILT FIVE OR SIX NEW AIRFIELDS ON THE PERIMETER OF
NORTHE VIETNAM. THE AIRCRAFT ARE FLYING OUT OF THESE AIRFIELDS FROM
RED CHINA AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THE COMMANDANT CONTROL STRUCTURE,
THE EARLY WARNING SYSTEM, IS NCW INTEGRATED BETWEEN RED CHINA AND
NORTH VIETNAM. NOW SENATOR KENNEDY ARGUES THAT WHAT HAPPENS IF AIRCRAFT
FLYING OUT OF THESE RED CHINESE BASES SHOULD ATTACK OUR AIRCRAFT FLYING
OVER NORTH VIETNAM, AND UNDER THE DOCTRINE OF HOT PURSUIT, AND WE HAVE SAID
TIME AND AGAIN THERE IS NO SANCTUARY ANY MORE, WHAT HAPPENS IF WE THEN STRIKE
T HOSE AIR BASES AS WE HAVE TO DO IF WE'RE GOING TO FOLLOW THIS HOT PURSUIT
POLICY, THEN THE RED CHINESE COM E BACK AND PERHAPS STRIKE THE TONSANUT (SP)
AIRPORT IN SAIGON? ISN'T THAT AN ESCALATION? IS THERE NO END TO THIS?
WHAT IS YOUR VIEW ON THIS ESCALATION TIT FOR TAT?
FORD: I THINK THERE IS A DISTINCT POSSIBILITY IN THIS AREA THAT YOU'VE
BEEN DESCRIBING THERE COULD BE SOME ADDITIONAL CONFLICT DIRECTLY BETWEEN
THE RED CHINESE AND OURSELVES, PARTICULARLY WHEN SECRETAR\ RUSK SAID
SIX OR NINE MONTHS AGO, THERE WOULD BE NO SANCTUARY IF ANOTHER NATION,
AND HE CERTAINLY IMPLIED RED CHINA GOT INTO THIS THING IN A VERY ACTIVE
AND A VERY LARGE WAY,
FORD
ROGERS: NOW IF THAT'S THE COURSE WE'RE ON, ARE WE GOING TO BE CAUGHT
LIBRI
WILLY-NILLY ON THIS THING AND ROLL DOWN HILL SO TO SPEAK, WHAT ELSE CAN
WE DO HOW DO WE REVERSE THIS THING?
PAGE SIX
FORD: I THINK YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT IT FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF THE INDIV-
IDUAL PILOT OR CREW. THE PRESIDENT, AS COMMANDER IN CHIEF, HAS DECIDED TO
SEND THESE PILOTS TO VIETNAM TO DO A JOB ON OUR BEHALF. WE'VE GIVEN THEM
GOOD WEAPONS, AND THEIR MILITARY LEADERS HAVE DECIDED THAT THEY HAVE
THIS PARTICULAR MISSION OR RESPONSIBILITY. NOW, IF IT'S IMPORTANT FOR
THEIR OWN LIFE PROTECTION, WE HAVE TO GIVE THEM SOME FLEXIBILITY IN MY
JUDGEMENT.
BRUBAKER: ARE YOU SAYING THIS ISN'T A MATTER TO BE DECIDED HERE IN
WASHINGTON
THE DANGER OF ESCALATING THE WAR?
FORD: I THINK THE OVERALL, YES. THE PRESIDENT, THE SEC. OF DEFENSE,
AND THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF ASSIGN CERTAIN MISSIONS, THEN THEY HAVE TO
BEAR THE BASIC RESPONSIBILITY OF WHAT THOSE PILOTS HAVE TO DO FOR THE
PROTECTION OF THEIR OWN LIVES.
BRUBAKER: OTHER THAN VIETNAM, WHAT ARE THE OTHER ISSUES AS YOU SEE THEM
CONGRESSMAN FORD?
FORD: ALL OF THE INDICATORS PROVE BEYOND ANY DOUBT THAT THE INCREASE IN
COST OF LIVING UNDER THE JOHNSON-HUMPHREY ADMINISTRATION WILL BE THE MAJOR
DOMESTIC ISSUE IN 1966.
BRUBAKER: ISN'T THE ADMINISTRATION TAKING ANY STEPS TO PREVENT INFLATION?
IT SAYS so.
FORD: PRESIDENT JOHNSON HAS SAID HE'S TAKING SOME STEPS. HE'S REPRIM-
ANDING
HOUSEWIVES HE'S CLOBBERING BUSINESSMEN, AND HE IS HITTING, TO
SOME EXTENT, LABOR LEADERS WHO ARE DEMANDING WAGES AB OVE HIS GUIDELINES,
BUT THE PRESIDENT IS DOING ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO HIT THE BASIC CAUSE,
ONE OF THE PRIME CAUSES OF INFLATION, WHICH IS THE EXCESSIVE SPENDING BY
THE FEDERAL GOV'T ON THE NON-MILITARY AREAS. IT SEEMS TO ME THE PRESIDENT'S
CONDEMNATION OF OTHER PEOPLE, AND OTHER SEGMENTS OF OUR POPULATION WOULD
BE IN BETTER TASTE IF HE WOULD DO SOMETHING ABOUT THE AREA WHERE HE HAS
COMPLETE CONTROL - THE EXCESSIVE SPENDING OF THE FEDERAL GOV'T.
PAGE SEVEN
BRUBAKER: MR. FORD, THIS IS ONE POINT THAT SOME DON'T UNDERSTAND.
DESPITE THE REPUBLICANS DEMAND FOR A REDUCTION IN SPENDING EARLY LAST
WEEK WHEN PRESIDENT JOHNSON IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, HAD
RECOMMENDED A CUT IN THE SCHOOL MILK PROGRAM AND OTHER AGRICULTURAL
PROGRAMS, REPUBLICANS REFUSED TO GO ALONG. WHY?
FORD: THIS IS UNDERSTANDABLE. THE SCHOOL LUNCH PROGRAM IS FOR THE HEALTH
OF THE POOR PEOPLE IN THE CITIES OF THIS COUNTRY. THE MILK PROGRAM IS
ALSO FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE POOR PEOPLE IN THE LARGER METROPOLITAN AREAS.
THE LAND GRANT COLLEGE PROGRAM, THE AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH PROGRAM
...
THESE WERE PROGRAMS THAT OVER A PERIOD OF MANY YEARS HAVE PROVEN TO BE
BENEFICIAL TO THE COUNTRY AS A WHOLE AND TO THOSE LEAST ABLE TO TAKE CARE
OF THEMSELVES. IT WAS JUST POOR POLITICS ON THE PART OF PRESIDENT JOHNSON
TO CUT THESE ESTABLISHED PROGRAMS THAT HAD DONE A JOB, AND THEN TAKE THAT
MONEY AND THROW IT INTO THESE GREAT SOCIETY PROGRAMS WHICH ARE UNPROVEN,
WHICH HAVE NOT WORKED, WHICH ARE COSTLY AND WHICH IN MANY INSTANCES, ARE
NOT HELPING THE POOR. WE JUST THINK THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES USED ITS
OWN JUDGEMENT, AS IT SHOULD, TO HELP THOSE PROGRAMS THAT HAVE PROVEN
BENEFICIAL RATHER THAN GAMBLE ON SOME OF THESE GREAT SOCIETY PROGRAMS
WHERE THE POOR AND OTHERS HAVE NOT REALLY GOT ANY HELP AND ASSISTANCE
ROGERS: TO GO BACK TO AN EARLIER TOPIC, AS ONE OF THE CHIEF CRITICS OF
SEC. MACNAMARA, YOU HAVE ACCUSED HIM OF MISMANAGEMENT AND ONE THING OR
ANOTHER, YET, AT THE SAME TIME, WHEN SOMEBODY ASKED YOU IF YOU THOUGHT HE
OUGHT TO BE GOTTEN RID OF, YOU SAID "NO, YOU SHOULDN'T CHANGE HORSES IN
MID-STREAM. NOW, ISN'T THIS A PRETTY GOOD SLOGAN FOR PRESIDENT JOHNSON
AND THE DEMOCRATS TO USE IN THE UP-COMING ELECTION WITH RESPECT TO ALL
OF CONGRESS?
FORD
FORD: I THINK IT'S DIFFERENT WARREN, BE CAUSETHE CONGRESS IS NOT IN THE
DAY-TO-DAY MANAGEMENT OF THE CONFLICT IN VIETNAM, THE CONGRESS IS SUPPOSED
TO BE INDEPENDENT BODY THAT CHECKS AND BALANCES THE ACTIONS OF THE
PAGE EIGHT
EXECUTIVE BRANCH OF THE GOV'T. THE CONGRESS IS SUPPOSED TO PASS LAWS,
TO INVESTIGATE AND TO KEEP THE PRESIDENT FROM GETTING AND USING TOO
MUCH POWER. THE CONGRESS IN 1965 AND 1966, A DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS, HAS
BEEN PRETTY MUCH A PAWN OR A PUPPET IN THE HANDS OF THE WHITE HOUSE
so I THINK THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, IF THEY WANT A REAL CHECKREIN BROUGHT
ABOUT THE EXCESSIVE USE OF THE TREMENDOUS USE OF POWER IN THE WHITE HOUSE
THEY HAD BETTER ELECT MORE REPUBLICAN SENATORS TO CONGRESS.
ROGERS; YOU'RE THE LEADER IN THE HOUSE, SENATOR DIRKSEN IS THE LEADER
IN THE SENATE, DESPITE WHAT YOU SAY, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, I THINK YOU
DON'T AGREE ON VIETNAM, I THINK THAT WHAT WE SEE IN THE REPUB/LICAN PARTY
NOW, WHICH IS ASKING THE PEOPLE TO GIVE IT CONTROL OF CONGRESS, THAT WHAT
WE SEE IS THE OLD BUSINESS OF BEING SPLIT DOWN THE MIDDLE AND FIGHTING
FOR HARMONY AS NEAR AS I CAN TELL. YOU DON'T HAVE A SINGLE LEADERSHIP
OF LEFT, RIGHT, MIDDLE, IT SEEMS TO ME THERE IS A GREAT DISPARITY AMONG
REPUBLICANS. AS A MINORITY PARTY, HOW ARE YOU GOING TO PULL THIS GREAT
THING TOGETHER, AND GO BEFORE THE PEOPLE AND CONVINCE THEM THAT THEY
SHOULD GIVE YOU CONGRESS?
FORD: FIRST, LET ME SAY THAT WE, SENATOR DIRKSEN AND I, WERE THE PRINCIPAL
SPONSORS OF WHAT WE CALL THE COORDINATING COMMITTE WHICH IS COMPOSED OF
REPUBLICAN GOVERNORS, MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE AND SENATE, CANDIDATES FOR
THE PRESIDENCY, AND THIS REAUBLICAN COORDINATING COMMITTEE HAS DONE A
WONDERFUL JOB OF PULLING THE PARTY TOGETHER, WHERE WE'VE HAD SOME GOOD
STATEMENTS ON THE CONFLICT ON VIETNAM, ON INFLATION AND RELATED MATTERS.
LET ME TURN THE POINT OVER, THERE IS AMNIMUM OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE
REPUBLICANS IN THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE AND ELSEWHERE. CONTRAST THAT IF
YOU WILL WITH THE DISUNITY, AND THE DISARRAY, AND THE BITTER BACK-BITING
IN THE SENATE AMONG DEMOCRATS. THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY IN THE SENATE IS
TORN ASUNDER WITH DISUNITY AND IT'S IMPORTANT TO POINT OUT THAT THEY
ARE DISUNIFIED ON THE BASIC ISSUE OF HOW TO ACHEIVE THE PEACE AND MAINTAIN
PAGE NINE
NATIONAL SECURITY AND I DON'T THINK THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WILL WANT A
MAJORITY PARTY IN THE CONGRESS THAT IS SPLIT ALL OVER THE LOT ON THIS
ISSUE OF PEACE AND NATIONAL SECURITY.
BRUBAKER: SPEAKING OF PEACE AND NATIONAL SECURITY, THERE WERE REPORTS
EARLIER THIS WEEK THAT THE ADMINISTRATION HAS BEEN URGING WEST GERMANY
TO ABANDON EVEN NOMINAL CONTROL OVER NUCLEAR WEAPONS - SAY A MULTI-LATERAL
UCNEAR FORCE. IS THERE ANY SUBSTANCE TO THE REPORT AND CAN THIS KIND OF
THING BE AN ISSUE FOR THE REPUBLICANS?
FORD: THE WHOLE PROBLEM OF NATO IS A VERY SERIOUS ONE TO THE NATION AND
TO THE WESTERN WORLD. I PERSONALLY DON'T HAVE ANY KNOWLEDGE AS TO WHETHER
OR NOT THE ADMINISTRATION IS GOING TO TOTALLY BACK OFF OF THE MLF THEY
CERTAINLY HAVE NOT BEEN VERY ACTIVE IN PROMOTING IT, NOT AS ACTIVE AS THEY
WERE A FEW MONTHS OR A YEAR AGO. I HAVE THE FEELING THAT THE ADMINISTRATION
IS CONFOUNDED BY THE MULTITUDE OF PROBLEMS IN NATO AND THEY REALLY AREN'T
DOING VERY MUCH ABOUT IT, AND TRAGICALLY, THIS IS HURTING NATO AND IT'S
HURTING OUR EFFORT TO MAINTAIN THE KIND OF STRENGTH WE NEED AGAINST
POSSIBLE SOVIET AGGRESSION IN WESTERN EUROPE.
RRUBAKER: WHAT DIRECTION SHOULD REPUBLICANS TAKE? SHOULD THEY DO MORE
TO ACCOMMODATE DE GAULLE FOR EXAMPLE?
FORD: IT SEEMS TO ME YOU SHOULDN'T POINT A FINGER AT DE GAULLE AND BLAME
HIM FOR EVERYTHING AS SOME PEOPLE APPARENTLY DO. I'M SURE THAT OVER A
PERIOD OF YEARS, REPUBLICAN AND DEMOCRATIC ADMINISTRATIONS , WE HAVEN'T
DONE AS MUCH AS WE SHOULD TO TRY TO KEEP DE GAULLE WITH US, AND NOW WE
FIND THAT THERE IS A TENDENCY ON THE PART OF THE ADMINISTRATION TO BLAME
ALL THE EVILS. OF NATO ON DE GAULLE. THERE MUST BE SOME WAY THAT WE CAN
FIND A FORMULA TO BRING FRANCE AND DE GAULLE INTO THE NATO OPERATION SO
THAT IT'S NOT TORN ASUNDER SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO SPEND TWO BILLION
DOLLARS MORE TO BUILD THESE ADDITIONAL MILITARY FACILITIES TO GIVE OUR
FORCES THE KIND OF OPERATIONAL CAPABILITY THEY NEED.
PAGE TEN
ROGERS: A MOMENT AGO YOU TALKED ABOUT THE DEMOCRATS BEING DISCOMB OB ULATED
AMONG THEMSELVES HOW DO YOU PLAN TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS AND HOW
MANY SEATS DO YOU THINK YOU'LL PICK UP IN THE NOVEMBER ELECTION?
FORD: SENATOR THRUSTON MORTON IS BY FAR A BETTER WITNESS ON HOW MANY
SEATS WE'LL PICK UP ® HE ESTIMATES BETWEEN FOUR AND SIX AND I THINK HE
IS THE BEST ONE TO ANSWER WHAT STRATEGY THEY WILL USE IN TRYING TO
ACHEIVE THIS.
ROGERS LET ME ASK ;YOU AB OUT THE HOUSE THEN NORMALLY IN AN OFF YEAR
ELECTION, THE OUT-OF-POWER PARTY PICKS UP AB OUT 37 SEATS THAT'S AB OUT
AVERAGE. WIL L YOU BE AB LE TO HIT THIS AVERAGE...DO YOU THINK YOU'LL GET
MORE OR LESS?
FORD: WARREN, I THINK WE'LL PICK UP 40 OR MORE HOUSE SEATS FOR THE
REPUBLICANS. SENATOR DIRKSEN SAYS 50 OR MORE. WE DISAGREE IN THIS AREA.
I HOPE THAT HIS ESTIMATE IN THIS CASE IS MORE ACCURATE THAN MINE. I'M
WILLING TO ADMIT THAT THE POSSIBILITY EXISTS THAT WE CAN PICK UP 50 SEATS
THROUGHOUTTHE U.S.
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
FOR RELEASE SUNDAY 5/1/66 A.M.
TELECAST 5/1/66 10:30 P.M.
OPINION IN THE CAPITAL
A METROMEDIA TELEVISION PRESENTATION
EXECUTIVE PRODUCER
MARK EVANS
PRODUCER
FLORENCE LOWE
DIRECTOR
MICHAEL SEAGLY
GUEST:
REP. GERALD FORD (R) MICHIGAN
HOST:
HERB BRUBAKER UNITED PRESS RADIO
REPORTER:
WARREN ROGERS LOOK MAGAZINE
- WASHINGTON BUREAU
EDITOR
THIS PROGRAM IS ALSO TELECAST ON THE FOLLOWING STATIONS:
TV
RADIO
WNEW
NEW YORK, N.Y.
KLAC
LOS ANGELES, CALIF.
KCSD
KANSAS CITY, MO
KMBC
KANSAS CITY, MO.
KMBC
KANSAS CITY, MO.
WCBM
BALTIMORE, MD.
KQED
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF.
WHK
CLEVELAND, OHIO
KUED
SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
WIP
PHILA. PA.
KTTV
LOS ANGELES, CALIF.
WNEW
NEW YORK, N.Y.
WCBB
LEWISTON, ME.
ARMED FORCES RADIO NETWORK
WEDH
HARTFORD, CONN.
WGBH
BOSTON, MASS.
WMEB
ORONO, ME.
WMED
CALAIS, ME.
WHYY
PHILA. PA.
WMEM
PRESQUE ISLE, ME.
WMHT
SCHENECTADY, N.Y.
WNED
BUFFALO, N.Y.
WQED
PITTSBURGH, PA.
WTTG
WASHINGTON, D.C.
WIRL
PEORIA, ILL.
WTVP
DECATUR, ILL.
PLEASE CREDIT METROMEDIA IN ANY QUOTES OR EXCERPTS FROM THIS PROGRAM
FORD LIBRARY & GERALD
IRAM
PAGE ONE
BRUBAKER: CONGRESSMAN FORD, AS REPUBLICAN LEADER IN THE HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES, DO YOU BELIVE THAT VIETNAM WILL BE THE NUMBER ONE
POLITICAL ISSUE IN THIS ELECTION YEAR?
FORD: IT WOULD APPEAR THAT THE PROBLEMS IN VIETNAM WILL BE MADE THE
MAJOR POLITICAL ISSUE BY THE AMERICAN PEOPLE BETWEEN NOW AND NOVEMBER
and
8TH. I FEEL THERE IS A GREAT DEAL OF UNCERTAINTY DISSATISFACTION,
AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE DEEPLY CONCERNED. AS A RESULT, IT WILL
UNDOUBTEDLY BE THE MAJOR POLITICAL ISSUE ON THE INTERNATIONAL FRONT.
ROGERS: MR. FORD, YOU SAY YOU BELIEVE THE VOTERS WILL MAKE VIETNAM
THE MAJOR ISSUE IN THE UPCOMING ELECTION CAMPAIGN. LET ME ASK YOU,
DO YOU THINK THAT WHETHER THE REPUBLICANS WIN LARGE NUMBERS OF SEATS
OR NOT, WHETHER THIS DEPENDS PRIMARILY UPON THE ISSUE OF VIETNAM?
FORD: NO, I DON!T THINK THE VOTERS DECISIONS ON THE PROS AND CONS,
THE MANAGEMENT OR MISMANAGEMENT, OF THE CONFLICT IN VIETNAM WILL BE
THE DECIDING FACTOR. THERE ARE ENOUGH OTHER ISSUES WARREN, THAT WILL
CONCERN THE AMERICAN PEOPLE; THE INCREASE IN THE COST OF LIVING UNDER
THE JOHNSON-HUMPHREY ADMINISTRATION, THE LACK OF CREDIBILITY IN MANY
AREAS, THE NEED ON THE PART OF THE PUBLIC TO RESTORE TWO-PARTY GOV'T
IN AMERICA, THE OTHER AREAS OF MISMANAGEMENT AND LACK OF PROPER ADMIN-
ISTRATION THESE ARE THINGS THAT WILL ALSO HAVE SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
ON THE AMERICAN VOTERS.
ROGERS: LET ME ASK YOU A CRYSTAL BALL QUESTION .WHAT DO YOU THINK IS
GOING TO HAPPEN IN VIETNAM BETWEEN NOW AND THE ELECTION?
FORD: WARREN, I WISH, AS AN AMERICAN, I COULD GIVE YOU AN ANSWER.
AN ANSWER THAT WOULD MEAN THAT THE U.S. WOULD HAVE ACHEIVED AN HONORABLE
PEACE, A PERMANENT SOLUTION, WHICH WOULD PERMIT THE U.S. MILITARY
PERSONNEL TO WITHDRAW, YET LEAVE OUR OVERALL POSITION IN SOUTHEAST ASIA
ONE OF STRENGTH. THIS IS WHAT I HOPE. I BELIEVE THAT OUR AMERICAN POLICY,
PAGE TWO
BOTH MILITARY AND DIPLOMATIC MUST BE AIMED AT THAT OBJECTIVE.
ROGERS: YOU'VE BEEN VERY CRITICAL OF THE MANAGEMENT OF THE WAR. YOU'VE
TALKED ABOUT SHORTAGES, ETC., BLAMED MR. MACNAMARA FOR DOING WHAT YOU
CONSIDER AN INADEQUATE JOB. GIVEN THIS CRITICISM, WHICH YOUBVIOUSLY
BELIEVE, HOW CAN WE HOPE TO ACHEIVE ANY SORT OF SUCCESS TO THE POINT
WHERE WE COULD WITHDRAW FROM VIETNAM?
FORD: EVEN THOUGH I THINK THERE IS CONSIDERABLE EVIDENCE OF WHAT I
HAVE DESCRIBED AS MISMANAGEMENT, SENATOR DIRKSEN HAS DESCRIBED IT
SOMEWHAT DIFFERENTLY, BUT THE SUBSTANCE OF OUR QUESTIONS OR OUR ALLEGAT-
IONS ARE THE SAME. DESPITE THESE MISTAKES IN JUDGEMENT, WHEN YOU
CONSIDER THE FACT THAT SECRETARY MACNAMARA HAS HAD OVER 50 BILLION
DOLLARS A YEAR FOR THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS, AND WHEN YOU CONSIDER THE
FACT THAT WE HAVE ALL THE OTHER POWER IN THE ARMY, THE NAVY AND THE
AIR FORCE, WE'RE BOUND TO BE SUCCESSFUL IF THE PROPER MILITARY MEANS
ARE USED.
ROGERS: SINCE YOU BEGAN YOUR CRITICISM, SECRETARY MACNAMARA HAS COME
BACK AS HE ALWAYS DOES IN A DEBATE, WITH THOUSANDS UPON THOUSANDS OF
STATISTICS. HE TALKS ABOUT BILLIONS OF BULLETS BEING AVAILABLE
FORD: MOST OF THEM IRREVELANT TO THE G.I. OUT IN THE FIELD
ROGERS: NOW ARE YOU STILL FIRMLY CONVINCED THAT HE IS MISMANAGING
THIS WAR AND THE RESULTANT SHORTAGES? HAS HIS ARGUMENT IN ANY WAY
SWAYED YOU FROM YOUR ORIGINAL CRITICISM?
FORD: THE SNOW JOB THAT SECRETARY MACNAMARA GIVES TO THE CONGRESS
AND OTHERS WHEN HE'S QUESTIONED,
....
THIS TACTIC ON HIS PART HAS NOT
CONVINCED ME THAT THERE ARE NOT AREAS WHERE A BETTER JOB COULD BE DONE.
THE FINE REPORTER IN SAIGON FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES MADE ALLEGATIONS OF
MISMANAGEMENT WHEN HE SAID THERE WERE BOMB FUSE SHORTAGES
THE
NEW
YORK TIMES WAS APPARENTLY CONVINCED OF THE ACCURACY OF THIS BECAUSE
THEY WROTE AN EDITORIAL SUPPORTING THEIR REPORTER AND CONTRADICTED
PAGE THREE
SECRETARY MACNAMARA. THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES WHICH IS
A DEMOCRATIC CONTROLLED COMMITTEE, RECENTLY CAME OUT WITH A REPORT,
VERY SEVERELY CRITICIZING SEC. MACNAMARA FOR HIS DECISIONS TO CUT BACK
B-52'S, TO REDUCE B-58'S AND NOT TO MOVE INTO A HIGH PERFORMANCE
STRATEGIC AIR COMMAND AIRCRAFT. I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO FIND AN
ACCUMMULATION OF INSTANCES WHERE THERE HAS BEEN MISMANAGEMENT. LET ME
ADD THIS, THOSE IN THE PRESS LIKE YOURSELF, THE AMERICAN CONGRESS,
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO KEEP THE SPOTLIGHT ON
SECRETARY MACNAMARA AND THE DEFENSE DEPT. FOR ONE SINGLE REASON. WE
250,000
HAVE NOW, 240,000 AMERICAN G.I. 'S STATIONED IN VIETNAM, ORDERED BY THE
COMMANDER- IN- CHIEF, AND IT'S OUR RESPONSIBILITY, COLLECTIVELY, TO
MAKE SURE THEY GET THE WEAPONS THAT ARE NEEDED ON TIME.
ROGERS: DO YOU THINK THE MISMANAGEMENT OF THE WAR, AS YOU CALL IT,
HAS CAUSED UNNEEDED CASUALTIES AMONG THOSE AMERICANS?
FORD: I WOULD HESITATE TO MAKE THAT ALLEGATION BECAUSE THIS IS A VERY
SERIOUS CHARGE, BUT WHERE THERE ARE SHORTAGES OF NEEDED WEAPONS, I'M
SURE THAT THE MAN IN THE FIELD WHO GOES OUT WITH BOMBS THAT DON'T HAVE
FUSES, HAS MANY, MANY, APPREHENSIVE AS TO THE JOB HE'S ABLE TO DO ON
BEHALF OF OUR COUNTRY.
BRUBAKER: MR. FORD, HAVE YOU COME UP WITH ANY NEW EXAMPLES OF MIS-
MANAGEMENT?
FORD:+ SINCE MY ORIGINAL CHARGE, THERE HAS BEEN A NUMBER OF OTHERS
WHO HAVE JOINED IN, INCLUDING HOUSE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES. I
BELIEVE SENATOR STENNIS, ON A MAJOR NETWORK, WHEN ASKED A QUESTION
SAID "THERE IS, AND THERE HAS BEEN, MISMANAGEMENT BY THE DEPT. OF DEFENSE"
I'M CONVINCED THAT AS WE GO DOWN THE ROAD, AND MY MAIL REFLECTS IT WITH
MOTHERS WRITING SAYING THAT THEIR SON DIDN'T HAVE THIS, AND WIVES
IBRARY
WRITING AND SAYING THAT THEIR HUSBANDS DIDN'T HAVE THIS PARTICULAR
WEAPON, OR THIS PART OF A WEAPON, THERE IS A GROWING ACCUMMULATION
IN AREAS WHERE THERE IS A LEGITIMATE REASON TO CHARGE MISMANAGEMENT.
PAGE FOUR
I JUST HOPE THEY'RE CORRECTIVE A BECAUSE THIS INVOLVES LIVES OF 240,000
the
AMERICANS WHO PRESIDENT JOHNSON SENT TO VIETNAM LAST YEAR.
BRUBAKER: WHY HASN'T SENATOR DIRKSEN ASKED FOR YOUR INFORMATION ON
THESE MISMANAGEMENT CHARGES? WHY DOES HE CONTINUE TO INSIST THAT HE'LL
RELY ON THE SENATE'S INFORMATION? WHY ISN'T THERE REPUBLICAN UNITY OF
THOUGHT?
FORD: I CAN ASSURE YOU THAT SENATOR DIRKSEN AND MYSELF HAVE DISCUSSED
THIS MATTER ALONG WITH OTHER REPUBLICAN LEADERS AND IT'S MY FEELING
THAT EVEN THOUGH HE USES DIFFERENT WORDS, AND I WISH I COULD HAVE THE
FLOW OF LANGUAGE THAT HE HAS, THE SUBSTANCE OF OUR ALLEGATIONS AND
QUESTIONS ARE EXACTLY THE SAME. AS HE SAID A WEEK OR so AGO, AT A
PRESS CONFERENCE, WHERE, I SUSPECT, BOTH OF YOU WERE THERE, HE IN
EFFECT, JOINED WITH ME, AND I STAYED WITH HIM.
THE
BRUBAKER: WHEN YOU WENT BACK HOME DURING THE EASTER RECESS YOU MUST
DETECTED GROWING UNREST AMONG THE PEOPLE ON VIETNAM POLICIES.
FORD: I THINK THAT'S AN ACCURATE APPRAISAL OF MY OBSERVATIONS IN TALKING
WITH PEOPLE AT HOME DURING THE RECESS . WHEN YOU TALK TO EITHER
DEMOCRATS OR REPUBLICANS, WHO WERE HOME AT THAT TIME, AND YOU ASK THEM
WHAT THE QUESTIONS WERE THAT THEY WERE ASKED BY THEIR CONSTITUENTS, ALL
OF THEM, OR VIRTUALLY ALL, WERE CONCERNED WITH PROBLEMS OF VIETNAM
BRUBAKER: ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THIS ISSUE, SENATOR ROBERT KENNEDY
FEARS GROWING ESCALATION OF THE WAR BECAUSE OF THE INVOLVEMENT OF MIG 21'S
w
DOG FIGHTS OVER NORTH VIETNAM. DO YOU HAVE ANY EVIDENCE THAT COMMUNIST
CHINA'S AIRCRAFT HAS BEEN INVOLVED IN THESE AIR BATTLES AND DO YOU FEAR
THE POSSIBILITY OF A DIRECT CONFRONTATION BETWEEN THE U.S. AND COMMUNIST
CHINA?
FORD: THERE APPEARS TO BE EVIDENCE OF COMMUNIST AIRCRAFT. I DON'T KNOW
WHETHER THEY ARE CHINESE BUILT OR SOVIET BUILT. I DON'T KNOW WHETHER
THE PILOTS HAVE BEEN TRAINED IN THE SOVIET UNION OR RED CHINA. THEY ARE
PAGE FIVE
CERTAINLY AIRCRAFT THAT NORTH VIETNAM COULDN'T BUILD. CERTAINLY THE
PILOTS COULDN'T HAVE BEEN TRAINED IN NORTH VIETNAM. so THERE IS SOME
INVOLVEMENT FROM EITHER THE SOVIET UNION OR RED CHINA. A VAST MAJORITY
OF GOV'T EXPERTS DO THINK THERE IS NOT A GREA PROBABILITY THAT RED
CHINA WOULD NOT GET INVOLVED IN THIS CONFLICT DIRECTLY. THIS IS WHAT
WE'RE TOLD BY PEOPLE WHO TESTIFY BEFORE THE VARIOUS COMMITTEES.
ROGERS: SINCE THE GULF OF TONKIN INCIDENT A YEAR AND A HALF AGO, THE
RED CHINESE HAVE BUILT FIVE OR SIX NEW AIRFIELDS ON THE PERIMETER OF
NORTH VIETNAM. THE AIRCRAFT ARE FLYING OUT OF THESE AIRFIELDS FROM
RED CHINA AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THE COMMANDANT CONTROL STRUCTURE,
THE EARLY WARNING SYSTEM, IS NCW INTEGRATED BETWEEN RED CHINA AND
NORTH VIETNAM. NOW SENATOR KENNEDY ARGUES THAT WHAT HAPPENS IF AIRCRAFT
FLYING OUT OF THESE RED CHINESE BASES SHOULD ATTACK OUR AIRCRAFT FLYING
OVER NORTH VIETNAM, AND UNDER THE DOCTRINE OF HOT PURSUIT, AND WE HAVE SAID
TIME AND AGAIN THERE IS NO SANCTUARY ANY MORE, WHAT HAPPENS IF WE THEN STRIKE
T HOSE AIR BASES AS WE HAVE TO DO IF WE'RE GOING TO FOLLOW THIS HOT PURSUIT
POLICY, THEN THE RED CHINESE COM E BACK AND PERHAPS STRIKE THE TONSANUT (SP)
AIRPORT IN SAIGON? ISN'T THAT AN ESCALATION? IS THERE NO END TO THIS?
WHAT IS YOUR VIEW ON THIS ESCALATION TIT FOR TAT?
FORD: I THINK THERE IS A DISTINCT POSSIBILITY IN THIS AREA THAT YOU'VE
BEEN DESCRIBING THERE COULD BE SOME ADDITIONAL CONFLICT DIRECTLY BETWEEN
THE RED CHINESE AND OURSELVES, PARTICULARLY WHEN SECRETARY RUSK SAID
SIX OR NINE MONTHS AGO, THERE WOULD BE NO SANCTUARY IF ANOTHER NATION,
AND HE CERTAINLY IMPLIED RED CHINA GOT INTO THIS THING IN A VERY ACTIVE
AND A VERY LARGE WAY,
FORD
ROGERS: NOW IF THAT'S THE COURSE WE'RE ON, ARE WE GOING TO BE CAUGHT
WILLY-NILLY ON THIS THING AND ROLL DOWN HILL SO TO SPEAK, WHAT ELSE CAN
WE DO
HOW DO WE REVERSE THIS THING?
PAGE SIX
FORD: I THINK YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT IT FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF THE INDIV-
IDUAL PILOT OR CREW. THE PRESIDENT, AS COMMANDER IN CHIEF, HAS DECIDED TO
SEND THESE PILOTS TO VIETNAM TO DO A JOB ON OUR BEHALF. WE'VE GIVEN THEM
GOOD WEAPONS, AND THEIR MILITARY LEADERS HAVE DECIDED THAT THEY HAVE
THIS PARTICULAR MISSION OR RESPONSIBILITY. NOW, IF IT'S IMPORTANT FOR
THEIR OWN LIFE PROTECTION, WE HAVE TO GIVE THEM SOME FLEXIBILITY IN MY
JUDGEMENT.
BRUBAKER: ARE YOU SAYING THIS ISN'T A MATTER TO BE DECIDED HERE IN
WASHINGTON. THE DANGER OF ESCALATING THE WAR?
FORD: I THINK THE OVERALL, YES. THE PRESIDENT, THE SEC. OF DEFENSE,
AND THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF ASSIGN CERTAIN MISSIONS, THEN THEY HAVE TO
BEAR THE BASIC RESPONSIBILITY OF WHAT THOSE PILOTS HAVE TO DO FOR THE
PROTECTION OF THEIR OWN LIVES.
BRUBAKER: OTHER THAN VIETNAM, WHAT ARE THE OTHER ISSUES AS YOU SEE THEM
CONGRESSMAN FORD?
FORD: ALL OF THE INDICATORS PROVE BEYOND ANY DOUBT THAT THE INCREASE IN
COST OF LIVING UNDER THE JOHNSON-HUMPHREY ADMINISTRATION WILL BE THE MAJOR
DOMESTIC ISSUE IN 1966.
BRUBAKER: ISN'T THE ADMINISTRATION TAKING ANY STEPS TO PREVENT INFLATION?
IT SAYS so.
FORD: PRESIDENT JOHNSON HAS SAID HE'S TAKING SOME STEPS. HE'S REPRIM-
ANDING HOUSEWIVES HE'S CLOBBERING BUSINESSMEN, AND HE IS HITTING, TO
SOME EXTENT, LABOR LEADERS WHO ARE DEMANDING WAGES AB OVE HIS GUIDELINES,
B UT THE PRESIDENT IS DOING ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO HIT THE BASIC CAUSE,
ONE OF THE PRIME CAUSES OF INFLATION, WHICH IS THE EXCESSIVE SPENDING BY
THE FEDERAL GOV'T ON THE NON-MILITARY AREAS. IT SEEMS TO ME THE PRESIDENT'S
CONDEMNATION OF OTHER PEOPLE, AND OTHER SEGMENTS OF OUR POPULATION WOULD
BE IN BETTER TASTE IF HE WOULD DO SOME THING ABOUT THE AREA WHERE HE HAS
COMPLETE CONTROL - THE EXCESSIVE SPENDING OF THE FEDERAL GOV'T.
PAGE SEVEN
BRUBAKER: MR. FORD, THIS IS ONE POINT THAT SOME DON'T UNDERSTAND
DESPITE THE REPUBLICANS DEMAND FOR A REDUCTION IN SPENDING EARLY LAST
WEEK WHEN PRESIDENT JOHNSON IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, HAD
RECOMMENDED A CUT IN THE SCHOOL MILK PROGRAM AND OTHER AGRICULTURAL
PROGRAMS, REPUBLICANS REFUSED TO GO ALONG. WHY?
FORD: THIS IS UNDERSTANDABLE. THE SCHOOL LUNCH PROGRAM IS FOR THE HEALTH
OF THE POOR PEOPLE IN THE CITIES OF THIS COUNTRY. THE MILK PROGRAM IS
ALSO FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE POOR PEOPLE IN THE LARGER METROPOLITAN AREAS.
THE LAND GRANT COLLEGE PROGRAM, THE AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH PROGRAM
THESE WERE PROGRAMS THAT OVER A PERIOD OF MANY YEARS HAVE PROVEN TO BE
BENEFICIAL TO THE COUNTRY AS A WHOLE AND TO THOSE LEAST ABLE TO TAKE CARE
OF THEMSELVES. IT WAS JUST POOR POLITICS ON THE PART OF PRESIDENT JOHNSON
TO CUT THESE ESTABLISHED PROGRAMS THAT HAD DONE A JOB, AND THEN TAKE THAT
MONEY AND THROW IT INTO THESE GREAT SOCIETY PROGRAMS WHICH ARE UNPROVEN,
WHICH HAVE NOT WORKED, WHICH ARE COSTLY AND WHICH IN MANY INSTANCES, ARE
NOT HELPING THE POOR. WE JUST THINK THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES USED ITS
OWN JUDGEMENT, AS IT SHOULD, TO HELP THOSE PROGRAMS THAT HAVE PROVEN
BENEFICIAL RATHER THAN GAMBLE ON SOME OF THESE GREAT SOCIETY PROGRAMS
WHERE THE POOR AND OTHERS HAVE NOT REALLY GOT ANY HELP AND ASSISTANCE
ROGERS: TO GO BACK TO AN EARLIER TOPIC, AS ONE OF THE CHIEF CRITICS OF
SEC. MACNAMARA, YOU HAVE ACCUSED HIM OF MISMANAGEMENT AND ONE THING OR
ANOTHER, YET, AT THE SAME TIME, WHEN SOMEBODY ASKED YOU IF YOU THOUGHT HE
OUGHT TO BE GOTTEN RID OF, YOU SAID "NO, YOU SHOULDN'T CHANGE HORSES IN
MID-STREAM. NOW, ISN'T THIS A PRETTY GOOD SLOGAN FOR PRESIDENT JOHNSON
AND THE DEMOCRATS TO USE IN THE UP-COMING ELECTION WITH RESPECT TO ALL
OF CONGRESS?
FORD: I THINK IT'S DIFFERENT WARREN, BE CAUSETHE CONGRESS IS NOT IN THE
DAY-TO-DAY MANAGEMENT OF THE CONFLICT IN VIETNAM, THE CONGRESS IS SUPPOSED
TO BE INDEPENDENT BODY THAT CHECKS AND BALANCES THE ACTIONS OF THE
PAGE EIGHT
EXECUTIVE BRANCH OF THE GOV'T. THE CONGRESS IS SUPPOSED TO PASS LAWS,
TO INVESTIGATE AND TO KEEP THE PRESIDENT FROM GETTING AND USING TOO
MUCH POWER. THE CONGRESS IN 1965 AND 1966, A DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS, HAS
BEEN PRETTY MUCH A PAWN OR A PUPPET IN THE HANDS OF THE WHITE HOUSE
so I THINK THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, IF THEY WANT A REAL CHECKREIN BROUGHT
ABOUT THE EXCESSIVE USE OF THE TREMENDOUS USE OF POWER IN THE WHITE HOUSE
THEY HAD BETTER ELECT MORE REPUBLICAN SENATORS TO CONGRESS.
ROGERS; YOU'RE THE LEADER IN THE HOUSE, SENATOR DIRKSEN IS THE LEADER
IN THE SENATE, DESPITE WHAT YOU SAY, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, I THINK YOU
DON'T AGREE ON VIETNAM, I THINK THAT WHAT WE SEE IN THE REPUB/LICAN PARTY
NOW, WHICH IS ASKING THE PEOPLE TO GIVE IT CONTROL OF CONGRESS, THAT WHAT
WE SEE IS THE OLD BUSINESS OF BEING SPLIT DOWN THE MIDDLE AND FIGHTING
FOR HARMONY AS NEAR AS I CAN TELL. YOU DON'T HAVE A SINGLE LEADERSHIP
OF LEFT, RIGHT, MIDDLE, IT SEEMS TO ME THERE IS A GREAT DISPARITY AMONG
REPUBLICANS. AS A MINORITY PARTY, HOW ARE YOU GOING TO PULL THIS GREAT
THING TOGETHER, AND GO BEFORE THE PEOPLE AND CONVINCE THEM THAT THEY
SHOULD GIVE YOU CONGRESS?
FORD: FIRST, LET ME SAY THAT WE, SENATOR DIRKSEN AND I, WERE THE PRINCIPAL
SPONSORS OF WHAT WE CALL THE COORDINATING COMMITTE WHICH IS COMPOSED OF
REPUBLICAN GOVERNORS, MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE AND SENATE, CANDIDATES FOR
THE PRESIDENCY, AND THIS REFUBLICAN COORDINATING COMMITTEE HAS DONE A
WONDERFUL JOB OF PULLING THE PARTY TOGETHER, WHERE WE'VE HAD SOME GOOD
STATEMENTS ON THE CONFLICT ON VIETNAM, ON INFLATION AND RELATED MATTERS.
LET ME TURN THE POINT OVER, THERE IS AMNIMUM OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE
REPUBLICANS IN THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE AND ELSEWHERE. CONTRAST THAT IF
YOU WILL WITH THE DISUNITY, AND THE DISARRAY, AND THE BITTER BACK-BITING
IN THE SENATE AMONG DEMOCRATS. THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY IN THE SENATE IS
TORN ASUNDER WITH DISUNITY AND IT'S IMPORTANT TO POINT OUT THAT THEY
ARE DISUNIFIED ON THE BASIC ISSUE OF HOW TO ACHEIVE THE PEACE AND MAINTAIN
PAGE NINE
NATIONAL SECURITY AND I DON'T THINK THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WILL WANT A
MAJORITY PARTY IN THE CONGRESS THAT IS SPLIT ALL OVER THE LOT ON THIS
ISSUE OF PEACE AND NATIONAL SECURITY.
BRUBAKER: SPEAKING OF PEACE AND NATIONAL SECURITY, THERE WERE REPORTS
EARLIER THIS WEEK THAT THE ADMINISTRATION HAS BEEN URGING WEST GERMANY
TO ABANDON EVEN NOMINAL CONTROL OVER NUCLEAR WEAPONS - SAY A MULTI-LATERAL
UCNEAR FORCE. IS THERE ANY SUBSTANCE TO THE REPORT AND CAN THIS KIND OF
THING BE AN ISSUE FOR THE REPUBLICANS?
FORD: THE WHOLE PROBLEM OF NATO IS A VERY SERIOUS ONE TO THE NATION AND
TO THE WESTERN WORLD. I PERSONALLY DON'T HAVE ANY KNOWLDDGE AS TO WHETHER
OR NOT THE ADMINISTRATION IS GOING TO TOTALLY BACK OFF OF THE MLF THEY
CERTAINLY HAVE NOT BEEN VERY ACTIVE IN PROMOTING IT, NOT AS ACTIVE AS THEY
WERE A FEW MONTHS OR A YEAR AGO. I HAVE THE FEELING THAT THE ADMINISTRATION
IS CONFOUNDED BY THE MULTITUDE OF PROBLEMS IN NATO AND THEY REALLY AREN'T
DOING VERY MUCH ABOUT IT, AND TRAGICALLY, THIS IS HURTING NATO AND IT'S
HURTING OUR EFFORT TO MAINTAIN THE KIND OF STRENGTH WE NEED AGAINST
POSSIBLE SOVIET AGGRESSION IN WESTERN EUROPE.
RRUBAKER: WHAT DIRECTION SHOULD REPUBLICANS TAKE? SHOULD THEY DO MORE
TO ACCOMMODATE DE GAULLE FOR EXAMPLE?
FORD: IT SEEMS TO ME YOU SHOULDN'T POINT A FINGER AT DE GAULLE AND BLAME
HIM FOR EVERYTHING AS SOME PEOPLE APPARENTLY DO. I'M SURE THAT OVER A
PERIOD OF YEARS, REPUBLICAN AND DEMOCRATIC ADMINISTRATIONS WE HAVEN'T
DONE AS MUCH AS WE SHOULD TO TRY TO KEEP DE GAULLE WITH US, AND NOW WE
FIND THAT THERE IS A TENDENCY ON THE PART OF THE ADMINISTRATION TO BLAME
ALL THE EVILS. OF NATO ON DE GAULLE. THERE MUST BE SOME WAY THAT WE CAN
FIND A FORMULA TO BRING FRANCE AND DE GAULLE INTO THE NATO OPERATION SO
THAT IT'S NOT TORN ASUNDER. SQ THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO SPEND TWO BILLION
DOLLARS MORE TO BUILD THESE ADDITIONAL MILITARY FACILITIES TO GIVE OUR
FORCES THE KIND OF OPERATIONAL CAPABILITY THEY NEED.
PAGE TEN
ROGERS: A MOMENT AGO YOU TALKED ABOUT THE DEMOCRATS BEING DISCOMB OB ULATED
AMONG THEMSELVES HOW DO YOU PLAN TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS AND HOW
MANY SEATS DO YOU THINK YOU'LL PICK UP IN THE NOVEMBER ELECTION?
FORD: SENATOR THRUSTON MORTON IS BY FAR A BETTER WITNESS ON HOW MANY
SEATS WE'LL PICK UP . HE ESTIMATES BETWEEN FOUR AND SIX AND I THINK HE
IS THE BEST ONE TO ANSWER WHAT STRATEGY THEY WILL USE IN TRYING TO
ACHEIVE THIS.
ROGERS : LET ME ASK ; YOU AB OUT THE HOUSE THEN NORMALLY IN AN OFF YEAR
ELECTION, THE OUT-OF-POWER PARTY PICKS UP AB OUT 37 SEATS THAT'S AB OUT
AVERAGE. WIL L YOU BE ABLE TO HIT THIS AVERAGE DO YOU THINK YOU'LL GET
MORE OR LESS?
FORD: WARREN, I THINK WE'LL PICK UP 40 OR MORE HOUSE SEATS FOR THE
REPUBLICANS. SENATOR DIRKSEN SAYS 50 OR MORE. WE DISAGREE IN THIS AREA.
I HOPE THAT HIS ESTIMATE IN THIS CASE IS MORE ACCURATE THAN MINE. I'M
WILLING TO ADMIT THAT THE POSSIBILITY EXISTS THAT WE CAN PICK UP 50 SEATS
THROUGHOUTTHE U.S.
DERALA R.FORD LIBRARY
Inf. or Broadcosts
CBS NEWS SPECIAL
"The 72¢ Dollar"
as broadcast over the
CBS RADIO NETWORK
Sunday, May 15, 1966
3:30 - 4:00 PM, EDT
p.12,14
14
p.12,
WRITTEN AND PRODUCED BY: Joel Heller
EXECUTIVE PRODUCER: Joseph Dembo
All copyright and right of copyright in this transcript and
in the program are owned by CBS. This transcript may not
be copied or reproduced or used in any way (other than for
purposes of reference, discussion and review) without the
written permission of the Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
1
CHARLES KURALT:
This is a sound of money being
made, An exhaust pipe being bolted to a car moving on an
assembly line in Detroit. Soon a customer will take delivery of
that 1966 model car and pay for it with 1966 model dollars. But,
while the customer's car is the biggest and best in history, his
dollars are the smallest. Compared with what dollars could buy
in 1946, they're only worth 72 cents, and before the end of this
year they may be worth even less. Americans are facing a hazard
of prosperity. It's called inflation.
ANNOUNCER:
From CBS NEWS: "THE 72¢ DOLLAR,"
a special broadcast with CBS NEWS Correspondent Charles Kuralt.
TOUR GUIDE:
Off to our right, we should see a
car leave the line every 54 seconds, under its own power, giving
us some 66 cars an hour.
KURALT:
The number of cars Detroit makes
is a barometer of our times. When auto sales are good, it's
usually a reflection of what's going on everywhere else. This
country - like the auto business - has had five years of steady
growth. We're now enjoying the greatest prosperity in our
history. But that prosperity is beginning to hurt. For six
years price rises were few and far between, and then about a year
and a half ago prices stopped easing up at a slow and steady rate
and suddenly began to climb faster. Food and medicine,
transportation and housing, all started to cost more. To find
out why, CBS NEWS went to Detroit to talk to a young couple whose
way of life depends on that symbol of the high-horsepower economy,
the automobile.
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
2
Assembly line worker Tim Mikulen
and his wife Connie helped us illustrate the problems of
inflation by telling their story.
TIM MIKULEN:
When I first got discharged
from the service, I came out - and I was looking for a job, and
couldn't find a job any place, besides menial part-time jobs - I
washed walls, caddied, did odd jobs - nothing you could make a
decent living at. And this went on for about 11½ months.
Everybody was out of work. There were tradesmen, skilled
tradesmen, plumbers, electricians, the ones out of the Big Three:
General Motors, Chrysler's, Ford's. Tried the public utilities.
Tried to get on the Police Department even. And that was sewed
up also.
KURALT:
As the nation's economy began
to pick up, things began to look brighter in Detroit, especially
for Tim Mikulen.
TIM MIKULEN:
The last part of 1961, I went
down the Ford Motor Company and they were hiring everybody. People
started buying cars, and they couldn't get enough people to work
then. There were - had a shortage of manpower. So things picked
up pretty well for us.
KURALT:
Tim's first job with the Ford
Company was loading cars on railroad trains. Today he's on the
assembly line, repairing the interior trim of Mustangs. He's
paid $3.08 an hour. He gets ten hours a week of overtime. But
Connie, Tim's wife, says a lot of that extra money is being used
up by higher prices at the supermarket.
CONNIE MIKULEN:
I'd like a pound and a half
of FORD LIBRARY
pork and a pound and half of veal
No, I want the 89 cent.
3
That's too expensive - $1.09 a pound, veal cutlets. And what
were they before? They were -
BUTCHER:
Eighty - eighty-nine cents a
pound.
CONNIE MIKULEN:
Eighty-nine cents a pound. Now
they're up to $1.09 a pound. And you can't cook the cheaper
stuff because it isn't as good. It shrinks anyway. So you might
as well get the better one if you - you know, want something to
eat.
KURALT:
Back home Tim and Connie
discussed what they bought.
CONNIE MIKULEN:
There were a few things that
went up, like tomatoes, for instance, went up. Five cost $1.06
cents. And milk went up. And hamburger went up. How much was
it last week?
TIM MIKULEN:
Last week, hamburger - ground
chuck was fifty-seven cents a pound. And this week, in just one
week's time, it went' up - up to sixty-six cents a pound.
CONNIE MIKULEN:
We just buy what we need and our
bill still ends up around $35.00 and $40.00.
KURALT:
Higher food prices have
aggravated inflation. A cut-back in meat production a few years
ago and costs went up. Last year's drought came along - and they
went up further. What about the future? Nate Fink, a vice
president of the Great Scot Supermarket chain where Connie shops.
FINK:
We're not looking for any
FORD
increased costs and we're not buying against the market, because
we feel that prices are definitely on a downward trend.
GERAL
LIBRARY
4
KURALT:
But other prices continue to
rise and they're beginning to have an important effect on peoples'
lives. Tim, for example, dreamed of owning his own home.
TIM MIKULEN:
My wife and I - we've been
living on rent now for four years, so we've been saving a dollar
here, a dollar there, and last year we went out pricing homes.
We don't want a new home, we're looking at older homes. So then
this year we went out again, looking; we figured we had enough
for a down payment anyway. And prices went up $2,000 on the same
home, in a year's time. So this puts us in a bind again, so we
have to wait longer now. So we can't afford to invest into a
home.
KURALT:
Connie has another way of
measuring inflation.
CONNIE MIKULEN:
My first child, Eric, was born
November 21 of 1963, and at the time the pregnancy cost $85. My
second son, Mark, was born January 6th, 1965, and he cost $90.
Now, this baby will be born around August 17th, 1966, and it'll
cost $100. Since everything else has gone up, I figured the
doctor had to go up, too.
KURALT:
The Director of Detroit's
Hospital Council, D. Eugene Sibery:
SIBERY:
The trend in hospital cost to
the patient in the Greater Detroit area, during the last two
years has been an upward one because of the increase in salaries
to hospital employees. And as medical science advances, of
necessity we're going to have to have more personnel and better-
trained personnel to provide these services. And as a result the
cost is going to rise.
5
KURALT:
This month in Detroit, the
National Association of Purchasing Agents held its annual
convention. The Chairman of its Survey Committee, E.F. Andrews,
is also a vice president of the Allegheny Ludlum Steel
Corporation.
ANDREWS:
After the steel strike in 1959
and the '60, '61 recession, and within that whole period of
great price stability, the members reporting prices up were
outnumbered by the members reporting prices unchanged, or the
members reporting prices down. But in late 1964, we crossed
over and those members reporting prices up began to outnumber
those members reporting prices down. And that has consistently,
every month, gone up, up, up. And this is why we came out in
last month's report and said, quote: "Inflation is here."
KURALT:
When this happens, some people
get hurt, people like Connie Mikulen's mother, Mary Horeski.
She's been a widow for seven years. She collects 95.30 a month
in Social Security. To keep up, she's taken a job, working
through the night as a janitress in the Ford building.
MRS. HORESKI:
As the prices have gone up, I find
it more difficult to manage on the money that I get. I don't
know, you take $10, it seems like a dollar bill. Not enough. I
cut down on the food because everything is so high, you know. I
never buy butter because I can't afford it. There're just a lot
of other things I can't afford, like the best of meats, you know,
and - I can't afford it.
KURALT:
Michigan's Democratic Senator
GERAL FORD LIBRARY
Philip Hart:
6
HART:
The Social Security benefits are
up-graded occasionally, but they always lag behind. And they're
way behind the ratio they were when we first put them on the
books. So it's the older person or anybody on a fixed income
we're most concerned about now, with respect to the evils, the
grim suffering that inflation can cause.
KURALT:
Other people get left behind, too.
At Greenfield Village, Henry Ford's Museum of the way things used
to be, a schoolteacher told us the way things are now.
SCHOOLTEACHER:
I'm concerned with what this
inflation is doing to the people who are really dedicated and
want to stay in the profession. The income stays fixed but the
prices go up and there doesn't seem to be any way where you can
have a balance between the two, wages and the cost of living.
KURALT:
The Detroit Fire Department has
its headquarters upstairs over the fire house, at the corner of
Washington and Larned Streets. The Chief is Glen Thom, who wants
his men to get a 1,000 raise this year.
THOM:
We in the fire service are in a
predicament right now. In a time of prosperity we are probably
suffering somewhat of a depression: number one in wages, and
number two in our inability to recruit new employees. I think
this is the first time since World War II that we've been in a
position where we haven't been able to get new people into the
department.
KURALT:
Not only is Chief Thom having
FORD
trouble getting men, but he's also watched inflation pump up the
price of the new engine he wants.
GERA
LIBRARY
7
THOM:
A few years ago, engines cost us
in the neighborhood of about $24,000. Today they'll run up close
to $28,000 or $29,000. One change, of course, is they're adding
Diesel engines to them, which adds about $1,000 or $1,200 to the
cost. But you can see the difference between the $24,000 and a
$29,000 in - just in the engines.
KURALT:
The war in Vietnam. Is this
what's really behind inflation? To some extent it is. The
military build-ups come at a time when business is booming.
Unemployment is at a 12-year low. Wages and profits are the
highest ever - so high, in fact, that we're buying almost as much
as the economy can produce. We're buying more homes, color TV,
and in spite of this week's cutbacks, more new cars than ever
before.
SPEAKER:
The major impact of the
Vietnamese war on our own operations has been an increase in our
material costs, and a shortage of skilled labor.
KURALT:
The president of the Ford Motor
Company, Arjay Miller:
MILLER:
In my mind there's no question
but that we at Ford, and industry generally, could operate at a
very high level without the stimulus of military demand. A
reduction of defense spending, on the other hand, in my opinion
at least, would strengthen our present prosperity by reducing
the inflationary pressures present at the present time.
KURALT:
And so our demands for bigger
and better things have had to compete with the demands of the war.
The result: supplies are strained, prices have gone up. How long
will that strain last? Secretary of Commerce John T. Connor:
8
CONNOR:
We hope that after the middle of
this year, we will be able to level off our defense spending and
thus help to slow down total demand. But we must at first
devote as much of our resources as is required to meet our
obligations in that area.
KURALT:
The Korean war cost us four
times as much as Vietnam. During one year of it the cost of
living went up nine per cent. The current rise has been three
per cent since last year, but the trend is still up; that's the
worry. While this war has not yet puffed up the dollar as Korea
did, it is contributing a straw that is bending the back of the
economy. If the war suddenly escalates, taking away more men and
material, we might be left with a lot of money to spend but with
less to buy. The result, an escalation of prices.
Here's another side of
inflation as seen by Detroit cab driver Alden Morris, whose own
company recently raised its fares.
MORRIS:
If you have the money, they'll
spend it - and if you spend too much of it, even businesses and
services that don't even have an excuse to raise wages, can't
stand to see all the gravy go by like that without upping the
prices, and getting in on the gravy train.
KURALT:
Prices go up when people have
enough money to demand more than can be produced. The cure for
higher prices is to either raise the production or take away the
money. But it's hard to raise production during war and boom
FORD
when labor and materials are scarce. So, away goes the money.
When it comes to taking money
LIBRARY
away, nobody can beat the Federal Government. To fight inflation
9
the Federal Government can raise interest rates, raise taxes or
cut down on their own spending. With less cash the customer
postpones that new car. The factory owner doesn't put up the new
plant. Demand goes rolling down the hill and prices come
tumbling after.
Some experts, like William
McChesney Martin, head of the Federal Reserve Board, are so
concerned about inflation that they favor tax increases immediately.
They don't want the Government to use its last resort, the strict
regulation of prices and wages.
There's another way of fighting
higher prices. It's the jawbone technique in which the President
asks the country to do something about inflation before he has to.
PRESIDENT JOHNSON:
This year, we must sacrifice the
luxury of tax reduction. We must hold the expansion of our
civilian Great Society programs below what would have been
possible without Vietnam. We must all exercise wage and price
restraints, in Government, in business and in labor.
KURALT:
As the result of the President's
salesmanship Detroit trimmed its budget. Mayor Jerome Cavanagh:
CAVANAGH:
There's about 15-to-20-million
dollars of capital spending which I had in the budget and took
out after the President's request, even though it was felt by
not just the departments but by the Budget Bureau and by our
office, that these had a sense of urgency to them, and were, if
not essential, close to it. But I did feel that we should respond
to the President's request and at least defer until next year.
LIBRARY
10
KURALT:
Detroit is an exception. Most
of the leading cities in the country have not held back on their
budgets. New York City, for example, raised its budget by more
than half a billion dollars. San Diego is going ahead with a
$27-million sports stadium. Louisville, Kentucky, will put
another million and a half into its new ZOO. And, ironically,
many cities are saying the President's own Great Society program
is acting as the focal point around which they're basing their
own spending.
In Detroit, the new president of
the National Association of Purchasing Agents, G. Lloyd Nunnaly,
who also happens to head up the buying for the Commonwealth of
Virginia.
NUNNALY:
I don't really see how that we
can hold this line and continue to give the type of services to
the non-productive, non-tax-paying public without this entire
program continuing to escalate.
KURALT:
At the Ford Company, a power
shovel gives the styling center a face lifting. But that shovel
may not be so busy in the future. President Johnson has asked
business for voluntary cutbacks in expansion to take the pressure
off the building and machine industries. Some companies have
complied with the President's request. For example, A.T.&T.
alone will not spend $200 million it had planned for expansion
this year. At the Ford Motor Company reductions are in order too.
Ford president Arjay Miller:
MILLER:
In response to the President's
request to cut back capital expenditures, we have come to the
11
conclusion that we can reduce our planned expenditures by 10 per
cent. We think we can do this without hurting, to any serious
degree, our ability to produce vehicles. We want to continue to
increase our output of vehicles because increased production is
one way to meet the danger of inflation.
KURALT:
While many companies will not
spend as much as they planned, they're still going to spend more
than ever before - and that keeps inflation rolling.
And what about Tim Mikulen?
Will he cut back on his spending?
MIKULEN:
Well, I think if a man could
afford a color TV or a little nicer car or a nicer piece of
furniture or a better-looking suit, he's working for it, I think
he should be able to go out there and buy it. If I want it and
I think I could afford it, I'd get it.
KURALT:
A schoolteacher agrees in
principle.
SCHOOLTEACHER:
Well, I think President Johnson
had a very good point when he pleaded with the housewife to watch
what she took off the supermarket shelf and to shy away from
the high cost items. But then again we are a country where we
like nice things. So I don't know if you're going to change the
pattern of living in a short time. I - I really don't know
exactly what the answer is.
KURALT:
One man who thinks he does know
what the answer is is Michigan Congressman Gerald Ford, who leads
the House Minority. He takes the traditional Republican position
in naming the chief culprit of inflation.
12
FORD:
We have to go back to the
fundamental fact that the Federal Government is the principal
cause, and you can't blame employees, you can't blame employers,
you can't blame housewives. The finger should be pointed
directly at those who are managing the Federal Government, and
they thus far have not held the line or cut back in non-military
expenditures.
HART:
Oh, my good Republican friends
have made inflation an issue, all the time except when they were
responsible for a depression.
KURALT:
Michigan Democratic Senator
Philip Hart.
HART:
Sure, it'll be a political issue;
it always is. I don't think it sells many newspapers, collects
many votes. Maybe it should. But I think that in the kind of
world in which we live and the obscurity of economics, we're
much more prone to vote a more direct issue. Even though tomatoes
cost more, John's bringing home a whole lot more than he did. So,
let's not rock the boat. Certainly, it'll be an issue. But that
doesn't mean that it will be decisive.
KURALT:
The voluntary curb-inflation-
yourself program continues. The chairman of the President's
Council of Economic Advisers, Gardner Ackley, joined the Johnson
campaign when he told the United States Chamber of Commerce that
take-home pay hasn't risen as fast as profits. Then he made a
request.
ACKLEY:
Is the price increase you're
considering really necessary? Are there not some prices that
ALL in FORD LIBRARY
13
13
the long run competition is going to force down, and that you can
cut now? Are you doing your part to fight inflation?
KURALT:
Another recommendation of the
Council of Economic Advisers has been the 3.2 guideline. It's a
suggestion that wages can increase about 3.2 per cent a year
without adding much to the cost of things. To many people that
doesn't seem realistic. Among them is an executive of Tim's
union, the United Auto Workers. Vice President Leonard Woodcock:
WOODCOCK:
I don't think the guidelines as
set at 3.2 per cent are realistic. First of all the arithmetic
is wrong. As first set up by the Council of Economic Advisers a
few years ago, it provided for a moving five-year period. And
had that five-year moving period been observed, we would have, today,
3.6 not 3.2. Secondly, this is a wage and price policy only and
not an income policy. And if we consider General Motors, for
example, the owners of the enterprise have over the last five
years obtained 21 per cent additional income through dividends on
a compounded basis annually, and you can't say to one portion of
the enterprise, "You must be restricted to 3.2 for the good of
the nation," when another portion of the enterprise is galloping
along at 21 per cent. So that my estimate is that when we come
to 1967 we will not be satisfied by any stretch of the imagination
by a mechanical application of 3.2 per cent.
MILLER:
The figures that I see indicate
that 3.2 per cent is more than adequate.
KURALT:
Ford president, Arjay Miller.
MILLER:
FORD
Generally, the consensus is that
there's something less than three per cent, is the appropriate
LIBRARY
figure for the rate of productivity increase in the total economy.
14
If you go back over a period of
five years only, the average is, say, 3.6, or something over three
per cent. I think though that any objective person would
recognize that the past five years have not been typical. It's
almost been a period of uninterrupted production increases. And
during the period of production increases you have an increase in
productivity. You've got to go back over cycles when there're
both ups and downs. And if you go through any period of time in
which there's an up-and-down cycle, the rate of productivity
increase is closer to 3.2 per cent and I think below.
KURALT:
And on the same subject, Tim
Mikulen:
MIKULEN:
3.2? No, I'd be very
dissatisfied with this because it wouldn't be doing nothing for
me. It's just - what - what is it - nine cents an hour or $5.00
a week? This is nothing nowadays. That can't even buy me two good
steaks.
If Mr. Reuther signed this type
of contract, then he'd be selling us down the river.
KURALT:
Most economists feel we're only
a short way over the threshold of this inflationary period. But
that's far enough for Congressman Gerald Ford.
FORD:
I think the record is clear from
past experiences. When you let inflation go too far, when you let
the cost of living get out of hand - as it is at the present time,
without some remedial action, what you in effect are doing is
FORD
planting the seeds of a recession. And it seems to me that the
Johnson Administration has let it go so far that there may well
LIBRARY
15
be the seeds being planted for a recession which means, of
course, fewer jobs and more people unemployed.
I'm not in favor of a tax
increase at this point, because I honestly believe we can cut
back non-military expenditures sufficiently to justify not having
one. As long as we make an honest effort on the Republican side
to cut back these areas of Federal spending, we could, in my
opinion, justify a vote against a second tax increase in 1966.
KURALT:
One of the ironies about the
present session of Congress is that it's added close to $3
billion to the President's budget. The Congressmen, like Tim
Mikulen, have traditionally found it difficult to make cuts when
self-interest is at stake. The present attitude of the
Administration toward handling inflation is expressed by Senator
Hart.
HART:
The concern is that by our
action, at the level of the Federal Government, we will in a
sense reach up and switch off the light instead of finding a
rheostat or a thermostat or whatever it is that lets you turn
the thing off a little bit, and a little bit, and a little bit.
It would be disastrous to jobs if to prevent an inflation of X
per cent we slashed public spending, increased interest rates,
raised taxes, with the net effect of withdrawing $20 billion or
$40 billion a quarter. This is the kind of brutal punch to the
jaw that could occur if our response to an inflationary danger
is unrealistic. And it would hurt jobs. It would hurt
everybody.
GERALD FORD UBRARD
16
But, again, I think that while
we're none of us are truly eligible for Ph.Ds in economics,
everybody in and out of government in the 1960's has learned a
lot of lessons. And we will not reverse the whole cycle if we
identify inflation as having reached a point where we must take
action.
KURALT:
Last week when the automobile
production lines gently slowed down, Wall Street shuddered. Some
people thought the business boom was going bust. But even with
less production than planned, the auto industry and everything
else continues to set new records. Inflation is continuing on
its way. Tim Mikulen doesn't speculate in the stock market, but
he does worry about a cutback, because that would cost him his
overtime and send him back to a 40-hour week.
MIKULEN:
If I go back to 40 hours, I
think I'd feel it pretty heavy. I have two boys now. I have
another one on the way, and I've still got a car payment, and
I've got more doctor bills. I - I think I'd feel the decrease
in hours or earnings quite a bit.
KURALT:
Negroes, who have done well by
the current boom by and large would be the first to suffer if a
setback came. Detroit City Councilman Nicholas Hood - himself a
Negro - explained why.
HOOD:
One thing that has happened in
the past is that the Negro has been the first to be hurt by a
cutback. He would be thrown out of work, and what gains he has
made - he doesn't have enough seniority to really maintain the
job. So he would be highly disadvantaged by a cutback.
17
KURALT:
Prices have been going up since
the cave man discovered a demand for improved rocks. The
greatest jumps usually come during or after a war. When they've
gone up slowly and steadily we've been able to live with them,
but rapid increases hurt. They hurt people like Mary Horeski.
They hurt the price of our products overseas. They make the
things we want in life harder to get. Connie Mikulen has her
own inflation lament.
MIKULEN:
He leaves the house about three
o'clock in the afternoon to go to work. The other day he came
home. It was 5:30 in the morning. So he comes home; he has a
sandwich, flops in bed. The next thing you know it's time for
me to get the poor guy up for lunch, and wash and shave, and
it's time for him to go to work. He doesn't see the boys. It
makes me feel terrible that he has to do this in order for us to
survive. If prices went down I think a man would have more time
to spend with his family. He wouldn't have to kill himself to
make that dollar to pay for the things that we need, so he has
to sacrifice and what he's sacrificing is his family.
KURALT:
And Tim himself feels inflation
is a kind of pervasive nightmare, inhabited by strange creatures.
MIKULEN:
The way things look I don't know
what's going to happen. Everything's going up higher and higher
and higher, and you wonder when the heck it's going to stop. It's
just a thing that's an octopus or some kind of monster. You
can't get away from it. It's just - it's on you. It's after youord
day after day, month after month, year after year, but I myself -
I just sit back and dig in my pockets. That's all.
GER
LIBRARY
18
KURALT:
If Tim Mikulen feels he's being
chased by the inflation monster, at least he's not running alone.
Recently President Johnson brought his Labor-Management Advisory
Committee to the White House to suggest ways of fighting
inflation. He asked them, "If you were President, what would you
do?" The committee is thinking about that. Its members can
suggest waiting to see what happens or an immediate tax boost.
They can suggest that labor trim its wage demands or that
business hold down its profits. They can plead for a cutback in
Federal spending, or even higher interest rates on loans. They
can recommend one or all or a combination of those things. And
then the President has to decide, for on his decision will depend
whether or not Tim and Connie Mikulen's inflation monster is
slain in this the Year of the 72¢ Dollar.
This is Charles Kuralt.
ANNOUNCER:
"The 72¢ Dollar" was written and
produced by Joel Heller and researched by Maurice Berk.
Executive producer, Joe Dembo. This was a special presentation
of CBS NEWS.
FORD LIBRARY
I
PLEASE CREDIT ANY QUOTES OR EXCERPTS FROM THIS ABC RADIO AND
TELEVISION PROGRAM TO "ABC'S ISSUES AND ANSWERS.'
2
ISSUES AND ANSWERS
3
- - -
4
SUNDAY, JUNE 19, 1966
5
GUEST: Congressman Gerald R. Ford (R. Mich)
6
House Minority Leader
7
INTERVIEWED BY: Bill Lawrence, ABC Correspondent
and
8
Wally Bruner, ABC Correspondent
9
- -
10
MR. LAWRENCE: Congressman Ford, now that you have labeled
11
the war in Vietnam "President Johnson's war," does this mean
12
that the basic bipartisan support of that conflict has ended?
13
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Bill, I think to set the record
14
straight if I might, I'd like to read what I said, one
15
sentence.
16
I said, "It is an undeclared war and in that sense it is
17
President Johnson's war."
18
In that context I think it is accurate to label it as I
19
did. The President is Commander-in-Chief. He has committed
20
285,000 U. S. military personnel to South Vietnam. He
21
determines the strategy and the tactics and so forth.
22
On the other hand, I think in all honesty the House and
23
the Senate, the Democrats and Republicans, do have a serious
24
responsibility here and we can't duck it and we shouldn't LIBERTY pass
25
it off cr seek to pass it off to the President. But
2
1
even more importantly in conflict because of its serious
2
consequences is a war involving the whole United States.
3
Now, I don't think that the conflict in Vietnam is going to be
4
a political issue unless we don't find some solution quickly.
5
MR. BRUNER: In labeling this as President Johnson's
6
war, was this your own personal observation, or was this a
7
decision reached perhaps through consultation with other
8
Republican leaders?
9
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: In this case, I prepared the state-
10
ment myself and I think it was accurate in the context that
11
I have tried to describe it.
12
MR. LAWRENCE: Well, does Senator Dirksen agree with
13
you, for example? Is there any conflict in the leadership of
14
the two houses here among the Pepublicans?
15
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I don't think there is any conflict
16
in the overall position of the Republican Party as far as the
17
conflict in Vietnam is concerned.
18
Senator Dirksen and I have repeatedly said that the
19
United States should stand forthrightly and steadfastly against
20
Communist aggression in South Vietnam, in Southeast Asia,
21
Berlin or any place else.
22
On the other hand, we in the Minority party in the Legis-
23
lative Branch should not try to run the war. We shouldn't
24
pick the weapons or determine the strategy. This is the
LIBRARY
25
responsibility of the Commander-in-Chief, President Johnson
3
1
But, as long as he takes a firm stand against Communist
2
aggression and terror, the Republicans will stand with him.
3
MR. BRUNER: Well, what else would you have him do that
4
he isn't doing now?
5
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: The Republicans, last December, in
6
their Coordinating Committee meeting, Wally, where we have
7
representatives from the House and the Senate and the Governors
8
and the former candidates for the presidency, we said that the
9
Republican Party was against an expanded large-scale ground
10
war on the Mainland of China.
11
We are fearful that the added commitment of about
12
15,000 U. S. military personnel each month by the President
13
is getting us into that position.
14
We, on the other hand, believe there are some steps that
15
can be taken, such as the closing of the Port of Haiphong
16
by any one of three or four different means or methods. We
17
think there ought to be a greater contribution by some of
13
our allies and if they won't help us, the least they ought to
19
do is stop helping the enemy. We don't feel it is our respon-
20
sibility to pick the tarqet, determine the strategy or the
tactics.
21
MR. LAWRENCE: Well, Congressman, you said just a moment
22
ago - I am sure you misspoke yourself, but let's get the
23
record straight --- you were against an expanded ground war
24
on the Mainland of China. I think you meant the Mainland of
25
4
1
Asia, though you are against the war with Asia too.
2
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I meant in the broad sense, Bill,
3
we are against a large-scale ground war on the Mainland of
4
Asia. That is the more correct way to put it.
5
We certainly would include the Mainland of China within
6
that definition.
7
MR. LAWRENCE: Do you see any danger that we are escalat-
8
ing into that kind of a conflict?
9
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, I think you can go back to
10
about 12 to 18 months ago when we had in South Vietnam
11
approximately 20,000 U. S. military personnel. We now have
12
287,000 U. S. troops in South Vietnam and we have other air
13
and sea forces around the perphery of South Vietnam.
14
It does appear, when you look at the numbers, that we are
15
approximating a large scale war in Southeast Asia and if the
16
trend continues to the figure some people are discussing,
17
400,000 or more, then I think we are engaged in a real big
18
conflict. Bigger, for example, numerically speaking, than we
19
had in Korea some ten or twelve years ago.
20
MR. LAWRENCE: Do you now see Vietnam in its present
21
condition a limited war expanding into a meaningful issue
22
in the 1966 congressional election?
23
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I think it could be although at the
FORD
24
moment it is very hard, Bill, to determine precisely.
If this strategy that the President is following continues VIBRARY
25
5
1
to indicate that we could be involved in a prolonged war,
2
I think the American people will take some action at the polls
3
next November, particularly if they think there is another
4
method that would bring the war to a conclusion more quickly,
5
such as, I think, more effective utilization of air and sea
6
power.
7
The American people will not stand for a long, drawn-out,
8
large-scale military conflict.
9
MR. BRUNER: Well, Congressman, you think we want to get
10
in and get out. You think this is the philosophy of the
11
American people one way or the other.
12
MR. FORD: Yes, Wally. My mail reflects it. I think
13
the various polls and surveys show that the American
14
people do want to be successful in South Vietnam. They
15
understand the consequences if we withdrew, but they are
16
getting more and more dissatisfied with the fact that we seem
17
to be making a bigger and bigger effort but we are not getting
18
the kind of success that will bring about negotiations and a
19
settlement, and the American people are on the breaking point
20
I really believe, of"either get in there and prevail, achieve
21
your objectives, or get out."
22
MR. LAWRENCE: Well, how do you translate this into a
23
vote in November? Do those who want to expand the war and
24
hit harder, do they vote Republican or do they vote Democratic?
25
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, this is difficult to analyze.
6
1
I wish I had the answer. I suspect that those who supported
2
President Johnson in 1964 when he in effect said, "We aren't
3
going to expand the war," they are probably very disillusioned
4
with the President's promise and his performance and they may
5
stay away from the polls.
6
On the other hand, those people who were Republicans
7
and who voted for the President may return to the Republican
8
fold and say, "Well, we made a bad choice. Let's try the
9
Republicans again."
10
I think this is probably what will happen. All of the
11
polls show the President's personal popularity is
12
plummeting downward, the support for the Democratic party is
13
being eroded away.
14
I think this will redound very greatly to the Republican
15
Party in November.
16
MR. LAWRENCE: Do you see a parallel between '66 and '68,
17
say, with 1952, when the Korean War was very unpopular, when
18
the Republicans called it "Truman's War?" Are you looking
19
for --
20
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Bill, I would go back to 1950. I
21
think right now we are more comparable to 1950 when the
22
Republicans made significant gains. There was no presidential
23
contest involved.
FORD
24
It seems to me that we are in a very similar situation
25
and the Republicans will be the beneficiaries in this off-
7
1
presidential year. If the President isn't more successful,
2
doesn't achieve more results by 1968, then I think we will
3
be in a comparable year to 1952.
4
MR. BRUNER: Well, Congressman, where do the people go
5
who want to withdraw from Vietnam?
6
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Wally, I don't think there are very
7
many voters in this country who do want to withdraw because
8
most Americans appreciate that withdrawal would be a significant
9
defeat for the United States and would, for a good many years,
10
put us in a position of a paper tiger.
11
The United States has a great stake in maintaining free-
12
dom and maintaining our own national security in South Vietnam
13
and it is a minority group, thank goodness, that says "Let's
14
pick up our chips, withdraw, go back to Pearl Harbor."
15
And so I think in this regard they won't have much of an
16
impact on the elections in 1966.
17
***
18
MR. LAWRENCE: As the Republican leader of the House, what
19
do you think of your party's chances in the '66 election?
20
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Bill, I am convinced we are going
21
to make very significant Republican gains from the court
22
houses to the Congress, including the state houses, in 1966.
23
It is my honest judgment, based on traveling in 25 states in
24
1966, and 40 some states in 1965, that we will pick
25
least 40 net gain in the House and could go fifty or
03 sup FORD, more, at IBRACY
8
1
probably five to seven extra Senate seats, anywheres from four
2
to six more Governors. This is the year of the elephant, as
3
we take a look at the public opinion polls, and our own sur-
4
veys.
5
MR. LAWRENCE: With the year of the elephant and even with
6
fifty seats you would still have a Democratic Congress.
7
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Yes, but, Bill, there would be a
8
little different ballgame, I might say. I think that some of
9
these extensive spending programs, so-called Great Society
10
programs that the President has been ramming through the
11
Congress in the last 18 months, would run into some more search-
12
ing interrogation, some opposition that would end up with a
13
better program rather than just open-ended authorization with
14
unlimited spending.
15
MR. BRUNER: How do you evaluate Ronald Reagan's victory
16
in California? He is a so-called Conservative Republican.
17
Does this mean the Republican Party perhaps is moving back to
18
the Goldwater right-wing philosophy, a little farther away
19
from center, or how do you look at it?
20
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Wally, anybody who got all the votes
21
that Ponald Reagan got in that primary got them from a wide
22
spectrum of Republican voters. He got a tremendous vote and
23
this was not just a right-wing element in the Republican
24
Party. It was a substantial vote by a great, great GERA number
BRARY
25
of Republicans.
9
1
I think he conducted, from my observations, a very
2
skillful campaign. He brought people in to work those who
3
had been divided in the past, and he certainly got the kind
4
of support that a candidate needs to win against Governor
5
Brown who, incidentally, himself, had a pretty rough ball-
6
game in his own primary against Mayor Yorty.
7
MR. BRUNER: Was it a personal victory or Republican
8
victory for Reagan?
9
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Based on what I understand he
10
espoused, the programs that he put forth, it was a Republican
11
victory. He didn't go off in one part of the political
12
spectrum as far as the Republican Party was concerned. He
13
talked about common sense, broad solutions to the problems of
14
the State of California, and,as a consequence, he got broad
15
support.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
FORD & LIBRARY 938400
10
1
1
MR. LAWRENCE: Well, if Mr. Reagan can beat Governor
2
Brown in November, do you see him as a Presidential
3
hopeful in '68?
4
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, certainly he would be
5
among those who would be considered, Bill. As you look at
6
the starters, so to speak at this stage of the ballgame, I
7
think you have got former Vice President Nixon, my own Governor
8
George Romney, the possibility of Mayor John Lindsay of New
9
York, and if Reagan wins he certainly ought to be considered
10
and maybe some others as we move down the path here.
11
MR. BRUNER: Who is your personal preference, Congressman?
12
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Wally, I am so busy trying to find
13
Republican candidates for the House and help them get
14
elected I haven't given it much thought. I will wait for the
convention in 1968.
15
16
MR. BRUNER: I noticed as you ticked off the possibilities
you mentioned Mr. Nixon first. Many people feel that you are
17
closer to him politically, both domestic and foreign. Is
18
that a fair observation?
19
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I have a great admiration for Dick
20
Nixon. He is a close personal friend and I thought he did a
21
great job as Vice President. I think he would have been a
22
fine President if he had been elected. But I am not picking
23
any Republican candidate in 1966 because unless we make some
24
gains in the House races and in the Senate races in 1966
25
GER
LIBRARY
11
2 1
we will have a hard time finding a good Republican candidate
2
in 1968. But if we can make the kind of gains that I am
3
sure we will make November 8, we will have a whole bevy of
4
first class candidates and the convention will do a good
5
job in selecting them.
6
MR. BRUNER: Well, Congressman, it is said that you might
7
be quite receptive to the Vice Presidential nomination
8
yourself. Is this an accurate statement?
9
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Wally, let me make a very firm
10
comment in that regard. I am not seeking, nor do I intend to
11
seek any elective office involving the Executive Branch of
12
the government. I am a candidate for reelection to the House
13
of Representatives. I would consider it the highest possible
14
honor to continue the job that I have or something on the
15
majority side, come after the November elections, so let's
16
eliminate once and for all any comments about me being a
17
candidate for any elective office in the Executive Branch
18
of the government.
19
MR. LAWRENCE: Once and for all, you now decline the
20
Vice Presidency even if it is offered to you in '68,
21
right?
22
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I think so, Bill.
about
23
MR. LAWRENCE. Is the Republican thinking / '68 now
FORD
24
based on the widely held assumption that President Johnson GERALO
LIBRARY
will seek another term?
25
12
3
1
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well certainly President Johnson
2
would want another term if he comes out of the Vietnam
3
war successfully, if he keeps the economy at the level that
4
he thinks it should be.
5
I see no reason why he shouldn't seek the Presidency
6
in 1968 but I am just as confident that a Republican candidate
7
could give him a good battle, as I see the picture now. And
8
it is not a political campaign that the Republicans should just
9
say we shouldn't engage in. We ought to get a good
10
candidate, we will have good issues, and I think we will have
11
a chance to win.
12
MR. LAWRENCE: Well, one of his aides told me the other
13
day he wouldn't bet a nickel either way on whether he would
14
run.
15
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, Bill, they are better
16
informed than I am. I could only -
17
MR. LAWRENCE: Well, would it change your thinking a lot
18
though, if you were running against another man?
19
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I don't think so. We should
20
nominate our candidate based on what our delegates think
21
is the best man, and we shouldn't worry about whether
22
President Johnson is going to seek reelection or whether it
23
will be Vice President Humphrey or Bobby Kennedy.
Thato
24
would be an interesting conflict in the Democratic convention. LIBRARY
I think we'd better make our own choice and let the Democrats
25
13
4
1
make their determination.
2
MR. BRUNER: Do you see it clear and positively,
3
though, that Mr. Johnson will seek another term? In your own
4
mind, and personally?
5
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I see no evidence to the contrary.
6
Most Presidents like to seek reelection, and I don't think
7
President Johnson is any different in that regard from his
8
predecessors.
9
MR. LAWRENCE: Congressman, to come back to the '66
10
campaign in which we are now engaged, what are the main
11
domestic issues on which you hope to profit politically?
12
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: The principal domestic issue,
13
Bill, is the failure of the Johnson-Humphrey Administration
14
to control the increases in the cost of living. The cost
15
of living went up two percent last year in 1965. In the
16
first four months of 1966 the cost of living went up 1.4 per-
cent, and if you analyze that for 1966 it will mean a price
17
18
increase of approximately four percent.
Now the President condemns labor and management for in-
19
20
creasing prices, or seeking wage increases. He tells
housewives they should buy cheaper, or buy less. But the
21
President doesn't do very much about controlling or cutting
22
back non-military expenditures, and this is where the problem
23
is and this is where he could do the most good, and I would
24
hope that he would tackle this problem before he condemns
25
LIBRARY
14
5 1
others.
2
Now the second important issue, I think, is that the
3
American people are concerned about a lack of a two-party
4
system in this country. They are concerned that the Executive
5
Branch is getting too powerful and that the Legislative
6
Branch with the overwhelming Democratic majorities,
7
simply does what the President tells them to do.
8
Now we have a tradition in this country of real compe-
9
tition in the House and the Senate between the two
10
major parties. We don't have that now, with the Democrats
11
having two to one majorities. The American people are fearful
12
that we are losing one of the basic cornerstones or
13
ingredients in our system by the Democrats having such a
14
wide superiority numerically speaking.
15
I think also another issue is the lack of credibility
16
of the Johnson-Humphrey Administration. We have got a file
17
of a great many pages where there have been many comments or
18
releases by the Johnson-Humphrey Administration which shows
19
they have told half the truth or failed to disclose all
20
of the facts, and then of course out in the Middlewest the
21
farmers are furious with the Johnson-Humphrey-Freeman
22
Administration, and for good reasons.
23
MR. BRUNER: Well, that is enough to start with now,
24
Congressman, for some questions on them.
LIBRARY
25
On inflation do you favor a tax increase this year?
15
1
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I don't, unless the President
2
can show that the costs of the war in Vietnam are getting out
3
of hand. In other words, if the President comes up with
4
a supplemental for the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines
5
of a very, very substantial amount, I think the Republicans
6
would have to take a look at it to see whether we could afford
7
to have that kind of added deficit particularly when
8
we haven't been able to cut back on non-military expenditures.
9
MR. BRUNER: of course you have charged, though - you
10
know, that the Vietnam budget has been hidden and that
11
we haven't been told the true cost of the Vietnam war. If
12
this is the case, won't we need increased taxes?
13
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Wally, there is no doubt that
14
they have failed to disclose the true cost of the war in Vietnam.
15
Last year the Presidetn sent up a hudget for the Defense
16
Department and before the end of the year the Congress had
17
to add at his request almost $15 billion in extra funds to
18
finance the military.
19
Now this year the President sent up a budget for the
20
Defense Department, including the costs of Vietnam, and
21
already they are running short of money for this fiscal year
22
with the increasing prospects of the next fiscal year.
23
All people who are knowledgeable in this area, the Members
24
of the Committee on Appropriations in the House and ino the
25
Senate, are sure that the President's budget underfunded GERA
LIBRARY
16
1
our military needs in Vietnam and elsewhere, and we can expect
2
anywhere from a five to six billion dollar supplement. Now
3
I don't think this is being honest with the American people.
4
I think that the President or the Secretary of Defense Or
5
his fiscal people in the Pentagon should have known, should
6
have been able to forecast what the costs were going to be and
7
in all honesty should have told the American people what this
8
conflict in dollars and possible taxes would mean.
9
MR. LAWRENCE: Do you think as a practical matter if
10
the President decided he wanted a tax increast at this late
11
date he could get it from this Congress?
12
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: If the President relates the
13
absolute need for additional funds for the war in Vietnam
14
to a tax increase, his prospects are good because most
15
Americans under no circumstances would want to deprive the
16
Defense Department of needed funds. But on the other hand
17
the President's chances of getting such a tax increase would
18
be improved if he would take some action to cut back non-
19
military expenditures.
20
******
21
22
23
FORD i LIBRARY
24
25
17
1
MR. LAWRENCE: Congressman Ford, what is the Republican
2
Party doing to try to attract the new Negro voter in the
3
south where the Negro has been pretty well kicked around
4
by the local Democratic Party?
5
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, it is interesting, Bill.
6
You know some of these ultra-racists in the Democratic
7
Party who caused all the trouble down in Alabama, for example,
8
in 1964 and '65, several of themcame to the Republican Party
9
this year and said they wanted to run as Republicans, and
10
the Republican organization in Alabama said, "No, we are
11
building a Republican Party in Alabama on a different basis
12
and we don't want you in our party as a candidate for the
13
Republicans."
14
I think this is the best evidence of what we are trying
15
to do in' Albaama and elsewhere. We want a Republican Party
16
not built on the traditional Democratic basis, but on a new
17
basis in the South.
18
MR. BRUNER: Well, Congressman, how do you stand on the
19
Civil Rights Bill, the one that is in Congress now,
20
concerning the section that would prohibit discrimination in
21
sales and rentals --- very briefly?
22
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I think the Republicans generally
23
will vote against the so-called Title IV as it stands.
I
24
think this goes far too far at the present time.
25
MR. BRUNER: Thank you very much, Congressman Ford, for
2
1.8
1
being with us on ISSUES AND ANSWERS.
2
***
3
(Next week: Robert F. Kennedy (Dem. - New York) .) .
4
5
*** - -
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
25
1
PLEASE CREDIT ANY QUOTES OR EXCERPTS FROM THIS ABC RADIO AND
TELEVISION PROGRAM TO "ABC'S ISSUES AND ANSWERS."
2
ISSUES AND ANSWERS
3
- - -
4
SUNDAY, JUNE 19, 1966
5
GUEST: Congressman Gerald R. Ford (R. Mich)
6
House Minority Leader
7
INTERVIEWED BY: Bill Lawrence, ABC Correspondent
and
8
Wally Bruner, ABC Correspondent
9
- -
10
MR. LAWRENCE: Congressman Ford, now that you have labeled
11
the war in Vietnam "President Johnson's war," does this mean
12
that the basic bipartisan support of that conflict has ended?
13
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Bill, I think to set the record
14
straight if I might, I'd like to read what I said, one
15
sentence.
16
I said, "It is an undeclared war and in that sense it is
17
President Johnson's war."
18
In that context I think it is accurate to label it as I
19
did. The President is Commander-in-Chief. He has committed
20
285,000 U. S. military personnel to South Vietnam. lle
21
determines the strategy and the tactics and so forth.
22
On the other hand, I think in all honesty the House and
23
the Senate, the Democrats and Republicans, do have a serious
24
25
responsibility here and we can't duck it and we shouldn FORD pass GRARY
it off cr seek to pass it off to the President. But
GERALD
2
1
even more importantly in conflict because of its serious
2
consequences is a war involving the whole United States.
3
Now, I don't think that the conflict in Vietnam is going to be
4
a political issue unless we don't find some solution quickly.
5
MR. BRUNER: In labeling this as President Johnson's
6
war, was this your own personal observation, or was this a
7
decision reached perhaps through consultation with other
8
Republican leaders?
9
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: In this case, I prepared the state-
10
ment myself and I think it was accurate in the context that
11
I have tried to describe it.
12
MR. LAWRENCE: Well, does Senator Dirksen agree with
13
you, for example? Is there any conflict in the leadership of
14
the two houses here among the Republicans?
15
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I don't think there is any conflict
16
in the overall position of the Republican Party as far as the
17
conflict in Vietnam is concerned.
18
Senator Dirksen and I have repeatedly said that the
19
United States should stand forthrightly and steadfastly against
20
Communist aggression in South Vietnam, in Southeast Asia,
21
Berlin or any place else.
22
On the other hand, we in the Minority party in the Legis-
23
lative Branch should not try to run the war. We shouldn't
24
pick the weapons or determine the strategy. This is the
LIBRARY
25
responsibility of the Commander-in-Chief, President Johnson.
3
1
But, as long as he takes a firm stand against Communist
2
aggression and terror, the Republicans will stand with him.
3
MR. BRUNER: Well, what else would you have him do that
4
he isn't doing now?
5
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: The Republicans, last December, in
6
their Coordinating Committee meeting, Wally, where we have
7
representatives from the House and the Senate and the Governors
8
and the former candidates for the presidency, we said that the
9
Republican Party was against an expanded large-scale ground
10
war on the Mainland of China.
11
We are fearful that the added commitment of about
12
15,000 U. S. military personnel each month by the President
13
is getting us into that position.
14
We, on the other hand, believe there are some steps that
15
can be taken, such as the closing of the Port of Haiphong
16
by any one of three or four different means or methods. We
17
think there ought to be a greater contribution by some of
18
our allies and if they won't help us, the least they ought to
19
do is stop helping the enemy. We don't feel it is our respon-
20
sibility to pick the target, determine the strategy or the
tactics.
21
MR. LAWRENCE: Well, Congressman, you said just a moment
22
ago -- I am sure you misspoke yourself, but let's get the
23
record straight - you were against an expanded ground war
24
FORD
on the Mainland of China. I think you meant the Mainland
25
GERALE of ORART
4
1
Asia, though you are against the war with Asia too.
2
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I meant in the broad sense, Bill,
3
we are against a large-scale ground war on the Mainland of
4
Asia. That is the more correct way to put it.
5
We certainly would include the Mainland of China within
6
that definition.
7
MR. LAWRENCE: Do you see any danger that we are escalat-
8
ing into that kind of a conflict?
9
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, I think you can go back to
10
about 12 to 18 months ago when we had in South Vietnam
11
approximately 20,000 U. S. military personnel. We now have
12
287,000 U. S. troops in South Vietnam and we have other air
13
and sea forces around the perphery of South Vietnam.
14
It does appear, when you look at the numbers, that we are
15
approximating a large scale war in Southeast Asia and if the
16
trend continues to the figure some people are discussing,
17
400,000 or more, then I think we are engaged in a real big
18
conflict. Bigger, for example, numerically speaking, than we
19
had in Korea some ten or twelve years ago.
20
MR. LAWRENCE: Do you now see Vietnam in its present
21
condition a limited war expanding into a meaningful issue
22
in the 1966 congressional election?
23
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I think it could be although at the
FORD
24
moment it is very hard, Bill, to determine precisely.
LIBRAR
25
If this strategy that the President is following continues
5
1
to indicate that we could be involved in a prolonged war,
2
I think the American people will take some action at the polls
3
next November, particularly if they think there is another
4
method that would bring the war to a conclusion more quickly,
5
such as, I think, more effective utilization of air and sea
6
power.
7
The American people will not stand for a long, drawn-out,
8
large-scale military conflict.
9
MR. BRUNER: Well, Congressman, you think we want to get
10
in and get out. You think this is the philosophy of the
11
American people one way or the other.
12
MR. FORD: Yes, Wally. My mail reflects it. I think
13
the various polls and surveys show that the American
14
people do want to be successful in South Vietnam. They
15
understand the consequences if we withdrew, but they are
16
getting more and more dissatisfied with the fact that we seem
17
to be making a bigger and bigger effort but we are not getting
18
the kind of success that will bring about negotiations and a
19
settlement, and the American people are on the breaking point
20
I really believe, of"either get in there and prevail, achieve
21
your objectives, or get out."
22
MR. LAWRENCE: Well, how do you translate this into a
23
vote in November? Do those who want to expand the war and
24
hit harder, do they vote Republican or do they vote Democratic?
25
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, this is difficult to analyze.
6
1
I wish I had the answer. I suspect that those who supported
2
President Johnson in 1964 when he in effect said, "We aren't
3
going to expand the war," they are probably very disillusioned
4
with the President's promise and his performance and they may
5
stay away from the polls.
6
On the other hand, those people who were Republicans
7
and who voted for the President may return to the Republican
8
fold and say, "Well, we made a bad choice. Let's try the
9
Republicans again."
10
I think this is probably what will happen. All of the
11
polls show the President's personal popularity is
12
plummeting downward, the support for the Democratic party is
13
being ecoded away.
14
I think this will redound very greatly to the Republican
15
Party in November.
16
MR. LAWRENCE: Do you see a parallel between '66 and '68,
17
say, with 1952, when the Korean War was very unpopular, when
18
the Republicans called it "Truman's War?" Are you looking
19
for --
20
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Bill, I would go back to 1950. I
21
think right now we are more comparable to 1950 when the
22
Republicans made significant gains. There was no presidential
23
contest involved.
R.FORDL
24
It seems to me that we are in a very similar situation
25
and the Republicans will be the beneficiaries in this off-
7
1
presidential year. If the President isn't more successful,
2
doesn't achieve more results by 1968, then I think we will
3
be in a comparable year to 1952.
4
MR. BRUNER: Well, Congressman, where do the people go
5
who want to withdraw from Vietnam?
6
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Wally, I don't think there are very
7
many voters in this country who do want to withdraw because
3
most Americans appreciate that withdrawal would be a significant
9
defeat for the United States and would, for a good many years,
10
put us in a position of a paper tiger.
11
The United States has a great stake in maintaining free-
12
dom and maintaining our own national security in South Vietnam
13
and it is a minority group, thank goodness, that says "Let's
14
pick up our chips, withdraw, go back to Pearl Harbor."
15
And so I think in this regard they won't have much of an
16
impact on the elections in 1966.
17
***
18
MR. LAWRENCE: As the Republican leader of the House, what
19
do you think of your party's chances in the '66 election?
20
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Bill, I am convinced we are going
21
to make very significant Republican gains from the court
22
houses to the Congress, including the state houses, in 1966.
23
It is my honest judgment, based on traveling in 25 states in
24
1966, and 40 some states in 1965, that we will pick up
at FORD LIBRARY
25
least 40 net gain in the House and could go fifty or more,
8
1
probably five to seven extra Senate seats, anywheres from four
2
to six more Governors. This is the year of the elephant, as
3
we take a look at the public opinion polls, and our own sur-
4
veys.
5
MR. LAWRENCE: With the year of the elephant and even with
6
fifty seats you would still have a Democratic Congress.
7
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Yes, but, Bill, there would be a
8
little different ballgame, I might say. I think that some of
9
these extensive spending programs, so-called Great Society
10
programs that the President has been ramming through the
11
Congress in the last 18 months, would run into some more search-
12
ing interrogation, some opposition that would end up with a
13
better program rather than just open-ended authorization with
14
unlimited spending.
15
MR. BRUNER: How do you evaluate Ronald Reagan's victory
16
in California? He is a so-called Conservative Republican.
17
Does this mean the Republican Party perhaps is moving back to
18
the Goldwater right-wing philosophy, a little farther away
19
from center, or how do you look at it?
20
REPPESENTATIVE FORD: Wally, anybody who got all the votes
21
that Ronald Reagan got in that primary got them from a wide
22
spectrum of Republican voters. He got a tremendous vote and
23
this was not just a right-wing element in the Republican FORD
24
Party. It was a substantial vote by a great, great number GERRA
LIBRARY
25
of Republicans.
9
1
I think he conducted, from my observations, a very
2
skillful campaign. He brought people in to work those who
3
had been divided in the past, and he certainly got the kind
4
of support that a candidate needs to win against Governor
5
Brown who, incidentally, himself, had a pretty rough ball-
6
game in his own primary against Mayor Yorty.
7
MR. BRUNER: Was it a personal victory or Republican
8
victory for Reagan?
9
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Based on what I understand he
10
espoused, the programs that he put forth, it was a Republican
11
victory. He didn't go off in one part of the political
12
spectrum as far as the Republican Party was concerned. He
13
talked about common sense, broad solutions to the problems of
14
the State of California, and, as a consequence, he got broad
15
support.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
BERALD FORD LIBRARY
10
1
1
MR. LAWRENCE: Well, if Mr. Reagan can beat Governor
2
Brown in November, do you see him as a Presidential
3
hopeful in '68?
4
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, certainly he would be
5
among those who would be considered, Bill. As you look at
6
the starters, so to speak at this stage of the ballgame, I
7
think you have got former Vice President Nixon, my own Governor
8
George Romney, the possibility of Mayor John Lindsay of New
9
York, and if Reagan wins he certainly ought to be considered
10
and maybe some others as we move down the path here.
11
MR. BRUNER: Who is your personal preference, Congressman
12
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Wally, I am so busy trying to find
13
Republican candidates for the House and help them get
14
elected I haven't given it much thought. I will wait for the
convention in 1968.
15
16
MR. BRUNER: I noticed as you ticked off the possibilities
17
you mentioned Mr. Nixon first. Many people feel that you are
18
closer to him politically, both domestic and foreign. Is
that a fair observation?
19
20
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I have a great admiration for Dick
21
Nixon. He is a close personal friend and I thought he did a
22
great job as Vice President. I think he would have been a
23
fine President if he had been elected. But I am not picking
any Republican candidate in 1966 because unless we make some
24
gains in the House races and in the Senate races in 1966
25
FORD LIBRARY CERALICA
11
2 1
we will have a hard time finding a good Republican candidate
2
in 1968. But if we can make the kind of gains that I am
3
sure we will make November 8, we will have a whole bevy of
4
first class candidates and the convention will do a good
5
job in selecting them.
6
MR. BRUNER: Well, Congressman, it is said that you might
7
be quite receptive to the Vice Presidential nomination
8
yourself. Is this an accurate statement?
9
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Wally, let me make a very firm
10
comment in that regard. I am not seeking, nor do I intend to
11
seek any elective office involving the Executive Branch of
12
the government. I am a candidate for reelection to the House
13
of Representatives. I would consider it the highest possible
14
honor to continue the job that I have or something on the
15
majority side, come after the November elections, so let's
16
eliminate once and for all any comments about me being a
17
candidate for any elective office in the Executive Branch
18
of the government.
19
MR. LAWRENCE: Once and for all, you now decline the
20
Vice Presidency even if it is offered to you in '68,
21
right?
22
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I think so, Bill.
about
23
MR. LAWRENCE. Is the Republican thinking / '68 now
FORD
24
based on the widely held assumption that President Johnson
will seek another term?
25
GERALD
12
3
1
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well certainly President Johnson
2
would want another term if he comes out of the Vietnam
3
war successfully, if he keeps the economy at the level that
4
he thinks it should be.
5
I see no reason why he shouldn't seek the Presidency
6
in 1968 but I am just as confident that a Republican candidate
7
could give him a good battle, as I see the picture now. And
8
it is not a political campaign that the Republicans should just
9
say we shouldn't engage in. We ought to get a good
10
candidate, we will have good issues, and I think we will have
11
a chance to win.
12
MR. LAWRENCE: Well, one of his aides told me the other
13
day he wouldn't bet a nickel either way on whether he would
14
run.
15
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, Bill, they are better
16
informed than I am. I could only ---
17
MR. LAWRENCE: Well, would it change your thinking a lot
18
though, if you were running against another man?
19
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I don't think SO. We should
20
nominate our candidate based on what our delegates think
21
is the best man, and we shouldn't worry about whether
22
President Johnson is going to seek reelection or whether it
23
will be Vice President Humphrey or Bobby Kennedy. That
24
would be an interesting conflict in the Democratic convention.
25
I think we'd better make our own choice and let the Democrats
13
4
1
make their determination.
2
MR. BRUNER: Do you see it clear and positively,
3
though, that Mr. Johnson will seek another term? In your own
4
mind, and personally?
5
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I see no evidence to the contrary.
6
Most Presidents like to seek reelection, and I don't think
7
President Johnson is any different in that regard from his
8
predecessors.
9
MR. LAWRENCE: Congressman, to come back to the '66
10
campaign in which we are now engaged, what are the main
11
domestic issues on which you hope to profit politically?
12
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: The principal domestic issue,
13
Bill, is the failure of the Johnson-Humphrey Administration
14
to control the increases in the cost of living. The cost
15
of living went up two percent last year in 1965. In the
16
first four months of 1966 the cost of living went up 1.4 per-
17
cent, and if you analyze that for 1966 it will mean a price
18
increase of approximately four percent.
19
Now the President condemns labor and management for in-
20
creasing prices, or seeking wage increases. He tells
21
housewives they should buy cheaper, or buy less. But the
22
President doesn't do very much about controlling or cutting
back non-military expenditures, and this is where the problem
23
is and this is where he could do the most good, and I would
24
25
hope that he would tackle this problem before he condemns GERA
LIBRARY
14
5 1
others.
2
Now the second important issue, I think, is that the
3
American people are concerned about a lack of a two-party
4
system in this country. They are concerned that the Executive
5
Branch is getting too powerful and that the Legislative
6
Branch with the overwhelming Democratic majorities,
7
simply does what the President tells them to do.
8
Now we have a tradition in this country of real compe-
9
tition in the House and the Senate between the two
10
major parties. We don't have that now, with the Democrats
11
having two to one majorities. The American people are fearful
12
that we are losing one of the basic cornerstones or
13
ingredients in our system by the Democrats having such a
14
wide superiority numerically speaking.
15
I think also another issue is the lack of credibility
16
of the Johnson-Humphrey Administration. We have got a file
17
of a great many pages where there have been many comments or
18
releases by the Johnson-Humphrey Administration which shows
19
they have told half the truth or failed to disclose all
20
of the facts, and then of course out in the Middlewest the
21
farmers are furious with the Johnson-Humphrey-Freeman
22
Administration, and for good reasons.
23
MR. BRUNER: Well, that is enough to start with now,
24
Congressman, for some questions on them.
FORD LIBRARY 07V8
25
On inflation do you favor a tax increase this year?
15
1
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I don't, unless the President
2
can show that the costs of the war in Vietnam are getting out
3
of hand. In other words, if the President comes up with
4
a supplemental for the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines
5
of a very, very substantial amount, I think the Republicans
6
would have to take a look at it to see whether we could afford
7
to have that kind of added deficit particularly when
8
we haven't been able to cut back on non-military expenditures.
9
MR. BRUNER: of course you have charged, though -- you
10
know, that the Vietnam budget has been hidden and that
11
we haven't been told the true cost of the Vietnam war. If
12
this is the case, won't we need increased taxes?
13
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Wally, there is no doubt that
14
they have failed to disclose the true cost of the war in Vietnam.
15
Last year the Presidetn sent up a budget for the Defense
16
Department and before the end of the year the Congress had
17
to add at his request almost $15 billion in extra funds to
18
finance the military.
19
Now this year the President sent up a budget for the
20
Defense Department, including the costs of Vietnam, and
21
already they are running short of money for this fiscal year
22
with the increasing prospects of the next fiscal year.
23
All people who are knowledgeable in this area, the Members
FORD
24
of the Committee on Appropriations in the House and in the
Senate, are sure that the President's budget underfunded
BRARY
25
16
1
our military needs in Vietnam and elsewhere, and we can expect
2
anywhere from a five to six billion dollar supplement. Now
3
I don't think this is being honest with the American people.
4
I think that the President or the Secretary of Defense or
5
his fiscal people in the Pentagon should have known, should
6
have been able to forecast what the costs were going to be and
7
in all honesty should have told the American people what this
B
conflict in dollars and possible taxes would mean.
9
MR. LAWRENCE: Do you think as a practical matter if
10
the President decided he wanted a tax increast at this late
11
date he could get it from this Congress?
12
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: If the President relates the
13
absolute need for additional funds for the war in Vietnam
14
to a tax increase, his prospects are good because most
15
Americans under no circumstances would want to deprive the
16
Defense Department of needed funds. But on the other hand
17
the President's chances of getting such a tax increase would
18
be improved if he would take some action to cut back non-
19
military expenditures.
20
******
21
22
23
24
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
25
17
1
MR. LAWRENCE: Congressman Ford, what is the Republican
2
Party doing to try to attract the new Negro voter in the
3
south where the Negro has been pretty well kicked around
4
by the local Democratic Party?
5
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, it is interesting, Bill.
6
You know some of these ultra-racists in the Democratic
7
Party who caused all the trouble down in Alabama, for example,
8
in 1964 and '65, several of themcame to the Republican Party
9
this year and said they wanted to run as Republicans, and
10
the Republican organization in Alabama said, "No, we are
11
building a Republican Party in Alabama on a different basis
12
and we don't want you in our party as a candidate for the
13
Republicans.'
14
I think this is the best evidence of what we are trying
15
to do in Albaama and elsewhere. We want a Republican Party
16
not built on the traditional Democratic basis, but on a new
17
basis in the South.
18
MR. BRUNER: Well, Congressman, how do you stand on the
19
Civil Rights Bill, the one that is in Congress now,
20
concerning the section that would prohibit discrimination in
21
sales and rentals -- very briefly?
22
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I think the Republicans generally
23
will vote against the so-called Title IV as it stands
24
think this goes far too far at the present time.
FREDI LIBRARY is
25
MR. BRUNER: Thank you very much, Congressman Ford, for
2
1.8
1
being with us on ISSUES AND ANSWERS.
2
***
3
(Next week: Robert F. Kennedy (Dem. - New York) .)
4
5
- - -
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
FORD i LIBRARY GERALD
25
Ford- Broadcasts
8-15-66
THOMAS J. DEEGAN COMPANY, INC.
802 RING BUILDING
WASHINGTON 6,D.C.
August 15, 1966
M.F.
The Honorable Gerald R. Ford
Room H230, Capitol Building
Washington, D. C.
Dear Congressman Ford:
By now you probably have been briefed on our request for
your support of the promotion of the Metropolitan Opera Touring
Company. The matter was discussed with your Press Secretary,
Paul Mildrich, last Friday by our staff assistant, Wes McPheron.
We would be most delighted if you will find the time today to parti-
cipate in a brief interview with Miss Rise Stevens, star of the Metro-
politan Opera, in the House Recording Studio, Room 160 of the Cannon
Building at the time set aside for the interview by Mr. Mildrich.
Mr. Mildrich has reserved fifteen minutes for filming you
and Miss Stevens in the House Recording Studio on Monday, August
15, from 12:30-12:45.
Enclosed is a proposed outline for the interview which calls
attention to the pending visit of the National Company to Grand Rapids
on October 14-21.
As you know, the Center is a sponsor of the Metropolitan
Opera. This sponsorship is consistent with the efforts of the Center,
which was established by Congress, to demonstrate its links to com-
munities throughout the United States. Our company is involved as
the public relations consultants for the Kennedy Center.
We suggest that during the interview, you bring out, as
indicated in the outline, your support for the Center and similar cul-
tural projects. Miss Stevens will respond in a similar vein.
The interview will be filmed in 16mm black and white film
for use on a local television station in Grand Rapids prior to the
appearance of the Touring Company there. It will last approximately
three minutes. We will service the film to the station.
Other Congressmen who are scheduled to participate in inter
views with Miss Stevens in regard to the appearance of the Touring
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
Company in their district are:
Los ANGELES
NEW YORK
PARIS
Congressman Ford
August 15, 1966
Page 2
Rep. Rodney M. Love, Ohio
Rep. William L. Springer, Ill.
Rep. Robert W. Kastenmeier, Wisc.
Rep. Robert E. Jones, Alabama
Rep. Wilbur D. Mills, Ark.
Rep. John C. Kunkel, Pa.
Rep. E. Ross Adair, Pa.
Rep. Thaddeus J. Dulski, N. Y.
Rep. William S. Moorehead, Pa.
Rep. Albert W. Watson, S.C.
Rep. David E. Satterfield, Va.
On the Senate side we hope to arrange interviews between Miss
Stevens and the following:
Senator Stuart Symington, Mo.
Senator Richard B. Russell, Ga.
Senator Birch Bayh, Ind.
Senator Vance Hartke, Ind.
Senator Albert Gore, Tenn.
Senator Robert Griffin, Mich.
In addition to the proposed outline for the interview, we have
enclosed the itinerary of the Metropolitan Opera National Touring Company,
a resume of the Company's background, and material on the John F. Kennedy
Center for the Performing Arts.
Sincerely,
Jack Raymond Raymond
Vice President
JR/mem
Enclosures (4)
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
COPY
COPY
AUTO
XERO
ONEX
PROPOSED OUTLINE FOR
TELEVISION INTERVIEW WITH RISE STEVENS
ANNOUNCER:
From Washington, D. C., we bring you
,
who is talking with Miss Rise Stevens, world-famous star of the
Metropolitan Opera and co-manager of the Metropolitan Opera
National Touring Company.
CONG:
Miss Stevens, I want to tell you that we're delighted that the
Metropolitan Opera National Touring Company will be visiting
during its nation-wide tour.
MISS STEVENS:
Thank you,
.
We're looking
forward with pleasure and enthusiasm to our visit to
,
on
.
CONG:
I understand that this tour is being sponsored by the John F.
Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.
MISS STEVENS:
That's right,
, and the Friends of
the John F. Kennedy Center, a voluntary organization whose purpose
it is to emphasize the national status of the Center which is now under
construction in Washington. A Center which will give the Capitol its
first national forum for the performing arts
music, the ballet,
opera, the musical theater, drama and poetry.
CONG:
One of the reasons I've supported the Center, Miss Stevens, is
because of its bi-partisan nature. It was authorized by the Congress
FORD
during the Eisenhower Administration and has had the support of every
LIBRARY
President since then. It was originally called the National Cultural
Center, but following the death of President Kennedy, it was given its
present name.
COPY
COPY
Ado
weak)
OREX
XERO
QUEX
2
MISS STEVENS:
Yes, there are no political lines in the performing arts.
We consider the Center's potential audience the same as our
National Opera Company.
our national population of 186 million
people.
CONG:
How many cities are included on this tour of the Metropolitan
Opera National Touring Company?
MISS STEVENS:
Sixteen cities in fifteen states. And - to remind - we'll be
in
on
0
CONG:
What will you be performing in
?
MISS STEVENS:
0 (Add
identification and comment on any local artist appearing with the
Company.)
CONG:
I believe our time is up now, Miss Stevens, so let me close
by wishing you and the Metropolitan Opera National Touring Company
as much success on the rest of your tour as I know you will experience
in
@
MISS STEVENS:
Thank you,
0
I know we'll enjoy our
visit to
@
FORD i LIBRARY GERALD
THE FRIENDS OF THE KENNEDY CENTER
To: Congressional Committee of the Metropolitan Opera National Company
The repertory for the 1966-67 season of the Metropolitan Opera National
Company will be Puccini's "La Boheme", Verdi's "La Traviata", Mozart's
"Marriage of Figaro" and Benjamin Britten's "Rape of Lucretia."
The following lists those cities and states to be visited by the
Opera Company through November, 1966.
STATE
CITY
DATE
Alabama
Florence
Oct. 31
Huntsville
Nov. 1
Arkansas
Little Rock
Oct. 29-30
Connecticut
Stratford
Nov. 12
Georgia
Columbus
Nov. 2
Augusta
Nov. 3
Illinois
Champaign
Oct. 4-6
Indiana
Fort Wayne
Oct. 17-19
Indianapolis (Opening)
Sept. 15-24
Maryland
College Park
Nov. 9
Michigan
Detroit
Oct. 10-15
Grand Rapids
Oct. 19-21
Missouri
St. Louis
Oct. 7-8
New Jersey
Newark
Nov. 25-27
New York
Buffalo
Sept. 26-28
Brooklyn
Nov. 10
Rochester
Nov. 14-15
Utica
Nov. 28
Ohio
Dayton
Oct. 3
Cleveland
Nov. 16-19
Columbus
Oct. 25-28
Pennsylvania
Pittsburgh
Sept. 29
Lebanon
Rhode Island
Providence
Nov. 22-23
Tennessee
Chattanooga
Nov. 4-5
Vermont
Burlington
Nov. 30
FORD 3 LIBRAR. DENALD
Virginia
Richmond
Nov. 7-8
Wisconsin
Madison
Oct. 22-23
GROWING NATIONAL OPERA
FOUR OFFICIALS OF THE METROPOLITAN DISCUSS THE SPADEWORK OF ITS NATIONAL COMPANY
THE ENTERPRISE
National Company is dedicated to organizing or enlarging
by Anthony A. Bliss
permanent support of the performing arts in each com-
munity it visits. In other words, long after the perform-
ances of the National Company are local music history,
In the coming months the public will hear a great deal
the community will benefit from increased members and
about preparations for the new touring division of the
patronage of the group we will have organized to assist
Metropolitan Opera-the National Company, a reper-
local leadership in the performing arts fields.
tory opera company whose establishment was announced
Eventually, to ease the burden of cost for these local
by President Kennedy last year at the White House. Part
organizations, the National Company will be able to offer
of its significance lies in the premise that it will absorb
them its sets and costumes on loan. Other services related
some of the superb talent emerging across the country.
to many of the aspects and problems of opera produc-
Made up almost exclusively of American singers on the
tion will be provided by the Metropolitan. What we will
threshold of the world's international opera houses, the
then be realizing through the National Company is a long-
new company will present opera in sixty-odd communi-
desired dream of the Metropolitan: that moment when
ties throughout the nation. For many in its audiences,
the National Company itself has no further purpose and
this will be their first experience of operatic theater.
can be disbanded, because the growth of strong and
The Metropolitan, with its millions of friends all over
healthy opera seasons interlocking in all regions of the
North America, is a national institution, and as such it
country will have made it unnecessary.
looks far beyond its image as "the old lady of Thirty-
ninth Street" to wider horizons. Its own renewal in the
forthcoming move to Lincoln Center is but one of many
THE ENSEMBLE
avenues of growth. Another is the National Company, with
by Rudolf Bing
its obligation to nurture native talent and to contribute to
the vitality and growth of opera throughout the country.
Within the straining walls of the Metropolitan Opera
It is no secret that over seven hundred Americans are
House in its last years, plans and projects for the much
singing
in
While
(Reprinted from OPERA NEWS, Nov. 14, 1964.)
The Washington Post
STAGE-SCREEN
MUSIC-DANCE-ART
how
STAMPS-RADIO
TODAY'S EVENTS
GARDENS
SECTION G
SUNDAY,
APRIL 18, 1965
G1
Kennedy Center: A
Cultural Blueprint
By Wolf Von Eckardt
the arts. And there was much heated
circulation, lobbies and work, stor-
sion of spaces that afford ample room
The approach needs nothing more
consists of five buildings to house
controversy about the location of the
age and rehearsal spaces so that this
for all kinds of exhibits and day-
than the goodwill and some of the
fabulous luxury apartments, a hotel,
NLY $600,000 MUST still be
Center's one, all-encompassing build-
Center for the Performing Arts will
time uses. The restaurants and bar
O
ample money of the Highway Depart-
offices, stores, swimming pools and
raised by June 30 before an act
ing.
perform to perfection for the artists
are on the roof with its terrace and
ment. Its rebuilt E Street Expressway
a restaurant. It is owned by a com-
of Congress, establishing the John F.
As designed by Stone, who was
and audience alike.
splendid view.
now runs straight on axis towards the
bined United States and Italian in-
Kennedy Center for the Performing
retained under the Eisenhower Ad-
With one exception, this effort at
Right at the entrance will be a
middle of the Center's front plaza.
vestment.
Arts as "the sole na-
ministration, the Center, with its
intensive, functional design has not
visitors' lounge and orientation room
But when it comes to the sunken
The last building of the complex
tional memorial" to
parking garages and all its necessary
yielded any sensational innovations
for visitors. Though the main arteries
freeway it hesitates timidly and then
which would crowd the Center and
the late President in
amenities, will cost $46.5 million. The
in theater architecture. The audi-
of audience traffic - from the en-
fizzles out into wormy ramps running
tower over it by 28 feet does not yet
the National Capital,
Treasury has advanced a deferred
toriums and backstage arrangements
trance halls or the underground ga-
every which way. The highway
have a building permit, though the
will become legally
loan of $15.5 million for the substruc-
for the 2200-seat opera, the 1114-seat
rage to the auditoriums-are spa-
designers have here repeated the
rest of the complex is under con-
effective.
ture. Congress has appropriated $15.5
theater and the 2744-seat concert hall
cious and clear, we'll need that orien-
disastrous mistake which has ruined
struction.
It is unthinkable
in Federal funds provided the re-
are, if you like, conventional.
tation through the building's com-
the potentially dignified continuation
that this last require-
maining $15.5 are raised privately by
lexity.
of Constitution Avenue across Theo-
dore Roosevelt Bridge.
A
RECONSIDERATION of our
Rather than experiment, Stone is
non-planning of this entire
ment will not be met
June 30.
seeking to make the true and tried
somehow.
Private contributions keep coming
both as efficient and pleasant as
A
S TO THE SITE, all concerned
had to accept the fact that, in
Nothing but the expense prevents
stretch of the Potomac is in order,
Von Eckardt The ground for
in. Only last week the Italian govern-
the E Street Expressway from
particularly since the President
modern architecture and engineering
architect Edward Durrell Stone's im-
ment deposited $1.1 million as earn-
the end, the Center must go where
wants to make the river a model of
can make it.
est money on its generous gift of
Congress had put its substantial con-
proudly crossing the freeway on a
beauty.
posing marble and gold structure
marble for the building. Operating
The exception is the cinema-studio
tribution - about 18 acres of park-
bridge that is suitably adorned and
along the Potomac was already sym-
would thus give the Center a digni-
And while we are at it, we might
which will serve not only as a small
funds, along with the Center's pro-
land at the foot of E Street, opposite
motion picture theater, seating 510,
fied approach for both people and
really make the Potomac walk-
bolically broken by President John-
gram and content, however, should
Roosevelt Island. President Kennedy
but also for intimate performances
had said so all along.
cars. The ramps for the cars that
way, furnished with pleasant light-
son last fall. Working drawings are
nearing completion. Bids will be
continue to keep its chairman, Roger
L. Stevens, hustling for quite some
of all kinds. Part of the steep seating
This location puts the Center some-
want to enter the freeway could
posts and benches, a great experi-
platform can mechanically rotate
what remote from the city. It is visu-
easily be tucked under this bridge.
ence. It could be cut under Memorial
taken this summer. The steam
time.
Bridge. The terrace of the Center
shovels should start digging this
to create an arena stage in the cen-
ally, if not physically isolated by a
Visually, symbolically and physi-
October. And no one doubts any
should be cantilevered all the way
THE DESIGN of the building, all
ter. It's enchantingly ingenious.
messy spaghetti of freeways that, as
cally such an approach would at
over Potomac Parkway right to the
longer that by spring 1969 at the
690 feet long, 360 feet wide
One great advantage, not only to
presently designed, will be difficult
once link the Center to the city, par-
latest, one of John F. Kennedy's fond-
edge of the water. The Planning
and just a foot lower than the Lin-
people in wheelchairs, is the ground
to cross on foot.
ticularly since the now lost E Street
est dreams will be realized.
Commission has objected to this and
coln Memorial, remains essentially
level entrance through huge, 60 foot
Nor is this disadvantage sufficiently
will eventually have to be run under
insisted that the terrace cover only
As now conceived, this dream of
unchanged since its model delighted
high halls that lead to the grand
offset by a spacious, park-like set-
the White House grounds to connect
half the drive to leave the walkway
providing our Capital with a national
Mr. and Mrs. Kennedy at its unveil-
lobby with its river view that runs
ting. The Watergate project is woe-
it with the other E Street downtown
open. But it might be great fun to
opera house, a theater, concert hall
ing in September, 1962, at Newport,
the full two-block length of the build-
fully crowding in. The southernmost,
which the Pennsylvania Avenue Com-
walk for a stretch through an arcade
and cinema-studio worthy of Amer-
R.I. Only the romantic idea of a con-
ing and serves all three main audi-
massive, sausage-like building of this
mission hopes to turn into a main
and enjoy the delight of framed out-
ica's cultural aspirations began to
vertible roofgarden for concerts and
toriums. For once we should have
wiggly complex encroaches to within
traffic artery.
looks.
take shape seven years ago.
performances had to yield to the
ample space during intermission.
300 feet upon what is to be a national
The Watergate complex, a design
The Center deserves to be a com-
There were enormous problems of
reality of airplane noise.
Tickets will be sold in the spacious
shrine. The dignity of the John F.
for which the Italian architect Luigi
plete and decisive part of our river-
financing in a country that still looks
Their ambition is to work out
entrance hallways. Elevators carry
Kennedy Center demands more land,
Moretti must have had a Riviera play-
and cityscape and its presence should
askance at Government support of
sound insolation, accoustics, interior
you up to the galleries and a profu-
air and greenery around it.
ground but not our city in mind.
be felt on a nice Sunday stroll.
FORD
GERALD
LIBRARY
Musical
COOO
Dance
COLUMBIA
PLAZA
Vistas
May Gain
Exciting
The Most
AVENUE
NAVY
INNER
LOOP=
By Paul Hume
FREEWAY
By Jean Battev
August 4, 1966
Mrs. William S. Moorhead
Congressional Chairman
Friends of the Kennedy Center
1701 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20566
Dear Mrs. Moorhead:
Thank you for your letter of July 30th, inviting me to
tape a five-minute television interview with Rise Stevens
for use in Grand Rapids when the Metropolitan Opera National
Company will be performing in Grand Rapids on October 19th.
I appreciate your giving me this opportunity and will be glad
to have my staff set up a mutually convenient time for the
taping when a member of your organization calls.
Thank you again and warmest personal regards.
Sincerely,
Gerald R. Ford, M. C.
GRF:1
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
FRIENDS OF THE KENNEDY CENTER
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE N.W. - WASHINGTON.D.C. 20566
TELEPHONE 382-1933
July 30, 1966
Dear Mr. Ford:
The Metropolitan Opera National Company will be performing
in your area on October 19.
The tour is being co-sponsored, as it was last year, by the
John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts and the Metropolitan
Opera Association.
In order to focus public interest, Rise Stevens, well-known
opera singer and co-manager of the touring company, has agreed to tape
five minute television interviews with those Members of Congress whose
areas are to be visited this fall. The company's itinerary is
here enclosed.
Miss Stevens and the Friends of the Kennedy Center very much
hope that you will be interested in meeting with her in the House or
Senate Television studio near the latter part of August. The tape
would then be at your disposal to use at the appropriate moment in
your area; about ten days or so before the company will perform.
One of the Friends of the Kennedy Center will call you shortly
to schedule the interview and to answer any questions you may have.
Meanwhile should you wish to call for more information, Miss Ellen
Coolidge at the Kennedy Center (382-1937), or Miss Kay Martin, in my
husband's office (225-2301) will be glad to help.
I hope that you will join Miss Stevens in assisting this fine
enterprise of young American artists.
With very best wishes,
huy Sincerely, William Moorhead S. Moorhead
Congressional Chairman
Friends of the Kennedy
Center
FORD i LIBRARY GERALD
John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts - Washington, D. C.
METROPOLITAN OPERA NATIONAL COMPANY
SAESON, 1966-67
(TENTATIVE)
DATE, June 17, 1966
SEPT.
OCT.
NOV.
DEC.
JAN.
FEB.
MARCH
APRIL
MAY
JUNE
Housts
NEW/YoRK
Greenville
Sacramento
K.C.
1.
Pittsburgh
Ottawa
X N.Y.
Huntsville, Ala
X
Asheville
Columbus, Ga.
N.Y.
2.
Augusta, Ga.
new York
Winston- Salem
3.
Dayton
4.
champaign
Chattanooga
Portland
5.
Boston
Mexico
6.
Jacksonville
Phoenix
ST. Louis
Richmond, Va.
7.
8.
St. Petersburg
Yakima
U. of Md.
9.
College Pk.
10.
Detroit
Brooklyn
Los Angeles
Seattle
11.
Daytona
12.
Stratford, Conn
Toronto
13
Washington D.C.
Tallhassee
14.
Rochester
15.
Indianapolis
Pensacola ?
16.
Cleveland
Baton Rouge
17.
Ft. Wayne
18.
to be determined
19.
Grand Rapids
Shreveport
20.
Huntington W.Va
21'
NW.
Knoxville
22.
Madison
Providence
23.
24.
Charlotte
Santa Barbara
time
GERALD
Columbus, O.
Newark
San Diego
26,
Buffalo
Montreal ?
27.
Columbia
28
Utica
Austin
Berkeley
Pittsburgh
Little Rock ?
Lebanon, Pa.
Burlington, Vt.
Houston
31.
Florence, Ala.
Kansas
Broadcasts
1
PLEASE CREDIT ANY QUOTES OR EXCERPTS FROM THIS ABC RADIO AND
TELEVISION PROGRAM TO "ABC'S ISSUES AND ANSWERS.'
ISSUES AND ANSWERS
I I
SUNDAY, OCTOBER 30, 1966
GUEST: Congressman Gerald Ford (R., Mich.)
House Minority Leader
INTERVIEWED BY: Bob Clark and
Bill Downs, ABC News Correspondents
MR. CLARK: Mr. Ford, nice to have you with us. We
might as well begin with all those headlines the President
has been making in Asia. Do you think the Manila Conference
and the President's travels have brought us any closer to peace
in Vietnam?
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Bob, I would like to answer that
this way: The American people hope that President Johnson
would To to Manila and come back with a permanent and
honorable peace. That has not been achieved. The American
people hope that the Manila Conference would result in a
higher degree of solidarity between the United States and our
five allies. That has not been achieved. As a matter of fact,
there seems to be some undercurrent of dispute between
Premier Ky and our own U. S. position involving Viet Cong
participation in the ultimate government that will take place
there. The American people hoped that President Johnson
IBRARY
would come back with greater help from other allies aroughout
2
1
the world who would join us in this fight. That has not
2
materialized. The American people hoped that our prestige
3
in Southeast Asia would be improved. This apparently has not
4
been a result, when you hear and see the riots that took
5
place during the President's trip.
6
May I add I think our prestige worldwide is suffering
7
some too. I recently saw some figures by Senator Morton that
8
indicate eight out of ten Europeans feel that our prestige
9
is lower today than it was under Kennedy and Eisenhower.
10
So, when you add it all up, I really don't feel that the
11
Manila Conference has made the American people feel better
12
than before it happened.
13
MR. CLARK: The big news out of Manila was the offer
14
to withdraw all American and allied troops from South Vietnam
15
if North Vietnam does the same. What do you think of that?
16
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I think we ought to know a little
17
bit more about that offer, the specifics of it. As you know,
18
there was some apparent contradiction between what our Am-
19
bassador to the U.N. offered a few weeks ago, Ambassador
20
Goldberg, when he made a rather similar proposal at the U.N.
21
There was that statement and then there was the statement
22
made October 12th by the Secretary of State that was almost
23
the same thing, and then the President's, or the Manila Con-
24
ference's statement made by the six nations. All of them
FORD
25
seemed to be somewhat - or to a degree, I should say
GERALD a little
3
1
contradictory and not entirely consistent.
2
MR. DOWNS: Congressman, would you favor withdrawal of
3
the United States if we can qet a peaceful and just settlement?
4
Do you think we should keep troops out there or should we
5
withdraw?
6
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Bill, it is good to say that we
7
should withdraw, but the terms upon which we withdraw, that's
8
the real question.
9
MR. DOWNS: Well, what terms would you set?
10
REPREST TATIVE FORD: If we were to withdraw, I would
11
insist that the North Vietnamese take their regulars out of
12
South Vietnam. The Viet Cong would have to be deactivated
13
and there would have to be certain assurances that the Viet
14
Cong would not lurk in the background and then move in and
15
take over again.
16
It seems to me that if we withdrew without these firm
17
assurances that are necessary, we could suffer and South Vietnam
18
would suffer a delayed defeat and certainly this would not be
19
justified after all of the sacrifices that have been made by
20
the Americans, both in Vietnam and elsewhere.
21
MR. DOWNS: Doesn't the communique say in effect -- at
22
least imply it, if it does not spell it out --- "We are not going
23
to pull out our troops until they have a secure and independent
24
government in Saigon that can operate"?
FORD LIBRARY
25
PEPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, the communique, Bill, was a
4
1
little indefinite in this regard. It didn't really point out
2
the basic terms by which we would make this withdrawal. It
3
didn't have any provisions in it that would insure the com-
4
pliance by the North Vietnam forces and by the Viet Cong.
5
This is where I think the American people have to know more
6
before they can say they are for the proposal that was made in
7
Manila.
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
FORD LIBRARY & GERALD
5
I
1
MR. CLARK: You say the Viet Cong would have to be
2
deactivated. Now as a practical matter, how can you accomplish
3
this without the presence of American troops?
4
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, this is an excellent question,
5
Bob. I have grave doubts that the South Vietnamese forces
6
are capable at the present time of handling the situation
7
by themselves. The South Vietnamese forces have had a large
8
desertion rate. They don't have the cadre of officers that
9
are needed to really do a job. I am not at all positive that
10
the Viet Cong can be properly and adequately handled by the
11
South Vietnamese forces. And if we just pulled out and
12
in effect left South Vietnam and moved our troops in
13
considerable numbers, for example to Thailand, which
14
may be a possibility, it would only move the battlefront
15
from South Vietnam to Thailand.
16
MR. DOWNS: As a Pacific power you don't really
17
think we should pull out of Southeast Asia altogether, do
18
you?
19
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I certainly do not. I have always
20
felt that the United States has an obligation and a respon-
21
sibility to steadfastly and effectively meet the challenge
22
of Communist aggression, Communist terror and Communist
23
subversion in South Vietnam and all of Southeast Asia. This
FORD
24
is to our benefit and to the benefit of the free world. So
25
I am not one who wants us to retreat to Pearl Harbor as some
6
2
1
Democrats unfortunately have said or implied. I believe
2
for our own security as well as the security of the free
3
world, we have an obligation to stay there and to prevail
over communism.
4
MR. DOWNS: I think this is the Administration's policy,
5
too. So therefore you are in agreement with that.
6
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I am in agreement, Bill, with their
7
basic aim and objective, I would put it. I do have questions
8
in other areas, but I am in agreement with the President's
9
determination to stay and to prevail over Communist aggression
10
in Southeast Asia.
11
MR. DOWNS: Isn't that where the Republicans, though, are
12
in trouble in trying to make the Vietnam war a political issue
13
in this election?
14
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Bill, Senator Dirksen and I have
15
repeatedly said that we don't believe the Republicans should make
16
Vietnam and the war and the crisis there a political issue.
17
We have tried to be responsible in this regard. We have
18
given more help to President Johnson in this area than most
19
of the Democrats -- in the Senate, particularly. I think
20
it is unfortunate that the President hasn't been able to get
21
more support from his own Democrats in the United States
22
Senate during this crisis.
23
MR. CLARK: There have been some proposals for an Asian
24
peace conference which would include the Communists as a
25
LIBRARY
7
1
followup to Manila. Would you like to see such a conference?
2
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Bob, as you know the Republicans --
3
Charlie Percy in Illinois, and others -- have been strong
4
for what we call an all-Asian peace conference. We felt
5
that this would be a big step in the right direction to bring
6
about peace in that area of the world and if that was held, I
7
would think in time you would have to bring in some of the enemy
8
leaders as well as the Asian leaders themselves who are on
9
our side.
10
MR. CLARK: Just who would you bring in, would you include
11
the Viet Cong, for instance, or Red China?
12
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I think all of the participants,
13
all of the combatants eventually, on the other side, would
14
have to sit down with the Asian leaders themselves who are on
15
our side. I have a lot of faith in President Marcos and the
16
other Asian leaders who are on our side. They have a firm
17
position. They are very staunch in their opposition to Commun-
18
ist aggression and terror. I think they could handle Ho Chi
19
Minh, and any of the other opposition forces who would be
20
at such peace table.
21
MR. CLARK: How about the Soviet Union who have been
22
supplying missile support to North Vietnam, would you have
23
them at the conference table too?
24
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I don't believe the Soviet
FORD Union LIBIRET
25
qualifies as an Asian nation in the context that we are
8
1
talking about.
2
3
MR. DOWNS: Congressman Ford, two weeks ago when the
4
President left for the Far East a number of you Republican
5
leaders on the Hill feared that he would so dominate the
6
news and the headlines that you wouldn't have a fair shake on
7
this campaign for the November elections. Do you feel that
8
he has dominated the headlines and what is the political
D
impact of the Manila conference?
10
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Bill, we were apprehensive that this
11
conference would dominate the news and that the President
12
would divert public attention from the basic issues that are
13
disturbing the American people. But my general impression
14
from traveling in about ten states in the last two weeks
15
during the time the President was in Manila is that the American
16
people are still concerned about those basic issues: high
17
prices, high interest rates, a disregard for the law. The
18
American people have been interested - and properly so -
19
in what has taken place in Manila, but I think they have kept
20
their eye on the ball, so to speak, on the basic issues between
21
Republicans and Democrats and I don't believe any last-minute
22
political oratory by the President, when he comes back and
makes his whirlwind tour around the country, will change
23
very many votes.
24
FORD
25
MR. DOWNS: You expect a political blitz then GERAL when he LIB comes
ARV
9
1
back?
2
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, all indications are the
3
President is going to visit a number of states and try to
4
convince some of our voters that things are good. I think
5
they realize problems are here and they haven't been solved
6
and the President's last minute political oratory won't change
7
very many votes.
8
MR. CLARK: You have been campaigning furiously around the
9
country for the past several months. You have raised the
10
suspicion in some quarters that you are working for something
11
more than just the election of Republican candidates, that
12
you are running for Vice President or maybe even President
in 1968.
13
14
Would it be fair to call you the Bobby Kennedy of the
Republican Party?
15
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Bob, in the first place there
16
isn't much resemblance between us and secondly our views are
17
very different. I have absolutely no political ambition for any
18
other office than to be reelected to my present seat in the
19
Congress and to continue to help the Republicans in the
20
House and I hope to be the Republican leader in the House in
21
the next two years.
22
MR. CLARK: But you would agree that you are not doing
23
FORD
yourself any harm for anything that might transpire
24
in the LIBRAR
future with all these contacts and good friends you are making
25
10
1
among Republican Party people around the country?
2
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, there is no doubt that
3
when I go from one district to another that I -- or at
4
least I hope I make good friends and get to know people
5
better, but this is for the purpose, really, of stimulating
6
our candidates in these districts and getting their friends
7
and their helpers to get out and elect us a responsible
8
Congress in the next session. What happens after that,
9
why of course is beyond my own control.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
FORD i LIBRARY GERALD
11
1
MR. DOWNS: Maybe we could call you the Richard Nixon
2
of Capitol Hill. Would that be more like it?
3
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Ucll, my desire, as I said a minute
4
ago, Bill, is not to come to any district for the purpose of
5
helping my own cause on a national level.
6
MR. DOWNS: You mentioned the economic issues and you
7
were one of the Republican Congres men or Republican leaders
8
who advised the ladies who are now on the picket lines in the
9
supermarkets, instead to picket the White House or the --- I
10
think you call it the "inflationary 89th Congress."
11
What did Mrs. Ford have to say about that?
12
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Well, Bill, we discussed that this
13
morning and I think she agrees with me that the cause of in-
14
flation today is not the farmer; it is not the businessman;
15
it is not the working man who is trying to act higher wages.
16
The cause of inflation in this country today is the excessive
17
spending, the non-essential, non-military spending out of the
18
Federal treasury.
19
I was surprised. She knows a great deal about this aspect
20
and if she is typical of the housewives throughout the country
21
--- and I think she is - I an very, very happy because in my
22
judgment this administration has been trving to divert public
23
opinion from the cause of inflation, which is federal spending,
24
to the businessman and to the farmer and to the supermarket
25
operator and the like.
GERALD
IBRARY
2
12
1
I think my friend, Esther Petersen, when she went out to
2
Denver to help some of these housewives was, to some extent
3
anyhow, trying to divert attention from the cause and she, and
4
these housewives, were only showing their ppposition to the
5
symptoms.
6
The housewives, I have great sympathy for them. I
7
understand their frustration, but they could do a better job
8
in the remaining days before the election to come down and
9
picket the White House and the majority members of the Congress
10
who added to the President's budget and who are equally
11
responsible for the high prices at the present time.
12
MR. DOWNS: There have been, though, signs that the
13
Congress itself saw something going wrong in the supermarkets
14
because you -- I don't know how you voted on this; how did you
15
vote on the Truth in Packaging Bill, for example?
16
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I voted for it, Bill.
17
MR. DOWNS: You voted for it. So, something has been
18
going on in the market that the housewife doesn't like. Now,
19
you were telling them, "Don't blame the supermarket, but blame
20
the President of the United States." But the supermarket is
21
there, the President isn't there. Do you think it is wrong
22
for these people to protest?
23
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Bill, I think the housewives who
24
are picketing supermarkets are aiming their ire not at the
25
products they net, but the prices they have to pay,
FORD LIBRARY & GERALD
3
13
1
and the prices they have to pay, the highest prices in a good
2
many years, if not all-time highs, the cause of that is not
3
the businessman who sells the product; it is not the farmer
4
who produces the commodities - -
5
MR. DOWNS:
It is not the trading stamps; it is
6
not the contest; it is not the "We will give you a free trip
7
to Europe;" you don't think that has anything to do with it?
8
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I think those are promotion gim-
probably
9
micks that/could well be left aside in this crisis of high
10
prices, but the Administration has sought by one means or
11
another in the last several weeks to divert public attention
12
from the cause. They have been treating the symptoms. The
13
Federal Trade Commission, for example, has belatedly jumped
14
into the fray and they are now at this last ditch moment before
15
the election going around trying to find out whether these
16
promotion proposals and these gimmicks are bad or good, or
17
whether they are inflationary or otherwise.
18
This Administration is doing everything it possibly can
19
to get public attention away from the real cause of inflation,
20
which is the federal spending that can be cut back and should
21
be deferred.
22
It is clever. It is good politics, but it isn't good
23
economics.
FORD
24
MR. CLARK: Did Mrs. Ford tell you when she complains
25
about high prices that there should be a tax increase to check
4
14
1
inflation?
2
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: We haven't gone that far, Bob,
3
but speaking generally, most Americans, from my travels
4
around, to some extent expect President Johnson to come back
5
from Manila and before January 10th, when Congress reconvenes,
6
let the cat out of the bag that we will have to have a third
7
tax increase within 14 months.
8
The President, I am sure, fully realizes that there is a
9
backlog, a big backlog of unfunded problems ir the Defense
10
Department as long as he didn't come back from Manila with
11
peace, and if he reveals the extent of this need and the
12
necessity in the Pentagon, as he should, for increased
13
expenditures for the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines, I am
14
positive that he will wrap up his tax increase in a tax bill
15
for the prosecution of the war in Vietnam.
16
MR. DOWNS: One thing on the boycott before we leave that.
17
Do you think it is going to hurt you or help you, these women
18
picketing?
19
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I believe it will help us because,
20
despite the diversionary tactics of the Administration, eight
21
out of ten Americans know, according, I think, to the Gallup
22
or Harris poll, that inflation is caused by excessive non-
23
essential, non-military spending.
FORD
24
MR. CLARK: With the continuing threat of inflation
LIBRARY
and with the almost total failure of Republicans in this
25
15
5
1
last Congress to make any substantial cuts in Great Society
2
programs, would you now agree with most economists that a
3
tax increase is needed now?
4
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I haven't yet seen enough evidence,
5
Bob, to convince me that a tax increase is inevitable, and,
6
furthermore, the Republicans in the House of Representatives
7
during this last session made repeated efforts to cut back on
8
non-military, non-essential spending. On five appropriation
9
bills we offered a five per cent cut in spending, which, if
10
it had been supported by the Democrats, we could have saved
11
$5,600 million. If those savings had been made, we could have
12
dampened the fires of inflation right now, and we could have
13
possibly avoided the need and necessity for a tax increase.
14
MR. CLARK: How many Pepublican seats are you going to
15
have to pick up in this next Congress before you can make any
16
substantial dent in Great Society spending?
17
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: We have to get, Bob, a minimum of
18
thirty House Republicans to replace those Democrats that ao
19
along almost exclusively with the President's programs.
20
I was amazed -
21
MR. DOWNS: Is this your prediction? Thirty?
22
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: No, Bill, I think we will get 40 or
23
more. From my travels around the country, it looks more and
24
more encouraging every day.
LIBRARI
MR. DOWNS: Well, that June 19th -- I hate to pull this on
25
16
1
you ------ on this same program you predicted 40 to 50 House seats.
2
Now, are you downgrading? Has something happened that has
S
made you become more conservative?
4
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: Bill, I have used a phrase more
5
recently that I think gives us a little flexibility. I have
6
said 40 or more, but I must say and say it very emphatically
7
that right now I am convinced I could put more emphasis on the
8
"more" which takes me up to the 50 figure that I used a few
9
months ago on this program.
10
MR. CLARK: President Johnson seems to be trying to paint
11
Republicans into a corner by recalling, quoting statistics
12
that since the turn of the century, since 1900, the average
1.3
gain by the out-of-power party in off-year elections has
14
been 41 votes. Therefore, if you accept President Johnson's
15
theme, if the Republicans pick up any less than 40 votes, it
16
is a victory for theDemocrats. Would you agree with Mr.
17
Johnson?
18
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I think the President is using
19
statistics to cover up a defeat that I believe he will suffer
20
on November 8th when we do make those kinds of gains. Dick
21
Nixon a few days ago had made a study, which is a very interest-
22
ing one, which shows in the first off-year election after a
23
President is elected, going back to Roosevelt to Truman to
24
Eisenhower, the net gain of theparty out of power is about
25
ten, so if we, as Republicans, pick up 40 or morezin BERA this
17
1
election November 8th rather than the ten which is the
2
traditional figure in this situation, Republicans will have
3
given a big boost and the American people will have rejected
4
the Johnson-Humphrey inflation Democrat Congress, a real
5
beating.
6
MR. CLARK: The Republican leader in the Senate, Everett
7
Dirksen, is still predicting a gain of 75 seats in the House.
8
I take it you feel he is a little optimistic.
9
MR. DOWNS: You are not taking any bets on that?
10
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I like to agree with Senator
11
Dirksen and we do agree practically all the time, but on this
12
one I will To along with his figure, but I think in all
13
honesty the one that I have quoted is the more likely one.
14
******
15
MR. DOWNS:, Congressman Ford, I think we agree that this
16
question of black power, the so-called white backlash, is a
17
real imponderable in the upcoming election.
18
How do you assess it?
19
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: First, all the Republican leaders
20
I know of have deplored and regretted that a limited number
21
of negro leaders have used this as a phrase and have sought to
22
exploit the situation. I don't think that the American people
23
are at all sympathetic; in fact, I think they are veryomuch
24
opposed to it. I have the feeling that in this election the
25
American people individually will make their decision on whether
18
1
or not the white backlash is a factor or not.
2
No one, Bill, can forecast right now whether this will
3
or will not be a substantial factor on November 8th.
4
MR. CLARK: In some of your recent campaign speeches you
5
seem to be implying rather strongly that the Administration is
6
responsible for race riots in the big cities. Do you believe
7
that?
8
REPRESENTATIVE FORD: I have never said that. I have
9
pointed out that under this Administration crime has gone up
10
about 46 per cent while our population has gone up only eight
11
per cent. I have pointed out that the Republicans in the House
12
on several occasions have tried to get amendments offered on
13
various bills that would give better tools to the Administra-
14
tion to solve these problems and unfortunately on one or more
15
occasions the Administration has opposed these either indirectly
16
or directly, such legislation.
17
MR. CLARK: I am sorry but our time is up. Thank you very
18
much for being our guest on ISSUES AND ANSWERS.
******
19
20
(Next week: Richard M. Nixon, former Vice President of the
21
United States and a leader of the Republican Party.)
22
-
23
24
FORD i LIBRARY GERALD
25
1
"ON THE RECORD"
Ald
2
ow
3
An interview with the Honorable Gerald R. Ford,
4
Minority Leader of the House of Representatives
5
Tuesday, November 22, 1966, at 11:00 a.m.
6
7
0
Q. The Republican Conference will meet shortly,
9
will it?
10
MR. FORD: It will meet on January 9.
11
Q. Do you expect to be re-elected as Minority
12
Leader?
13
MR. FORD: I hope that the whole leadership group
14
which served in the 89th Congress will be re-elected.
15
Q. There has been some question about whether Les
16
Arends wants to continue on as Whip. Have you discussed that
17
with him?
18
MR. FORD: I haven't discussed it with him. I just
19
assumed that he wanted to continue as Whip. I have talked
20
to Les and he never mentioned it. I told him, as I told
21
everybody else in the leadership, that I strongly hope that
22
all of them would be candidates and would be re-elected.
23
Q. What are the Republicans going to do in the
FORD
24
House this year that they didn't do last year, now that
GERAL you LIBRARY
25
have added strength?
2
1
MR. FORD: Well, I think the overall approach we
2
will take is that we are going to insist that the legislative
3
process be re-established in the House of Representatives.
4
I am sure all of you knew that we felt that in the last
5
Congress the legislative process as we have known it in the
6
past just didn't operate. The ratios were so great that to
7
a substantial degree on the big issues, when the Administra-
0
tion wanted something, the House didn't operate in a typical
9
legislative way.
10
We are going to insist that the committbes operate
11
in a proper way. There is going to be better consideration
12
of measures in the committees. We hope that the House, itself,
13
well again function as a legislative body.
14
Q. Jerry, do you favor, in line with what you just
15
mentioned, eliminating the 21-day rule?
16
MR. FORD: We haven't made any decision on that.
17
The leadership is going to get together in the next month.
18
Q. What is your personal feeling on it?
19
MR. FORD: Well, I don't believe in saying what I
20
feel as an individual until I have worked out what I think the
21
leadership as a whole should feel. There are some in the
22
leadership who have expressed themselves that we ought to
23
fight the 21-day rule and return to what it was. Several of
24
the leadership have suggested that we go back and take
RAL the FORD LIBRARI
25
"Fair Play" amendments that followed the '62 election take
3
1
some of the ideas we had at the time following the '64 election,
2
and incorporate those in some of the rules changes.
3
Then one of the members of the leadership has sug-
4
gested that we take the 21-day rule and fight to take from it
5
the discretion of the Speaker -- as you know,now the Speaker
6
has the discretion to recognize the Chairman of the particular
7
committee -- and make it mandatory that he recognize not only
C
the Chairman but the Ranking Minority Member. This would
9
insure that also the Ranking Minority Member can force the
10
legislation on the Floor after the 21 days has expired.
11
What I am trying to say is that we have some alterna-
12
tives that we are going to explore. We will get together some-
13
time in the next month and try to pick our course of action.
14
Q. Have you had any indication that Carl Albert,
15
who is the Democratic Majority Leader, will insist on rein-
16
stating the 21-day rule in the new Congress?
17
MR. FORD: I haven't talked to Carl about it.
18
Q. If they don't move,it won't be there, will it?
19
MR. FORD: Oh, yes, the House has to adopt its rules
20
the day the session begins. So the new Congress has full
21
flexibility on what it wants to approve.
22
Q. Do you expect to have to fight to achieve this
23
return of the legislative process, or do you think that it will
24
be a foregone conclusion?
25
MR. FORD: We have 47 more members. On its face,
4
1
that would insure that both in committee and on the Floor
2
there will be a re-establishment of this legislative process.
3
Q. Will you get more members on the committees?
4
MR. FORD: Well, in 1965, following '64, the Democratic
5
leadership said that we had 32.-some per cent and they had
6
67. -some per cent. It was virtually 68 to 32, so let us use
7
those figures. Based on the elections of two weeks ago, it is
0
43 to 57. They said on all committees two years ago that it
9
ought to be 32-68. We couldn't do much about it. We feel
10
that if there was a mandate in '64, there is a mandate in '66,
11
and we ought to get the same consideration.
12
Q. Do you think that you will?
13
MR. FORD: We are sure going to fight for it.
14
I think we, have good reasons to fight for it, because there
15
was a very substantial change in public sentiment as re-
16
flected in the gains we made. If the concept of carrying out
17
the will of the people in '64 was sound in '65, it sure is
18
sound in '67.
19
Q. Could you expect to get some support from
20
Southern Democratic committee chairmen on this matter of
21
getting a greater number of Republicans on the committees?
22
MR. FORD: Well, this brings up the whole issue of
23
the Republican-Southern Democrat coalition. My feeling two
24
years ago, and my feeling today, is that the Republicans ⁰
25
ought to make their own decisions on policy matters,
GERALD
just
LIBRARY
GE
5
1
like I think we ought to make our own decision on the committee
2
ratio. We want Republican representation on committees.
3
On issues we will make up our own mind or we will
4
make our own determinations on what policies should be.
5
We will get whatever help or whatever support we can get from
6
any Democrats.
7
On the ratios on committees, if we can get any
8
Democratic help in the breakdown of committee ratios, we will
9
sure be glad to have it.
10
Q. As a practical matter, you will be getting support
11
more from Southern Democrats than anyone else, won't you?
12
MR. FORD: This is what they have to decide. But
13
I want to repeat and reiterate, the Republican policy decision
14
will be made by Republicans. We will welcome help from Northern,
15
Southern, Liberal, or Conservative Democrats.
16
Q. Is this a bargaining situation now, where you
17
are saying, in effect, the signals are out to the Southern
18
Democrats, that if they expect to get any Republican help,
19
they had better provide votes for increased Republican committee
20
holdings?
21
MR. FORD: No, I wouldn't put it that way. We have
22
187 Republicans. We will make our decisions in the leadership
23
and otherwise with those numbers in mind. We certainly ex-
24
pect some Democratic help on a number of issues. Whether or
25
not they will help us on committee ratios or not, I couldn't 838
LIBRARY
6
1
tell you.
2
Q. The Democrat help you expect, that is Southern
3
Democrats?
4
MR. FORD: Not necessarily. We had some help on some
5
issues last year from Northern Democrats.
6
Q. What would you do in exchange? How could you
7
help the Southern Democrats if they came along to help the
0
Republicans or lend support to the Republicans?
9
MR. FORD: I don't think that I want to be in the
10
position of making any deals with any Democrats, none whatso-
11
ever. This was a Republican mandate, in my judgment, on
12
November 8. I am sure that you know we fielded more Republican
13
candidates against more Democrats across the board than we
14
ever did before. We received more results nation-wide with
15
the exception of three states. We didn't do well in New York,
16
we didn't do well in the State of Washington, and we lost one
17
seat in the State of Maine. Other than that, we made good
18
Republican progress acorss the board.
19
So what we have to concentrate on is making this
20
a Republican policy. Even though we don't have the majority,
21
we have to make certain that the public understands that our
22
decisions come from within the Republican Party, so we can
23
build in '68 to have Republican candidates against every
Democrat.
24
Q. South as well as North?
25
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
7
1
MR. FORD: Nation-wide.
2
Q. Isn't it more likely, though, that the Republi-
3
cans and the Southern Democrats will in fact be lined up on
4
a majority of issues?
5
MR. FORD: That is up to them. After we make our
6
decision, Paul, that is their decision and not ours.
7
Q. Les Arends was quoted the other day as saying
8
that Republicans and Conservative Democrats will control the
9
next Congress. Would you agree with that?
10
MR.FORD: I don't know. We hope to maximize our
11
unanimity, and I think that we have made considerable progress
12
in that as a result of the '66 elections. I am not saying
13
that we will get unanimous Republican votes on every issue.
14
That just doesn't happen. But we will get a higher degree
15
of unity among Republicans in the next two years than we did
16
in the last two. If the Democrats want to support us, that is
17
for them to decide. We aren't going to make any deals with
18
them.
19
Q. But in shaping your policy, won't you be taking
20
into consideration, if you do this or that, you will pick up
21
25 or 30 votes from the Conservative Democrats and thereby
22
carry the day on the Floor, whereas otherwise you might go
23
down swinging?
24
MR. FORD: Well, their unanimity has been far from
25
perfect, too, on the Administration side, although LALD EE in the
8
1
last Congress there was always the pressure of the White House,
2
which I assume will be true in the next two years.
3
Q. Do you think it will be greater?
4
MR. FORD: It will have to be greater if they want
5
to win. They have 47 less votes to start with than they had
6
before.
7
Q. Do you foresee a real battle in the House this
8
year over legislation?
9
MR. FORD: I hope so, Paul.
10
Q. Are you going to have your own positions on war
11
and poverty? Are you going to have an alternative of some
12
sort to the war on poverty?
13
MR. FORD: Well, as you know, Quie and Goodell
14
had their proposal this year, which we offered as a motion to
15
recommit, and we offered amendments as the bill was considered.
16
It was a disappointing exercise or result, because we didn't
17
have enough votes. But I would assume that we would have the
18
same approach on that program in the next two years as we
19
had in the last two.
20
Q. Are you going to have a full range of alternative
21
programs, in effect a Republican "State of the Union" message?
22
MR. FORD: We are anticipating another State of the
23
Union message. We think it was successful last year. We have
24
some of our staff people working on ideas for it at the
LIBRARY
25
present time.
9
1
Q. Would you have a Viet Nam position in it?
2
MR. FORD: Well, asyou know, last year Senator
3
Dirksen took the foreign policy side, and I took the domestic
4
side. I would hope that we could have some suggestions in
5
this area in our State of the Union Message, as I know we will
6
have some on the domestic side.
7
Q. Are you going to do it that way again?
0
MR. FORD: I haven't talked to him about that detail
9
yet.
10
Q. Will you ask for free television time for this?
11
MR. FORD: We certainly expect to make the same
12
request, and we hope we get a little more time and a little
13
better time.
14
Q. How do you feel about the President's request
15
to Eisenhower to tour Asia and other parts of the world?
16
MR. FORD: Well, if General Eisenhower's health
17
permits it, I think he would be a fine goodwill emissary, as
18
far as the United Statesis concerned. I think he and his
19
doctors have to make up their minds as to whether he is
20
physically able to do 80.
21
Q. Would that steal some of the Republican thunder
22
on Viet Nam, if Eisenhower does go out there?
23
MR. FORD: I wouldn't think so. I think Ike would
24
go as an emissary for all of us -- Democrats, Republicans,
25
and otherwise. I think his worldwide stature today is higher
10
1
than it was at almost any time except right after World War II.
2
Q. Wouldn't it be taken as evidence of bi-partisan
3
support for the Administration's Viet Nam policy?
4
MR. FORD: Well, I think I am right, that the Repub-
5
licans have given pretty strong bi-partisan support to the
6
Administration on Viet Nam in the last two years. In fact,
7
we have given a lot more support to the President in this area
8
than some of his Democratic Senators particularly have in the
9
last two years.
10
As a matter of fact, we have given him far more
11
support on the overall policy in Viet Nam in the House. You
12
didn't see any Republicans voting one day for an appropriation
13
and then within twelve hours signing a petition, as I think
14
seventy-some Democrats did, saying, "Well, maybe we shouldn't
15
have voted that way. We have a different position."
16
Q. Do you think Viet Nam ought to be a bi-partisan
17
issue?
18
MR. FORD: I think the overall objective of meeting
19
the Communist aggression, and Communist terror, and Communist
20
subversion in Viet Nam should be a bi-partisan aim. This
21
doesn't mean that we have to sit silently, or we can't raise
22
some questions and can't make some broad suggestions. But on
23
the overall objective I believe the Republicans will stand
24
with the Administration as long as itkeeps that overall
25
objective as our national goal.
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
11
1
Q. You are saying you would feel free to criticize
2
the methods the Administration uses to reach that objective?
3
MR. FORD: Not in a nit-picking way, no. But I use
4
as an example here the coordinating committee, the statement
5
of December of 1965, which made some broad suggestions.
6
I think that they were valid then, and I think that they are
7
valid now.
S
Q. Do you think the Republicans will have a more
9
distinct Viet Nam policy than they have had in the past?
10
MR. FORD: I think it is too early to tell, Paul,
11
at this point. What we hope to do, and this is in broad out-
12
line, is this: I would hope that our leadership can sit
13
down with some experts in several fields, in the field of
14
economics to see what they tell us the prospects are for the
15
economy in the next twelve months, with perhaps some military
16
people who can give us a better perspective on the problems
17
in that area, and some experts in some of the other fields
18
that will inevitably be considered in legislation up here.
19
Until we have had that opportunity, I think it is
20
premature for us to be definitive on, we will say, Viet Nam.
21
Q. Yesterday the Administration indicated in the
22
United Nations that it was in favor of the Italian proposal
23
to study the possibility of admitting Red China into the
24
United Nations, the two-China policy. Where will the
Republican leadership stand on that?
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
25
12
1
MR. FORD: This was a little surprising to me, because
2
from everything I have ever heard the Secretary of State and
3
others say heretofore, they were opposed to the admission of
4
Red China into the United Nations. My own overall feeling
5
in this regard is that until Red China proves by some per-
6
formance that they should qualify, I don't think that they
7
should be admitted.
8
Q. I have one other question on Viet Nam.
9
You mentioned there was an agreement with the Administ
10
tration on the goals in Viet Nam. I wonder what do the
11
Republicans see as the goal? Is it a victory, a negotiated
12
peace, or if we do get a negotiated peace, are you then
13
going to criticize Johnson for selling out cheaply, or what
14
do you want?
15
MR, FORD: If you take the various words that have
16
been used by the Administration, sometimes they talk about
17
victory, and Hubert has been the one principally who used
18
that term, but several others have used it. Others talk
19
about a negotiated settlement. They have used a wide variety
20
of phraseology in defining their own goals. I think it would
21
be helpful if they would be more definitive themselves. But
22
I would refer here to what the coordinating committee said
23
in December of last year, when the words they used were,
24
"We do not seek unconditional surrender of North Viet Nam.
25
We seek unconditional security for South Viet Nam."
FORD LIBRART
13
1
Those are the exact words that were used as an over-
2
all objective.
3
Q. Can that be engotiated?
4
MR. FORD: I think it can be negotiated.
5
Q. Let me ask you about the national political
6
situation. Do you feel that the emergence of some very popular
7
Republican Governors is taking away or moving the leadership
0
of the party nationally from Washington to some of these
9
Governors?
10
MR. FORD: I would hope that the Republican victories
11
in the Senate races and the Gubernatorial races and the House
12
races and also in the legislative races would prove that the
13
Republican coordinating committee was a very, very sound
14
vehicle for the enunciation of Republican philosophy and
15
Republican policy statements, and that the leadership of the
16
party as a whole would stay in the coordinating committee.
17
Q. Hasn't the coordinating committee been pretty
18
well dominated by the Capitol Hill Republicans?
19
MR. FORD: Paul, if you had been there, and seen
20
some of the arguments -- and I use "arguments" in the right
21
sense -- you would have seen that all elements of the party
22
had a major part in the drafting of the statements we have
23
set forth. I guess numerically you could say the eleven
24
House-Senate leadership was the biggest segment. There are
FORD
25
five Governors and five ex-candidates for the Presidency,
GERALD
LIBRARY
14
1
and some from the National Committee, and one from the legis-
2
lative group. But it didn't always work out that the House
3
and Senate people were unanimous. There were bona fide
4
differences of opinion that were resolved without any one
5
segment of the party, the Governors, or the Capitol Hill
6
people, or others, taking ironclad positions.
7
Q. Do you think the coordinating committee will
0
be able to continue its role in the next two years as well
9
as you think it has in the last two?
10
MR. FORD: I think it should do better. In the
11
first place, it is a going concern, Jerry, and secondly it
12
proved its worth in the last two years. We didn't have a
13
number of spokesmen going off in one direction or another.
14
We had once every three months a meeting of the group, and
15
this brought in all elements of the party. My impression was
16
that it was a major factor in our party unity. It certainly
17
kept the party from going off in ten different directions.
18
Q. Do you think the coordinating committee will
19
be in position in a major way to determine the Republican
20
platform for 1968 or the election of candidates in 1968?
21
MR. FORD: Well, certainly the policy statements
22
which will be periodically issued by the coordinating committee
23
ought to be working papers for the platform committee.
24
It is not the function, however, of the coordinating com- FORD
25
mittee to pick the candidate for the Presidency. This, I think,
15
1
would be an overstepping of the charter of the coordinating
2
committee.
3
Q. Do you think the party will nominate a moderate
4
or liberal rather than a conservative in 1968?
5
MR. FORD: Well, we get into a problem of definition
6
here. I think we will nominate a good, strong, progressive
7
Republican candidate in 1968.
8
Q. Would you agree with Rockefeller and Romney
9
that, as quoted in the Times today, the party is moving away
10
from conservatism?
11
MR. FORD: I haven't read the New York Times today,
12
and so I don't know. I read the New York Times yesterday.
13
They seemed to be talking a little differently from one another!
14
Q. They washed that out.
15
MR. FORD: There was a semantic difference.
16
Q. Do you think there is going to be a conservative-
17
moderate fight in 1968 as there was in 1964?
18
MR. FORD: I think the '68 convention, and I really
19
hope this, will be a rather open convention, where the dele-
20
gates who come there will not be so tied down to one candidate
21
or another that they can't exercise some judgment at the con-
22
vention.
23
Q. Well, some of them will be tied down.
24
MR. FORD: There will be some. I think it will be
25
a much more open convention in '68 than it was in '64, where
LIBRARY
16
1
there will be a freer exercise of delegate discretion at the
2
convention than there was in 1964.
3
Q. Are you saying that these various candidates
4
should not try to get a leg up now? Are you telling them
5
to hold off for a while?
6
MR. FORD: Obviously we are going to have some
7
Presidential primary contests, and I think that this is good.
C
Of course, those delegates will be tied to the candidate
9
that prevails. But there are a lot of delegates who come from
10
states where there isn't a favorite son, where there is not a
11
Presidential primary, where the delegates can be selected
12
on the basis of their past Republican effort, their interest
13
in picking the candidate who can win, who can carry the party
14
banner.
15
I would hope we would have a lot of delegates in
16
this category who don't come to the conventtion totally and
17
irrevocably committed to any one candidate, so they can ex-
18
press their own viewpoint and use their own discretion at a
19
national convention.
20
Q. Do you believe that a candidate will come from
21
the ranks of the party's Governors?
22
MR. FORD: We have some pretty good potential candi-
23
dates there.
24
Q. As a practical matter, do you think that that
IBR
25
is where you are going to get your Presidential nominee from?
17
1
MR. FORD: Well, all I can say is we have several
2
firstclass Governors who have done an excellent job, and
3
certainly on the basis of their record they are really in the
4
forefront, and would make good candidates.
5
Q. Do you think it will be an officeholder?
6
MR. FORD: I would think so.
7
Q. An officeholder, did you say?
0
That leaves out Nixon, doesn't it?
9
MR. FORD: Let me put it this way: I would not rule
10
out any person who has contributed significantly to the
11
Remblican cause over the past years.
12
Q. When you were talking about these delegates
13
going to the convention uncommitted, one of the things you
14
mentioned was the past Republican record. Were you talking
15
about the record of supporting past Presidential nominees?
16
MR. FORD: No, their record as a Republican, as an
17
officeholder. In other words, in order to sell a candidate
18
in the political arena, you have to have a record to present.
19
Q. Do you think Romney's failure or lack of support
20
for-Goldwater in '64 has hurt him or will hurt him?
21
MR. FORD: Well, it bothers a number of the most
22
devoted Goldwater people.
23
Q. Does it bother you?
FORD
24
MR. FORD: No, because I understand his reasons for
what he did in 1964. As you know, I nominated him at the
LIBRARY
25
18
1
convention, and I hoped he would do as I did in '64. I sup-
2
ported Goldwater after the convention. But he had some special
3
reasons in our State for not doing so. He never opposed
4
Goldwater. He just didn't take a position, as I recall.
5
He didn't take a stand one way or another. He was running
6
for Governor on his record. The State of Michigan in '64
7
was a tough state for a Republican running statewide. He was
8
the only one who was elected, outside of Bill Milliken, and
9
they ran as a team, Governor and Lieutenant Governor. It was
10
one vote, really. He had some special problems.
11
When you consider the fact that Johnson won Michigan
12
by about 800,000, it was a tough state for a Republican to
13
win.
14
Q. So you think Romney was completely justified in
15
doing what he did in '64?
16
MR. FORD: I can understand it.
17
Q. But you are mt saying he was justified in doing
18
it?
19
MR. FORD: I thought he might have taken a little
20
different position, but I don't condemn him for the position
21
that he took. He had a real tough decision to make. It was
22
his best judgment that what he was doing was the right
23
thing. I don't question anybody under those very hard cir-
24
cumstances. The fact that he won was darned important for the
25
State of Michigan, as proven by what happened on November 8
GER
IBRARY
19
1
of this year. If he had not won in 1964, the Republican
2
Party in Michigan would be a shambles today.
3
To take the other side of the coin, I don't know
4
whether you were out in Michigan during the last campaign,
5
but no Republican that I ever knew who was running state-
6
wide has ever done more than George Romney did in '66 for the
7
total Republican effort. Thank goodness he won in '64 so
8
he could be the key to the Republican success in '66.
9
Q. Do you think that what he did in this election
10
has cleansed his record?
11
MR. FORD: Well, he certainly has proved beyond any
12
doubt that he can help Republicans from the Congress down to
13
any other office in the State.
14
Q. Do you agree with those who say that he is the
15
front-runner?
16
MR. FORD: I don't like to claim credit for the use
17
of that word, but I think I was the one who first said that
18
he was the front-runner at the present time.
19
Q. Are you going to work in his behalf for the
20
nomination?
21
MR. FORD: Let me put it this way: First, as I
22
said earlier as you all know, I nominated him at the con-
23
vention in '64, and I think that he was and has been the best
FORD
24
Governor that I have ever known in the State of Michigan.
LIBRA
25
I think his record will show that he has probably been as good
20
1
if not the best Governor in the history of the State. But for
2
me to do the best job here in this position, I don't think
3
that I should at this stage be campaigning for any Presidential
4
candidate. What we need is to get 187 Republicans in the House
5
to work together.
6
Assuming that I will be the Leader in the next two
7
years, for me to be for one candidate and against others,
C
I think could undermine our Republican effort in the House.
9
Certainly not all 187 would be for the candidate I necessarily
10
was for at this stage. So for me to do the best job in this
11
position, I have to stay clear at the present time of any
12
endorsement of any candidate.
13
Q. When would be the time?
14
MR. FORD: First I have to be a delegate. It would
15
probably be after I get to be a delegate.
16
Q. To the convention, you mean, in '68?
17
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
18
Q. Specifically what are you going to do to give the
19
Republicans in Congress a forward program rather than a
20
negative one?
21
Aren't you going to be in a position of being the
22
opposition to the Administration proposals? What are you going
23
to do?
24
MR. FORD: Well, I think that we will follow the same
25
pattern that we followed in the last two years. Where
GERATO R.FORD the LIBRARY
21
1
Administration makes a recommendation, if there is a problem,
2
we will have our Republican alternative. We did that in
3
the voting rights issue, and we did that in medicare, and we
4
did it on four or five other proposals, including the poverty
5
program.
6
Until we have had some of these additional conferences,
7
and until we have consulted as a group, I don't think that we
0
should lay out specifically what our program is going to be.
9
Q. Is it possible that there might be such a
10
battle that there may be a stalemate and not much atall would
11
be accomplished?
12
MR. FORD: I would hope not. I don't think that
13
the country can afford a two-year period of stalemate and
14
drift. I think we have to keep moving. I would hope that the
15
Republicans in the House can make a constructive contribution.
16
Q. Jerry, along that line, I have one question.
17
If you were able to keep all or most of your 187 Republicans
18
unified on any given issue, how many votes do you think that
19
you would need from the other side to put together a
20
majority on the Floor?
21
MR. FORD: Well, you usually need 215, depending
22
upon absentees. If you get 205 to 215 votes, you usually win.
23
Q. You are talking about 20 to 25 votes then,
24
or 20 to 30 votes?
25
MR. FORD: Yes.
BERALD FORD LIBRARY
22
1
Q. Are you going to try to knock out suchGreat
2
Society programs as rent supplements and the demonstration
3
cities and teacher corps, and a couple of those other con-
4
troversial bills?
5
MR. FORD: Well, I don't want to be in the position
6
this morning of identifying one program or another. But I
7
can assure you we are going to tighten up on the expenditures.
0
We are going to tighten up on the guidelines in legislation.
9
A number of the laws now on the statute books just give a
10
blank check to the Administration. Probably the best
11
authority on that is what Mike Mansfield said a year ago,
12
and what he repeated not more than a couple of weeks ago.
13
He agrees that the legislation we passed in the last two
14
years was full of loopholes and rough corners, and was passed
15
without any estimate of current or ultimate cost.
16
I think the Congress has a big responsibility in the
17
next two years to take a look at what has been done and to
18
tighten up both as to expenditures and as to guidelines for
19
the Executive Branch of the Government.
20
If we do that, plus what new problems are on the
21
horizon, with what new proposals we can come up with to solve
22
those problems, I think the Congress can do a good job.
23
Q. One of the questions is whether we ought to have
24
a tax increase.
25
FORD is LIBRARY GERALD
23
1
MR. FORD: Have you seen my speech of yesterday up
2
in New York before the United States Savings and Loan Associa-
3
tion?
4
Paul can give you a copy of it. Early in the
5
morning, Dr. Heller spoke and advocated one. I raised serious
6
questions as to whether or not that was the right thing to
7
do on the basis that the economy might well need some stimula-
C
tion rather than some depressant in 1967. Probably what I
9
said in that speech would be the best for you to use.
10
Q. If you had a tax increase, but the Democrats
11
were willing to go for a tax-sharing proposition along the
12
line that Congressman Laird outlined the oter day, would
13
that change your position then?
14
MR. FORD: I don't think that the two are necessarily
15
compatible. What the Administration asks for, and for example
16
what Dr. Heller was proposing, was a percentage increase in
17
personal and corporate tax. He said it was on a temporary
18
basis. Tax-sharing is not raising revenue. It is taking
19
more revenue away from the Federal Government. So I don't
20
think that the two are compatible. There are different approaches
21
to different problems.
22
Q. I was thinking of a bargaining position, if the
23
Administration were to say they would like to raise taxes,
24
and at the same time will inaugurate a policy of sharing more
25
of our revenue with the States and presenting it as a package.
24
1
MR. FORD: Quite frankly, I haven't considered that
2
as a package deal. Even if that were possible, it doesn't
3
obviate the problem of whether or not we ought to increase
4
taxes, period. There are a number of responsible tax authori-
5
ties and economists who really question whether a tax increase
6
in the light of the economic conditions today would be the
7
right thing to do.
0
So to go for a tax increase that was the wrong thing
9
to do, and to tie in a tax-sharing, in itself might be the
10
wrong approach.
11
Q. In anticipation of '68, are you going to give the
12
Governors an important voice in determining what will be
13
Republican policy on the Hill?
14
MR. FORD: Through the coordinating committee,
15
surely.
16
Q. Will they be able to influence House Republican
17
positions on specific legislation?
18
MR. FORD: We would welcome their recommendations.
19
Q. I was thinking of something like open housing.
20
Most of the Republican Governors who are considered Presidential
21
timber are open-housing advocates. But the party position
22
on the Hill last year was opposed to the Administration bill.
23
MR. FORD: I can't speak for Senator Dirksen, who
24
took certainly the most adamamant position against open housing
25
Q. Just taking that one issue, do you anticipate
GER
LIBRARY
25
1
that open housing will come up again this year and what will
2
the Houe Republican position be?
3
MR. FORD: I would say based on the record in '66
4
there would be no particular change in it. I haven't seen any
5
new-legal authorities that would probably change Senator
6
Dirksen's view on whether or not it was constitutional.
7
I haven't seen any briefs or any court decisions that would
8
change his mind.
9
I would hope that the rest of the Civil Rights Bill
10
of 1966, including the Cramer Amendment, would be approved.
11
I would doubt that Title IV would get favorable approval
12
in 1967 or 1968.
13
But the rest of the bill, as we said repeatedly
14
on the Floor of the House, and particularly the Cramer Amend-
15
ment, I think was good legislation.
16
Q. You are talking about the bill with Mathias'
17
amendment?
18
MR. FORD: I am talking about eliminating Title IV,
19
which was the Mathias Amendment.
20
Q. Let me get into one other area.
21
Do you think that there is any need for it or do
22
you think that the investigation of the Kennedy assassination
23
should be re-opened?
24
MR. FORD: Well, let me phrase it this way:
I have
25
seen no new evidence produced by any of the critics
GERAL There ARJ is
26
1
nothing from any source that Iknow of, evidence-wise, that is
2
different than what it was before the Commission. On that
3
basis, if that assumption is true, and I think it is, I still
4
believe that the decisions, recommendations and conclusions
5
of the Warren Commission were sound.
6
Q. Governor Connally apparently in the last week,
7
after lloking at some pictures taken by Mr. Zapruder, is
C
inclined to believe that he was not hit by the same bullet
9
that struck President Kennedy, which was one of the findings
10
of the Warren Commission.
11
MR. FORD: Governor Connally so testified before
12
the Commission. This is not a new viewpoint he has. He did
13
so testify. The Commission examined with great care the
14
Zapruder film. It was gone into in great detail. The Com
15
mission, if you will read it very carefully, did not cate-
16
gorically say that the first shot that hit Kennedy was also
17
the shot that hit Connally. I think the words or phrases are
18
that it is persuasive that the first shot that hit Kennedy
19
also hit Connally, but we did not categorically say that we
20
took a unanimous view on the one-shot theory.
21
Q. Did the Commission consider the implications
22
of a second shot, one not fired at Kennedy, but a second
23
shot hitting Connally and not the same bullet that struck
24
Kennedy?
FORD LIBRARY
25
MR. FORD: We considered that as a possibility.
27
1
Q. Did you reject the idea that that necessarily
2
meant a second assassin or accomplice for Oswald?
3
MR. FORD: We were very categorical in our conclusions.
4
We said Lee Harvey Oswald was the assassin, but we also said,
5
and this language was carefully drafted, that the Commission
6
has found no evidence of a conspiracy, foreign or domestic.
7
Then we went down through the various questions that involved
8
a conspiracy.
9
Q. Was that a unanimous feeling within the Com-
10
mission?
11
MR. FORD: Yes.
12
Q. Do you think the Commission examined all of the
13
evidence that has been turned up to this date?
14
MR. FORD: Not up to this date. We were discharged
15
in September of 1964, and our responsibilities ended.
16
Q. Do you think there has been new evidence?
17
MR. FORD: We examined all of the evidence that we
18
could assemble prior to the issuance of the report.
19
Q. DO you think there might be a need to review any
20
evidence that has been turned up since that date, perhaps not
21
by the Commission, but by another body of equal stature or
22
comparable stature?
23
MR. FORD: If there is new evidence, I would have
24
no objection to a responsible authority or group examining FORD
25
that evidence.
BRARY
28
1
Q. Do you think that this rash of books and specu-
2
lation is plowing over old ground mostly? There is no new
3
evidence, is there?
4
MR. FORD: None of the books that I have read, or the
5
reviews of various books that I have read, has shown any new
6
evidence. Certainly the Zapruder film is not new evidence.
7
That was very basic and very important evidence before the
C
Commission. And Governor Connally's views are not new. He
9
testified to that effect at the time of his appearance
10
before the Commission.
11
Q. Did the members see the autopsy films and the
12
autopsy report?
13
MR. FORD: No, I did not. In all honesty, I think
14
that this is the most unsound criticism of the Commission.
15
You are all layman, and I am a layman. Supposing they brought
16
in all of the x-rays, and all of the photographs right here,
17
and said, "Now you examine them." Would you feel qualified
18
to pass judgment on what they meant?
19
Wasn't it more sensible to bring up the people that
20
conducted the autopsy, Commander Hume who was the doctor and
21
the other two people who performed it, and get them under
22
sworn testimony to tell their impressions and to diagram what
23
it meant? Isn't that a lot more sensible than to turn over
24
a pile of x-ray films and other technical data to
GERALD
group
LIBRARY
25
of laymen?
29
1
I think that this is the most unsound criticism of
2
any that have been made.
3
Q. Do you think this speculative stuff could
4
reach a point where enough doubts are raised that the Warren
5
Commission report could be undermined and would require a new
6
investigation, or do you think this is going to die out?
7
MR. FORD: Well, they are still writing books and
0
articles about Lincoln's assassination. That was one hundred
9
years ago.
10
Q. Have you seen or heard anything that shakes your
11
confidence in the conclusions of the Warren Commission report?
12
MR. FORD: None.
13
Did any of you read Merriman Smith's article?
14
Q. Yes; in the Saturday Evening Post?
15
MR. FORD: Yes. That was pretty strong, and a
16
pretty good defense. I would assume all of you agree he is
17
a very responsible man, and he was there, and he certainly
18
has no axe to grind.
19
Q. Thatis in line with what Paul said, if it might
20
not be in the public interest, because perhaps now we are at
21
the zenith of this rash of criticism or question-raising
22
or maybe it will grow bigger. I wonder whether it wouldn't
23
be in the public interest to sit down and have somebody go
FORD
24
point by point through every one of these questions BERAIT that << BLARY are
25
raised and answer them.
30
1
MR. FORD: I don't think we are the ones to decide
2
that. After all, we were given a job to do, and we did the
3
very best we could on the job, and I don't think that we
4
should get into the controversy.
5
MR. NILTICH: What you are suggesting is that some
6
other group take the same evidence that the Warren Commission
7
studied and go over all of that and say whether or not they
8
think the Warren Commission was right.
9
Q. That is not what I am suggesting at all. I am
10
suggesting that some group take all of the criticism and all
11
of the questions that have been raised since the Warren Com-
12
mission report, and look through them and see specifically
13
what they are offering, and investigate those thigns, and
14
then attempt to see if it is possible to respond to them, and
15
see if perhaps some new issue is being raised that hadn't
16
been recognized before.
17
(Discussion off the record.)
18
Q. Let me ask you one more political question:
19
What do you think the past election meant to the
20
Republican Party, and how much of an increased chance to win
21
the Presidency do you think you have from it?
22
MR. FORD: Well, when you add up all of the gains
23
that were made from the state legislatures to the governor-
FORD
24
ships and to the Congress, it has really revitalized the party
AL
25
across the board. It makes it certain that the Republicans
31
1
are going to have a strong Presidential-Vice Presidential
2
ticket in '68. I said, as some of you may remember, that if
3
we don't make gains in '66, we will have a hard time finding
4
good candidates; but if we make gains in '66, we will have
5
plenty of good candidates. I think that there is evidence
6
there that we have a number of alternatives.
7
Q. Did it move you in any particular direction?
0
MR. FORD: I would say it was a middle-of-the-road
9
Republican victory, when you add up all of the variations in
10
the formula.
11
Q. Does it point to the election of a middle-of-
12
the-road candidate as well in 1968?
13
MR. FORD: I would think so, yes. It makes it more
14
possible, let me put it that way.
15
(The interview was concluded at 12:15 p.m.)
10
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
FORD & LIBRARY 9ERALD
25
HEITED PRESS INTERNATI NAL AUDIO NETWORK
315 National Press Bldg., Washington, D.C.
FROM THE PEOPLE
FOR RELEASE: MONDAY AM°S
DEC. 26, 1966
GUEST: Rep. Gerald Ford-GOP House leader
MODERATOR: JOHN CHAMBERS
PANEL: FRANK ELEAZER-UPI House Correspondant
Wally Brunner--UPI-AudiorCongressional Correspondant
CHALBERS:What is your prime target for the 90th Congress?
FORD: I believe the major difference between the 89th and 90th Congress is the House of Represen-
tatives will be re-established as a legislative body. It will be indépendant of the pressures and
domination of the White House. We'll be considering legislative proposals in the House, and in
commit tee and on the floor in what has been the traditional way legislation is handled. I'm
convinced TO wkll do a far better job. No will probably tighten up some of the legislation. We vill
certainly reduce expenditures. We'll perhaps do some things legislatively that we'rnt done and
probably should have been done in the 89th Congess. But it will be primarily a more constructive
Congress than it was two years ago,
brunner:How are you going to get all this done without a majority?
FORD:We are naturally hopeful that we'll get some help from discern' g democrats who will believe
in the Republican program that we will determine inour Republican policy committee. In the past
we ve gotten help from both Northern and Southern Democrats, liberal democrats and conservative
democrats. We hope and trust ther will be a continuation of some help end assistance from
deomocrate in 1987 and 1968.
BRUNNER: How does the membership line up by numbers then?
FORD: All I can say is ne have 187 Republicans. There is no coaltion. No automatic coalition. We
have to depend on getting help from Democrate on the soundness of our policy and the persuasiveness
of our arguments. I think TO will-I certainly hope so,
ELEAZER:WHETE ARE YOU GOING TO REDUCE EXPENDITURES?
RALD FORD VIBRARY
FORD: I would agree that the 89th Congress talked about reducting expenditures was'nt very
effective in achieveing it and the failure of the democratic majority to make the reductions
resulted in inflation and as a result I think the American people repudiated the Democratic Party
on this issue as well as many others. Now in the 90th Congress I think we are going to be able to
-2-
make some reductions in expenditures because the Republicans will continue what they tried to do
in the last two years and we've got more troops to do it with. But let me take a specific
example. I happen to think, for example, that the $100 million that is available for the 80 called
beautification==at the very least, could be substantially reduced if not terminated during the
crisis that we have. I feel that some of the expendibures for the Wax on Poverty can be reduced...
ELEAZER: Are'nt all those things really just peanuts when we are talking about $140 billion
federal budget?
FORD: I don't think $100 million for beautification is peanuts. That's a lot of tax money from
a lot of good people and in my judgement these are simply illustrations of areas where we dan
make reductions. And if we do it down the line, across the board, they add up pretty quickly and
I'm convinced we can make reductions of t least $5 billion if the House and the Senate puts its
mind to it.
ELEAZER: Five billion dollars below what-what we're spending in the current year?
FORD: In some of these programs yes.
CHAMBERS: Not the $140 billion the President is thinking about Congress for.
FORD: Of course there's been just so much speculation around Washington as to just what the
President's budget is going to be, Until we actually see what he is sending up to Congress we
cen't bee to categorical as to the topm figure and what ne are going to reduce it. This is one of
the problems we face. This administration has used more budget girmickry-has kept the American
people in more fiscal darkness than any other administration in the history of the U.S.
CHAMBERS: Do you mean this budget is going to be a gimmick?
FORD: No, I did'nt say that. All I'm saying is that this administration a year ago tried to fool
deficit
the people as to the fact that they were going to have a $1,800,000 Now in the Budget
document itself, which was a phony document, they tried to cover up the actual and honest fiscal
pichase. They included in revenue the sale of certain assests. They took $1,800,000 in gutting
the silver content ofthe coins. They did other things which were in actual practice deceptive as
far as the overall picture is conderned. And now, all of a sudden, in stead of a $1.8 billion
deficit that the Presidentpromised a ye 3" ago, we now find that the estimates are there will be
a deficit of anywhere from $6 to $10 billion at the end of the fiscal year.
-3-
CHAMBERS: And so they are going to have to raise revenues and presumably this year?
FORD: Thisis a decision thePresident is in the process of making right now. I don't know whether
be is going to propose a tax increase or not,
BRUN ER#Do you think the Démocrats are going to continue to spend more money or are'nt they going
to be trying to reduce the budget too?
FORD: I will hope the Democrats who W O re-elected in the House will have gotten the message
from the voters in November. The voters certainly in my opinion voted to have a congress that was
more responsible fiscal and I think the Democrats who were re-elected go the message. In addition
the Republicans who were elected and those who were elected defeating Democrats will certainly de
what they can.to reduce experditures.
ELEAZER:Nould'nt it be equally dishonest for the President to hold out to the American people
that expenditures are going to be cut by this Congress?
FORD: What I've really said 1s that we should have and the country deserves-truth in budgeting.
We did'nt have truth in budgeting in the budget that was submitted to the American people in Jan.
of 1966.
ELEAZER$ Isn't it a fact that spending rises goes up no matter whether the Republica
are in or theDemocrats-it goes up.
FORD:The rise in expenditures in the last two years under the discredited 89th Congress has been
greater than any other. It's almost unbelievable that we are going to have a bugget of $140 billio
according to some so-called experts. And particuarily when we see that not allof that increase
comes from the conflict in Vietnam. As a matter of fact, according to the strtistics we have been
able to find there has been a very substantial rise in non-military expenditurss-almost equal-
not quite=but almost equal to the rise in the expenditures for the military.
CHAMBE'S: Do you see any hope that the ner # ight decelerate and won't cost as much?
FORD: I think all Americans are very hopeful that the conflict in Vie tham will slow down nd
that it will terminate and that we can have an honorable and permanent peace in Vietnamo
FORD
CHAMBERS: But That are the cold progabilities?
GERALD
LIBRARY
FORD# It does'nt look encouraging at this particular moment. But as long as we keep pressure on
the communist aggressors in South Vietnam and as long as we are making progress both militarily
and 1n our pacification program==I think the prospects improve for a settlement in Vietnam.
BRUNNER:How will the Republicans be able to tram reducing expenditures around to their political
desires in 1968 when they don't have a majority to point to?
FORD: I'm confident that the American puople will know which political party took the lead-which
political party had the greater number of votes in making these expenditure reductions. The
American people are very responsible group-they are better informed than most politicians give
them credit for and I thillik , come 1968 they will know which political party was responsible and
which was not.
BRUNNER:How can you have you and Romeny, from the same state leading the Republican ticket?
FORD: The best answer to that is under no circumstances am I interested in being a candidate for
either the vice-presidency or the presidency. I eliminate that problem by my own action and this
of course leaves it clear to Gov. Romney to by our favorite son and a potential Republican
candidate for the Presidency.
CHAMBERS: Do you forsee an anti-missile missile gap coming up?
FORD: It does appear that the United States has not taken the necessary initiative to go into
production on the anti ballistic mis ile missle. This program has been und I research and developm
stage for eight years or more-my best recollection is that we have spent close to $2 billion on
the rdsearch and devlopment of the anti-ballistic missile. I feel that t'e congress in the last
session was right in adding money to the military budget for the purpose of etting into the
production of an enti ballistic missile miscile system. I would hope that President Johnson and
Mr. MeNam/ra that was made availabel by the Congress for this project.
ELEAZER:Have you seen evidence that Russia is deploying its version of an anti mishile missile?
FORD:There has been evidence for some time that the Soviet Union was deploying an anti ballistic
mississle system around the city of Moscow. The have very good intellegence which shows that to
a degree they have been constru ting instal ations of this sort of a weapons systme. It S eema to
me that we are behind the Soviet Union in this particular project and once you get behind in a
project ofthis magnitude it's almost impossible to catch up.
ELEAZER: I this miscile is purely defensive-why do we worry about 1t?
LIBRARY
FORD: The answer is very simple. If you have an anti-missile missile system, 15 means that your
country is not in as great a danger as it would be from a missile attack. Because you have the
-50
potential to destroy the initial attack or part of it that might come from an enemy. Now if you
don't have any défensive system, you are totally at the mercy of the aggressor.
EFERRER:Are the Republicans prepared to support the $35 billion, McNamare says it will cost to
build and deploy this anti missile system?
FORD#Th to figure of $30 to $35 billion that Secretary McNamara talks about is not an expenditure
that is going to take place all in one year. It's D six or seven year program so that costs would
be spread out over the period of time of six or seven years. Republicans, if it is proven necesser:
for an anti-missile, missile system will support the program.
ELEAZER: How about the fall out shelters Mr. McNamara says we've got tohave to go along with it
if it is going to be effective.
FORD: My experience on the Appropriations committee subcommittee on defense apropriations have
not leen percuaded yet that a fall out shelter program is ablsoutely necessary. It certai ly
does'nt have the same priority the anti missile missile system has.
eleezer:Doh't the explosions of our own nuclear anti-missile , missiles, shower down on US and
ffallout on us.
FORD: Well, from the information that I have gotten-primarily fromthe news media, I understand
that the new Nike-X system that they have developed with the improved booster and the other
techinical improvements=that our weapon-the defensive weapon-can get into the air fatter-will
intercept faster and willtravel more rapidly and intercept the enemy further away from the U.S.
so that the fallout problem is not the same today as it has been in the past.
CHAMBERS: Would you say the Russian lead has reached the proportion that we now have an anti-
missile, missile gap? I am not certain because I have not at the present time had the full
benfit of the most recent intellegence information from the Pentagon. But the e certainly is
growing evidence that we are behind in the installation of an anti-ballistic missile, missile
system. This could bedome a serious military chisis if we delay too much longer.
ELEAZER: At a recent meetingof Rep. gov. you committed the Rep. members of the House to change
in theSocial security system under which you said benefits would be tied to the cost of living.
Congress?
I assume you meant that when the cost of living goes up the pensions go up without BERAIR any setion
LIGRARY
FORD: That was the Republican proposal that was made during the 89th Congress--ss I recollect
almost 100 members on the Republican side introduced a bill that wo provide an automatic
-6-
Social Security benefit increase and when the cost of living rose.
FORD: go you also propose that the payments go down when the cost of living goes down-1t does
that some time?
F RD: Well we have'nt experienced that problem under this administration with its inflationary
policies--but there is n bottom so to speak, a lower limit placed on it, so that this is a problem
would not be adversly felt by the beneficiaries.
ELEAZUR: I wonder if Republicans will be prepared to support a proposal that payroll taxes 30 up
automatically along with the benefits?--without any sction by Congress.
FORDsThe Republican proposel for increasen in Social Security WAS made in the 89thCongress in
1966 did not call for an increase in the payroll tax.
ELEAZER: How are you going to finance it them?
FonD:The actuaries-the statisticians from the Social Security Administration had information
which showed that an 8 per cent increase in benefit -across the board could be financed -ithout
any additional payroll tax.
CHAMBERS#I wonder if you think the Warren Commission should hear the tape Jacqueline Kennedy made
for the Manchester book-willll it be revealing in any way?
BCRDs The Warren Commission did interrogate Mrs. John F. Kennedy. The commission in my judgement
got all of the necessary information from Mrs. Kennedy as to the problem that was our responsibilit
The Warren commissionhed the responsiblity of finding out who assassinated the late John F.
Kennedy and Mrs. Kennedy could not, in my opinion on the problem of who fired the sh ot or shots
that resulted in the death of the late John F. Kennedy.
CHAMBERS: I certainly will read it 2 if and when it is published but at the moment we've got &
few other problems here in the Congress that are pratty important.
BRUN ER: Are the Republicans going to initiate any programs under the Republican banner this year?
FORD:The Republican program is right now in the process of being formulated. Letme give you a
few ideas that I think will be in what we will try to do. The Republicans have taken the ball and
have started to run with what we call federal tax sharing. This was a proposal that was inititated
in 1958-it was pushed by Dr. Heller meet is now a Republican proposal--it is the answer to the
as
problems of the big cities-the problems of the big statesawhere they have fairly well exhaused
their revenue potential.
-7-
BRUNNERs Tell isn't that simply federal aid without federal control?
FORD:It's federal aid with a addition minimum of federal control. One of theproblems you have with
& traditional grant insid program is that there is so much federal control that you don't really
solve the problems. And Tre think that with federal taxqsharing or federal tax credits we can give
to the local communites-to the respective state-a share of the federal income taxes and local
people who have imagination, ingenuity and ability can solve these problems more of ectively
rather than being hemstrung by federal controls.
CHALBERS:How do you feel Johnson 1$ doing. What effect is the resignation of B111 Noyers and
the repudiation of the Democratic governors havings-what effect is this having orr the men and on
his policies?
FORD:The American people have shown by various surveys and polls that they are loosing confidence
in the Johnson-Humphrey administration. The President's popularity, according to these polls has
plumeted. The election certainly was a Republican victory, I think because of our good record but
it also reflected an adverse public reaction to the Johnson administration. The Democratic
governors are now calling for some changes as far as the Johnson administration is concerned. There
is some simmering conflicts among the democrato almost in every state in the union. The Democratic
party is the disunified party-sit is torn asunder by the failure of its policies end the conflicts
among 12s people. I think the Democrats are in for a very had time for the next two years.
BRUNIER: Do you thi k President Johnson is a sure bet to seek re-election in 1968?
FORD: Only President Johnson can make that determination. I personally feel thatif the President
is in good health, he behöbebere will seek re-election.
ELEAVER: Could he have wen if he hdd been running this year?
FORD: I don't think he could have won because the Republicans got 4 million more votes, nationwide
than the Democrate and if the President had been running this year-with his personal populerity
at a very low fi uro-I doubt he couldhave been re-elected.
CHAMBERS: What do you think has happened to Lyndon Johnson? Do you think this concept of personal
power and consensus that centered in him has failed?
RALD LIBRAT FORD
FORD:It's very difficult to analyze. Could be due to a loss of popularity of the President and the
denocratic party.
8
CHAMBERS:Is the party torn asunder because Lyndon Johnson has played a strong personal role or is
it because he has'nt.
FORD: Well, I thi k part of their problem 1s the failu 's of their policies both domestically and
internationally. In addition the Democratic party at the present time is olé and creeky, It does'nt
respond to the particular proglems at home and abroad as well as it should. Old time political
machines when they start to fall spart disintergrate very quickly. I think the democrats are in
this stage at the present time.
CHAMBERS: Do you think it proves Lyndon Johnson is not the super politician we all said he was?
FORD: The American people, fortunately, have the opportunity periodically to approve or disappresve
decisions previoulsy made and the Americ n people on Nov. 8, in my opinion, repudiated the policies
and the leadership of the Democratic party on Nov. 8.
ELEAZER:Do you think Congreseman Adam Powell will be seated Then Congress convenes.
FORD:There certainly is growing evidencethat Mr. Powell has more and more problems than people
enticipated. He's got both criminal and civil contempt proceedings against him in New York; t'ere t'
is evidence that the committee where he has been chairman has been handling its finances rather
loosly. When all this evidence comes to the House on Jan. 10, there is a distinct possiblity
Mr. Powell will not be seated.
BRUNNERs Do you favor him being seated?
FORD: I'm going to wait and see what the evidence is on Jan. 10.
GERALD FORD LIBRARY