Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
1672692
label
Carter, Jimmy
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
1672692
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Carter, Jimmy
citationUrl
collections
Michael Raoul-Duval Papers
Election Campaign Files
subjects
Presidential campaign, 1976
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
1672692
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1976-09-30
month
9
year
1976
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1976-05-01
month
5
year
1976
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
1dbf2a56978fe56b
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box 14, folder "Carter, Jimmy" of the Michael
Raoul-Duval Papers 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. Michael Raoul-Duval donated to the
United States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives
collections. Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in
the public domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are
presumed to remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject
to a valid copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
H- file Carter
CARTER: THE SHAPE OF A NEW ADMINISTRATION
With Georgia mafia aides freely saying that they'll be expediters and
appointmentmakers, not policymakers, in a Carter administration, so that
decision-making will flow back out to the departments, there's growing interest
-- and as yet only sketchy information -- on who might be riding herd on that
departmental policymaking. Here is what's being said in various media, espe-
cially in states where prominent Carter supporters may have job leverage.
Foreign Affairs: Lots of talk about Zbigniew Brzezinski or George
Ball becoming Secretary of State, less attention to the multinational economics
of it.
Brzezinski's Trilateral Commission (through which he nurtured his
Carter connection) is partly a vehicle for multinational corporation chiefs led
by David Rockefeller of the Chase Manhattan, but also including top officers of
Coca-Cola, Bendix, Deere, Texas Instruments, Exxon, Caterpillar, Hewlett-Packard
and Sears Roebuck, as well as a half dozen leading banks and investment houses.
Ball is a partner of Lehman Brothers (and Ball is also a Trilateral Commission
board member). Both Brzezinski and another Trilateral associate close to Car-
ter's organization --- Columbia Prof. Richard Gardner -- have written on the need
for a foreign policy that transcends strictly national interests and takes a
broader view. Bear in mind that the broader view of the Trilateral Commission is
generally friendly to multinational corporations. This fits very well with
Carter's multinational tax credit assurance to a July 22 metting of top business-
men. Also, Yale Prof. Richard Cooper, mentioned as Undersecretary of State Econo
mic Affairs, is a director of banking and insurance companies, and of the
Rockefeller Brothers Fund.
Interior: Carter has primary campaign-period obligations to Texas and
Oklahoma party leaders, and although Louisiana Governor Edwin Edwards doubts
Carter on oil and gas policy, Texas-Oklahoma politicos are more optimistic. The
Houston Chronicle reports (7/11) that Oklahoma Gov. David Boren, who will head
Carter's energy policy task force, is "viewed as a prospect for Secretary of the
Interior.' Oklahoma papers say the same thing. Per task force policy, the mag-
nitude of the long-term effort envisioned by Boren "is reflected in his proposal
that capital investment in energy research and development needs be increased $1
trillion over the next quarter century."
Agriculture: After earlier rumors that Carter farm policy adviser P.R.
Smith, cottongrowing Vice President of the Georgia Farm Bureau, might be the
&
FORD
next Agriculture Secretary, strong pressure has grown up for a Midwest secretary
One longshot possibility is Robert J. "Pud" Williams, Illinois state director
Agriculture and chairman of Carter's farm effort in the 12-state Midwest region
LIBRARY
Meanwhile, the Lincoln (Nebraska) Star of July 11 reports that Nebraska Gov. J.J.
Exon, expected to be a Senate candidate in 1978, is also being touted for Sec-
retary of Agriculture. Exon says fellow governors are pushing him for it, and
"if Jimmy Carter is elected President and wants to talk to me about it, I would
have thorough personal discussions with him," He adds, "I've been the man carry-
ing the ball on agricultural policy at the governors' conferences.' Overall, Exon
says the next secretary should be a politician from the Midwest rather than
someone who represents agribusiness or agricultural institutions. Exon also
mentioned former North Dakota governor William Guy (D). Meanwhile, there is no
doubt that Carter is doing very well with the farm vote. Southern farmers are
giving him landslide backing, and even among normally Republican Illinois farm-
ers, Ford leads Carter by only 35.6% to 32.6% per a Prairie Farmer magazine poll
(Chicago Tribune, July 19).
Housing and Urban Development: Quite a few possibilities. Harvard
law professor Charles Haar, a planning expert who heads Carter's task force, was
4
an assistant HUD secretary in the Sixties and could come back. Carter himself
is big on planning, having chaired several southwest Georgia planning commis-
sions. Another HUD Secretarial possibility is Pittsburgh Mayor Pete Flaherty
who, like Oklahoman Boren, was one of Carter's earliest supporters. Flaherty is
thought likely to seek a Washington job in preparation for his 1978 gubernatorial
bid, and the Pittsburgh Press (7/11) says many "have suggested the Mayor could
qualify as a cabinet officer or urban-affairs coordinator" but the Press adds
that Flaherty is also an expert on bureaucratic house cleaning and agency-reduc-
tion and might serve "in some special capacity as a payroll-reduction expert."
Another possibility. .Louisville Mayor Harvey Sloane. The Louisville Courier-
Journal (7/11) notes that Sloane, whose term will expire next year, "was among
the very few prominent national Democrats who endorsed Carter before the first
primary. Sloane has also been instrumental in helping Carter with his health.
and urban affairs campaign planks." But the paper notes that few Kentucky party
people think Carter would offer Sloane a cabinet job, and that he might not
accept a sub-cabinet slot (presumably Undersecretary of HUD or HEW).
Transportation: Another possibility for Pittsburgher Flaherty. Bert
Lance, the Atlanta National Bank President who's a key Carter Fundraiser and
served as Carter's Georgia Transportation Commissioner (1971-73), worked closely
with Flaherty in the Pennsylvania primary. Lance himself is not expected to
seek the job, and neither is transportation task force head Alan Boyd, a former
Transportation Secretary.
Health, Education and Welfare: University of North Carolina President,
William Friday, whose name has been mentioned, puts down the report in response
to home state media. Another possibility.
United Auto Workers chief Leonard
Woodcock. This from the Detroit Free Press (7/11): "Woodcock also said that if
Carter is elected, he wants a position in the new administration. The UAW
President mentioned that he has heard speculation that he is being considered
for two cabinet posts --- Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare or Secretary
of State -- but said he has not sought either specifically. Both Carter and
Mondale are very close to the National Education Association, and can be expected
to support their goals as well as push for a separate Education Department.
Mondale's brother Mort, a past president of the Minnesota NEA, is currently an
NEA staff member in Minnesota. As for health, one Carter advisor is already play-
ing a double role. Mary King, Carter health task force coordinator, is president
of Mary King Associates, a health management firm seeking federal contracts.
Labor: The new "Labor Coalition" of liberal unions has displaced
George Meany's AFL-CIO regulars as the labor force having the ear of the pre-
sumed throne, even though Meany forces were able to block selection of Machinists
Union official Bill Holayter as Carter campaign labor liaison (see detailed
articles in 7/13 Detroit Free Press and 7/15 Los Angeles Times). This new group,
prinicipally consisting of the UAW, the Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers, the
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, the National
Education Association, the Communication Workers, the Machinists and the United
Mine Workers, is expected to have a major say in selecting both the Labor Sec-
retary and the HEW Secretary. Also, look for the top political operatives of
the coalition -- William Dodds of the UAW, Michael Miller of the Communications
Workers, Bernie Aronson of the Mine Workers, William Welsh of the Municipal
Employees, Holayter of the Machinists and Terry Herndon of the Teachers --- to
play a key role in November elections coordination as they did in the spring
primaries (eventually mostly on behalf of Carter).
Commerce: Nothing much yet. Alan Boyd's name is mentioned, but the
job is seen more likely to go to an Establishment-type businessman.
5
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Alan, Mike Deval
You asked for a memo, and
here's an essay. It's a wonder
I didn't wind up with my
autobiography. But I hope these
ramblings are enlightening to
the Westside Yankees.
Kayr (Pullen)
CARTER AND THE SOLID SOUTH
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
The question as to whether Jimmy Carter will sweep the
South is tied up in whether emotional symbols are more power-
ful than changing economic and social realities.
To the extent that Southerners still feel an apartness
from the rest of the Nation, based on feelings of both pride
and inferiority, to that extent, Jimmy Carter from Georgia
has a definite emotional pull.
The strange mixture of inferior and superior feelings
that most Southerners, my generation included, inherited
still influences our perceptions of America. As recently
as the late 60's, Southerners often felt like foreigners in
other parts of the Nation. Not only were we usually treated
as bigots, we also felt keenly the lackluster reputation of
our educational systems, the lack of cultural advantages and
the hostility of other Americans to our folkways and our accents.
(Sally Quinn last week described Miss Lillian's accent as
"exquisite." The Eastern press has not always been so flatter-
ing.) This type of emotional reaction that certainly influenced
Lyndon Johnson all of his life has been mitigated by rapid
changes in Southern society and National attitudes about the
South.
Southerners usually have a love-hate relationship with
their region. It is probably not unlike the feelings of any
group of Americans with a strong cultural identification. Even
in trying to analyze the South, my own feelings became a mixture
of homesickness and defensiveness. The social structures I
love the most are those I wanted to escape, and perhaps that
sums up the power of Carter's use of Southern myths.
Carter is playing upon two essentially conflicting myths
the "good ole boy" rural South and the "black and white together"
new South. (Journalists have discovered a "new" South with the
regularity of the changing seasons since World War II.)
Plains, Georgia is not the South
Plains, Georgia is not the South any more than Grand Rapids,
Michigan is the North. The small Southern town is exactly
what many Southerners happily escaped. Because of the narrowness
of religions, these towns are very confining with rigid social
rules and limited educational opportunities. (Rosalynn Carter
did not want to leave the Navy and go back.)
2.
The affectations of the "good ole boy" are enjoyed most
by those Southerners now living in air-conditioned suburban
comfort. Being "down home" in the rootless suburbs of
Atlanta, Memphis or Dallas gives a sense of identity, and
perhaps beer-drinking brother Billy Carter makes citified
and genuine rednecks feel good. Why Americans who ran away
from small towns to the cities love the "idea" of a small
town may be of more sociological than political significance,
but it is obviously part of Carter's interpretation of how to
play the American mood. It may well be an interpretation
with limited appeal in those traditional Democratic industrial
strongholds where voters probably have seen such towns only
on television.
(I did note a very high percentage of the citified rednecks
(Jaycees in double-knit suit types) among Reagan's leaders in
West Tennessee.)
"The 'New' South of Black and White Together"
As both creator and victim of myths, perhaps the South has
more of them about race relations.
The race problem often has been the central political and
emotional fact of Southern life. Southerners, primarily whites,
have long tried to romanticize the character of black-white
relationships. With the demise of the civil rights movement
some blacks have joined this effort.
Just as the South was not as grim a place for blacks as it
was pictured in the 50's and 60's, so today it is not as good
and cheerful as depicted. Southern schools are statistically
more desegregated than schools in other parts of the country.
The ugly symbols of segregation separate bathrooms, water
fountains and "white only" signs---are gone, but social segre-
gation in neighborhoods, churches and most private events is
still a reality.
Most of the important changes in the South resulted from
improved economic conditions and a surface degree of racial
tolerance. I believe the two factors are intertwined. When
most white leaders finally realized the stigma of segregation
and racial injustice retarded economic progress, then the out-
side pressures from the media and the Federal government helped
produce change.
FORD is LIBRARY CERALD
3.
The media often traffics in outdated myths. While the
picture of "Daddy" King and Jimmy Carter singing "We Shall
Overcome" has great emotional appeal to most blacks and
liberals, especially those from the South, it is a warped
picture.
The King church in Atlanta is just as segregated as Carter's
church in Plains. While black ministers from the Baptist Church
(a different brand of Baptists from their white counterparts
in the Southern Baptist Church) and other all-black denomina-
tions were active in the civil rights movement, very few Funda-
mentalists marched along. The "We Shall Overcome" Christianity
of the liberal ministry never significantly touched existing
religious organizations. Churches in the South are rarely
integrated.
Blacks and whites together may sound good to ease the
memories of a legally segregated society, but Southerners know
better. Muted racial animosities remain, but a carefully
nurtured indifference- a feeling of live and let live pre-
vails as long as the economy is good and Federal intervention
is at a minimum.
The irony of Carter's wedding of two such disparate myths
is that much of the racial hatred that is still voiced is
between blacks and rural and upwardly mobile rednecks. (It is
very instructive to look at the Southern states with the highest
percentage of blacks to see where this conflict is the strongest.)
Southern liberals, of which I count myself one on the race
issue, have "mea culpaed" themselves to death for so long that
few, if any, want to think the strains of civil rights music
in Madison Square Garden is based on limited and distorted
realities of the South in 1976 or the Nation, for that matter.
The "Tara" Mentality
The South of plantations and a "gracious" way of life, which
existed only for a few, is a myth with an appeal totally out of
proportion to its relationship to modern life. Today the
appeal probably comes from its racism overtone and from the
threat that change still represents to many Southerners. This
myth is an absolute contradiction to the two Carter uses, and
FORD & GERALD LIBRARY
4.
for those Southerners who find Plains tacky and the Kings dis-
gusting, this myth is their favorite.
In analyzing whether Carter will sweep the South automati-
cally, the warring character of these myths should be taken
into account. It's going to be quite a juggling act to pull
together the rednecks, the liberals and the would-be aristo-
crats under one umbrella of "The South Will Rise Again."
The Real New South--Money and Air-Conditioning
Prosperity has done more to bring the South into the Union
than Sherman did. The links between the rise of Republicanism
in the South and the economy are very strong ones. To be sure,
Republicans offered a more conservative philosophy at a time
when the National Democrats were moving left on such critical
issues in the South as local control, the peace movement and
social involvement. It was, however, also important that more
and more Southerners had enough money to start thinking
Republican.
There are two significant problems that have already damaged
Republican inroads in the South. State-wide GOP organizations,
where they have any strength, are generally linked to persona-
lities, and in very few areas have Republicans managed to build
the kind of county organizations that survive and prosper regard-
less of the candidate.
The other detrimental impact came from the Agnew resignation
and Watergate. Many of the Republicans who built the party in
the lean years of the 1950's and early 60's were personally
wounded by the Agnew revelations, and then hit a second blow by
Watergate.
Agnew's genuine popularity in the South produced much bitter-
ness after his resignation. The results of the combination have
left some experienced party leaders without much stomach for
another Presidential effort. Watergate may help Carter more in
some areas of the South than his appeal to regionalism.
I believe it would be a mistake to write off the South
entirely, because Southerners may vote their pocketbooks and
conservatism more than their regional pride.
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
5.
In looking at ways to beat Carter in the South, it should
be remembered that Walter Mondale represents and was one of
those "Yankees" who preached against the bigoted and backward
South. What some Southerners viewed as "heroes," others thought
of as "outside agitators." And not all of those who disliked
those who preached at the South were racists, some of us just
thought the rest of the country should get its own house in
order.
Two other areas of Carter's Southern background also have
potential political implications: his religion and the media's
reaction to the South.
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
CARTER AND THE SOUTHERN BAPTIST CHURCH
As one of the fastest-growing, if not the fastest-growing,
Protestant denomination in the country, the Southern Baptist
surge could be very critical in areas other than the old South.
Only in-depth polling can determine the emotional pull of
Carter's religion on members of his own faith, but the strength
of the religious tie could be crucial in Texas, the Sunbelt
States and Southern California.
Witnessing or publicly testifying to one's faith is a very
important tenet of the Southern Baptists. Given this, Carter's
open testimony must have great appeal to his fellow Southern
Baptists and perhaps to other Baptists and Fundamentalists
as well.
It could be very important to know how involved Southern
Baptists may be in a Carter campaign. Many large Baptists
churches, as part of their evangelical efforts, have sophisti-
cated broadcast facilities. Often Baptist churches are very
politically involved in anti-liquor and anti-pornography cam-
paigns. (Liquor is to Baptists what abortion is to Catholics.)
In the 1960 Presidential campaign, Baptist and other Funda-
mentalist ministers preached against John Kennedy's election.
Special tracts, warning against the Catholic menace in govern-
ment, were distributed at church services. Anti-Catholicism is
generally more theological than personal, since many areas of
the South have few, if any, Catholics, but it remains today
part of Fundamentalists teachings.
The Fundamentalists denominations are part of the Protestant
Restoration movement. The Restoration contrasts with the Reforma-
tion, which produced the Lutherans, Methodists and Presbyterians
among others. The Fundamentalist churches built their theology
on claims of having restored New Testament Christianity, instead
of reforming the Catholic tradition. This distinction accounts
for the anti-ecumenical spirit of the Fundamentalists.
Even mainstream Protestant denominations are more conserva-
tive in the South. For example, the two main branches of the
Presbyterian Churches have not totally reunited after the
FORD & LIBRARY 07V830
2.
Civil War split. The Pentacostal movement, which has affected
most forms of Christianity, has given strong impetus to con-
servatives in Southern churches, who want old-fashioned theology,
not social work.
Southern churches also function as social centers, and this
function has a strong relationship to class structures. Southern
Baptists are generally, but not always, strongly middle class,
and the roots are rural. Although the Southern Baptists like
the Churches of Christ are organized on a congregational basis,
the Southern Baptist Convention provides a central vehicle for
coordination of evangelical efforts.
It may well be that the negative impact of Carter's born-
again Christianity on Jews, ethnic Catholics and those Americans
without religious ties will offset whatever pluses his religion
has for those of his own faith or middle-aged Americans, dismayed
with modern morality. Nevertheless, it is an emotional element
in this campaign that deserves exploration, all the more so
because it appeals to precisely the strongest groups of those
who vote, the middle-aged.
FORD is LIBRARY GERALD
CARTER AND THE MEDIA
Carther's use of the Southern mystique may be as impor-
tant in terms of the media as it is to Southerners. The South
with its many legends, some inherited and others manufactured,
makes good copy, and the abundance of colorful characters,
real or pretend, makes interesting film.
The civil rights movement influenced a generation of journa-
lists, who still fondly remember the emotional highs of those
days. In the years between Little Rock in 1956 and King's
assassination in 1968, a surprising number of television and
print reporters, now on the National scene, got their first
big breaks. (Chancellor, Doug Kiker, Charles Quinn are among
many NBC reporters who covered civil rights. Tom Brokaw and
Don Oliver both got their starts at WSB in Atlanta. Tom
Jarriel moved to the White House as a result of his coverage
of the South. Jim Squires, the Chicago Tribune Bureau Chief;
Bill Kovich, The New York Times Bureau; Fred Graham, CBS; and
David Halberstam are all products of John Seigenthaler's
Nashville Tennessean. Moyers and Cronkite are also Texans.)
It may sound strange, but the camaraderie of those days was
not unlike that of wartime. There was some danger and much
excitement. Many reporters are crusaders at heart, and the
civil rights movement was a crusade with media-created heroes
and villians. Never mind that many stories never came close
to understanding the emotions of blacks and whites in the South,
the reporters enjoyed those years. I covered the waning days
of the movement and King's death, and despite the agonies I felt
as a local reporter who lived in Memphis, the "fox-hole" menta-
lity made it all seem strangely exhilerating.
I believe these experiences are going to leave many of
these reporters with an extra vulnerability to Carter's version
of the New South. They are going to want to believe and promote
Carter's hoke. It may, of course, backfire if the rest of the
country gets bored to death with hearing about the South, but
the return of the networks and the National reporters certainly
will be enjoyed as revenge by those Southerners, who endured
the first invasion with gritted teeth.
CONCLUSION
Here are some questions from this personal look at the South:
*How Southern do Southerners feel? Is regional pride and
regional defensiveness stronger than new economic realities
and conservative politics?
*How much will Watergate and Agnew resignation hurt in those
areas of the South where Republicans gained politically
in past decade?
*How much influence will religion have on voters? Will Southern
Baptists be motivated to vote their religion instead of their
pocketbooks? How afraid are Catholics of Carter's religion?
*How much validity do the Carter myths about the South have for
the rest of the Nation?
*How much will the media help sell Carter's Southern mystique?
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.
t
side
Jimmy Carter
Election: News
on the
U.S. Economy and Business
Jimmy Carter recently paused in
tried to reach lower and lower levels of
his pursuit of the Democratic nomi-
unemployment. I think that most anal-
nation for President to discuss some
yses have shown that if you reached a
level of, say, 3 percent unemployment
questions of particular concern to
through government or private-sector
business. A. James Reichley, a mem-
efforts, the inflation rate would prob-
ber of FORTUNE'S board of editors,
ably rise above 10 percent.
and associate editor Ann Hengsten-
berg conducted the interview with
How would you go about the creation
of more jobs?
the former Georgia governor.
In the first place, contrasted with
Governor, what would you do to deal
some of my opponents, I would consider
with inflation in the economy?
the private sector the primary supplier
I would proceed aggressively, with the
of jobs. I hope that everything the gov-
first emphasis on jobs. My economic ad-
ernment does will be oriented to mag-
visers and I agree that until you get the
nify the influence of taxpayers' money
unemployment rate down below 5 per-
by providing more jobs in the private
cent, there's no real danger of escalating
sector. For instance, we should allocate
inflationary pressures. I would also fa-
research and development funds to the
vor additional money supply, carefully
industries that are inevitably going to
controlled, but I think a little more than
arise in the future. One example would
we've had in the past two years.
be solar energy, where a small invest-
Would you resort to wage and price
ment in research and development mon-
controls under any circumstances?
ey can result in a very rapid increase in
FORD is LIBRARY GERALD
no increase in the services to our people.
I would like to have standby wage and
price control authority that could be
Do you think we need more planning
used for a limited period of time, but I
in the overall economy?
doubt that I would ever use it. I know
I don't like the prospect of government
that Arthur Burns has advocated that
planning that would be binding on pri-
this authority be permitted for a period
vate industry, but my own experience in
of forty-five days. This would permit the
government is that planning ought to
President, or his surrogates, to try to
initiate at the executive level, with the
reach an accommodation with manage-
President and his office, or with the gov-
ment and labor to hold down peremptory
ernor of a state. Secondly, the goals and
increases in wages or prices. But I would
policies established ought to be publicly
not favor mandatory or permanent wage
divulged. And they ought to be con-
and price controls. My philosophic com-
stantly amended as goals are reached or
mitment is to a freer economy.
priorities are changed so that the pri-
How far do you think you can get in-
vate sector-business, industry, agricul-
flation down?
ture, and so forth-can cooperate with
the government in the evolution of their
I don't see any reason why the perma-
own long-range plans. I don't favor gov-
nent level of inflation can't be as low as
ernment domination of private industry
2 or 3 percent. If we get down below 4
with government plans.
percent unemployment, you would have
very high inflationary pressures as you
What should be the approximate bal-
ance between government and private
shares of the G.N.P.?
Fortune Magazine, May - (excerpted)
(con't)
file
Enigma of Jimmy Carter is pushing
the Jewish vote to President Ford
WASHINGTON - President Ford's
Jews acknowledged that the twó-phase
prospects for scoring well this November
U.S. policy has led to a series of "shocks"
among American Jewish voters im-
from the administration - the 1975
proved last week, even as Ford was
"reassessment" after Sec. of State Henry
threatening to veto increased aid for
A. Kissinger failed to achieve a Sinai
Israel. The reason was the heightened
settlement; implications that the United
likelihood that Jimmy Carter will be his
States might negotiate with the
Democratic opponent.
Palestine Liberation Organization; the
Ford's record on the Middle East has
decision to institute arms sales to Egypt;
been criticized by some Jewish leaders,
criticism at the United Nations of Israeli
but Carter's is unknown and the former
settlement policy in occupied Arab lands
Georgia governor's open Christian fervor
and the threat to veto efforts to add $550
is said to make some Jews nervous.
million in aid to Israel this year.
White House aides and top leaders of
Ford has endeavored to explain his
the organized Jewish community said
positions to American Jewish leaders
that, against Carter, Ford could now
directly, and has achieved some success.
aspire to match the 38 percent Jewish
In March he met with 12 presidents of
support achieved by former President
major Jewish organizations, assuring
Richard M. Nixon in 1972, a record for a
them that his position on Israel's survival
Republican in recent history.
was exactly as it has been for 25 years,
Ford was given little or no chance of
and asking the leaders to have confidence
achieving such levels against Sen. Henry
that his commitment was fundamental.
M. Jackson (D-Wash.), whose candidacy
One of the leaders said, "Overall,
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
all but collapsed last week in Penn-
President Ford's record on Jewish issues
sylvania, or against Sen. Hubert H.
had been good. We realize he has added
Humphrey (D. Minn.), who said he would
responsibilities as President that he
not run in any primaries.
didn't have as House minority leader.
Jackson and Humphrey are regarded
Much of my view is colored by the kind of
as two of the strongest friends Israel has
person he is, by his sympathy, sincerity
in U.S. politics. At one time Ford was
and warmth."
too, but things have changed among
At the White House, Ford's liaison
some observers.
officer with the American Jewish
As the pro-Israeli newsletter Near
community is David Lissay, a Domestic
East Report noted last week, Ford en-
Council aide formerly active in Jewish
tered the White House "with an im-
organizations in Philadelphia. Lissay
pressive record of support for Israel
took over from Dr. Robert Goldwin,
during his 24 years in the Congress.
although Goldwin continues to attend
important meetings on Jewish affairs. At
"Since taking office, however, he has
Ford's campaign committee, the person
sought to combine this tradi. nal support
in charge of Jewish voters is Detroit
for Israel with an effort to increase U.S.
financier Max Fisher.
influence in the Arab world, especially
Fisher reportedly has been advising
Egypt and Saudi Arabia."
Ford for months that he could run
Both White House aides and influential
[Continued on page
Joseph A. Califano Jr.
Jimmy Carter's Opportunity
If elected President in November,
eral government, of its competence and
Gov. Jimmy Carter will have the great-
of its corruption. On these crises Nader,
est opportunity to alter the course of
Reagan, Bok, the antibusers, Jesse Jack-
our nation and our government since
son and the corporate board chairmen
Franklin Roosevelt's election in 1932
can agree.
and Lyndon Johnson's landslide in
As a Democrat, Jimmy Carter would
1964.
face these crises not only with a citizen
The special opportunity for Carter
consensus pressing for action, but with
derives in part from the fact that only a
an opportunity for a superb congres-
Democratic President can hope for a
sional partnership. By inauguration
Congress led by members of his own
day, the House and the Senate will have
party. But a new President from either
elected new leaders. That leadership
party would share the same opportun-
will be Democratic, and it will be
ity offered by an even more important
strong. Rep. Thomas P. O'Neill, the cer-
fact of contemporary American politi-
tain Speaker, will be more like Sam
cal-life: the depth and breadth of the
Rayburn than Carl Albert. Robert
citizen consensus that we are in the
Byrd, the likely Senate Majority Leader
throes of a crisis of confidence in gov-
(or Hubert Humphrey, the main com-
ernment that the people expect the
petitor for that post), will be more like
next President to resolve. That consen-
Lyndon Johnson than Mike Mansfield.
sus stems from three crises that beseige
And a new Democratic President
the national executive: 1) a crisis of con-
would find many enthusiastic new
fusion as to its role in our society; 2) a
members in each House-50 House
crisis of competence as to performance
members and eight senators have al-
of its tasks; and 3) a crisis of corruption
ready decided to relinquish their seats.
of person and institution.
Their replacements and others who un-
There is first the crisis centered on
seat incumbents or move from fresh-
the confusion over the proper role of
man to sophomore status would be ar-
the national government-the execu-
riving with the same mandate.
But even with that congressional
partnership, the new President must
n Mr. Califano, a Washington attor-
work fast. Carter's early nomination
ney, was President Johnson's special
victory gives him the chance to be pre-
assistant for domestic affairs. This ar-
pared for a running start should he be
the one to assume office on Jan. 20,
ticle is adapted from a recent address
1977. He should not be sidetracked by
before the Women's National Demo-
petty party squabbles over the plat-
cratic Club.
form or any lingering credentials
fights. He must, of course, focus on
winning the November election, but he
itive's relationship to the Congress and
must give some time to preparing to
the courts; its relationship to the state
govern.
land local governments; and its relation-
For a new President wins only the
ship to the private sector, and to the
opportunity to direct-and hopefully
people.
redirect-the activities of the executive
SUITO what extent are the failures of our
branch. He does not win control of it.
foreign policy the result of executive
Such is the self-sufficient nature of
dominance to the exclusion of the Con-
the federal bureaucracy that the most
gress over the past 15 years? Is it this
difficult administrative task of the new
dominance and secrecy that has per-
President will be to parlay his electoral
mitted the combination of misjudg-
majority and his 2,000 plus presidential
ment, dissembling and abuse of power
a few short years (we) have become en- recently for illegally taking bribes to
appointments into policy control over
that so scars the years from Kennedy to
the executive branch.
Carter Staff:
Close Knit
"Outsiders'
By Juies Witcover
Washington Post Staff Writer
In the swirl of differing
opinions on Jimmy Carter,
there is agreement on one
thing: what the former
Georgia governor has
achieved in the presidential
politics of 1976 he has
largely achieved himself.
It is, in fact, the man's
independence of traditional
alliances with political lead-
ers, and the absence of any
card-carrying Svengalis
around him-no Fred Dut-
ton (Robert F. Kennedy's
1968 presidential campaign
manager), no Mark Shields
(a Washington political con-
sultant), no David Garth (a
media consultant) - that
makes so many orthodox
politicians wary of him.
How do you "do business"
with a man who is so aloof
from, even contemptuous of,
the political "establish-
ment?"
Yet no man gets as far as
Carter has this year without
help. But since Carter has
eschewed a Washington
base and has instead kept
his campaign headquarters
in Atlanta, little is known
about the individuals who
play important roles, and
provide political and other
advice, to the phenomenon
of 1976.
They are a relatively
small and close-knit group,
predominantly but nòt exclu-
See STAFF, A6, Col. 1
file Carter
By MALCOLM BALFOUR
Jimmy Carter believes in UFOs
- because he has seen one himself.
EXCLUSIVE-Jimmy Carter: The Night I Saw a UFO
And if he becomes President, he 11
release to the public all UFO data in
about the former Governor's remark-
Mrs. Charlotte Stembridge, a school
talk several times about spotting the
the possession of the government.
able experience.
teacher, said: "The object was three
UFO.
Speaking exclusively to The EN-
After his speech in Thomaston, my
balls of light, clustered in a circle,
"I was particularly impressed be-
QUIRER, the Democratic front-runner
father was stepping out into the park-
flashing and changing from red to
cause Jimmy is a scientist, a spe-
declared:
ing lot of the club with a group of
green. It drifted slowly across the
cialist in nuclear
"If I become President, I'll make
businessmen when they spotted the
sky - then disappeared quickly."
engineering. He
Carter Suggests a Rights Plan
Sile
Of Compensatory Opportunity'
Carter
MAY 1976
or
By CHARLES MOHR
Special to The New York Times
CINCINNATI, May 4 Jimmy say that Jimmy Carter did
Carter said today that, in a con-
more" than they did.
tinuing struggle to erase dis-
"I believe," he added, "in in-
crimination from American so-
suring that all Americans
ciety, "compensatory opportuni-
should have not only equal op-
ty," and not just equality,
portunity, but should also have
should be offered in some cases
compensatory opportunity if,
to blacks and to other victims
through my influence or yours,
of past intolerance.
they have been deprived of the
The former Georgia Governor,
opportunity of fully using their
who appears to be running well
talents."
ahead of his opposition for the
At a news conference later,
Democratic Presidential nomi-
he said, "You can provide equa-
nation, did not amplify his re-
lity of opportunity by law but,
mark in great detail. However,
quite often, that is not ade-
since be seems at most times
quate"
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
May 12, 1976
TO:
MIKE DUVAL
FROM:
JIM CANNON
FORD LIBRARY is GERAL
FYI.
file
Carter
Education Daily IVIAY 1010
DEM PLATFORM COULD INCLUDE DEPT. OF ED
If frontrunner Jimmy
Carter lives up to his previous stands on education, come midsummer, new party
rules could put him on a party platform that includes a provision for the creation of
a separate Department of Education.
Under this year's new rules, the candidate who comes to the convention with the most
delegates will get the most say in the Platform Committee's deliberations, and
Carter's growing string of primary victories makes his stands on everything--includ-
ing a Department of Education--increasingly likely to appear in the platform the
Democrate offer the country in November.
Carter has said he favors
a separate Department of Education (which) would
consolidate the grant programs, job training, early childhood education, literacy
training and many other functions currently scattered throughout the government.
The result would be a stronger voice for education at the Federal level. (ED,
Apr. 6),
Platform Machinery Makes it Possible
This is the first year, according to
Deputy Platform Director Paul Jensen, that presidential candidate preference votes
will be proportionally reflected on each of three standing Democratic committees
(Platform, Rules and Cradentials). The permanent members of each standing com-
mittee will be elected by the state's national delegates as they are elected through-
out the course of the state primaries, which end June 8, and all delegates must be
selected by June 21. Each standing committee will be composed of 153 members
having 150 votes, allocated to the states "in accordance with the same distribution
formula used to allocate delegates to the National Convention. Consequently the
candidate who has the delegates will also have the committee control, and for the
first time, concurs Jensen, the leading party candidate will enjoy a proportional con-
tribution to the content of the party platform.
Before this week's primaries, Carter's 446 delegates put him ahead of active can-
didates Udall and Jackson two to one, Victories in three out of the four states voting
Tuesday should give Carter a lock of 100 more, pushing him close to 40 percent of
the golden 1505 needed for nomination.
Theoretically, Carter could eventually lose the nomination in a brokered convention
and still be the chief contributor to the Party's platform. "Yes, that is a possibility,"
Jensen winced.
Platform Committee to Hear Carter Testimony
Stuart Eizenstat, Issues Di-
rector at Carter's main headquarters in Atlanta, said that Carter is scheduled to
testify at hearings before the Full Platform Committee to be held May 17-19 in Wash-
ington. Eizenstat refused to speculate about Carter's testimony, butithe candidate's
stands on increased Federal responsibility for school funding, vocational training
and handicapped education "may receive consideration" in the preparation of his
testimony.
-11-
NEA, AFT Believe It Too
Both the National Education Association and the Ameri-
can Federation of Teachers (AFL-CIO) favor a separate education department and say
they will testify at the May 17-19 hearings too. The first meeting of the Platform
Drafting Subcommittee is scheduled for June 14-16 in Washington. The National Con-
vention starts July 12 in New York's Madison Square Garden,
THE WHITE HOUSE file
WASHINGTON
Carton
NOTE FOR: Mile Duval
FROM
: RON NESSEN
F YI
RHN
POLITICAL FOCUS/ROBERT WALTERS
The Boys on the Carter Bus
R. FORD LIBRARY
Virtually unnoticed in the turmoil of the contest for this
New York Times: Carter and his press staff have been par-
year's Democratic presidential nomination has been the ani-
ticularly hostile toward investigative reporters, including
mosity evidenced by former Georgia Gov. Jimmy Carter, the
Nicholas Horrock, a member of The New York Times Wash-
leader in that race, toward the news media.
ington bureau who has been probing Carter's past. and free-
Carter and his staff have become increasingly testy with
lance magazine writers Phil Stanford and Steven Brill.
reporters. especially those engaged in investigative reporting
Horrock reportedly received an icy response from the Car-
about the candidate and his campaign journalists with a
ter organization when seeking pre-publication comment on a
penchant for noting the contradictory positions he has taken
story disclosing Carter's acceptance of free airplane trips from
on numerous issues and others who press for answers to tough
Lockheed Aircraft Corp. and PepsiCo Inc. while governor.
questions.
Horrock refused to discuss his experience, but other sources
Boston Globe: In recent months, Carter's hostility has reached
said Jody Powell, Carter's press secretary. suggested that the
the point where reporters not only have been grumbling proper course for the newsman to take was to ascertain
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
May 31, 1976
FORD & GERALD LIBRARY
Dick,
Attached is a brief paper prepared by Powell
Moore (formerly on the White House Congres-
sional Relations staff) which analyzes Jimmy
Carter. Powell, a Georgian, has known Carter
for ten years. This is not based on any
research, but rather simply reflects Powell's
impressions.
This paper tracks with some of the research
being done by the RNC, which is that Carter
has two major weaknesses:
First, his personality and character
are similar to Richard Nixon in terms
of deviousness and inability to deal
with people face to face.
Second, Carter flip flops on the issues
(talks out of both sides of his mouth),
similar to McGovern.
Mike
Mike
FORD & GERALD LIBRARY
Jimmy Carter has the Democratic Party in a serious
dilemma. If they nominate him, they are stuck with a
candidate who lacks the experience and temperament to be
President and one who is widely distrusted by leaders of
the Democratic Party, with considerable justification.
If they fail to nominate him, after he has been so spectacularly
successful in the primaries, the ripple throughout the south
will cost them severely at the polls in November. It will
be difficult to convince southerners that his regional origin
did not cause them to gang up on him and snatch from him the
nomination. Either outcome favors the immediate implementation
of a strategy directed at Carter.
There are other reasons to begin now with an anti-Carter
strategy. His momentum must be broken because he as the
Democratic nominee would be very difficult for any Republican
to beat. With a Southerner leading the ticket, southern states
cannot be counted on to abandon their traditional party. This
bloc of electoral votes combined with the northern industrial
states, which tend to favor any Democrat, will leave very little
left for the Republican nominee.
Moreover, a Carter Presidency would in the opinion of
many Carter-watchers damage seriously the office. Barring
a miraculous change in him, he can be counted on within three
years to challenge Richard Nixon as one of the most unpopular
-2-
FORD & GERALD LIBRARY
Presidents in American history. The office and the country
can ill-afford another blow to the Presidency.
The system depends upon the adversaries of the candidate
to make sure the people understand his weaknesses before
they vote for him. It is up to Republicans to contribute
to weeding our Carter if he is unqualified. As David Broder
acknowledged in a recent column, the press has failed to
convey to the American public the shortcomings of his
qualifications.
A brief review of Carter's political career may be
instructive. He returned to his hometown of Plains in the
early fifties after a ten-year career in the Navy following
graduation from the Naval Academy. He won narrowly a
legally contested race for the State Senate in 1962 and
served there until January, 1967. As a comparatively
sophisticated senator from rural south Georgia, he captured
more than his share of attention from the Atlanta media
and was soon recognized as a man with political future.
As an unusually strong partisan in a state where party
loyalty was on the wane after Senator Goldwater carried it
in 1964 and the Johnson administration became increasingly
unpopular, he considered a race against Bo Callaway for
Congress, who was in his first and only term in the House
of Representatives. Some who knew Carter detected a special
disdain for Callaway at the time. It may sound farfetched
that a mature person would be motivated by such considerations,
but the combination of Callaway's West Point background,
strong Republican advocacy, and silk stocking status may
have caused the competitive adrenalin to flow of the peanut
farmer Democrat from the Naval Academy.
Developments in early 1966 caused Carter to enter the
Governor's race. Callaway had decided to leave his apparently
safe House seat in favor of the chance of becoming Georgia's
first Republican Governor since Reconstruction. In addition,
a major void was created on the Democratic side when former
Governor Ernie Vandiver withdrew on a claim of ill-health.
There were several candidates in the race and Carter
finished a strong third behind former Governor Ellis Arnall,
who had the black vote, and Lester Maddox. Carter was a
sensible alternative for moderate Democrats and geared his
campaign accordingly. Maddox and Arnall gained positions
in the run-off with less than 30 percent of the Democratic
vote and Carter scored somewhere in the twenties coming very
close to overtaking Maddox, as the second place finisher.
Parenthetically, Maddox won the run-off and the Atlanta
papers, which supported Arnall, claimed that Republican cross-
overs, who thought that Maddox would be an easier target for
Callaway, provided the margin of victory.
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
After losing in 1966, Carter commenced a four year
campaign for Governor and the nature of his peanut warehouse
business permitted him to become virtually a full-time
candidate. From the beginning, he had an uphill battle
against former Governor Carl Sanders, who served from 1963
to 1967 and who was prohibited by law from succeeding himself.
As a result of his progressive record as Governor and his
support for the Great Society, Sanders pre-empted the black/
liberal vote in Georgia, which had given Hubert Humphrey
about 28 percent of the 1968 total. This left for Carter,
Georgia's largest voting bloc, which was the 41 percent that
voted for Wallace in 1968. After running as a moderate in
1966, Carter was able to accomodate himself in order to
reach these voters.
While Sanders pursued his $100,000 a year plus law
practice in Atlanta during 1967, 1968, and 1969, Carter was
speaking in churches and to civic clubs and listening to the
people. He told them what they wanted to hear and gained
the support of leading spokesmen for segregation in Georgia,
who probably disliked Sanders more than they favored Carter.
He played to the emotions of people who distrust the Atlanta
elite in the same manner that he plays to the emotions of
people who distrust Washington today. His strategy paid off
and his victory in 1970 was an upset.
It did not take long for the Wallace/Maddox element to
discover he did not belong to them and he lost his base
of support, becoming a very unpopular governor. He alienated
-5-
the state legislature and the consensus when he left office
in 1974 was that he could not get elected sheriff in his
home county.
He apparently decided he was worthy of a presidential
race after being exposed to Jackson, Humphrey and McGovern in
1972, concluding if they could bat in the Presidential
league, he could. He spent considerable time during his
last two years in office plotting his strategy and he maneuvered
himself into the chairmanship of the Democrats "Campaign 74
Committee." In this position, he began learning the ways of
national politics. After leaving office in January, 1975, he
became a full-time candidate for President and the rest is
history.
If one asks why he has been able to succeed in this
year's race, the answers are varied. A combination of
factors have worked in his favor:
(1) He has been totally dedicated to winning the
Presidency while other candidates have had
FORD & LIBRARY
distractions like protecting a Senate seat
and running a Senate Committee.
(2) He has perceived better than other candidates
that less than 10 percent of the total population
selects the nominee of both parties; has identified
that narrow segment of voters and has effectively
gone after them maximizing his resources.
-6-
(3) He was able to establish early respectability
as a candidate by winning in New Hampshire and
Florida. He accomplished this by pouring a
disproportionate amount of time and resources
into New Hampshire and he benefited in Florida
because Florida was the time and the place for
the National Democratic Party to rid itself of
the Wallace nuisance, and he was the best man
to accomplish it.
(4) The caliber of the opposition was weak and he was
able to survive the process of elimination.
Humphrey was crippled and could not risk the
primaries; Kennedy stayed out; Askew passed up
the race and Brown may have moved too late leaving
only Scoop Jackson, Mo Udall and Birch Bayh as
credible candidates.
(5) He has benefited from the anti-Washington mood
and has been unburdened by the baggage of specific
stands on specific issues. Governors and former
Governors have historically fared better than
Senators and House members in American Presidential
sweepstakes up until the post World War II era
when foreign policy became more important.
-7-
The strategy for defeating Carter must be aimed at
forcing him to make a major mistake and to lose his composure.
It is too bad the Eagleton affair was wasted on McGovern.
Problems have to be created for him where he is forced to
make choices and hopefully make the wrong choice if given
enough opportunities.
The best hope for accomplishing this is through a well-
organized, well-orchestrated attack strategy using a variety
of spokesmen who are capable of making news followed by a
creative negative issues advertising campaign in the fall
if he is nominated.
This effort should be aimed at smoking him out on the
issues and causing his ruthless, duplicious character to
surface from behind his smile. He should be closely tracked
on the issues and challenged on a daily basis by someone
knowledgeable in categories of issues.
An operational structure could be assembled along the
following lines:
(1) Establish a team with spokesmen assigning each of
them to an issue. The make-up should include highly
FORD LIBRARY &
visable Senators and Cabinet Officers and might be
as follows:
Goldwater/Tower - Defense and National Security
Simon - the Economy
Dole - Agriculture
-8-
Hills - Housing
Kleppe - Energy
Richardson - Social Programs
Griffin - Labor.
(2) Establish a research capability that receives
daily information on each Carter statement that
would supplement news accounts.
(3) Ask each spokesman to assign his press secretary
or some other project officer to the task. This
individual would also have a responsibility for
tracking Carter's statements and for developing
a complete catalogue of all of his positions on
assigned issues.
(4) Conduct daily meetings of the representatives of each
spokesman where an attack on Carter is planned.
(5) On a rotating basis, depending on events, issue
a statement or conduct a press conference using
a spokesman.
The purpose of this program should be to make sure the
American people know Carter well because he would probably
be rejected by the voters if they knew him better. If you
conducted off-the-record interviews with people who have had
considerable experience with him, including former colleagues
-9-
in the governors' conferences, members of the Georgia
legislature, members of the Georgia Congressional
Delegation and their staffs, certain words would bubble
to the surface. These words include such epithets
as phony, liar, hypocrite, lacks integrity, double crosser,
two-faced, speaks from both sides of his mouth, and similar
phrases.
If the people go to the polls without a thorough knowledge
of a candidate's shortcomings, the people have been failed
by the candidates opponents, just as a jury as well as a
defendant is failed in a legal case when a lawyer makes an
inadequate presentation. The President has the capability
to put the mechanism in place to educate the public on
Carter. In spite of the fact that he is no longer assured
the Republican nomination, he should go ahead and order the
execution of a negative Carter strategy as part of his duty
as leader of the Republican Party.
To understand the objectives of a negative Carter project,
you first need to understand Carter and the fact that there
are two sides to him:
(1) There is the Carter, who has Paul Warnke as a
national security advisor and will cut $7 billion
from the defense budget and there is the Carter,
who has Paul Nitze as his advisor and will add
$30 billion to the defense budget.
-10-
(2)
The Carter who spoke in Wisconsin in favor of
repealing the right to work laws; the Carter who
said in Georgia before a group of financial
supporters a week later that he does not support
repeal of right to work laws.
(3)
The Carter, who has built his campaign on a claim
that he has streamlined the State Government in
Georgia; the Carter, who presided over a state
administration that increased its employees by
20 percent and increased state spending by 50
percent.
(4)
The Carter, who would simplify income tax forms and
eliminate deductions including interest on morgage
payments; the Carter, who denies his plan to eliminate
interest deductions.
(5)
The Carter, who ridiculed Lester Maddox in New
Hampshire; the Carter, who praised him in 1970.
(6)
The Carter, who pledged to "end once and for all the
threat Wallace represents to our country;" the Carter,
who promised in 1970 to invite Wallace to Georgia to
address the state legislature and is on-the-record a
number of times praising him.
-11-
(7)
The Carter, who promised to support Wallace in
1972, if he would not offer a slate of delegates
in Georgia; the Carter who made the nominating
speech for Scoop Jackson in Miami after Wallace
lived up to his end of the bargain.
(8)
The Carter, who claimed, after he was castigated
by Wallace supporters for backing Jackson, that he
was carrying out a wish of the late Senator Russell;
the reality that anyone who knew Dick Russell knows
that he would never have made that request.
(9)
There is the Carter, who said "Other than my father,
Senator Russell made the greatest impact on my life.
I never made a political decision without consulting
him first. He kind of adopted me 19 years ago."
There is the real Carter who never had a particularly
close relationship with Dick Russell.
(10)
There is the Carter, who looked Bob Strauss in
the eye and said he had no problem with him continuin
as chairman through November; the Carter who,
according to his former speechwriter, talked of
canning Strauss.
(11)
The Carter, who asked Julian Bond to intercede with
McGovern in behalf of him becoming McGovern's running
mate; the Carter who denied Bond's claim; and the
Carter who later acknowledged it.
(12)
The Carter, who pledged his support to Reuben
Askew to be Chairman of the Southern Governor's
Conference; the Carter who went back on his
pledge.
(13)
The Carter, who told environmentalists he supports
strip mining legislation; the Carter who told
coal operators that he doesn't.
(14)
The Carter, who told a reporter falsely that Senator
Russell promised to vote for him in 1970; the Carter,
who called Senator Russell to apologize and claim
he never said it; the Carter, who told the reporter
that he said it, but it was off-the-record.
(15)
The Carter, who said he opposed Richard Nixon since
he lived in California in 1950; the Carter who
profusely praised John Mitchell for his law and
order campaign at a dinner in Atlanta in 1971.
(16)
The Carter, who talks of a need for honesty in
government; the Carter, who met with Secretary Butz
in behalf of the peanut industry in 1973.
(17)
The Carter, who talks of love; the Carter who sent
a message recently to the Mayor of Atlanta to
"
"kiss my
(18)
The non-politician Carter, who is running against
all the Washington politicians; the Carter who has
been a full time candidate for public office for
-13-
six of the last ten years and in the Governor's
office the other four, where he spent considerable
time on politics.
Finally, there is the Carter, who tells the people he
will never lie to them, but there is the string of evidence
to the contrary that could be uncovered easily if adequately
researched. This memorandum is simply the product of unverified
recollections of a person who has closely observed him and known
him for ten years.
New York Times, 6/11/76, Pg. 1
thrust of his positions has re-
Most of his staff members
mained consistent throughout
say that Mr. Carter is merely
the campaign.
practicing good politics, and
One theme emerges from an
they note accurately that many
examination of the range of Mr.
other successful politicians, in-
Carter's stances on the issues.
cluding President Kennedy,
Carter's Position on Issues
made a point of campaigning
It is that, in every case, he
on positions that were guar-
seems to have attempted to sa
anteed not to alienate voters.
Designed for Wide Appeal
tisfy the greatest possible num-
One ranking aide disagrees,
ber voters.
however, This aide, who is
Such a pragmatic strategy is
reputed to have good political
sensibilities, recently remarked
By DAVID E. ROSENBAUM
not unusual among successful
in an exasperated tone, "If he
Special to The New York Times
politicians. But, Mr. Carter has
would just get booed once,
WASHINGTON, June 10-An
matters and that he acted like
left himself open to unusually
about anything, it would make
intensive scrutiny because be
examination of Jimmy Carter's
a political chameleon, changing
all the rest of his positions so
has based his campaign to a
stands on the range of cam-
much more credible."
his colors to suit his environs.
large extent on his own trust-
paign issues shows that, in
worthiness and credibility.
Rhetorical Skills
Mr. Carter now appears as-
nearly every case, he seems to
sured of the Democratic Presi-
When he began his run for
Mr. Carter employs a num-
have taken the positions de-
the Presidency 16 months ago,
ber of rhetorical techniques to
dential nomination in New York
signed to satisfy the most pos-
when he was, in his own words,
make his stands acceptable to
sible voters and alienate the
next month, and he continued to
"an unbelievably obscure can-
both sides of a controversy.
fewest.
pick up delegates and endorse-
didate," he told small gather-
One is to espouse a position
ings, "I will never lie to you."
while speaking in a way de-
His opponents and critics in
ments today from, among oth-
It is a line that, to this day,
signed to appeal to those hold-
his successful run through the
ers, Gov. Milton J. Shapp of
he has retained in his basic
ing the opposite view,
Democratic Presidential prima-
Pennsylvania and Senators Rob-
stump speech. And it is also
Thus, asked in heavily Ro-
a promise that has left him
man Catholic Rhode Island
ries contended that the former
ert C. Byrd of West Virginia
open to special scrutiny.
about his position on abortion,
Governor of Georgia was "fuz-
and James E. Eastland and
At the outset of a four-day
Mr. Carter began by saying.
zy" on the issues, that he
John C. Stennis of Mississippi.
campaign swing last month, one
"I think abortion. is wrong. I
switched his stands on many
Assuming he is the nominee,
of his staff members was
don't think the government
the charges of fuzziness on is-
asked to name one bold posi-
ought to do anything to en-
tion that Mr. Carter had taken,
courage abortion."
sues are likely to be revived
just one issue on which the
Then, he described, his posi-
by his Republican opponent in
leading Democratic Presidential
tion: He would oppose a con-
the general election campaign.
candidate had risked opposition
stitutional amendment that
A review of Mr. Carter's po-
by taking a stand on principle.
would overturn the Supreme
sition papers, stump speeches
'Give Me a Week'
Court's ruling permitting abor-
tions. He would seek Federal
and answers to questioners
After a moment's reflection,
aid for sex education, family
shows that his stands are
the aide answered hy making
planning instruction and adop-
usually detailed and sophisti-
a joke. He quoted the famous
tion procedures.
cated. While he has changed
response by President Eisen-
He ended by saying, "I'll do
the tone of his appeal slightly
hower to a question about what
everything I can to minimize
ideas Richard M. Nixon, as Vice
abortion.'
in certain cases-on aid to the
President, had contributed to
Another tactic Mr. Carter
cities, for example-the basic
the Eisenhower Administration:
uses in speeches is to agree to
"If you give me a week ,I
"study" something favored by
might think of one."
persons whose support he is
Others on the Carter staff
seeking.
acknowledge that their candi-
For instance, throughout his
date studies opinion polls care-
campaign, Mr. Carter has op-
fully and tries to position him-
posed direct Federal aid to help
self in such a way that as few
cities out of financial straits.
voters as possible become dis-
Last week, however, he prom-
affected by his stands on the
ised Mayor Beame he would
issues.
"study the creation of a Fed-
Mr. Carter himself told a
eral municipalities securities in-
crowd at Shaw High School
surance corporation to assist
in East Cleveland, Ohio, one
localities in marketing their
evening last week: "The main
bonds and in reducing interest
thing that's tied me to the
levels now faced by munici-
voters of this nation is that I
palities and to provide volun-
feel the same as you do about
tary self-controls in municipal
the issues that are important
financial matters."
to your life."
Another method used by Mr.
Surveys by The New York
Carter is to take a position that
Times and CBS News this year
encourages both sides of a
indicate that the strategy has
question to believe that he is
been successful. They have
on their side.
shown time and again that con-
He says, for example, in an
servative voters tend to view
appeal to businessmen, that he
Mr. Carter as conservative,
would not ask Congress for
that moderates see him as mod-
legislation repealing the Fed-
erate and that liberals see him
eral law that permits state
as liberal.
right-to-work statutes and that
Indeed, reporters who have
he would do nothing to en-
traveled with the former Gov-
courage that kind of legislation.
ernor since the first of the year
But, he continues, reaching for
and observed him before every
labor support, if Congress
type of voter cannot recall an
passes. such a measure, he
instance in which an audience
'would be glad to sign it."
appeared displeased at one of
A fourth rhetorical technique
his statements.
Star
TRB
Site Carter
6/19/76
Political punditry do
the small S(
Predictions are fun but
is a tricky job counter Californo to
Most of us, at first any-
that the media will tradi-
tricky in the pundit busi-
way, had little idea who
tionally start snapping and
ness - they are an occupa-
was running or why. In the
biting again - legitimately
tional hazard that ought to
beauty contest voters
enough, no doubt - after
article
be resisted but never are. It
picked the captain of the
telling how wonderful, by
is a temptation to come
Ship of State not on his
golly, it all is.
right out now and say that
knowledge of navigation but
Jimmy Carter will win by a
on his hearty manner. It
It will be easy to fault a
landslide next Nov. 2 (for
has left us for the final
Carter administration, we
better or worse). But shall I
stage with a choice between
guess; how long can a fresh
actually commit myself to
Jimmy Carter, the Great
face be fresh, or a newcom-
that? Remember election
Who-is-he?, and the Ford-
er be "anti-Washington"
eve four years ago!
Reagan Right-wing Twins.
who is part of Washington?
The crowd looked at
When the ultimate comes
Our guess, too, is that the
Spiro Agnew at his cam-
next November it is esti-
big Carter federal reorgan-
paign headquarters and
mated that 50 per cent of
ization program will bog
chanted jubilantly, "Twelve
voters will vote 75 million
down if attempted. It
more years, twelve more
will be missing.
strikes us as a gimmick;
years!" meaning that he
it's been tried before with
would follow his beloved
little success.
leader Richard Nixon with
TRB is the traditional
On the other hand, if
two terms of his own after
signature on a weekly col-
Jimmy Carter actually has
1976. And Time magazine in
umn appearing in The New
reform plans - a minimum
a special predated edition.
Republic magazine, writ-
income for the working and
6pm
9/20
DRAFT
DRAFT
DRAFT
EMPTY PROMISES OR EMPTY POCKETS? (OR who pays the PIPER)
Jimmy Carter is playing the old shell game with the American people this year. His
Platform is a cynical and deceptive array of peanut shells, and the voters are supposed to
guess which ones contain real pledges and which ones merely cover empty promises,
The Carter campaign has denied Republican charges that just 5 of Carter's programs
would add $100 billion and all of them over $200 billion to the annual cost of the federal
government. They challenged Republicans to prove their charges.
The Republican Policy Committee analysis (see attached chart) shows that the total
would, in fact, be far higher over $217.2 billion a year in additional federal spending
by 1980 and over $706.1 billion for four years - a percent increase in federal spending.
Many of Carter's pledges are vague, unspecific or confusing. Why? Because if Carter
dared to spell out precisely what he meant, he would have to admit either that his were hollow
promises or that his program would cost almost a trillion dollars for four years and that's
not peanuts!
Republicans know, the American people know and Carter himself knows that this kind of
spending is wildly impossible and irresponsible. Personal and corporate income taxes by
64
1980 will run about $312 billion Carter's programs would mean raising taxes by -
Everyone would have to pay a lot more, not just those with incomes above $14,700 as Carter
recently suggested. If he did not raise taxes to pay for these programs, the alternative
would be unprecedented and staggering inflation, the least equitable tax of all.
That is why we don't think the pledges and promises made by Candidate Carter and his
platform would be kept by President Carter. This calculated deceit of the Carter Platform
arcuses false hopes from individuals and groups cuped into believing they would benefit from
rew or expanded programs. We saw in the 1960's how destructive and demoralizing it is to
raise people's expectations and then not deliver. Carter's Platform promises to repeat this
sad cycle.
If Carter disagrees with our analysis, we ask him to explain to the voters exactly what
he does mean. Shell gemes are for carnivals, not for the 1976 presidential election. The
American people deserve a straight answer on this important question.
FORD & LIBRARY 076839
Page 2
President Ford and Senator Dole stand on the Republican Platform -- does Carter support
his? The Republican Policy Committee hopes this analysis will prompt an honest and candid
response from Carter -- not more evasion, deceit or empty rhetoric.
Additional Federal Costs of Democratic/Carter Platform
Proposal
1980 one-year
1977-80 four-year
estimate
estimate
LOW
MID
HIGH
LOW
MID
HIGH
(billions)
(billions)
1.
HIMPHREY-HAWKINS:
$12.1
$21.8
$31.5
$29.9
$56.5
$83.2
2.
COUNTERCYLCICAL AID:
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
4.0
6.0
3.
PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT:
1.0
2.3
3.6
11.0
13.7
18.9
4.
PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS:
1.5
1.5
1.5
6.2
6.2
6.2
5.
DIRECT STIMULUS TO
PRIVATE SECTOR:
1.65
1.65
1.65
6.6
6.6
6.6
6.
NATIONAL HEALTH INSURANCE:
88.7
101.6
114.6
314.1
342.5
370.9
7.
WELFARE REFORM:
12.3
18.9
25.6
44.4
70.8
*97.3
8.
FEDERAL TAKEOVER OF STATE
LOCAL WELFARE COSTS:
4.1
5.2
6.4
14.68
18.71
22.94
9.
TITLE I, ELEMENTARY &
SECONDARY EDUCATION ACT
full funding:
.25
1.175
2.1
1.0
4.7
8.4
10.
CHILD DEVELOPMENT
PROGRAMS:
7.1
14.2
25.10
13.4
26.6
47.0
11.
EDUCATIONAL FINANCE
EQUALIZATION:
11.0
22.0
27.88
38.35
76.7
85.28
12.
TAX BENEFIT FOR THE EDUCATION
OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY
PUPILS:
.6
.9
1.2
2.4
3.6
4.8
13.
EXPANDED VOCATIONAL
EDUCATION:
.7
.8
.9
1.7
2.0
2.4
14.
COST OF EDUCATION PAYMENTS
TO HIGHER EDUCATION IN-
STITUTIONS:
.75
1.0
1.25
3.0
4.0
5.0
15.
VOTER REGISTRATION:
.05
.225
.500
.2
.9
2.0
16. INCREASING SOCIAL SERVICES
TO KEEP PACE WITH
INFLATION:
1.4
1.5
1.7
4.1
4.5
4.9
17.
LIBERALIZATION OF ALLOWABLE
EARNINGS LIMITATION UNDER
SOCIAL SECURITY:
1.8
4.6
5.8
7.2
18.4
23.2
18.
VA EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE
- 2 years
0
O
0
.9
.9
.9
19.
INDEX REVENUE SHARING
TO INFLATION:
1.4
1.7
2.0
3.4
4.2
5.0
20.
CHANGE REVENUE SHARING
FORMULA
6.7
.9
1.25
2.7
3.6
4.5
21.
SUBSIDIES OF LOANS FOR LOW
& MODERATE INCOME HOUSING
CONSTRUCTION:
1.5
5.5
3.0
6.0
10.9
12.0
22.
EXPAND HOUSING SUBSIDIES
FOR THE ELDERLY:
.1
.2
.3
.4
.8
1.2
Proposal
1980 one-year
1977-80 four-year
estimate
estimate
LOW
MID
HIGH
LOW
MID
HIGH
(billions)
(billions)
23.
STEADY FLOW OF HOUSING
CREDIT:
.06
.13
.19
.3
.5
.8
24.
UPGRADING SECONDARY ROADS
& BRIDGES:
.8
1.6
2.4
1.6
3.3
4.9
25.
FULL FUNDING OF RURAL
DEVELOPMENT ACT:
.4
.6
.8
1.5
2.1
2.9
26.
INCREASED FEDERAL FUNDING
FOR ENERGY RESEARCH AND
DEVELOPMENT:
.6
1.3
1.6
.8
1.6
2.3
27.
FARM PRICE SUPPORT
PROGRAMS:
4.4
4.9
6.2
16.4
17.8
20.6
29.- 74.
?
?
?
?
?
?
TOTAL:
$161.5+
$217.2+
$270.5+
$534.2+
$706.1+
$850.1+
1. HUMPHREY-HAWKINS BILL
The Congressional Budget Office prepared an economic analysis of the Humphrey-Hawkins bill,
H.R. 50, "The Full Employment and Balanced Growth Act of 1976." (May 21, 1976.) Using a variety
of economic and policy assumptions, this analysis indicated that although the initial net cost
(allowing for reduced unemployment compensation payments and increased tax revenues) would run
between $12.1 and $31.5 billion, the net cost of the program after 12 months of operation would
taper off to between $7 and $19.9 billion and after 24 months to between $5.4 and $15.9 billion.
Estimating the four year cost can be done two ways. Using the initial cost figure ($12.1 to
$31.5 billion) to represent achievement of 3 percent unemployment by 1980, assume a linear pro-
gression toward that goal at a 25% rate annually, i.e. one-fourth the full program in the first
year ($3 to $7.8 billion), one-half the second year and three-fourths the third year. The total
four year net cost under this method of estimating would range between $30 and $78.5 billion.
An alternative would be to compute the initial cost, the 12-month figure, the 24-month figure and
assume that the fourth year would approximate the 24-month figure as well. This yields a range
of net cost between $29.9 and $83.2 billion. As CBO further indicates, "inflation that occurs
between 1976 and 1980 could increase these costs." These estimates are based on 1976 dollars.
The range of estimates for each period depends on displacement and inclusion or exclusion
of teenagers over age 18 in the program. Public employment programs often displace some workers
who had previously been employed, perhaps in lower-paying private-sector jobs, or by simply
rehiring with federal funds persons who had been previously paid with state or local funds. CBO
low-end cost estimates were based on an assumption of zero displacement, while high-end estimates
assumed a. 40 percent displacement rate. Higher displacement would mean even higher costs.
2. COUNTERCYCLICAL AID TO CITIES
Marry ambitious countercyclical aid proposals were circulated in Congress in the wake of the
New York City fiscal crisis. The concept giving no-strings-attached federal grants to states
and cities found its way into a job creation bill, S. 3201 (now P.L. 94-369) as Title II.
Congress overrode the veto of this legislation and, pending appropriations, distribution of
countercyclical funds is scheduled to begin in the fall of 1976.
Originally proposed as an annual $2 billion program, the enacted version was pegged at
$1.25 for the first five quarters. However, the first (July, 1976) quarter payment will total
somewhat over $300 million.
Although the Democratic Platform endorses the countercyclical aid concept without specifying
a funding level, Jimmy Carter in his presentation to the Democratic Platform Committee stated
that "$2 billion of countercyclical assistance is essential and affordable."
Estimating added countercyclical aid costs depends on future rates of unemployment. Assum-
ing the present program at $1 billion annually, Carter's $2 billion proposal means an added $1
billion per year. Higher or lower unemployment rates affecting the current program would raise
or lower this one-year estimate. The four-year estimate would similarily be affected by the ex-
tent and duration of 6% or higher unemployment rates.
:
FORD
3. PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT
ERALD
LIBRAR
The Democratic Platform states that "consistent and coherent economic policy requires federal
anti-recession grant programs accompanied by public employment In each case, the programs
should be phased in automatically when unemployment rises and phased out as it declines. In
Carter's presentation to the Democratic Platform Committee he was more specific:
we should provide 800,000 summer youth jobs and double the CETA program
from 300,000 to 600,000 jobs."
In February, 1976, the House of Representatives, under Democratic leadership, passed the
"Emergency Employment Projects Amendments of 1976," H.R. 11453. This legislation would have in-
creased Title II and VI CETA public employment jobs from 320,000 to 600,000. The Congressional
Budget Office estimated that additional costs, over existing programs, would run about $4.373
billion for Fiscal 1977, assuming an average annual cost of $7289 per job created. The Education
and Labor Committee disagreed with this estimate and predicted that the average man-year cost of
a public service job under the bill would be $8500, or an overall cost of $5.1 billion.
This legislation was side-tracked in the Senate, however, and H.R. 12987, a stop-gap measure
continuing the CETA public employment programs due to run out during the Fiscal 1976-77 transi-
tion quarter, was enacted instead. The net cost of the Senate version of H.R. 12987 was estimat-
ed by the Congressional Budget Office to be $1.543 billion in Fiscal 1977. The final conference
version of the legislation will be an estimated $2.5 billion.
President Ford, by contrast, had requested a $1.5 billion measure that provided for phasing
out Title VI of this program in Fiscal 1977.
-2-
Since the Carter and Democratic Platform proposals range from the program favored by the
House Democratic leadership to the final version of H.R. 12987, an estimate range is derived by
assuming that President Ford would provide $1.5 billion in Fiscal 1977 for Title VI during its
phase-out period and nothing thereafter while assuming that a Carter administration would go for
the $5.1 billion program, the $2.5 billion program or a figure inbetween, probably depending on
prevailing unemployment rates. This computation yields a Fiscal 1977 net estimate of between $1
billion for the added cost of H.R. 12987 over the President's request to $3.6 billion for the
added cost of H.R. 11453 over the President's request. Assuming that inflation increases would
cancel out any savings from lower program levels due to reduced unemployment, a four-year range
falls between $11 billion and $18.9 billion.
All the above estimates allow for the potential savings to be realized from unemployment com-
pensation reductions and increased tax revenues. Regarding summer jobs, it should be noted that
since 830,000 summer jobs were funded this year, 80,000 more than Carter recommended, a small sav-
ings would be obtained.
4. PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS
The Democratic Platform calls for "public works projects" as a part of a "consistent and
coherent economic policy." Carter, in his testimony before the Democratic Platform Committee
elaborated:
"creation of meaningful and productive public needs jobs as a supplement
to the private sector, including jobs for unmet needs in areas such as
housing rehabilitation and repairing our railroad railbeds."
A major public works-jobs initiative by the Congressional Democratic Leadership, H.R. 5247,
the "Public Works Employment Act" was enacted in January 1976. When it was vetoed by President
Ford, Congress responded with a second similar but scaled down bill, S. 3201, which became Law
despite a second veto. Were it not for having a Republican President in the White House, the
first measure would now stand as public law, and with a Democratic President, the total cost
might have been even higher than H.R. 5247.
H,R, 5247 carried a $6.2 billion authorization which would have resulted in a Fiscal 1977
spending increase of about $2.5 billion, over $1 billion in Fiscal 1978 and another $1.5 billion
in Fiscal 1979 and beyond.
5. DIRECT STIMULUS TO THE PRIVATE SECTOR
The Democratic Congress enacted the "Emergency Employment Appropriations Act, 1976," H.R.
4481, in an ill-advised effort to stimulate the economy through increased deficit spending.
Typical of "direct stimulus" proposals, this measure weighed in at some $3.3 billion over the
amount requested by President Ford, and would have required expenditures of about half this
amount in Fiscal 1976 and the remainder in Fiscal 1977 and subsequent years, despite the fact
that unemployment percentages were already trending downward. Several items in the bill were
for increased spending levels for existing programs; their effect would be to lock in higher
costs for these programs in future years. Assuming that a Democratic Congress unimpeded by a
Republican President would enact a program of at least this magnitude, a $1.65 billion annual
figure stands as a reasonable estimate.
6. NATIONAL HEALTH INSURANCE
Both the Democratic Platform and Jimmy Carter's presentation to the Democratic Platform
Committee call for a comprehensive national health insurance system with "universal and manda-
tory" coverage, financed by a combination of employer-employee shared payroll taxes and general
tax revenues.
The most serious legislative proposal to provide this form of health insurance is H.R. 21,
the Kennedy-Corman bill. Federal spending for the first year of this program has been estimated
at $70 billion by the Rand Corporation (May, 1976). However, this cost will be offset by a
savings of $4 billion through elimination of present tax expenditure items. The net cost during
the first year of the program's operation is therefore estimated at about $66 billion. This
approximates the estimates made by the Congressional Budget Office.
Projecting the cost of national health insurance, the Congressional Budget Office in its
March 15, 1976, Budget Options for Fiscal Year 1977 report discussed the impact of various op-
tions. For a tax-financed comprehensive national health plan, it calculated the following range
of estimates (which vary depending on assumptions regarding the effectiveness of cost controls):
FY
billions
1977
$114.0 $116.5
1978
$125.4 $135.4
1979
$138.3 $156.7
1980
$151.4 $177.3
1981
$164.7 $200.1
-3-
CBO estimated continuation of programs which health insurance would replace during the same
period to cost:
FY
billions
1977
$45.0
1978
$50.8
1979
$56.5
1980
$62.7
1981
$69.3
By contrast, President Ford's budget proposed curtailing growth in federal health expendi-
tures by program consolidation and limiting reimbursable physician and hospital costs, while add-
ing protection against catastrophic health costs and placing a ceiling on beneficiary cost-sharing
for medicare services. The Ford proposal would have saved $3.3 billion in Fiscal 1977, reducing
the total to $41.7 billion. Figures are not available for anticipated savings through Fiscal
1981 but they would yield a program somewhat less costly than the present one.
By subtracting the projected cost of present programs from the anticipated costs of a tax-
financed comprehensive national health insurance program, it is possible to get an idea of the
added costs of Carter's platform proposal:
FY
billions
1977
$69.9 - $71.5
1978
$74.6 - $84.6
1979
$81.8 - $100.2
1980
$88.7 - $114.6
1981
$95.4 - $130.8
Total added cost over the 1977-1980 four-year period would be between $314.1 and $370.9
billion.
7. WELFARE REFORM
According to the Democratic Platform, "Fundamental welfare reform is necessary. We should
move toward replacement of our existing. system with a simplified system of income maintenance,
substantially financed by the federal government." Both the Platform and Carter's testimony to
the Platform committee emphasize the need for a work requirement.
The proposal developed by former Congresswoman Griffiths (D-Mich.) stands as the most serious-
ly considered welfare reform proposal of the type Carter describes. The Congressional Research
Service of the Library of Congress estimates that the Griffiths bill will cost, in addition to
the $11.2 billion currently being spent on welfare programs (1976 figure), an additional $1.5
billion in outlays and $8.4 billion in lost tax revenues, for a total cost of $9.9 billion over
present welfare costs,
The Congressional Budget Office in their March 15, 1976 report on Budget Options, estimated
that,
"If the (Griffiths) system were initiated in 1978 and cash allowances were raised
to keep pace with inflation, the first year cash allowance outlays would be $2.3
billion less than levels needed to maintain current policy in the programs which
the cash allowance would replace AFDC and food stamps.
However, the tax credit would reduce 1978 revenues and generate outlays estimated
at $25.4 billion. Estimated costs do not assume an extension of the present earned
income tax credit. The net effect. would be to raise federal outlays for income
assistance for the lower-income population by $23.1 billion in 1977 and $26.4 billion
by 1981.'
In contrast, President Ford has proposed several cost-saving measures for welfare programs
which would reduce program costs below the current policy level by $4.9 billion in fiscal year
1977. Computing the cost of the Griffiths proposal over present policy, however, yields the
following estimates if the Library of Congress estimate is used as the lav figure, the CBO esti-
mate as the high figure, and the average of the two as the middle figure:
FY
Low
Medium
High
(billions)
1977
$ 9.9
$16.5
$23.1
1978
10.7
17.3
23.9
1979
11.5
18.1
24.7
1980
12.3
18.9
25.6
Total
$44.4
$70.8
$97.3
-4-
8. REDUCING STATE AND LOCAL SHARE OF WELFARE COSTS
Carter, testifying before the Platform Committee, stated that, "The welfare burden should
be removed from cities, with all welfare costs being paid by the federal and state governments."
The Democratic Platform elaborated, "Local governments should no longer be required to
bear the burden of welfare costs there should be a phased reduction in the states' share of
welfare costs.
Using HEW's most recent (1975) figures, a 75 percent federal government assumption of state
and local contributions for AFDC, SSI and Social Services would amount to $4.38 billion, in
addition to the $10.7 billion in federal funds already being spent. A 75 percent takeover of
just AFDC contributions would run some $2.8 billion over the present federal share of $4.5
billion.
Four-year estimates were not available. However, it is clear that inflation, increased
welfare rolls and whatever higher welfare costs are involved in a welfare reform program would
push the estimates up significantly. If more than 75 percent federal takeover were contemplated,
this too would increase federal costs.
CMB calculates that under current policy, AFDC costs would increase during the next five
years at about seven percent annually while SSI would go up annually at a rate between eight
and eleven percent. Ignoring the increases that would be attributable to" a costly welfare re-
form program, figuring an annual growth rate of eight percent and working from the 1975 figures,
the following estimates are derived:
FY
low1
medium
high2
(billions)
1977
$ 3.26
$ 4.18
$ 5.10
1978
3.52
4.51
5.50
1979
3.80
4.87
5.94
1980
4.10
5.25
6.40
Total
$14.68
$18.71
$22.94
LAFDC only
2AFDC, SSI and Social Services
9. TITLE I, ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION ACT
The Democratic Platform states that,
"We should strengthen federal support of existing programs that stress improvement
of reading and math skills. Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
must reach those it is intended to benefit to effectively increase these primary
skills. 'Break-throughs' in compensatory education require a concentration of
"
resources
Democrats in Congress have repeatedly sought full funding of Title I, ESEA, i.e. appropria-
ting fully as much as the Act authorizes. Since the FY 1977 authorization is $4.39 billion and
the appropriations will be $2.28, full funding would require an additional $2.1 billion in
Fiscal 1977 (high estimate). The Congressional Budget Office's July 15, 1976 report on Budget
Options indicates that "increasing the share of federal resources devoted to services for in-
adequately served populations could add $250 million to Title I" (low estimate). Choosing a
course of increased funding mid-way between full funding, the goal of the education lobby, and
the CBO's budget option yields a figure of $1.175 billion. Assuming that inflationary pressure
will push up present expenditure rates as well as Carter increases between 1977 and 1980, the
four-year estimate is simply a multiplication of the 1977 one-year estimate.
10. DEVELOPMENTAL AND EDUCATIONAL CHILD CARE PROGRAMS
The Democratic Platform calls for,
"federally financed, family centered developmental and educational child care
programs -- operated by the public schools or other local organizations, in-
cluding both private and comunity -- and that they be available to all who
need and desire them."
Carter's presentation to the Platform similarly called for "adequate child care for all
-5-
parents who desire to use it," and for "high quality, accessible child care facilities so that
mothers who wish to work can do so."
The leading proposal to develop the kind of program described by the Democratic Platform
is the one developed by Senator Mondale, the Vice-Presidential nominee, and Rep. Braderas, S.626/
H.R. 2966, "The Child and Family Services Act." This would create a new federal program.
This legislation contains a deceptively low initial authorization level sufficient only to
allow for an initial planning phase and a gradual start-up of this massive new program -- just
$1.85 billion for a three-year period. However, the program structured under this Act, if fully
implemented, would be vastly more costly after the initial start-up period. Most of those who
have sponsored the bill and have testified before House and Senate Subcommittees on it have em-
phasized its child care or child development aspects, and it is fair to say that they hope the
program would make available reasonably high quality child care services to those who want or
need them.
The Executive Director of the Child Welfare League testified, for example, that, "appro-
priations needed to provide decent child care for the segments of the child population most at
rish is $14.243 billion per year. Costs for purely custodial care, would be about half
that amount."
His estimates were based on the following assumptions:
"latchkey" children needing care:
Amount
10,000 under age six.
$26,000,000 ($2,600 per child
per year)
842,000 school age
$1.094 billion ($1300 per child
per year)
$1.120 billion
184,000 children looked after by caretaker while
at work:
65,000 preschool
$169 million
119,000 school age
$154 million
$.323 billion
4,925,000 preschool children requiring care whose
parents are in work force.
$12.8 billion
TOTAL
$14.243 billion
(Joint Hearings of the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, U.S. Senate and the
Subcommittee on Select Education and Labor, U.S. House of Representatives, on
S. 626 and H.R. 2966, on February 21, 1975, page 210.)
The Congressional Research Service of the Library of Congress attempted to cost out a
fully-implemented Brademas-Mondale child development/child care program and arrived at a $25.1
billion figure, making the following assumptions:
Children Under 1 Year -- 3,081,000; assume a 5 percent participation rate and
a cost per child of $3,000.
Cost = $462,150,000.
Age 1 -- 2,999,000; assume a 10 percent participation rate and
a cost per child of $3,000.
Cost = $899,700,000.
FORD
Age 2 -- 3,014,000; assume a 20 percent participation rate GERRAL and
a cost per child of $2,700.
Cost = $1,657,700,000.
LIBRARY
Age 3 -- 3,225,000; assume a 50 percent participation rate and
a cost per child of $2,500.
Cost = $4,031,250,000.
Age 4 - 3,577,000; assume a 50 percent participation rate and
a cost per child of $2,500.
Cost = $4,471,250,000.
Age 5 -- 3,493,000; assume a 50 percent participation rate and a
cost per child of $1,700.
Cost = $2,969,050,000.
continued on next page
-6-
Ages 6
through
12
-- 25,824,000; assume a 50 percent participation rate
and a cost per child of $900.
Cost = $11,620,800,000.
Ages 13
and
14
-- 8,434,000; assume a 30 percent participation rate and
a cost per child of $800.
Cost = $2,024,160,000.
High though this estimate may seem, the Library points out that the bill does not limit
eligibility for services and that the costs per child were mid-range estimates based on amounts
currently deemed necessary by experts for "adequate" or "good" child care.
Assuming that Carter would fully implement the program described in the platform, estimates
are made based on the Library of Congress figure for the high-range, the Child Welfare League
figure for the mid-range, and half the Child Welfare League figure for the low-range. It is also
assumed that the program will begin at a very modest level and then double each year to reach
full program levels by 1980.
FY
low
medium
high
(billions)
1977
$ .9
$ 1.75
$ 3.13
1978
1.8
3.55
6.27
1979
3,6
7.10
12.55
1980
7.1
14.20
25.10
Total
$13.4
$26.60
$47.05
11. EDUCATIONAL FINANCE EQUALIZATION
The Democrats indicate that they want to,
"guarantee that jurisdictions of differing financial capacity can spend equal
amounts on education With increased federal funds, it is possible to enhance
educational opportunity by eliminating spending disparities within state borders."
In Congress, several bills have been proposed by Democratic leaders to achieve this "equali-.
zation" of educational finances via infusions of federal funds.
H.R. 16 was introduced by Rep. Perkins, Democratic Chairman of the House Education and Labor
Committee. Under this proposal, Title I Basic Grants to States would be between $4.1 and $4.5
billion based on a 41.1 million school enrollment figure for the 1978-79 school year base figure.
Title II Equalization Grants would run between $21.1 and $23.3 billion. The range in both cases
depends on whether or not private school enrollment were compensated. The grand total for this
bill, therefore, would be between $26.2 and $27.8 billion by 1980.
H.R. 16 - Educational Finance Equalization
(billions)
Title I - basic grants
Title II equalization
Total
Grants
1977
public only
$4.33
$8.83
$13.16
public & private
4.77
9.74
$14.51
1978
public only
$4.30
$13.16
$17.46
public & private
4.74
14.49
$19.23
1979
public only
$4.23
$17.27
$21.50
public & private
4.66
19.00
$23.66
1980
public only
$4.16
$21.19
$25.35
public & private
4.57
23.31
$27.88
TOTAL
public only
$17.02
$60.45
$77.47
public & private
18.74
66.54
$85.28
This proposal presses the limits of what an unrestrained Democratic Congress prodded by a
Democratic President might seek for an educational finance program and therefore constitutes a
-7-
high-range estimate.
For a mid-range estimate, H.R. 10145, another Perkins bill, was used. This measure provides
for a federal grant to all States for each fiscal year equal to one-third of the aggregate current
expenditures in all States for the second fiscal year preceding such fiscal year which were de-
rived from State or local sources. The costs of this program will be approximately $16.6 billion
for Fiscal 1977, $18.1 billion for 1978, $20 billion for FY 1979 and $22 billion for FY 1980.
For a low-range estimate, assume that a program is enacted amounting to only one-sixth the
aggregate current expenditures, i.e. one-half the amounts specified in H.R. 10145.
12. TAX AID FOR THE EDUCATION OF ALL PUPILS
The Democratic Platform supports "a constitutionally acceptable method of providing tax aid
for the education of all pupils in non-segregated schools in order to insure parental freedom in
choosing the best education for their children."
Dozens of bills have been introduced in Congress on this subject. Assuming eligible private
school enrollment of between five and six million and an average tax benefit of $150 per year --
a threshhold amount necessary to have any meaningful impact on parents' ability to afford private
education - the revenue cost would be $900,000,000. A $200 tax benefit would mean a revenue
cost of $1.2 billion annually (high estimate) while a $100 tax benefit would reduce revenues by
$.6 billion (low estimate). For four-year estimates, it is assumed that enrollments will hold
steady, although were such a tax benefit to be enacted it might well have the effect of stimulat-
ing increased private school enrollments.
13. EXPANDED VOCATIONAL EDUCATION
The Democratic Platform favors expanding federal support in various areas of educational
need, including vocational education. It also commits itself to support of adult education
and training which will provide skills.
Jimmy Carter, testifying before the Democratic Platform Committee, elaborated by stating
that these programs should address the 2.5 million students leaving the educational system with-
out adequate vocational training and the 750,000 untrained youth entering the unemployment pool
annually. He recommended that comunity colleges and other existing programs be strengthened
and extended.
One reasonable estimate of what expanded federal support in these areas might entail would
be to look at the House and Senate-passed versions of new vocational education legislation.
The Senate version, S. 2657, authorized for Title II vocational education and Title V career
education programs of $1.091 billion for Fiscal 1978, $1.310 billion for FY 1979, and $1.525
billion for FY 1980.
The House version, H.R. 12835 authorized for vocational education $.780 billion for FY 1977,
$.973 billion for FY 1978, $1.134 billion for FY 1979, and $1.314 billion for FY 1980.
Current spending levels for Occupational, Vocational and Adult education are running some-
what over $600 million annually.
Using the House bill as the low estimate, the Senate bill as the high estimate and the
average of the two as the mid-range estimate yields the following:
FY
low
medium
high
(billions)
1977
$ .1
$ .2
$ .3
1978
.4
.45
.5
1979
.5
.6
.7
1980
,7
.8
.9
Total
$1.7
$2.05
$2.4
14. COST OF EDUCATION PAYMENTS TO HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS
The Democratic Platform calls for the federal government to "directly provide cost of educa-
tion payment to all higher education institutions. to help cover per-student costs which far ex-
ceed those covered by tuition and fees."
Such a program is presently authorized at $1 billion annually under the Higher Education Act,
Title IV - A - 5, Sec. 419 (including general assistance to graduate schools). Funds for this
-8-
program have never been appropriated, so any money for it would be in addition to present spend-
ing levels.
Using this already-enacted $1 billion program as a mid-range estimate, a low estimate might
be derived by calculating 75% funding while a high estimate might mean a 25% increase in the
program.
15. VOTER REGISTRATION BY MAIL
Both the Democratic Platform and Jimmy Carter, in testimony before the Platform Committee,
called for:
"passage of legislation providing for registration by mail in federal
elections to erase existing barriers to voter participation."
Democratic Members of the House of Representatives, responding to pressure from candidate
Carter, pushed through a watered down version of the "Voter Registration Act," H.R. 11552. The
Senate, favoring a more ambitious proposal, has not acted. Carter, in the meanwhile, subsequently
advocated "universal registration, a still more costly option.
Estimates for implementing a registration by mail program have been variously estimated at
$50 million to $500 million. Usually excluded from these estimates are the hidden expenses the
Postal Service will be forced to absorb for distribution of the registration forms to every ad-
dress in the United States.
Although federal elections are held every two years, the cost estimates for the registration
legislation are computed on an annualized basis. Using $50 million for a low estimate, $500
million for a high estimate and the mid-point of $225 million as a mid-range estimate and assuming
that increasing experience and efficiency in operating the program will cancel out inflation in-
creases during the first four years yields four-year estimates of $.2 billion, $.9 billion,
$2 billion.
16. INCREASING THE SOCIAL SERVICES PROGRAM TO KEEP PACE WITH INFLATION
The Democratic Platform states:
"In 1972, the ceiling for federal social service grants was frozen at $2.5 billion,
and subsequent inflation of 28 percent has reduced the effective federal aid to
existing programs. While there must certainly be a ceiling on such grants, it
should be raised to compensate for inflation and to encourage states and localities
to expand social services to low- and moderate-income families."
Compensating for the 28 percent inflation since 1972 will cost $700 billion annually, giving
a new social services base of $3.2 billion. Estimating FY 1977-80 costs depends on what inflation
rate is assumed. Using a 5 percent rate for a low estimate, a six percent rate for the middle
estimate, and a 7 percent rate for a high estimate yields the following additional costs over the
present ceiling ($2.74 billion in FY 1977, $2.5 billion thereafter):
FY
low
medium
high
(billions)
1977
$ .5
$ .6
$ .6
1978
1.0
1.1
1.2
1979
1.2
1.3
1.4
GERALD R. FORD LIBRARY
1980
1.4
1.5
1.7
Total
$4.1
$4.5
$4.9
Extending eligibility for social services to low- and moderate-income families would involve
an astronomically expensive restructuring of this welfare-oriented program, the cost of which is
impossible to calculate without further details.
17. LIBERALIZATION OF THE ALLOWABLE EARNING LIMITATION UNDER SOCIAL SECURITY
There is currently a limit of $2760 on the amount one may earn and still draw full social
security benefits. The Democratic Platform advocates "a liberalization of the allowable earnings
limitation under Social Security for older Americans who wish to continue working and living as
productive citizens."
Raising the present limit to $5000 would cost $1.8 billion in additional Social Security
benefit payouts. A $10,000 limit would add $4.6 billion; a $15,000 limit would add $5.8 billion
and any limit higher than $20,000 would cost from $6 to $7 billion.
-9-
Using $5000 as a low estimate, $10,000 as a mid-range estimate and $15,000 as a high
estimate and holding these figures constant (even though income security benefits for the aged
increased by 28.5 percent between 1975 and 1977 and can be expected to continue climbing sharply
during the next four years) yields four-year estimates of $7.2 billion, $18.4 billion and $23.2
billion respectively.
18. EXTEND VA EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE TWO YEARS
In previous wars, veterans received eight years of educational benefits. Thus far, Vietnam
veterans have received 10 years of benefits, and Carter proposes to extend educational assistance
two years for those veterans already enrolled and drawing benefits in VA-approved educational
and training programs.
According to the Veterans Administration, provision of a two-year extension to veterans who
were enrolled in education programs under the G.I. bill during the Spring semester of 1976 and
whose educational benefits expired on May 31, 1976 would cost $610 million in FY 1977 and $356.5
million in FY 1978.
19. INCREASE REVENUE SHARING TO COMPENSATE FOR INFLATION
An increase in the annual funding of the general revenue sharing program to compensate for
the erosion of inflation is called for by the Democratic Platform.
Using a five percent rate for a low estimate, a six percent rate for a middle estimate and
a seven percent rate for a high estimate gives the following increases in the present $6.65
billion revenue sharing program:
FY
low
medium
high
(billions)
1977
$ .3
$ .4
$ .5
1978
.7
.8
1.0
1979
1.0
1.3
1.5
1980
1.4
1.7
2.0
Total
$3.4
$4.2
$5.0
20. CHANGE REVENUE SHARING FORMULA
Without greater specificity, it is impossible to cost out the impact of a broadly-based
comunity needs formula which conceivably could include poverty, condition of housing stock,
percentage of dependent population or other variables. However, H.R. 10319, a measure introduced
by Rep. Fascell and proposed as an amendment during the 1976 revenue sharing debate, provided a
needs-based formula using only poverty level data. A computer simulation of the impact of this
formula showed that the additional cost could be $630 million annually, or a four-year total of
$2.52 billion.
Adjusting the formula to measure tax effort could be done in a variety of ways. Assuming
that the principal concern is to expand the definition of tax effort to include other non-tax
sources of revenue such as water, sewage and sanitation charges, however, yields an annual $270
million figure for a four-year total of $1.08 billion.
-10-
Using these estimates as a mid-range figure, 75% of that amount as the low estimate and
125% as the high estimate yields the following:
FY
low
medium
high
(billions)
1977
$ .675
$ .9
$1.125
1978
.675
.9
1.125
1979
.675
.9
1.125
1980
.675
.9
1.125
Total
$2.7
$3.6
$4.5
21. SUBSIDIES AND LOANS FOR LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING CONSTRUCTION
The Democratic Platform takes the Republicans to task for losing the "vision of the House
Act of 1968 the result of three decades of enlightened Democratic housing policy. reasserts these
goals and pledges to achieve them." This Act, typical of the extravagant promises and false ex-
pectations of the 1960's, promised 2.6 million units a year. Achieving this would involve subsi-
dizing probably 1 million units substantially or even building them directly. Assuming $25,000
per unit, the cost would be $25 billion annually for direct construction. Reinstituting the ori-
ginal Section 235 and 236 programs with a 1 percent interest rate for 40 years would involve obli-
gations of $72 billion.
Such goals are obviously impossibly high, and the Democratic Platform and Carter's testimony
to the Platform Committee pledge support for direct federal subsidies and low interest loans to
encourage the construction of low- and moderate-income housing.
Fiscal Year 1977 outlays for housing subsidies to stimulate low- and moderate-income housing
under Section 8, interest subsidies, Section 235 and 236 amount to $3 billion.
Assuming the Democrats mean to double this figure, an assumption well in keeping with legis-
lative proposals by Democratic Congressional leaders, would mean another $3 billion annually for
a four-year total of $12 billion.
The Congressional Budget Office March 15, 1976 report on Budget Options indicates that ex-
panding production of subsidized housing for lower-income households through emphasis on Section
8 and assisting roughly 5.2 million households would require additional outlavs of $1.7 billion
in Fiscal 1977, $1.2 billion in Fiscal 1978, $2.5 billion in Fiscal 1979 and $5.5 billion in Fis-
cal 1980, for a four-year total additional outlays of $10.9 billion.
Using a 50% increase in existing outlays as a low estimate, the CBO option as a middle esti-
mate and a doubling of existing outlays as a high option yields the following:
FY
low
medium
high
(billions)
1977
$1.5
$1.7
$3.0
1978
1.5
1.2
3.0
1979
1.5
2.5
3.0
1980
1.5
5.5
3.0
Total
$6.0
$10.9
$12.0
22. HOUSING SUBSIDIES FOR THE ELDERLY
Both Carter and the Democratic Platform call for expansion of the highly successful programs
of direct federal subsidies to provide housing for the elderly. Fiscal year 1977 outlays for this
program are approximately $200 million. "Expansion" is assumed to mean a 50 percent increase, a
doubling or a 150 percent increase for purposes of arriving at low, medium and high estimates.
This would require $.1, $.2 or $.3 billion respectively for one-year and $.4, $.8 or $1.2 billion
for four-years.
23. STEADY FLOW OF HOUSING CREDIT
Carter's testimony before the Democratic Platform Committee called for "providing a steady
source of credit at low interest rates to stabilize the housing industry." This proposal was in-
cluded in the Democratic Platform.
The major program that Democrats in Congress have pushed in the past and are likely to press
in the future in the mortgage credit area is GNMA. An additional $5 billion has been authorized
in the Emergency Housing Act of 1976. $2 billion of this $5 billion has been appropriated for
use by HUD during Fiscal 1977. Assuming all $5 billion would be appropriated and utilized during
a Carter Administration, and assuming further an outlay level equal to 10 percent of total obli-
-11-
gational authority results in an estimate of $.125 billion per year or $.5 billion over four years.
Spending only half this amount could be assumed for a low estimate, while additional legislation
to spend 50% more would yield a high estimate.
24. UPGRADING SECONDARY ROADS AND BRIDGES
The Transportation plank of the Democratic Platform offers commitment to dealing with trans-
portation needs of rural America by upgrading secondary roads and bridges and by completion of
the original plan of 1956 for the interstate highway system where it benefits rural Americans.
The most recent (1972) National Highway Needs Study estimates that some $36.8 billion of
backlog and new needs would accrue by 1980, and $38.4 billion by 1990, in terms of 1969 dollars,
or $51.7 and $53.9 billion in terms of current dollars. Undertaking this upgrading in a four-
year program is not feasible because state and local matching funds would not be available, feder-
al regulations preclude expeditious programming of capital improvements, the construction industry
could not respond to this magnitude of demand so quickly nor could state and local highway agen-
cies. Therefore, apportioning the upgrading goal out through 1990, assuming that no increase at
all could occur in 1977, a realistic attempt to upgrade secondary roads and bridges would involve
at a low range $1 billion annually between FY 1978-80 for a FY 1980 expenditure increase of $.8
billion and a cumulative FY 1978-80 expenditure increase of $1.630 billion. At a mid-range of
$2 billion annually from FY 1978-80, the FY 1980 expenditure increase would be $1.614 billion for
a cumulative impact of $3.26 billion. At a high-range $3 billion FY 1978-80 level, the FY 1980
expenditure increase would be $2.42 billion and the cumulative impact would be $4.9 billion.
25. FULL FUNDING OF THE RURAL DEVELOPMENT ACT
The Democratic Platform "pledges to strengthen the economy and thereby create jobs in our
agricultural and rural areas by the full implementation and funding of the Rural Development Act
of 1972."
Under existing policy, Federal expenditures for the Act are expected to be $.29 billion in
FY 1977, $.34 billion in FY 1978, $.48 billion in FY 1979 and $.67 billion in FY 1980.
The Library of Congress examined the 14 programs contained in the Rural Development Act and
estimated that probable maximum levels of program participation and demand would increase costs
between $.64 billion and $.82 billion during those years. Using this as a high estimate, 75%
of this figure for a mid-range estimate and half the maximum for a low-range estimate yields the
following additional expenditures:
FY
low
medium
high
(billions)
1977
$ .32
$ .48
$ .64
1978
.35
.53
.70
1979
.38
.56
.76
1980
.41
.61
.82
Total
$1.46
$2.18
$2.92
26. INCREASED FEDERAL FUNDING FOR ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
The Democratic Platform recommends "that the federal government promptly expand whatever
funds are required to develop a new system of energy support an active federal role in research
and development of clean burning and commercially competitive coal burning systems and technolo-
gies, (and undertake) major federal initiatives, including major governmental participation in
early high-risk development projects to harness renewable resources like solar, wind, geother-
mal, the oceans, and other new technologies such as fusion, fuel cell and the conservation of
solid waste and starches into energy."
The Congressional Budget Office, in its July 15, 1976 Background paper No. 10 on Energy
Research: Alternative Strategies indicates that a full funding strategy would add to the Presi-
dent's base program completion strategy all of the demonstration projects identified in ERDA's
national plan in all program areas. This would be a high option estimate for the ambitious energy
research and development program described in the Democratic Platform.
A mid-range option would be a strategy downplaying the fission programs but emphasizing all
other long-term technologies. A low-range option would be a strategy emphasizing near- and mid-
term technologies and deferring all major long-term technology demonstration projects not already
underway.
-12-
In terms of budget outlays, the costs of these options over the program completion costs
of $2.7 billion in FY 1977, $3.2 billion in FY 1978, $3.6 billion in FY 1979 and $3.8 billion in
FY 1980 would be:
FY
low
medium
high
(billions)
1977
:
--
--
1978
$ .1
$ .1
$ .1
1979
.15
.2
.6
1980
.6
1.3
1.6
Total
$ .85
$1.6
$2.3
27. FARM PRICE SUPPORT AND PARITY PROGRAM
The Democratic Platform states that,
"Without parity income assurance to farmers, full production cannot be
achieved in an uncertain economy. We must assure parity returns to farmers
based on costs of production plus a reasonable profit."
Carter expressed the same concern in his testimony to the Democratic Platform Committee.
This Language would seem to support the view that a Carter Administration would reinstitute
the farm price support policies and acre limitations of the 1950's and 1960's. These old farm
policies were largely abolished by the 1973 Agricultural and Consumer Protection Act. A return
to these discarded policies would cost the U.S. more than $4 billion a year by 1980 according to
estimates of agricultural economists at the Brookings Institution and the U.S. Department of
Agriculture.
Allowing for inflation, storage costs and crop size, estimates for additional costs of a
price support program are:
FY
low
medium
high
(billions)
1977
3.8
4.0
$ 4.2
1978
4.0
4.3
4.8
1979
4.2
4.6
5.4
1980
4.4
4.9
6.2
Total
$16.4
$17.8
$20.6
28. DOMESTIC DEVELOPMENT BANK
29. YOUTH PARTICIPATION IN PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT PROGRAMS
30. ESTABLISH SPECIAL MEANS FOR TRAINING AND LOCATING JOBS FOR DIFFICULT TO EMPLOY PEOPLE
IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR AND TO EXTENT NECESSARY IN PUBLIC SECTOR
31. ADEQUATE FUNDING FOR A GREATLY IMPROVED GOVERNMENT-WIDE SYSTEM FOR DELIVERY OF EQUAL JOB
& PROMOTION OPPORTUNITIES
32. DIRECT GOVERNMENT LOANS FOR SMALL BUSINESS, ESPECIALLY MINORITY OWNED
33. "INDEXATION OF MINIMM WAGE (would affect some government employees).
34. RAISE PAY STANDARDS FOR OVERTIME (would affect some government employees)
35. EXTEND UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE TO COVER ALL WAGE AND SALARY WORKERS
36. FULL ENFORCEMENT OF OSHA, COMPREHENSIVE MINE SAFETY ACT AND BLACK LUNG COMPENSATION
37. INDEPENDENT CONSUMER AGENCY
38. INCENTIVES TO REWARD EFFICIENCY & INNOVATION, ASSURE NONDISCRIMINATION AND AFFIRMATIVE
ACTION IN CIVIL SERVICE
39. PARTIAL PUBLIC FINANCING FOR CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATES ON MATCHING BASIS
40. OFFICE OF CITIZEN ADVOCACY IN EXECUTIVE BRANCH
41. FULL FUNDING FOR NEIGHBORHOOD LEGAL SERVICES FOR THE POOR
42. GOVERNMENT SUPPORTED SYSTEMS FOR DEVELOPING OBJECTIVE PRODUCT PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
-13-
43. INCREASED FEDERAL AID TO GOVERNMENT LABORATORIES AND PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS TO SEEK THE CURE
TO HEART DISEASE, CANCER, SICKLE CELL ANEMIA, PARALYSIS FROM SPINAL CORD INJURY, DRUG
ADDICTION AND OTHER INFLICTIONS (sic)
44. INCREASING THE NUMBER OF DOCTORS AND PARAMEDICAL PERSONNEL IN THE PRIMARY HEALTH FIELD
45. VIGOROUS FEDERAL PROGRAMS AND POLICIES OF COMPENSATORY OPPORTUNITY AND FULL FUNDING OF
CIVIL RIGHTS PROGRAMS
46. EXPAND FEDERAL SUPPORT FOR BILINGUAL EDUCATION
47. FEDERAL AID TO IMPLEMENT DESEGREGATION THROUGH MATCHING FUNDS, INCENTIVE GRANTS AND OTHER
MECHANISMS
48. INCREASED FEDERAL INVESTMENT IN GRADUATE EDUCATION
49. FULL FUNDING OF LIBRARY PROGRAMS
50. ADEQUATE FUNDING AND IMPROVED MANAGEMENT AND HEALTH CARE IN VA HEALTH CARE PROGRAM
51. REDUCING HEALTH COSTS PAID BY SENIOR CITIZENS UNDER THE PRESENT SYSTEM
52. EXTEND MEDICARE TO AMERICANS ABROAD WHO ARE ELIGIBLE FOR SOCIAL SECURITY
53. FUNDING FOR THE GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS AND HUMANITIES
54. SPECIAL ANTI-RECESSION EMPLOYMENT PROGRAMS FOR ARTISTS
55. INCREASED EMPHASIS ON REHABILITATION OF EXISTING HOUSING TO REBUILD OUR NEIGHBORHOODS
56. INCREASE LOANS AND SUBSIDIES FOR HOUSING AND REHABILITATION ESPECIALLY IN POVERTY-STRICKEN
AREAS
57. MASSIVE EFFORT TO HELP MAJOR OLDER CITIES IN THEIR UNPRECEDENTED FISCAL CRISES
58. FUNDING AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE JUVENTLE JUSTICE AND DELIQUENCY PREVENTION ACT OF 1974
59. EXTEND FEDERAL DEATH BENEFITS TO POLICE KILLED IN THE LINE OF DUTY
60. INCREASED FEDERAL OPERATING SUBSIDIES FOR MASS TRANSIT IN URBAN AND RURAL AREAS
61. PROGRAM OF NATIONAL RAIL AND ROAD REHABILITATION AND IMPROVED MASS TRANSIT TO PUT THOUSANDS
OF UNEMPLOYED CONSTRUCTION WORKERS BACK TO WORK
62. DEVELOP PROGRAMS TO MAKE THE FAMILY FARM ECONOMICALLY HEALTHY AGAIN
63. INSURE AND GUARANTEE LOANS FOR ELECTRIFICATION AND TELEPHONE FACILITIES FOR RURAL AMERICANS
64. INSURE THE EXISTENCE OF ADEQUATE FACILITIES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES SUCH AS WATER SUPPLY AND
SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS, DECENT HOUSING AND NEEDED TRANSPORT
65. NEW FEDERAL INCENTIVES FOR AIDING INDIVIDUAL HOME OWNERS IN UNDERTAKING ENERGY CONSERVATION
INVESTMENTS
66. STRIP MINING REGULATION
67. REVITALIZE BASIC CREDIT PROGRAMS FOR FARMERS
68. PROVIDE ADEQUATE CREDIT TAILORED TO THE NEEDS OF YOUNG FARMERS
69. REINSTATE SOIL CONSERVATION PROGRAMS
70. FEDERAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS TO FARM WORKERS FOR HOUSING, EMPLOYMENT, HEALTH CARE, SOCIAL
SERVICES, AND EDUCATION
71. SUBSTANTIAL INCREASES IN FUNDING FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
72. FEDERAL ASSISTANCE IN PROMOTING GREATER DEVELOPING COUNTRY CAPTTAL MARKETS
73. SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE MULTI-NATIONAL WORLD FOOD RESERVE SYSTEM
74. INCREASE BILATERAL AND MULTILATERAL ASSISTANCE TO AFRICA
Sit
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
MEMORANDUM FOR DICK CHENEY
FROM JIM REICHLEY
Attached is documentation for the memo
on Carter that you gave me some time ago.
The documentation has been supplied
by the RNC.
Dived
wal
JUL 1 1978
LIBRARY GERALD R. FORD
Point 1.) There is the Carter, who has Paul Warnke as a national security ad-
visor and will cut $7 billion from the defense budget and there is the Carter,
who has Paul Nitze as his advisor and will add $30 billion to the defense
budget.
Columnists Rowland Evans and Robert Novak relate that erstwhile
speechwriter Robert Shrum was troubled bv Carter's rejection of
a "massively reduced defense ." Washington Post, May 13, 1976.
In his memorandum recounting his days as a Carter speechwriter
Shrum quotes an aide as saying that "the three men Carter most
trusts on foreign aid and defense policy "are Columbia University
professor Zbigniew Brzezinski, Admiral Hyman Rickover, and Paul
Nitze, former assistant Defense Secretary. New Times, June 11, 1976.
Shrum relates that Carter rejected a Brzezinski naper because of
advice by Nitze. Evans and Novak point out, however, that "both
Brzezinski and Nitze want Carter to preserve his options in pre-
paration for virtually inevitable higher military spending - advice
accepted by Carter, according to Shrum's disclosures. Washington
Post, May 13, 1976
Evans and Novak note with interest that Shrum discloses that Carter
is reconsidering his opposition on the B-1 Bomber, making Carter
the only Democrat candidate with the exception of Sen. Henry Jack-
son to consider the issue favorably. Washington Post, May 13, 1976.
Carter has stated repeatedly his position favoring a cut in the mili-
tary budget. Shrum points out that Carter has not indentified the
base figure for the cut, meaning that he could fulfill this promise
while permitting spending to rise. In addition to vagueness, Shrum
relates a reluctance on the part of Carter to speak on the issue,
quoting him as saying "I don't want to tie my hands as president
Anyway, there's no political advantage in the issue." New Times,
June 11, 1976
Point 2.) The Carter who spoke in Wisconsin in favor of repealing the right to
work laws; the Carter who said in Georgia before a group of financial supporters
a week later that he does not support repeal of the right to work laws.
In an article in the April 14, 1976 Atlanta Constitution written by
Jim Merriner, Carter is said to have stated in Waukesha, Wisconsin,
" I think the 14-B should be repealed = In that same article,
however, Merriner reports that Carter said during a meeting of his
Atlanta Executive Finance Committee in Atlanta that he had not advo-
cated repeal of the 14-B. This was two weeks after his statement
in Wisconsin.
Point 3.) The Carter who has built his campaign on a claim that he has streamlined
the State Government in Georgia; the Carter, who presided over a state administration
that increased it employees by 20% and increased state spending by 50%.
It is a given fact that Carter has repeatedly attacked the federal
bureaucracy as "wasteful," and entirely too large. But, as is
Page 2
alledged and according to Dick Pettys in a February 16, 1976,
article in the Atlanta Constitution, in Carter's own "stream-
lined" Georgia government, state employment "rose under Carter from
34,322 to 42,400, an increase of 24 percent."
Also, "the state budget increased from $1.057 billion in fiscal
1971 to $1.675 billion, an increase of 58.5 percent.
Point 4.) The Carter who would simplify income tax forms and eliminate deductions
including interest on mortgage payments; the Carter, who denies his plan to elimi-
nate interest deductions.
On Monday, February 23, 1976, when asked by a member of the audience
in Boston's League of Women Voters forum whether his tax reforms
would include elimination of this tax break for homeowners, Carter
said it "would be among those that I would like to do away with."
The article found in the February 26, 1976 Boston Globe begins by
stating that opposition among leading Democrats was very vocal con-
cerning Carter's plans "to eliminate the income tax deduction for
home mortgage interest payments.'
Yet, in the May 3, 1976, edition of Business Week, when asked if he
was "against the homeowner's mortgage interest deduction," Carter
answered, "No. I have said that this is one of the tax incentives
I would consider changing, But I believe we do need some incentives
for private home ownership."
Point 5.) The Carter, who ridiculed Lester Maddox in New Hampshire; the Carter,
who praised him in 1970. :
In an article in the October 27, 1970, Atlanta Constitution, there
is the following statement:
= In Columbus (Ga.), while Maddox beamed from the first row, Carter
described the Governor (Maddox) as representing 'The essence of the
Democratic Party. he has compassion for the ordinary man. I am
proud to be on the ticket with him.
However, after Maddox vigorously campaigned against Carter in New
Hampshire this year, this statement is found:
" Carter admits he was shaken by the ferocity of the attacks on him,
but he says he tried to deal with them in the usual way. I I had
four years of this with Maddox as lieutenant governor so I told
,lody (Powell, his press secretary) to just treat it like it was Lester.
Also, in the February 21, 1976, New York Times Carter said that the
New Hampshire voters had "too much judgement to pay any attention
to what Lester Maddox says."
Maddox called Carter a liar and a fraud. Carter responded with -
" Lester Maddox has a press conference every week or so and calls
me a liar, or a thief, or an atheist or a Communist or a Socialist
or a dictator, and I never had any inclination to respond."
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
Page 3
Point 6.) The Carter who pledged to "end once and for all the threat Wallace
represents to our country;" the Carter, who promised in 1970 to invite Wallace
to Georgia to address the state legislature and is on-the-record a number of
times praising him.
The entire question of the Carter-Wallace relationship is
enigmatic, especially after the venomous attacks each had for the
other in the North Carolina primary and then the ensuing Wallace
endorsement of Carter.
When Sanders was Governor of Georgia, he would not allow Wallace
into the state assembly to speak because he felt Wallace to be a
racist and segregationist. Sanders is a staunch Southern liberal.
In the February 25, 1972 Atlanta Constitution, there is a report of
Wallace's speech to the Georgia Assembly upon Carter's invitation
and subsequent introduction of Wallace to the Assembly.
On June 18, 1972, Carter was reported to have been in Red Level,
Alabama at a "Wallace Appreciation Day" wearing a "Wallace in '72"
button.
In the August 4, 1972 Birmingham News, Carter endorsed Wallace as the
figurehead needed to build a Southern movement to seperate state
elections and national tickets.
Also, in a letter reprinted in the controversial article by Stephen
Brill in the March Harper's, Carter says to a disgruntled Wallace
supporter concerning Carter's nominating speech for Henry Jackson
at the Democratic Convention of 1972, " I have never had anything
but the highest praise for Governor Wallace." The letter is dated
August 4, 1972.
There is other evidence that Carter actually backed Wallace for
both the President and Vice-President spot on the 1972 ticket,
On the other hand, in the Southern showdown between Carter and
Wallace in North Carolina, Carter said, "Governor Wallace has for
a time unfortunately been a spokesman for the South. The South has
changed and I think for the better." Washington Star, March 19, 1976.
And then again, II I'm not running against Wallace; I'm running against
what he stands for." Los Angeles Times, March 22, 1976.
Point 7.) The Carter, who promised to support Wallace in 1972, if he would not
offer a slate of delegates in Georgia; the Carter who made the nominating speech
for Scoop Jackson in Miami after Wallace lived up to his end of the bargain.
That Carter gave the nominating sneech for Jackson is political
history, but the contention that Carter promised a conditional
endorsement of Wallace, can only be substantiated by Wallace's
charges in this year's North Carolina primary which should be
taken with this political fact in mind.
Page 4
In the March 18, 1976 Christian Science Monitor, Wallace presents
his attack on Carter's credibility. It should be noted that Wallace
in fact did not enter the Georgia caucus in 1972.
Point 8.) The Carter who claimed, after he was castigated by Wallace supporters
for backing Jackson, that he was carrying out a wish of the late Senator Russell;
the reality that anyone who knew Dick Russell knows that he would never have made
such a request.
The documentation for Carter's insistence that it was with
respect to a dying Russell that Carter nominate Jackson is
found in the August 14, 1972 letter re-printed in Harper's
March, 1976. The allegation that Dick Russell would never
have made such a request can not be documented by us.
Point 9.) There is the Carter, who said "Other than my father, Senator Russell
made the greatest impact on my life. I never made a political decision without
consulting him. He kind of adopted me 19 years ago.' There is the real Carter
who never had a particularly close relationship with Dick Russell.
It is known that Carter was the only man ever publicly endorsed by
Senator Russell.
In addition, Russell was instrumental in Carter's career in
several ways. First, Russell helped secure Carter's discharge
form the Navy unon the death of his father. Second, Russell met
with and advised Carter frequently on running a campaign. Third,
Russell during his last illness would summon Carter to visit him
when Carter was in Washington to keep him abreast of the "goings-
on" in Georgia. Fourth, Russell gave Carter lists of long-time
supporters in Georgia for Carter to contact. Bill Shipp, "Carter
Career Owes Everything to Russell," Atlanta Constitution, January
23, 1971.
According to a newspaper account of the incident, Carter delivered
a eulogy to Russell in which he said," Other than my father, Sen.
Russell made the greatest impact on my life. I never made a politi-
cal decision without consulting him. He kind of adopted me 19
years ago.
There has not been any data found as to the validity of the statement
"There is the real Carter who never had a particularly close
relationship with Dick Russell.
Point 10.) There is the Carter, who looked Bob Strauss in the eye and said he
had no problem with him continuing as Chairman through November; the Carter who,
according to his former speechwriter, talked of canning Strauss.
Carter advisor Charles Kirbo reportedly told Strauss that there was
no problem in him continuing as party chairman. This was echoed
by Carter in Washington April 3, when asked by Strauss himself.
Rowland Evans and Robert Novak, "Carter and Strauss," Washington Post,
May 11, 1976.
Page 5
Carter also allowed word to seep out following his victory
in the Pennsy primary that Strauss would be retained
through the November election. (Evans and Novak)
Evans and Novak quote Robert Shrum as saying that Carter talked
of removing Strauss in Pittshurgh on April 25. Carter reportedly
said: "If we can't remove Strauss I'll be a pretty pathetic nominee."
A Carter aide reportedly telephoned Strauss and explained that
Carter had meant that "a nominee who could not (name a new chair-
man) would be 'pretty pathetic!
Point 11.) The Carter, who asked Julian Bond to intercede with McGovern in behalf
of him becoming McGovern's running mate; the Carter who denied Bond's claim; and
the Carter who later acknowledged it.
It is known that Julian Bond interceded with McGovern in an
effort to have Carter named as the replacement to Sen. Thomas
Eagleton on the ticket. David Nordan, Atlanta Journal, August
3, 1972.
Bond claimed in March that his lobbying with McGovern had been
done at Carter's request, a claim which was denied by Carter
Press secretary Jodv Powell. Jim Merriner, Atlanta Constitution,
March 29, 1976.
Merriner quotes McGovern press secretary Alan Baron as saying:
" Julian said he was doing this at Carter's request!" Baron was
quoting Sen. McGovern.
In a different account of this incident, Baron is quoted as
saying that Bond was one of 'several Southerners' who went to
McGovern headquarters in Miami Beach "and said they had been asked to
come by Governor Carter." New York Times, March 31, 1976
Carter has subsequentially acknowledged that he approached Rep.
Andrew Young and Coretta King about lobbying for him as`à 1972
vice-presidential candidate. Washington Post, April 4, 1976.
There has been no information found as to any acknowledgement by
Carter that Bond's claim is accurate.
Point 12.) The Carter, who pledged his support to Reuben Askew to be Chairman
of the Southern Governor's Conference; the Carter who went back on his pledge.
It is known that in 1973 Askew "was -led to believe that Carter
supported his candidacy for chairman of the Southern Governor's
Conference. Bill Peterson, Washington Post, February 25, 1976.
Maryland Governor Marvin Mandel was chairman of the conference
nominating committee that year and 11 was led to believe that
Carter supported Florida Gov. Reuben Askew for the conference
chairman post.' Michael Kiernan, Washington Star, May 14, 1976
Page 6
At the conference, Carter supported Texas Gov. Dolph Briscoe for the
post. This position was surprising because Carter was the only
governor whose position on the Askew-Briscoe confrontation was
not predictable on the basis of previous image and ideology. David
Nordan, Atlanta Journal, September 23, 1973.
A contemporary observer explained Carter's support of Briscoe in
light of his close relationship with Robert Strauss and his desire to
establish a more conservative image for himself. David Nordan,
Atlanta Journal, Septmeber 23, 1973
When asked about his vote, Carter stated that his position had "nothing
to do with liberal VS. conservative or old VS1 new or anything of
that nature!" Writer David Nordan continues that "Carter said he
was backing Briscoe because the Texan was the first to get into the
contest and asked Carter's support some time ago." The Atlanta Journal,
September 25, 1973
Carter remains unpopular with many governors, especially those involved
in the Askew situation. Said one source, I don't think Askew has ever
forgiven Carter. I know Marvin still remembers." Michael Kiernan,
Washington Star, May 14, 1976
It is felt that Carter is unpopular with among those governors with
whom he worked closely primarily because of "deep-rooted resentment
about Carter's actions at governors' conferences is the conviction
"that he frequently misled governors about his intentions at several
points.'
Point 14.) The Carter, who told a reporter falsely that Senator Russell promised
to vote for him in 1970; the Carter who called Senator Russell to apologize and
claim he never said it; the Carter, who told the reporter that he said it, but
it was off-the-record.
SEE ATTACHED COPIES
Point 15.) The Carter, who said he opposed Richard Nixon since he lived in California
in 1950; the Carter who profusely praised John Mitchell for his law and order
campaign at a dinner in Atlanta in 1971.
Carter was quoted in an April 1974 issue of People magazine as being
"a Nixon hater from way back," a quote which Carter labelled as inaccurate
in a telephone interview carried by United Press International. Atlanta
Journal, April 15, 1974
Carter's office released a statement for the press in which Carter
stated that he had nothing personal against then President Nixon,
saying that "my off-hand personal comments about Mr. Nixon came
during a general conversation, which. I incorrectly assumed was not
for publication. They were intended to indicate a continuing political
opposition to Mr. Nixon ever since 1950, when I was a resident of Cali-
fornia and witnessed his first campaign for the United States Senate,
and a belief that no previous President has ever been personally dis-
Page 7
honest, even during the Grant and Harding Administrations."
Mike Wazlavek, Atlanta Constitution, April 15, 1974
Re: the contention that Carter praised John Mitchell at a dinner in Atlanta in 1971.
Nothing has been found to substantiate this.
Point 16.) The Carter, who talks of a need for honesty in government; the Carter,
who met with Secretary Butz in behalf of the peanut industry in 1973.
On April 5, 1973 the Department of Agriculture announced changes in the
peanut price support system. Carter was highly critical of these,
contending that this move could cost as much as $50 per ton. Atlanta
Journal, April 6, 1973
At'a press conference on November 1, 1973, Carter announced that during
an upcoming trip to Washington, he would be meeting with Agriculture
Secretary Butz, saying that cutbacks in peanut subsidies and exports then
being recommended by Butz would have a "catastrophic effect upon Georgia's
farm economy and thus on the economic prosperity of the entire state.
Atlanta Journal, November 2, 1973.
It must be remembered that Georgia is the nation's largest peanut
producing state (producing about 40% of the nations' peanuts) and
that peanuts are the leading cash crop in Georgia. Atlanta Journal,
April 6, 1973
Point 17.) The Carter, who talks of love; the Carter who sent a message recently to
the Mayor of Atlanta to "kiss my
11
Carter's entire campaign rhetoric has been infused with "the politics
of laughter, 'joy', campassion," etc. June 14, 1976, however, in the
Shrum article in the New Times, Carter reportedly told Jackson to
"kiss my ass =
Also, when he heard of Kennedy's comments about his "intentional
imprecision , "Carter said that Kennedy ,too ,could kiss his ass.
Point 18.) The non-politician Carter, who is running against all the Washington
politicians; the Carter, who has been a full time candidate for public office for
six of the last ten years and in the Governor's office the other four, where he
spent considerable time on politics.
Carter has always insisted on his independence from Washington, etc
Yet when faced with the political realities after the primaries, Carter said
in the L.A. Times May 22, 1976, that he might have to engage in "horse-
trading" for delegates in the convention.
BERALD FORD LIBRARY
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
TO : Mike Duval
FROM: DAVE GERGEN
FYI
FORD LIBRARY & GERALD
Junes
Dural
Charrock
THE WHITE HOUSE
FYI
WASHINGTON
Df 7/26
July 15, 1976
MEMORANDUM FOR:
DAVE GERGEN
FROM:
BOB MEAD An
SUBJECT:
JIMMY CARTER
Allow me to share with you some thoughts and perceptions I
had last evening watching the Democratic nominating speeches
for Governor Carter. (No charge for this.) This contribution,
along with David Broder's excellent article, "Carter Enigma
is Real," may in some small way help President Ford in his
approach for a November victory. (I'm sure there are experts
in this already, but my interpretation might add a little.)
I realized during the nominating speeches that an air of the
Gospel was flowing from my television set. Speeches were more
like testimonials or confessionals. Phrases used i.e. "when
you come to know him the way I do" (used by Jesus' disciples)
and he can lay that burden down. (in obvious reference
to the plight of racism) are typical of how the campaign has
been going. They were falling short of equating him with God.
It is very effective on television, and several scenes reminded
me of Madison Square Garden when Hitler appeared in the late
30's. There was mass control and mass psychology (exactly what
the Germans did); people were caught up in the mystique of it
all. (Present day maharajas do this also.)
The bottom line, I suppose, is that you must be very careful in
the way you will deal with Carter, in speeches and attitudes.
You cannot defy him, or say anything bad about him. (Thus you
challenge the world of Christianity.)
On television the nominee caresses, soothes, croons, if you will,
to put the people at ease. That soft, even-toned voice relaxes
people, and they are receptive. He uses an old trick of lowering
his voice to make you want to lean forward to hear him. (If you
ever have lunch with Eric Sevaried, sit next to him as he uses
this technique.) Carter also pauses long enough for his lis-
teners to shout for more of that "wisdom."
Carter uses this religious atmosphere to his advantage. Karl
Marx called religion the opiate of the masses. When you're down
and out (Carter on how the country's going), when you need a fix,
to get a shot to get your mind off your troubles, you look for
something soothing. (Has he not been telling us he understands
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
our problems?)
The Governor comes across, also, as if he is in charge, no one
else. There is an air of confidence about him on television
which goes along with that soothing voice. "I am nothing but
a peanut farmer..." (Jesus was a carpenter.)
When you start saying that Carter is not specific, particularly
on issues, remember that Jesus was not specific. He said,
" only follow me, I will show thee the way He never said
how he would do it or what he would do. Jesus only said, "
you must believe." Never did he explain how or why.
Like Jesus, Carter to a lot of people is a symbol of what you
believe you are Your faith lifts you up you have faith in
yourself. You do the work, Carter doesn't He is trying to
give an incentive to lead a good life to prevent that judgment
day. (No one ever commits suicide who sees hope, and Carter is
offering out that hope.)
There are lessons to be learned from his style and manner. Per-
haps now politicians will refrain from shouting campaign oratory
and let others whip up a frenzied audience instead. But attacks
on him will be dangerous. You must now think of a way to "out-
Herod Herod."
FORD is LIBRARY GERALD
DEX TO VAIL
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
August 22, 1976
MEMORANDUM FOR:
FOSTER CHANOCK
MIKE DUVAL
JERRY JONES
FROM:
DAVE GERGEN
SUBJECT:
Carter Campaign Plans
Both CBS and NBC reported tonight that Carter has now
pinpointed his "battleground states" -- i.e., those states
where he will be concentrating because he thinks that's
where the battle will be won or lost. The nets agreed
that the list included:
California
Illinois
Indiana
Massachusetts
Michigan
New Jersey
New York
Ohio
CBS said it also included Texas and Florida; NBC didn't
mention them.
CBS said that he had also selected his main "target groups":
blacks, hispanics, Jews, and Catholics.
As you know, he already assumes he has the South locked
up and he said after Kansas City that he thought Ford was
"forfeiting" the South.
FORD & LIBRARY 071830
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Mike,
This might be useful to you
in connection with the Debates.
Apparently Carter may be
trying to strengthen his
position on the Defense budget
issue. I have sent a copy
to Allan Woods for his comments.
Jim Connor
9/7
FORD LIBRARY & GERALD
September 7, 1976
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
Sile
FROM:
MAX L. FRIEDERSDORF
m.f.
SUBJECT:
Jimmy Carter
Last week about 50 top executives from leading defense
contractors were summoned to Atlanta for a meeting with
Eizenstate, Carter's top issues staffer (a list of those
attending is attached).
George Troutman and Harry Levine, of General Electric,
visited my office following the Atlanta meeting to give
me a report.
The meeting in Atlanta was very cool, with little if any
rapport established.
Levine gave me the attached report which contains some
exceedingly interesting material pertaining to Carter and
his continuing fuzziness on the issues.
Levine said that the corporation executives challenged
Eizenstat on many of his questions, and it was not clear
whether Carter organized the meeting to (1) get campaign
ideas; (2) establish a better relationship with the industry;
(3) lay the groundwork to say he had met with industry
representatives to seek cost saving suggestions.
FORD LIBRARY & CERALD
The following questions were presented by Eizenstat, who has Carter's
issues effort:
1.
It appears from statistics available that only about 20% of defense
procurement is being done on open bidding? Can procedures be changed
to permit more open bidding for procurement? Will this result in any
savings?
2.
Present procurement procedures tend to promote "best and final" and
"technical leveling" practices that lead to inequities and cost overruns.
What can be done to reform these procedures?
3.
How can cost overruns be avoided or lessened?
4.
Is there any way in which defense procurement can be coordinated with
foreign policy objectives?
5.
Why is it not feasible to save money by extending the period in which
military personnel are rotated? Our (Gov. Carter's) findings are that
extending tour of duty by 2 months would result in an annual saving of
$400 million. A six-month extension would save over a billion dollars.
6.
What kind of re-organization of DOD can best serve the National interest?
For instance, there are more officers in the Pentagon than there are at sea.
7.
What can be done to cope with the grade creep in the civilian and military
ranks?
8.
It has been said that standardization can save NATO up to $17 billion.
What are the domestic problems with standardization? What are the
international problems? How can we achieve the optimum degree of
standardization? What are the issues associated with domestic VS.
foreign procurement?
9.
Are Reserve Forces useful? Are they cost effective?
10.
What is the impact of arms sales abroad? Is the present level of sales
healthy? Do arms sales accomplish our foreign policy objectives?
11.
What are the problems industry faces in dealing with the Government?
What can be done to cut the red tape? What can be done to improve
Government/Industry relations?
FORD i LIBRARY GERALD
In connection with the B-1, Eizenstat stated the Governor was in favor
of R&D but felt that the size of the program warranted a re-examination before
the aircraft was put in production.
As to the foreign sales of military equipment, Eizenstat stated that the
Governor's views do not necessarily coincide with that expressed in the Demo-
cratic platform. He said that the Governor feels there should be a cap on the
amount of foreign sales of military equipment, but there was no clarification on
how the Governor differed with his platform on this point.
Eizenstat said that the Governor was quite concerned that a means be
developed to relate the introduction of new weapons systems to the Country's
foreign policy objectives.
Eizenstat stated that Governor Carter would listen to any thoughts that
Adm. Rickover had but was not bound and would not slavishly follow Adm. Rickover.
(It is my understanding from independent sources that Adm. Rickover did not remembe
Gov. Carter from his Navy days and has only recently talked to the Governor, and
they are, in fact, not close.) However, Eizenstat did state that Governor Carter
was concerned about the size of the U.S. Navy viz a viz the Russian and that the
Governor did favor a mix of naval vessels -- small and large, nuclear and non-
nuclear powered ships.
Eizenstat stated that the Governor has never claimed that consolidating
Government agencies in Washington, as he did in Georgia, would reduce the number
of Federal employees. In fact, Civil Service rules would limit what they can do;
however, the consolidation would increase the efficiency of the Federal Government.
FORD LIBRARY i GENALD
- 2 -
ATTENDANCE LIST AT ATLANTA
1. Mr. John W. Anderson
Vice Pres. & Group Executive
Aerospace & Defense Group - Honeywell, Inc.
Providence, R. I.
2. Mr. Robert Anderson
President & Chief Executive Officer
Rockwell International Corp.
600 Grant St.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
3. Mr. Harry Levine
Program General Manager,
General Electric Co. Corporate Office
Wash, D. C.
4. Herbert H. Gray, Executive V. Pres.
Southeast Region - Atlanta
Westinghouse Electric Corp.
FORD & GERALD LIBRARY
5. Harry B. Smith
Executive Vice Pres.
Defense & Electronics Systems Center
Baltimore, Md. - Westinghouse
6. James H. Schofield, Jr.
Director, Washington Ofc.
Magnavox Govt. & Industrial Electronics Co.
7. Ralph Clark, V. Pres. (Corp.)
TRW, Inc. , Wash, D. C.
8. Dr. M. C. Adams,
Group V. Pres., AVCO Corp.
Wilmington, Mass.
9. Mr. E. J. LeFevre, Vice Pres.
General Dynamics Corp.
Washington, D. C.
10. Mr. Robert B. Ormsby
President, Lockheed Georgia Co.
Marietta, Ga.
11. Mr. William McGinty
Director, Govt. /Industry Marketing
Federal Systems Division
IBM Corp.
Wash, D.C.
12. Mr. Kenneth Mark
Director, Strategic Planning
The Boeing Co.
Wash, D. C.
13. Mr. Barry J. Shillito, President
Teledyne Ryan Aeronautical
San Diego, Calif.
14. Mr. Dennis Nichols
Corporate Director, Govt. Relations
Fairchild Industries, Inc.
Germantown, Md.
15. Mr. Arthur Stanziano
Vice Pres. - Washington
The Hazeltine Corporation
Wash, D. C.
16. Mr. Jesse R. Lien
Sr. Vice Pres. & General Mgr.
Electronic Systems Group
GTE Sylvania
Waltham, Mass.
17. Mr. Clark MacGregor
Vice President
United Technologies Corp.
Wash, D. C.
18. Mr. Forbes Mann, Sr. Vice Pres.
The LTV Corp.
Wash, D. C.
19. Mr. J. L. Winkel, V. Pres., Marketing
Hughes Aircraft Corp.
Arlington, Va.
20. Mr. William W. Woodruff
Manager, Program Development (Legis. Liaison)
Hughes Aircraft
Wash, D.C.
21. Mr. Robert C. Smith
Vice Pres., Domestic Customer Relations
E-Systems, Inc.
Arlington, Va.
22. Mr. George Sloan
Director of Corporate Planning
McDonnell Douglas Corp.
St. Louis, Mo.
23. Mr. Philip C. Kautt
Corporate Director of Govt. Develop.
EG&G, Inc.
Arlington, Va.
24. Mr. L. S. Wyler
TRE Corporation
Suite 720
9460 Wilshire Blvd.
Beverly Hills, Calif.
25. Mr. V. J. Adduci, President
Electronics Industries Assn.
2001 Eye St, N. W.
Wash, D. C.
26. Mr. W. A. Simcox, Director of Planning
Electronics Industries Assn.
2001 Eye St, N. W.
Wash, D. C.
27. Hubert Harris, Vice Pres.
Citizens & Southern Natl. Bank
SEALD R. FORD
Atlanta, Ga.
28. Mr. Sam T. Martin, Jr.
S. T. Martin Associates
Great Falls, Va.
29. Mr. Jack Christiansen
Special Asst. to President & Chairman of the Board
Grumman Aerospace Corp.
Bethpage, L.I., N.Y.
30. Mr. John Chapman
Director, Government Relations
Bendix Corp.
Wash, D. C.