Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Source Description
This file contains questions about Watergate, Cambodia, Warren Commission, and personal finances.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
1126640
label
Ford, Gerald R. - Vice Presidential Confirmation - Questions
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
1126640
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Ford, Gerald R. - Vice Presidential Confirmation - Questions
description
This file contains questions about Watergate, Cambodia, Warren Commission, and personal finances.
citationUrl
collections
Benton L. Becker Papers
General Subject Files
subjects
Executive-Legislative relations
Governmental investigations
Presidential appointments
Vice-Presidents
iiifBase
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
1126640
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1973-11-30
month
11
year
1973
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1973-11-01
month
11
year
1973
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
url
mediaId
89802af74ed5f1bc
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box 1, folder "Ford, Gerald R. - Vice Presidential
Confirmation - Questions" of the Benton L. Becker 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. Benton Becker donated to the United
States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.
Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public
domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to
remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid
copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Digitized from Box 1 of the Benton Becker Papers at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
I.
SUBJECT: John Bentia (Pres. Alliance Mfg. Co.) $500
contribution to Friends for Ford.
II. QUESTIONS POSED BY HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE:
A. Circumstances of contribution:
1. Mailed to Committee at Michigan address or
hand delivered?
2. Was contribution solicited?
III. FACTUAL ANALYSIS: Letter to House Judiciary Committee
by Bentia states:
A. Contribution was hand delivered to GRF in former
Rep. Bow's office.
B. Bow was Bentia's Congressman.
C. Voluntary contribution - not solicited by FORD or
any of his associates.
D. Had met Ford on two different occassions over the
years when he was making speeches at Canton, Ohio
(GOP fund raising events).
IV. POSITION:
A. Contribution reported by Friends of Ford.
B. Not solicited.
UNIVERSITY PROP
THE ALLIANCE MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC.
ALLIANCE, OHIO
JOHN BENTIA
PRESIDENT
October 24, 1973
Mr. William P. Dixon, Counsel
House Committee on the Judiciary
2226 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D. C. 20515
Dear Mr. Dixon:
In reply to Mr. Jerome M. Zeifman's letter of October 19,
1973 which, incidentally, arrived in our office on
October 24 -- perhaps the delay was due to the Veteran's
Day holiday the contribution to Representative Gerald
Ford was hand delivered directly to Mr. Ford and it was
in Representative Frank T. Bow's office. Mr. Bow was
our District Representative at that time.
This was a voluntary contribution and not solicited in
any way by Representative Ford or any of his associates.
Representative Ford sent a letter of acknowledgment to
me on October 20, 1972.
We had met Mr. Ford casually on probably two different
occasions over the years when he was making speeches at
Canton, Ohio at Republican fund raising events.
Sincerely yours,
for
John Bentia
JB:jw
quicle
4500
FORD d LIBRARY GERALD
NINETY-THIRD CONGRESS
PETER W. RODINO, JR. (N.J.), CHAIRMAN
HAROLD D. DONOHUE, MASS.
EDWARD HUTCHINSON, MICH.
GENERAL COUNSEL:
JACK BROOKS, TEX.
ROBERT CLORY, ILL.
JEROME M. ZEIFMAN
ROBERT W. KASTENMEIER, WIS.
HENRY P. SMITH 111, N.Y.
DON EDWARDS, CALIF,
WILLIAM L. HUNGATE, MO.
TOM RAILSBACK, ILL.
Congress of the United States
ASSOCIATE GENERAL COUNSEL:
CHARLES W. SANDMAN, JR., N.J.
GARNER 3. CLINE
JOHN CONYERS, JR., MICH.
CHARLES E. WIGGINS, CALIF.
COUNSEL:
JOSHUA EILBERG, PA.
DAVID W. DENNIS, IND.
JOSEPH FISCHER
JEROME R. WALDIE, CALIF.
HAMILTON FISH, JR., N.Y.
WALTER FLOWERS, ALA.
WILEY MAYNE, TOWA
Committee mt the Judiciary
HERBERT FUCHS
HERBERT E. HOFFMAN
JAMES R. MANN, S.C.
LAWRENCE J. HOGAN, MD.
WILLIAM P. SHATTUCK
PAUL S. SARBANES, MD.
WILLIAM 3. KEATING. OHIO
House of Representatives
CHRIS NOLDE
JOHN F. SEIBERLING, OHIO
M. CALDWELL BUTLER, VA.
ALAN A. PARKER
GEORGE E. DANIELSON, CALIF.
WILLIAM S. COHEN, MAINE
JAMES F. FALCO
ROBERT F. DRINAN, MASS.
TRENT LOTT, MISS.
CHARLES B. RANGEL, N.Y.
Mashington, D.C. 20515
MAURICE A. BARBOZA
HAROLD V. FROEHLICH, WIS.
DONALD G. BENN
BARBARA JORDAN, TEX,
CARLOS J. MOORHEAD, CALIF,
FRANKLIN G. POLK
RAY THORNTON, ARK.
JOSEPH J. MARAZITI, N.J.
ROGER A. PAULEY
ELIZABETH HOLTZMAN, N.Y.
THOMAS E. MOONEY
WAYNE OWENS, UTAH
October 19, 1973
PETER T. STRAUB
EDWARD MEZVINSKY, IOWA
MICHAEL W. BLOMMER
ALEXANDER B. COOK
315 10/29 m Regula
Mr. John Bentia, President
brought this car
Aliance Manufacturing Company
Aliance, Ohio
Dear Mr. Bentia:
On October 13, 1973, President Richard M. Nixon nominated
Representative Gerald R. Ford of Michigan to be Vice Presi-
dent of the United States pursuant to Section 2 of the 25th
Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. The
President's nomination was referred to the Committee on the
Judiciary.
In order to complete a thorough investigation of Mr. Ford's
qualifications for the Office of Vice President, it would
be helpful if you would furnish the Committee with some in-
formation respecting your contribution of October 20, 1972,
to the Ford for Congress Committee of Michigan.
Specifically, it would be helpful if you would notify me
of the full circumstances of your contribution, including
whether it was mailed to the Committee at its Michigan ad-
dress, was hand delivered, or was given in some other
fashion. Additionally, it would be helpful if the Committee
on the Judiciary knew whether your contribution was solic-
ited in any way, and if so, by whom.
Pursuant to H. Res. 74, agreed to by the House of Represent-
atives on February 28, 1973, the Committee is authorized
"to require, by subpoena or otherwise, the
attendance and testimony of such witnesses
and the production of such books, records,
correspondence, memorandums, papers, and
documents, as it deems necessary"
GERALD LERANT R. FORD
OCT 24 1973
Mr. John Bentia
Page 2
October 19, 1973
To assist the Committee in fulfilling its responsibility, it
will be appreciated if you provide the information requested
not later than October 24, 1973. Please address your response
to William P. Dixon, Counsel, House Committee on the Judiciary,
2226 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20515.
Sincerely yours,
Jerome M. Zeifman
General Counsel
GERALD R LIBIT FORD
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
15
15
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
OLIVER
WENDELL
M
OLIVER
OLIVER
HOLMES
WINDELL
HOLMES
WENDELL.
HOLMES
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20515
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
CERTIFIED
Mr. John Bentia, President
Aliance Manufacturing Company
No. 394731
Aliance, Ohio
MAIL
GERALD
FORD R.
QUESTIONS OF CONGRESSMAN ROBERT F. DRINAN
FOR THE HONORABLE GERALD R. FORD
THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 1973
1. In the recent past it was revealed that some 14 members of
the House and of the Senate were told prior to April 30, 1970
of secret bombing raids over the neutral country of Cambodia.
You have indicated that you heard on at least two occasions prior
to that date about these bombings.
The 3800 secret sorties over a period of 14 months were at
least by clear implication denied by the President -- when he told
the nation on April 30, 1970 that the United States had been
scrupulously neutral toward Cambodia prior to that time.
Can you justify any member of Congress' withholding in-
formation from the Congress about an unauthorized war in a neutral
nation the cost of which is approximately $130 million?
If you were President could you approve of a system where
important information of this nature is given to only a handful
of Members of Congress and withheld from the vast majority of the
535 members of the House and the Senate?
2. It has been estimated that there are some 200,000 or more
Vietnamese political prisoners in South Vietnam. The United
States contributes substantially to the detention of these persons
who are held prisoner because they are politically opposed to the
regime of President Thieu.
Experts on Indochina state that President Thieu can in all
probability remain in power with or without elections as long as
his political opponents are retained in jail. As a result of
this situation the self-determination promised to the people of
South Vietnam by the United States is severely limited.
Would you approve of measures by the Congress or by the
Administration to release those citizens of South Vietnam who have
been imprisoned because of their political convictions? If so how
would you do it?
3. Many Americans are dissatisfied with the results of the legal
proceedings surrounding the My Lai massacre in Vietnam. Many
Vietnam veterans relate stories of atrocities done by themselves
or by other Americans.
Page 2
Question 3 (con't)
Are you satisfied that American military legal officials
have punished all persons involved in such illegal activities?
Would you approve of a study carried out under the auspices
of the United Nations or some other international organization
with respect to the degree of compliance of the United States in
Vietnam with the rules of war as set forth by the Geneva
Conventions?
TONARY
QUESTIONS OF CONGRESSMAN ROBERT F. DRINAN
FOR THE HONORABLE GERALD R. FORD
THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 1973
1. In the recent past it was revealed that some 14 members of
the House and of the Senate were told prior to April 30, 1970
of secret bombing raids over the neutral country of Cambodia.
You have indicated that you heard on at least two occasions prior
to that date about these bombings.
The 3800 secret sorties over a period of 14 months were at
Americand
least by clear implication denied by the President -- when he told
the nation on April 30, 1970 that the United States had been
scrupulously neutral toward Cambodia prior to that time.
Jen Can you justify any member of Congress' withholding in-
formation from the Congress about an unauthorized war in a neutral
nation the cost of which is approximately $130 million?
If you were President could you approve of a system where
important information of this nature is given to only a handful
of Members of Congress and withheld from the vast majority of the
535 members of the House and the Senate?
jamblin
right 40 info
/
Some circimatanery in Congress
wouldyou malae Carbolia Combing
not
Today -75
2. It has been estimated that there are some 200,000 or more
Whom
Vietnamese political prisoners in South Vietnam. The United
VP
States contributes substantially to the detention of these persons
get?
who are held prisoner because they are politically opposed to the
regime of President Thieu.
Experts on Indochina state that President Thieu can in all
probability remain in power with or without elections as long as
his political opponents are retained in jail. As a result of
this situation the self-determination promised to the people of
South Vietnam by the United States is severely limited.
Would you approve of measures by the Congress or by the
Administration to release those citizens of South Vietnam who have
been imprisoned because of their political convictions? If so how
would you do it?
3. Many Americans are dissatisfied with the results of the legal
proceedings surrounding the My Lai massacre in Vietnam. Many
Vietnam veterans relate stories of atrocities done by themselves
or by other Americans.
Page 2
Question 3 (con't)
Are you satisfied that American military legal officials
have punished all persons involved in such illegal activities?
Would you approve of a study carried out under the auspices
of the United Nations or some other international organization
with respect to the degree of compliance of the United States in
Vietnam with the rules of war as set forth by the Geneva
Conventions?
ISSUE -- TAPES
Q.
Mr. Ford, if your were the President, would you have
released the Watergate tapes?
Talking Points
1) Support the concept of confidentiality of
Presidential tapes, papers and memoranda
2) Repeat your previous statement that for
political reasons the President should have
released the tapes sooner
3) Philosophize: Release of the tapes at an
earlier time would have eliminated doubts
by the American people, the Congress, and
the news media, regarding the integrity of
the President.
Q.
Do you feel the Watergate Committee should receive
the tapes?
Talking Points
No, at the present time, we should continue
to resolve the problem in the Courts.
Q.
why did you approve of the President's initial compromise
on the tapes?
Talking Points
The compromise was well beyond what the Court
required -- (explain compromise)
*
Q.
Why did you support the President's action in the firing
of Archibald Cox?
Talking Points
It is within the President's power to remove members
of the Executive Branch.
id.
Do you tnink the President was justified in firing Cox?
Talking Points
From a public relations apary taise standpoint, it's unfortunate R.
that the firing of Cox has created such an uproar.
FORD
however, I have urged and the President has said
ne will appoint a Special Prosecutor.
LIBRARY
TAPES CONTINUED
Q.
Do you think the President would have had the right
to defy a Supreme Court order in the event that the
Supreme Court would have demanded that he turn over
the tapes, presidential papers, and other memoranda
relating to the Watergate case?
Talking Points
1) Generally speaking, no, I don't think the President
or any other man can be above the law.
2) However, there may be some situation which is as
hypothetical as your question, which would cause
any President to take a second look at the issue.
Q.
Mr. Ford, if you were President and the Watergate
situation would have arisen, what would you have done?
Talking Points
As I said before, I support the concept of confidentiality
of Presidential tapes, papers and memoranda, and I also
said I called upon the President some months back to
release the tapes for sound political reasons
in the
atmosphere of Watergate, I would have released those
portions of the tapes and other materials to the Courts
Niver
in order to resolve the entire issue as quickly as
possible. I believe that compliance in these areas
would have resulted in a just resolution of the situation.
Q.
Mr. Ford. On May 2, the President admitted that he
sought to limit the scope of the Watergate investigation
in order to conceal the activities of the White House
security operation known as the Plummers, since 3 members
of the Plummers operation -- Messrs. Hunt, Liddy and
Against
Barker, were directly involved in the Watergate breakin.
Would you as President:
X
A-Establish a so-called "Plummers Unit"
B-would you have proceeded to coverup the activities
of the Plummers knowing full well that members or
the group were directly involved in the breakin at
Watergate?
Talking Points
A President -- as this President aid -- may find
himself in a situation where there may be grave sec-
urity leaks and he may have to take extraordinary
action. However, I cannot agree with the
establishment of a separate security group beyondoRD
those already in existance. The President clearly
was given bad advice.
GER
LIBRARY
Tapes Continued
Q.
Mr. Ford, are you saying the President has made some
mistakes in his handling of the Watergate affair?
Talking Points
I'm not saying that the President has made
mistakes
I have stated that I would have
handled it differently.
Q.
What would you have done differently?
I've already explained this in response to other
questions.
GERALD R. FORD LIBRARY
SPECIAL PROSECUTOR ISSUE
Q.
Do you support a Special Prosecutor?
-A- YES
Q.
How would you make him truly independent?
Talking Points
1) I think there are a number of ways
a. support of measures now pending in Congress
b.
establishment of an independent panel by the
President who would be directed to recommend
one or two names to Judge Sirica. The panel
could be made up of three retired Supreme Court
Justices, or by the former Chief Justice, Mr.
Warren
a former Member of Congress, such as
Senator John Williams, along with a former
Vice President, Hubert H. Humphrey. I think
these may be methods in which a man could be
chosen who could have true independence.
Q.
Would a Special Prosecutor appointed by the President
within the Justice Department be independent?
Talking Points
It depends on who the man is and what the President's
conaitions are in appointing him.
Q.
How can a Presidential appointed Special Prosecutor be
independent if you already have said a President has
the right to fire him or a member of the Exeuctive
Branch?
Talking Points
I think that the President has full knowledge of the
peoples' concern over the independence of a Special
Prosecutor. We have witnessed national outrage
at the firing of Mr. Cox. I think that the President
will maintain a Special Prosecutor's independence.
Nobody wants to clear this up more than President
Nixon.
FORD B. GERALD LIBRARY
EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE
Q.
Mr. Ford, what do you consider to be the limits
of Executive Privilege in light of Watergate
or define for us what Executive Privilege is.
Talking Points:
I think that Executive Privilege cannot be
defined without knowledge specifically of
instances
...
and I think that I would be
unwise, as would any member of this panel,
or any other man who is not President, to
attempt to broadly define Executive Privilege
and the areas it can cover, without knowing
the circumstances, now, or in the future,
sparingh
we
Q.
Do you think that Executive Privilege should
10
be extended into areas where there is suggestion
of criminality? I refer specifically to the
ITT affair, the Russian Wheat Deal, the
$2 million contributed by the American Milk
Producers
?
Taliing Points:
Concept stated above.
GERALD R. FORD
LIBRARY
TAPES, EXEC. PRIVILEGE, SPECIAL PROSECUTOR CONTINUED
Q
In Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, you stated release of
the Watergate tapes should "wipe out any semblance
of justification for impeachment. "
Do you still stand on your statement?
Talking Points
I think President Nixon's releasing of the tapes has
gone a long way in clearing up this matter of impeachment--
and any further action is a question for the House to
determine. To finally resolve the question, this
is why I have stated that I support the continuance
of the House Judiciary Committee investigation.
Q.
In 1970 when you were trying to impeach Justice Douglas,
you said that grounds for impeachment are anything
the House determines. (Good behevin)
Do you still stand by that statement?
Talking Points
*
The constitution defines grounds for impeachment as
Onviction of "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes
and Misdemeanors. " The House of Representatives, under
Article I, Section 2, clause 5, shall have the sole
Power of Impeachment, and Article I, Section 3, clauses
6 and 7 provide for the sole Power of the Senate
no
to try all Impeachments.
*
Article II, Section 4
Again, this is why I have stated that I support
the investigation of the House Judiciary Committee --
as was my basis for the statement I made back in 1970
regarding the Douglas affair.
R.
GERALD
SEAL
LIBRARY
Q.
Last week you said that House impeachment investigations
should continue.
Is this still your position.
A.
Yes - (see following page in further reference to this)
had mad such evid ance.
Q.
If you are confirmed, and the President is impeached,
do President? you think you are capable and qualified to be
Talking Points
This is a very difficult for any man to answer about
himself.
Frankly there is no such training ground. for becoming
President. However, if one did exist, I would have
to say that I can be proud of my past 25 years of
service in the Congress.
This answer, Gentlemen, is really your decision.
BERALD R. FORD
ANYUSIT
RUNNING FOR OFFICE
Q.
Are you willing to state before this Committee that you
have no plans for running for further political office?
A.
I stand on my previous statements regarding this question.
INTEGRITY OF THE VICE PRESIDENTIAL OFFICE
Q.
How do you plan to restore integrity to the office of
the Vice President?
Talking Points
By doing the very best job I can -- I intend through
my Constitutional duty as President of the Senate, if
confirmed, to do everything I can in my power to bring
the Executive and Legislative Branches closer and to
establish a more harmonious working relationship between
these two bodies.
FUTURE SELECTION OF VICE PRESIDENTS
Q.
Do you have any ideas on how future Vice Presidents should
be selected?
Talking points
Measures before the Congress now receiving my thought and
consideration
POWERS OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH
Q.
Do you think the powers of the Executive Branch are too
big and how can the Congress re-assert its Constitutional
powers?
Talking Points
1) by a different method of choosing the VIren
Frankly, I think a closer working relationship
between Congress and the White liouse would provide
for and go a long way in solving some of these
problems.
R.
Q.
HOW can we restore confidence in the Executive Branch?
FORD
-more-
LIBRARY
Q.-
In your judgment, can President Nixon ever restore
the confidence of the American people in the
Executive Branch?
Mes - foreign policy area when all the facts are
aired --- remembered most for his contributions here--
getting to the bottom of the whole deal, etc.
"Policies are sound - discream
DEPALD R. FORD
LIBRARY
CAMBODIA BOMBING
Q.
Were you informed by the President of the secret
bombing of Cambodia, uring the 2 year period
before the Congress was informed, and the American
people?
Q.
If so, di your support the President keeping this
a secret?
Q.
Do you feel that this was an encroachment upon the
Congress' right to make war?
GERALD R. FORD
LIBRARY
Joseph Wolf
INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS
Executive
Privilege
Question: In 1963, when the issue was whether Gen. Taylor
had to testify on the Bay of Pigs before a Subcommittee
of the House, you spoke strongly against the concept of
Executive Privilege being applied.
Would you tell us in what cases you believe
Executive Privilege does apply? Need it be applied in
every case in which it might be applied, or should its
application be only where disclosure of the particular
data concerned would be unquestionably contrary to the
public interest?
War
Powers
Question: In 1971, you called for legislation that would
require Congress to approve, alter or terminate any
military action started by the President within 30 days
of starting such action.
Would you explain your thinking in that
score? Would the President have a right to veto such
Congressional action?
War
Question: Would you engage yourself that if you become
Powers
President you would not dispatch US forces into
situations likely to result in military action without
Congressional approval?
FORD OF LIBRARY GERALO
War
Question: Situations in times of tension have a way of
Powers
growing beyond expectations. What are your views on how
the Congress as a whole can be kept informed of developments
and prospects on a truly current basis in such emergency
situations?
Security
Question:
In 1951, you introduced a bill to repeal
Executive Order 10290, establishing the system of
classification of security information. What are your
views on the need to have the right to classify information?
Should classification be grounds for denying information
to the Congress?
Jackson
Question:
The Administration wants to withdraw its
Amendment
proposal to give the USSR MFN treatment. If we are not
going to give them MFN treatment at this time, what harm is
there in saying that we won't in the future, either, unless
they respect the human rights of those who want to emigrate?
European
Question:
Why did the Administration take it for granted that
Allies
our European allies would cooperate in the airlift to Israel?
Why hadn't it consulted with our allies to find out of they
would? If they won't, what good are allies?
Marified - mithdraw trups in Engree
Detente
Question:
Don't you believe the President has over-stated
the importance of detente? He seems to say that detente
1
is what avoids nuclear war and led to a ceasefire in the
GERALD R. FORD
LIBRARY
Middle East. But are things any better when Soviet and US
interests don't happen to coincide?
Cambodia
Question:
You generally supported the President on
Indochina. Yet how do you explain that things seem to be
going better for Cambodia now that we are out of there?
Military
Question:
In 1964, you said that more positive US
Solutions
military action in Viet Nam affecting our ground forces
might have turned the tide. In 1967, you called on the
government to stop pulling our punches, particularly air
power. In 1972, you supported the bombing of North Vietnam.
This sounds like persisting on seeking a military solution
to a problem that required a political solution. Do you
believe that once US forces are involved in a situation
we must always seek a military rather than a political
solution?
Oil
Question:
How should we structure our foreign policy
so that oil blackmail will not affect our national interests?
Executive
Question:
There is pressure to have important international
Agreements
agreements (such as base rights abroad) accomplished by Treaty
rather than Executive Agreement. Otherwise, the Congress
can be faced with a fait accompli as to our foreign involvements.
Wouldn't that be a good idea?
SEPALD R. FORD LIBRARY
Oil
Question:
We need to import oil. But not only do we not
have enough oil, but the tanker fleet is predominately foreign.
Are we hostage to tanker nations as well as producer nations?
Nato
Question:
If cur NATO allies fail to provide us with balance
of payments and budgetary relief, shouldn't we cut our deployments
in Europe pro tanto, as Senator Jackson has proposed?
MBFR
Question:
If we don't come to agreement on force cuts within
a reasonable time, shouldn't we go ahead unilaterally to reduce
our forces, creating an example the Soviets might follow?
Comprehen-Question: Why shouldn't we follow the Kennedy example of a
sive
Nuclear
moratorium on atmospheric tests and declare a moratorium on all
Testing
Morator- military nuclear testing so long as the USSR acts accordingly?
ium
Arms
Question:
If we fail to get agreement on some qualitative
Control
limitations in SALT II, will we have to jettison SALT I's
quantitive limitations and go back to a full scale nuclear
arms race? Shouldn't we de;ay giving the Soviets and
benefits such as trade concessions until we see how that comes
out?
GEBALIC R. FORD LIBRARY
Quentions
2
From a reading of the information compiled by the Committee staff
as it is set forth in the black, three ring notebook available for reading
by Members of the Committee in Room 2226 Rayburn, the following areas may
raise some questions of impropriety, conflicts of interest or possibly
acts of illegality. Most of these questions are raised primarily because
the information available is incomplete. Additional information is needed
in order to put these questions in their proper perspective. From a
reading of the "Black Book" the following may be points of interest:
1) Mr. Ford's method used in depreciating his condominium on
27584
his Federal income tax return;
Mary
In 1967 Mr. Ford executed an installment sale of 1,076 1/4
shares of stock in Ford Paint and Varnish Co. Was this a
preferred stock bailout;
6906
3) There is a discrepancy in the amounts of money Mr. Ford
McBaini
listed as honoraria (1971-72) on his House statement and that
reported on his Federal income tax return;
The above three points were raised prior to the IRS tax audit which
was completed last Friday and the audit raises none of the above questions
but does disclose the use of an improper deduction. Mr. Ford's tax audit
disclosed the purchase of clothing ($871.44) for Mr. and Mrs. Ford for use
at the Republican National Convention and deducted as a business expense.
He's agreed to pay IRS $435.77;
4) Alleged 1970 corporate contribution through a lobbyist -
(American President Lines and Pacific Far East Lines)
5) Ford employee contributions to his 1972 campaign (Bob llartmann's
wife and Frank Meyer);
?
6) Small Business Administration loan for a constituent corporation;
7) Dept. of Agriculture case involving a successful request by Mr.
Ford for a re-evaluation of a case;
8) Rospatch Corporation - Mr. Ford as member of the Board of
Directors allegedly worked for the favored treatment of a
customer of Rospatch with regard to Japanese exports to the
U.S.
9) Warren Commission - breach of an unwritten promise?
copy Ford 4"
a) Life Magazine article written by Mr. Ford.
-
b) Disclosure of the Oswald diary
c) Publication of the book Portrait of an Assassin.
GERALD R. FORD LIBRARY
in
- 2 -
1) From a reading of Mr. Ford's income tax return a question has been
raised concerning the method of depreciating used with regard to his
condominium located in Vali, Col. Mr. Ford's CPA used the 200% de-
clining-balance method. The only accelerated depreciation methods
allowed for new real estate bought or constructed after July 24,
1969, are the 150% declining balance method and any other consistent
method which does not give greater allowances in the first two-thirds
of useful life than the 150% declining-balance method. There is an
exception to this rule and more information is needed to determine
u
?
whether Mr. Ford's condominium falls within this exception. Mr.
Cramer indicated that Mr. Ford entered into an agreement to purchase
the condominium in May 1969, with the actual closing of the sale in
May 1970, and possession in June, 1970.
2) The IRS tax audit of Mr. Ford's Federal income tax returns for the
years 1967 through 1972 was completed and deliveredto his office late
Friday, November 9, 1973. The audit indicates that in 1972, clothing
valued at $871.44 was purchased by and for Mr. and Mrs. Ford through
the Gerald R. Ford - Fifth Congressional District account for use at
the 1972 Republican National Convention. IRS position is that "although
the clothing was purchased for the convention, the clothes are the
type of clothing that can be worn throughout the year." Mr. Ford's
PAID
CPA has agreed with the IRS position and Mr. Ford's tax deficit is
$435.77.
3) In 1967 Mr. Ford executed an installment sale of 1,076 1/4 shares of
stock in Ford Paint and Varnish Co. Additional information is needed
McBAIN
to determine whether this was a preferred stock bail out. If this had
constituted a preferred stock bail out then any gain should have been
treated as ordinary income rather than capital gain.
4) American President Lines and Pacific Far East Lines (Shipbuilding Com-
panies) pled guilty to making illegal campaign contributions and were
1972
fined $50,000. These firms gave Mr. Ford $100 through a lobbyist.
Section 610, Title 18 U.S.C. precludes corporate contributions to
Prosperte
OK
political campaigns and any person who accepts or receives such con-
tributions shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more
than one year, or both, and if the violation was wilful shall be fined
not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.
5) There is a discrepancy in the amounts of money Mr. Ford listed as
honoraria (1971-72) on Part B of his Financial Disclosure Statement
filed with the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct and
that reported on his Federal income tax returns.
TOERIO FORD LIBRARY
- 3 -
A) In 1971 the honoraria amount filed with the House
Committee was $21,200.00 and the amount reported on
his Federal ineome tax return was $22,240.00, a differ-
ence of $960.00 This difference creates no problem
with the IRS, however, if not further explained could
raise a question of a possible violation of House Rule XLIV.
That rule provides that all honorarium aggregating $300.00
or more from a single source must be listed. The difference
between the House and IRS filings may represent honoraria of
Inc prove
less than $300.00 from a single source which is not required
to be filed with the House.
B) In 1972 the amount of honoraria which Mr. Ford filed with
the House was $18,729.82 and the amount reported on his
Federal income tax for that year was $18,079.82, an un-
explained difference of $650.00 3 chacks
6) There are two incidents involving possible indirect Ford-employee
contributions to his 1972 campaign.
A) The Friends of Jerry Ford Committee reported to the House
that the wife of one of the six special and minority
employees (Robert T. Hartman) made a contribution of $500.00
to the Friends of Jerry Ford Committee of Grand Rapids, Mich.,
on November 3, 1972.
B) The schedule of payments of Mr. Ford's printing expenses
?
incurred to the minority printing clerk indicates that a
one time employee, Frank Meyer, now deceased, paid a printing
bill of $1,000.00 on April 3, 1972.
The relevant provisions of the Federal law which prohibit Federal
employees, including Members of Congress, from making or receiving
political contributions from Federal employees are Sec. 602 and
607 of title 18 U.S.C. They read in part as follows:
Sec. 602 "Whoever, being a Senator or Representative or
employee of the U.S
directly or indirectly solicits, receives
or is in any manner concerned in soliciting or receiving
any
contribution for any political purpose whatever
shall be fined
not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than three years or
both."
Sec. 607 "Whoever, being [a] person in the service of the
U.S
directly or indirectly gives or hands over to any
Senator
or Member of Congress any money or other valuable thing on account
?
0
of or to be applied to the promotion of any political object, shall
be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than three years,
or both."
FORD LIBRARY
- 4 -
There is one exception to Sec. 602 and that is by custom. It
is not considered to be a violation of this provision for a Member
of Congress to make a political contribution to another Member of
Congress. Vol. VI, Sec. 401, Cannon's Precedents of the House of
Representatives, reads as follows:
401. Provisions of the statute relative to solicitation of
contributions for political purposes do not apply to such solicita-
tions by one Member of Congress from another.
7)
Small Business Administration Case
A) Aug. 24, 1972 Mr. L.J. Smith, President of Smith Brothers
Elevators (Mich.), wrote to Mr. Ford asking why "his pre-
liminary application submitted by the Union Bank and Trust
Co. for a SBA loan was ineligible."
B) Aug. 29, 1972 Mr. Ford wrote a letter to SBA stating that
Answer
"I would like to urge that some way be found to make County
Elevator eligible for participation in a SBA loan.
C) Sept. 11, 1972 SBA responded to Mr. Ford's letter of Aug. 29
stating that Smith Brothers Elevators is not a small busi-
ness for the purposes of receiving a SBA loan but that its
determination can be appealed to the Small Business Appeals
Board in Washington.
D) Sept. 14, 1972 Mr. Ford wrote a letter to the Chairman of
the Small Business Appeals Board, which stated that "your
favorable review of the above determination, consistent with
existing rules and regulations, will be appreciated."
E) Oct. 16, 1972 Deputy Commissioner of SBA responds to Mr.
Ford's Sept. 14 letter stating that the Sppeals Board on
October 14, 1972, determined that the firm meets the Small
business size.
7)
Department of Agriculture Case
A) Frank B. Fehsenfeld wrote a letter to Mr. Ford with reference
Aman
authorization. to a denial of his corporation's application for food stamp
B) Feb. 27, 1973 Ford staff member wrote letter to the Food
and Nutrition Service Dept. of Agriculture requesting that
the earlier denial be re-evaluated.
1 GERALD R. FORD
- 5 -
c) May 1, 1973 Food and Nutrition Service reply to Ford's
letter informing him that based on a re-evaluation, Mr.
Fehsenfeld's application has been approved.
8) Rospatch Corp. (local corp. in Grand Rapids)
In June 1964, Mr. Ford was elected to the Board of Directors of
the Rospatch Corp. In Aug. 1971, Mr. Chaille, Chairman of the Board
of Rospatch, wrote a letter to Mr. Ford asking Mr. Ford to assist Mr.
Kahn, President of National Association of Woven Label Manufacturers
in his efforts to have woven labels excluded on the list of goods
whose exportation would be voluntarily regulated by Japan (because of
the saturations of the woven label market in this country by the
Japanese severely threatened the entire U.S. woven label industry.)
Rospatch Corp. was not in the woven label business nor was it a
full member of the National Association of Woven Label Manufacturers;
however, Rospatch Corp. had good customers in the Woven Label business
leasing Rospatch's cutting and folding machines. Mr. Ford corres-
ponded with the agencies involved on behalf of the woven label industry..
Woven labels were finally included on the list of goods to be voluntarily
regulated by Japan.
9) 1972 campaign - D.C. funds paid for
10thckets / " by Ford D.C. DEV.3, Dec.4, 1972 1972 Rospatd
Asked renturned
111,00
(mo.Nastzman)
10) Rice Rapistan Disney - Legal survice - what
GERALD R. FORD
Quentions
2
copies
From a reading of the information compiled by the Committee staff
as it is set forth in the black, three ring notebook available for reading
by Members of the Committee in Room 2226 Rayburn, the following areas may
raise some questions of impropriety, conflicts of interest or possibly
acts of illegality. Most of these questions are raised primarily because
the information available is incomplete. Additional information is needed
in order to put these questions in their proper perspective. From a
reading of the "Black Book" the following may be points of interest:
Main
1) Mr. Ford's method used in depreciating his condominium on
2) In 1967 Mr. Ford executed an installment sale of 1,076 1/4
shares of stock in Ford Paint and Varnish Co. Was this a
preferred stock bailout;
3 6906
6584
his Federal income tax return;
Mary
3) There is a discrepancy in the amounts of money Mr. Ford
Youth
Mc SAINI
listed as honoraria (1971-72) on his House statement and that
reported on his Federal income tax return;
The above three points were raised prior to the IRS tax audit which
was completed last Friday and the audit raises none of the above questions
but does disclose the use of an improper deduction. Mr. Ford's tax audit
disclosed the purchase of clothing ($871.44) for Mr. and Mrs. Ford for use
at the Republican National Convention and deducted as a business expense.
He's agreed to pay IRS $435.77;
4) Alleged 1970 corporate contribution through a lobbyist -
(American President Lines and Pacific Far East Lines)
5) Ford employee contributions to his 1972 campaign (Bob Hartmann's
Moknowlsdge
wife and Frank Meyer);
6) Small Business Administration loan for a constituent corporation;
?
7) Dept. of Agriculture case involving a successful request by Mr.
Ford for a re-evaluation of a case;
8) Rospatch Corporation - Mr. Ford as member of the Board of
Directors allegedly worked for the favored treatment of a
U.S. customer of Rospatch with regard to Japanese exports to the
9) Warren Commission - breach of an unwritten promise?
a) Life Magazine article written by Mr. Ford.
b) Disclosure of the Oswald diary.
c) Publication of the book Portrait of an Assassin.
FORD of LIBRARY GERALD
- 2 -
1) From a reading of Mr. Ford's income tax return a question has been
raised concerning the method of depreciating used with regard to his
condominium located in Vali, Col. Mr. Ford's CPA used the 200% de-
clining-balance method. The only accelerated depreciation methods
allowed for new real estate bought or constructed after July 24,
1969, are the 150% declining balance method and any other consistent
method which does not give greater allowances in the first two-thirds
of useful life than the 150% declining-balance method. There is an
exception to this rule and more information is needed to determine
K
?
whether Mr. Ford's condominium falls within this exception. Mr.
Cramer indicated that Mr. Ford entered into an agreement to purchase
the condominium in May 1969, with the actual closing of the sale in
May 1970, and possession in June, 1970.
2) The IRS tax audit of Mr. Ford's Federal income tax returns for the
years 1967 through 1972 was completed and deliveredto his office late
Friday, November 9, 1973. The audit indicates that in 1972, clothing
valued at $871.44 was purchased by and for Mr. and Mrs. Ford through
the Gerald R. Ford - Fifth Congressional District account for use at
the 1972 Republican National Convention. IRS position is that "although
the clothing was purchased for the convention, the clothes are the
type of clothing that can be worn throughout the year." Mr. Ford's
PAID
CPA has agreed with the IRS position and Mr. Ford's tax deficit is
$435.77.
3) In 1967 Mr. Ford executed an installment sale of 1,076 1/4 shares of
stock in Ford Paint and Varnish Co. Additional information is needed
McBAIN
to determine whether this was a preferred stock bail out. If this had
constituted a preferred stock bail out then any gain should have been
treated as ordinary income rather than capital gain.
4) American President Lines and Pacific Far East Lines (Shipbuilding Com-
panies) pled guilty to making illegal campaign contributions and were
1972
fined $50,000. These firms gave Mr. Ford $100 through a lobbyist.
Section 610, Title 18 U.S.C. precludes corporate contributions to
Prosperate
political campaigns and any person who accepts or receives such con-
tributions shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more
than one year, or both, and if the violation was wilful shall be fined
not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.
5) There is a discrepancy in the amounts of money Mr. Ford listed as
honoraria (1971-72) on Part B of his Financial Disclosure Statement
filed with the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct and
that reported on his Federal income tax returns.
LISEARY GERALD R. FORD
- 3 -
A) In 1971 the honoraria amount filed with the House
under ortor
Committee was $21,200.00 and the amount reported on
his Federal income tax return was $22,240.00, a differ-
ence of $960.00 This difference creates no problem
with the IRS, however, if not further explained could
"Roports" thouse an
raise a question of a possible violation of House Rule XLIV.
Hewle
That rule provides that all honorarium aggregating $300.00
or more from a single source must be listed. The difference
between the House and IRS filings may represent honoraria of
less than $300.00 from a single source which is not required
to be filed with the House.
Inc Tax
B) In 1972 the amount of honoraria which Mr. Ford filed with
the House was $18,729.82 and the amount reported on his
Federal income tax for that year was $18,079.82, an un-
explained difference of $650.00 3 sip chades
6) There are two incidents involving possible indirect Ford-employee
contributions to his 1972 campaign.
A) The Friends of Jerry Ford Committee reported to the House
that the wife of one of the six special and minority
employees (Robert T. Hartman) made a contribution of $500.00
to the Friends of Jerry Ford Committee of Grand Rapids, Mich.
on November 3, 1972.
B) The schedule of payments of Mr. Ford's printing expenses
?
incurred to the minority printing clerk indicates that a
one time employee, Frank Meyer, now deceased, paid a printing
bill of $1,000.00 on April 3, 1972.
The relevant provisions of the Federal law which prohibit Federal
employees, including Members of Congress, from making or receiving
political contributions from Federal employees are Sec. 602 and
607 of title 18 U.S.C. They read in part as follows:
Sec. 602 "Whoever, being a Senator or Representative. or
employee of the U.S.
directly or indirectly solicits, receives
or is in any manner concerned in soliciting or receiving. any
contribution for any political purpose whatever. shall be fined
both." not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than three years or
Sec. 607 "Whoever, being [a] person in the service of the
U.S. directly or indirectly gives or hands over to any Senator
or Member of Congress any money or other valuable thing on account ? 0
of or to be applied to the promotion of any political object, shall
be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than three years,
or both."
R.
GERALD
FORD
LIBRARY
- 4 -
There is one exception to Sec. 602 and that is by custom. It
is not considered to be a violation of this provision for a Member
of Congress to make a political contribution to another Member of
Congress. Vol. VI, Sec. 401, Cannon's Precedents of the House of
Representatives, reads as follows:
401. Provisions of the statute relative to solicitation of
contributions for political purposes do not apply to such solicita-
tions by one Member of Congress from another.
7)
Small Business Administration Case
A) Aug. 24, 1972 Mr. L.J. Smith, President of Smith Brothers
Elevators (Mich.), wrote to Mr. Ford asking why "his pre-
liminary application submitted by the Union Bank and Trust
Co. for a SBA loan was ineligible."
B) Aug. 29, 1972 Mr. Ford wrote a letter to SBA stating that
Answer
"I would like to urge that some way be found to make County
Elevator eligible for participation in a SBA loan. "
C) Sept. 11, 1972 SBA responded to Mr. Ford's letter of Aug. 29
stating that Smith Brothers Elevators is not a small busi-
ness for the purposes of receiving a SBA loan but that its
determination can be appealed to the Small Business Appeals
Board in Washington.
D) Sept. 14, 1972 Mr. Ford wrote a letter to the Chairman of
the Small Business Appeals Board, which stated that "your
favorable review of the above determination, consistent with
existing rules and regulations, will be appreciated."
Board
E)
Oct. 16, 1972 Deputy Commissioner of SBA responds to Mr.
Ford's Sept. 14 letter stating that the Sppeals Board on
October 14, 1972, determined that the firm meets the Small
business size.
7)
Department of Agriculture Case
A) Frank B. Fehsenfeld wrote a letter to Mr. Ford with reference
to a denial of his corporation's application for food stamp
authorization.
Conding Aman required
B) Feb. 27, 1973 Ford staff member wrote letter to the Food
and Nutrition Service Dept. of Agriculture requesting that
the earlier denial be re-evaluated.
CHALD R. FORD
- 5 -
c) May 1, 1973 Food and Nutrition Service reply to Ford's
letter informing him that based on a re-evaluation, Mr.
Fehsenfeld's application has been approved.
8) Rospatch Corp. (local corp. in Grand Rapids)
In June 1964, Mr. Ford was elected to the Board of Directors of
the Rospatch Corp. In Aug. 1971, Mr. Chaille, Chairman of the Board
of Rospatch, wrote a letter to Mr. Ford asking Mr. Ford to assist Mr.
Kahn, President of National Association of Woven Label Manufacturers
in his efforts to have woven labels excluded on the list of goods
whose exportation would be voluntarily regulated by Japan (because of
the saturations of the woven label market in this country by the
Japanese severely threatened the entire U.S. woven label industry.)
Rospatch Corp. was not in the woven label business nor was it a
full member of the National Association of Woven Label Manufacturers;
however, Rospatch Corp. had good customers in the Woven Label business
leasing Rospatch's cutting and folding machines. Mr. Ford corres-
ponded with the agencies involved on behalf of the woven label industry.
Woven labels were finally included on the list of goods to be voluntarily
regulated by Japan.
R.FORD
The Honorable Elizabeth Holtzman
Dear Ms. Holtzman:
The following information is in response to your inquiries
to me in your letter dated November 19, 1973.
A. Mr. Harold Albert is an old and trusted friend. He
had what I considered to be a legitimate claim and my inter-
vention in his behalf, was in my opinion, justified based on
the merits of his case. I had no knowledge of Mr. Albert's
contribution or the contribution of Seidman and Seidman to the
Kent County Republican Finance Committee. The circumstances
resulting in the resolution of Mr. Albert's case are best
described in the enclosed communications.
I know of no contributions made to me or to any of my
campaign committees by Mr. Albert. The action I took on Mr.
Albert's behalf was in no way connected to his contribution
to the Kent County Republican Finance Committee. I know of
no other action taken on Mr. Albert's behalf by me. There
was nothing illegal or improper about this action.
B. Mr. James Chamberlain is President of Gill Manufacturing
Corporation, a large manufacturer of children's clothing in
Grand Rapids. He is an extremely knowlegable businessman whom
I felt would make a solid contribution to the National Advisory
Council on Flamable Fabrics. I was notified on July 25, 1973,
that he had been so appointed. I had no knowledge that Mr.
Chamberlain contributed $1,155 between 1969 and 1973 to the
Kent County Republican Finance Committee. I know of no contri-
butions made to me or any of my campaign committees by Mr.
Chamberlain. My recommendation of Mr. Chamberlain was in no
way connected to his contribution to the Kent County Republican
Finance Committee. No illegal or improper action was taken by
GERALD
- 2 -
office on behalf of Mr. Chamberlain regarding this appointment.
With the exception of forwarding Mr. Chamberlain's views on
pending rule making to the appropriate federal agencies, my
records reflect that the only additional action taken at his
request was the insertion in the December 17, 1971, CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD of a statement by Roger Wilson, Chairman, Products Flam-
ability Committee, American Apparel Manufacturers Association,
dealing with that Association's efforts to solve the apparel
flamability problem.
C. Bob Webster is President of Holly's Inc. a restaurant
chain in my District. My letter to the Chairman of the Price
Commission was in response to correspondence from Mr. Webster
questioning the high cost of meat and asking when action by
the Price Commission could be expected to meet this problem.
The Price Commission responded by sending me the enclosed
letter which includes a copy of the Federal Code dealing with
restaurants. I forwarded this information to Mr. Webster. I
do not know if Holly's Inc. was exempt from the price controls
on the basis of number of employees or annual sales. I had no
knowledge that Mr. Webster contributed $500 to the Kent County
Republican Finance Committee. I know of no contribution made
to me or any of my campaign committees by Mr. Webster. My
correspondence to the Price Commission was in no way connected
to Mr. Webster's contribution to the Kent County Republican
Finance Committee. No illegal or improper action was taken by
my office on behalf of Mr. Webster.
D. On August 24, 1972, I received the enclosed communication
from Smith Brothers Elevators requesting clarification of a
recent Small Business Administration (SBA) ruling respecting
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
- 3 -
country elevators and the constiuent's status as a retailer
rather than a storer of goods. That letter was forwarded on
August 29, 1972, to the SBA requesting the SBA's review of
the letter and clarification of the eligibility of country
elevators for participation in SBA loans. On September 11,
1972, the enclosed response was received from SBA Administrator,
Thomas Kleppe, reflecting the procedures to appeal their ruling.
On September 11, 1972, Mr. Smith wrote the Small Business
Standard Sized Board requesting reconsideration of the SBA
ruling which letter was incorporated with my letter of
September 14, 1972, to the Size Appeals Board requesting a
review of the matter, "consistent with existing rules and
regulations." On September 21, 1972, the Chairman of the
Size Appeals Board acknowledged my communication and advised
later, on October 16, 1972, that the Size Appeals Board had
determined that Smith Brothers met the small business size
requirements and found it eligible for small business finan-
cial assistance. I had no personal knowledge of the $75 con-
tribution to the Friends of Jerry Ford Committee by Mr. L. G.
Smith on November 13, 1972, and know of no other contributions
made to me or to any of my committees by Mr. Smith. My
Congressional assistance to Smith Brothers, in both the SBA
matter and the Interstate Commerce Commission matter, were
not related to Mr. Smith's contribution.
With respect to your inquiry in paragraph 2 of Section D,
I have enclosed xerox copies of my letter of May 18, 1973,
to the Interstate Commerce Commission Chairman, George M.
Stafford, together with his response of May 29, 1973. To
the best of my knowledge, the inquiry continues to be under
R. FORD LIBRARY
- 4 -
consideration by ICC. No illegal or improper action was taken
by my office on behalf of Mr. Smith or Smith Brothers Elevators.
E. Vari-tech Company is a manufacturer of lasers in Grand
Rapids which experienced what appeared to be an inordinate
delay in securing an export license. I forwarded a copy of a
letter from Mr. Merlin Applegate, President, Vari-tech Company,
to Commerce Secretary Dent requesting information as to the
cause of the delay and asking what I might advise Mr. Applegate.
The disposition of the case is best described in a letter to me
dated April 10, 1973, from Mr. Stephen Lazerus, Deputy Assistant
Secretary for East-West Trade. I had no personal knowledge of
Mr. Applegate's $50 contribution to the Ford For Congress
Committee in 1972. I know of no other contribution made to me
or to any of my campaign committees by Mr. Applegate. My assis-
tance to Mr. Applegate was in no way connected to his contribu-
tion to the Ford for Congress Committee. I know of no other
action taken on Mr. Applegate's behalf by me or my office. No
illegal or improper action was taken by my office on behalf of
Mr. Applegate regarding this matter.
F. Mr. Chet Williams, Chairman of the Board, Williams
Form Engineering Corporation of Grand Rapids, is an old friend
who had difficulty in receiving a surtax refund of $3,558.10
to which he was entitled. I forwarded Mr. Williams' letter
and entry documents to the Bureau of Customs with a request
that they follow through on the matter in whatever manner they
deemed appropriate. The Bureau of Customs, based upon the
documentation provided, concluded that the surtax should not
have been levied since the material in question sailed from
England and was enroute prior to the time the surtax was
applicable.
GERALD A. FORD
- 5 -
The second matter to which you refer was a request made by
me to the Department of Commerce in Mr. Williams' behalf to
look into the patent difficulties Mr. Williams had encountered
in Japan. I have no knowledge of Mr. Williams' contribution
to the Kent County Republican Finance Committee. I know of no
contribution made to me or to any of my campaign committees
by Mr. Williams. My assistance to Mr. Williams was in no way
connected to his contribution to the Kent County Republican
Finance Committee. No illegal or improper action was taken by
my office on behalf of Mr. Williams.
information
G. Wolverine World Wide Inc., a Rochford Grand Rapids firm, is the
in
manufacturer of mushpuppies, a well-known brand of footwear.
The Department of Labor rejected Wolverine's proposal to pro-
vide employment opportunitites to minority people under the
JOBS Program. I requested the Department of Labor to review
the file to determine whether there was anything which could
be done, consistent with existing rules and regulations, to aid
Wolverine World Wide Inc. in its efforts to provide employment
opportunities in severely depressed areas. My records reflect
that on April 7, 1972, Wolverine was advised by the Department
of Labor to submit a new proposal under the JOBS Handbook. I
do not know the disposition of this matter. I have no knowledge
of Mr. Cummiskey Cumminsky's contribution to the Kent County Republican
Finance Committee. I know of no contribution made to me or
any of my campaign committees by Mr. Cumminsky. My action in
this matter was in no way connected to Mr. Cumminsky's contri-
bution to the Kent County Republican Finance Committee. No
illegal or improper action was taken by my office on behalf of
Mr. Cumminsky or Wolverine World Wide Inc. I know of no other
action taken on Mr. Cumminsky's behalf or Wolverine's behalf
by me or my office.
FORD LIQUINED
- 6 -
H. On February 22, 1973, my office received a copy of a
letter addressed to the Food Stamp Review Officer of the
Department of Agriculture from B.S. Fehsenfeld, President of
Crystal Flash Petroleum Corporation. That letter requested
a review of a recent denial to participate in the Food Stamp
Program. On February 27, 1973, my Grand Rapids Office for-
warded a copy of the aforementioned letter to Mr. Edward
Hekman, Administrator, Food and Nutrition Service of the
U. S. Department of Agriculture. On March 6, 1973, Mr.
Fehsenfeld received an acknowledgment from the Food Stamp
Review Officer reflecting that his office would review the
matter. On March 12, 1973, I received a communication from
Edward Hekman acknowledging my letter of February 27, 1973,
indicating that a Review Officer had been assigned to study
the matter. On April 27, 1973, Mr. Fehsenfeld was notified
from the Food Stamp Review Officer that, "based on a careful
review of all information submitted and especially on my
personal visit to your store," his application had been
approved. On May 1, 1973, Mr. Hekman notified me of Mr.
Fehsenfeld's approval.
My review of my files indicate that no other action was
undertaken by my Congressional Office for the individual or
corporation cited herein. I had no knowledge of Mr. Fehsenfeld's
contributions to the Kent County Republican Finance Committee
and such contributions were in no way related to the Congressional
interest I demonstrated in his inquiry. I have no knowledge of
other campaign contributions from individuals connected with
this corporation and unequivocally state that nothing illegal
or improper occurred in connection with this transaction.
Sincerely,
LIBRARY GERALD FORD
Gerald R. Ford, M. C.
Voda
Trom rom Br Bee kee
I
ROBERT WINTER-BERGER
Re W-D Ques Two
(1) W-B has alleged that between 1966-1969 he loaned you $15,000
in cash. What have you to say about this allegation,
contained in an affidavit W-B gave to the Senate Rules &
Administration Committee?
(2) W-B, in his book "The Washington Pay-Off", has stated that
you were treated by Dr. Hutschnecker of New York. Is this true?
(3) W-B has alleged that he paid two of your personal friends
$1000 for an introduction to you. What are the facts as
you know them?
(4) It has been alleged by W-B that he introduced you to Francis
Kellogg, who was seeking an ambassadorship, and that through
his efforts and your suggestions Mr. Kellogg contributed
$125,000 to the Republican Party.
What are the facts in this matter?
(5) How long have you known N-B?
How often did you see him? Under what eircumstances?
How did the relationship ever develop?
(6) W-B has alleged that with respect to a speech you have at
Parsons College that you on several occasions attempted to
pressure him into paying the cost of a chartered jet plane
needed to get you back to Washington. The cost of $1,500.
What are the facts?
YORK
&
UNIVERSITY
GERALD
II CAMPAIGN FINANCING
(1) In 1972 there vas a D.C. Committee which raised funds for
your reelection. What can you tell us about the way the
funds were spent. Were any reports filed by the Committee -
why not? Is there any list of committee contributors - why not?
(2) Does Michigan law limit a candidate to spend no more than
$10,500 in his Congressional campaign?
Does it also apply to committees supporting a candidate?
(3) In late October and early November of 1970 your received
five checks for your campaign totalling $11,500. You have
said you endorsed these over to the Republican Campaign
Committee for use as it saw fit. Over the period of the same
campaign the Committee was contributing to several other
campaign committees working for your reelection at least $10,600.
Was this a case of earmarked funds or of funds being laundered?
(4) Do you know a farmer named Schaufelberger? Would you comment
on newspaper allegations recently printed in which he is
said to have stated that you collected funds from milk
producers to funnel into the Republican Party.
FORD
R.
E.S.
GERALD
III FOREIGN AFFAIRS
(1) What is your background in international affairs?
(2) What is your position on
a.
troop levels in Europe
b.
relations with China
c. the Middle East problem
d.
relations with Cuba
:
relations with Russia
c. NATO
E. SEATO
GERALD R. FORD LIBRARY
1
I
Robert Winter -Berger
(1.) W-B has alleged that between
1966-1969 he loaved you $15,000 in
cash. hut have you to say about this
allegation, contained in an affictavit W-B
gave to the Senate Rules & administration lamimter?
(2) W-B, in his bank "The Washington Pay-Off",
has stated that you were treated by
Dr. Hutschnesher of new york. dathis true ?
(3.) W-B has alleged that he paid two of your
personnal friends $1000 for an introduction
to your?
to W bat are the focts us you know
(4.) alt has been alleged by W-B that he
introduced you to Fravis Kellogg, who was
seeking an ambasiadarship, and that thru
his efforts and your suggestions mr.
Kellogg contributed $125,000 to the Republican
Party. W hat are the facts in this matter?
(5.) How lang have you known W-B?
what circumstances! How did the
How often schid you see him ? Under
FORD
LIBRARY
R.
relationship ever develop?
OFRALO
(6.) W-B has alleged that w/respest to a
speech you gave at Passaur College
that you an several accessions
2
attempted to pressure you into
paying the cost of a chartered
person needed to get you The
W ushington.
cost of 41, 500. what are the
facts ?
GERALD R LERARY FORD
/
II Campaign Financing
(1.) the 1972 there was a DC
Committee which raised funels for
your re election. about What the can
take way the funds were
you tell ess
spent. where any sepacts
nut ? as there contraintors list of
feled by the why
committee -why met?
(2.) Does michagan for limit a
condidate to spend ne more than
$10,500 in his Congussional
Candidate? to committees supporting a
companyn ? Does it also apply
(3.) In late October & early Navember
of 1970 you received fine
checks for your compaign
said you evelored these over
totaling $11,500. you have
to the Republican Compaign
LIBRARY
FORDO
Committee for use the period as of it saw
R.
compaign time the Committee was
fit. as about the some
DEPALD
contributing to you several own for
your re-election at least $ 3,000 was
Campaign commatlersa 10,600
this a case of
Z
or of funds
funds being
(4.) Do you know a farmer named
weld you
consument on allegations
recently printed - in
which be is said to have
stated that you collected
fiends from much producers
to fermal Party. into the Republican
GERALD LEBRARY R. FORD
3
III Foreign affairs
(1.) what is your bockground in
international affairs ?
(2.) what is your paution on
a- - trap in Europe
h- relations w/ China
d- relations u/ Cuba
c- the middle East peoblem
e- relations w/ Pussia
d- NATO
a SEATO
A FORD LIBRARY
/
IV Electron Reform
(1.) Do you support public IF NOT,
funducing of electrons
believe are becessary?
reforms do you
& FORD LIBRARY
GERALD
/
V Watergate
(1.) should the Watugate Committee
continue its investigations ?
(2.) Do we need a special prosecutar?
How should he be appointed?
what is your operion of Lean Jarouski?
(3) should this Committee go for-
ward w/ its investigation of
the question of the improchment
of the President ?
(4.) Hould the President release
the tapes and all other pertinement Evid iner
programs relating to the Watergate. ?
(5.) what is the extent of Executive
should it be as a general
Provelege in your vilw ? How
proctice ? How w/ respect to the
Watergate matter?
with respect to the Watergole investigation
6. What would your postion be
in The event you become President ?
FORD
LIBRARY
GERALD
Zv How can you insure wathous It there will
never before he another Watergate episode Shauld
you presid End
8.
/
VI The Mudia K the Cedminatration
(1.) Recently Pus. Nision has attacked
its "vissines Supturial deporting". Do
the needia, particularily TV, for
you cigree w/ his cessessment ?
(2) Senator Weesher has released copies
of memos between high Whate Hause
Coardinated attack on the news
aids in which plans for a
media was formulated
Pocyan support see what is
activity?
your opinion of such
relations between the W-H and the media
3, Mhat can be done to informe
the to Establish a working
4, What steps do you intend to
relationship between you ad the frem?
R FORD LIBRARY
GERALD
1
UII Current Q uesteans
Whot
do Nishing to ford shortages.
(1.) rationing? Do we need to phone gasoline
showed we
(2.) Do you support the Presidents'
impaundment actions ? what
is you view ? generally an this
guestian
3. What in the number me domestic
problem grehing this country Today ?
4, What tips you he taken to contact
inflation?
about an economic ?
5. Will the shortage fuel bring
6. What steps can be taken to
prevent this from happing?
GERALD R. FORD
t
VIII Steelcose
(1.) The Chicago Daily new recently
curried a story stating that steeldase
bad intervened to help
Furniture Co. serve the contract
to furnish federal officer in
Chicago do this twe ?
(2) Have Steelcare executives been
contributors to your campaigns
over the years Z
3. Would you Inimerate the
have had with Corp or
contacts that you n affict
its officers?
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
T
IX Civil Rights
(1.) some would moth classify your
general record are
nights legislation as one of
opposing the bitter , Noting to
supporting The bills on final
"gut" them),
passage answer this How ? do you
(2.) Recalling the Uating Rights the Amend bilt monts
g/970 you apposid
to extend Ho effective 1965
act why ? supported proposed = substitute
measurg to expand covorage to
>ll parts of t he nation. What was
your purpose for doing so?
3.
GERALD R LIGRARY FORD
1
X General
(1.) what was your relateanship
stamp
5
w/ 6. Gordon h idely?
(2) Do you really believe that have
las should the
boen
(3.) How do you velew you view role
as Uw
bradership and
4.) what quality must
a Preselent have K
(5.) what must the President do to
the effects of
recover from n Watergate ? Do
belowe that be will
?
White -
the
FORD
&
GERALD
(
XI GRF is networth investments
(1.) Explain how could purchase
your Uail
(2) Did you purchase the stock in
the old Kent Bank yourself a
sold ?
ok-did you service which you Later
GERALD A. AMMOIT FORD
IV ELECTION REFORM
(1) Do you support public financing of elections - if not,
why not?
What reforms do you believe are necessary?
GERALD R HOTT FORD
V WATERGATE
(1) Should the Watergate Committee continue its investigations?
(2) Do we need a special prosecutor?
How should he be appointed?
What is your opinion of Leon Jarowski?
(3) Should this Committee go forward with its investigation of
the question of the impeachment of the President?
(4) Should the President release the tapes and other pertinent
evidence relating to the Watergate?
(5) What is the extent of Executive Privilege in your view?
How should it be used as a general practice?
How with respect to the Watergate matter?
(6) What would your position be with respect to the Watergate
investigation in the event you became President?
(7) How can you insure us that there will never be another
Watergate episode?should you become President?
FORD LIBRARY
VI THE MEDIA & THE ADMINISTRATION
(1) Recently Pres. Nixon has attacked the media, particularly
TV, for its "vicious, hysterical reporting." Do you agree
with his assessment?
(2) Senator Weicker has released copies of memos between high
White House aides in which plans for a coordinated attack
on the news media were formulated.
What is your opinion of such activity?
(3) What can be done to improve relations between the White House
and the media?
(4) What steps do you intend to take to establish a working
relationship between you and the press?
GERALD R. FORD LIBRARY
VII CURRENT QUESTIONS
(1) What do ve need to do relating to fuel shortages?
Should we have gasoline rationing?
(2) Do you suport the President's impoundment actions? What
is your view generally on this question?
(3) What is the number one domestic problem facing this
country today?
(4) What stage can be taken to control inflation?
(5) Will the shortage of fuel bring about an economic slowdown?
(6) What steps can be taken to prevent this from happening?
FORD R. GERALD LIBRARY
VIII STEELCASE
(1) The CHICAGO DAILY NEWS recently carried a story stating that
you had intervened to help Steelcase Furniture Co. secure
the contract to furnish federal offices in Chicago.
Is this true?
(2) Have Steelcase executives been contributors to your campaigns
over the years?
(3) Would you enumerate the contacts that you or your office
have had with Steelcase Corp. or its officers?
FORD B. GERALO LIBRARY
IX CIVIL RIGHTS
(1) Some/might classify your general record on civil rights
legislation as one of voting to "gut" them with ammendments,
and then supporting the bills on final passage.
How do you answer this?
(2) Recalling the Voting Rights Amendments of 1970 - you
supported a substitute measure to expand coverage to all
parts of the nation. What was your purpose for doing so?
FORD R. GERALO LIBRARY
X GENERAL
(1) What was your relationship, if any, with G. Gordon Liddy?
(2) Do you really believe that Justice Douglas should have been
impeached?
What was your role in this activity?
(3) How do you view your role as Vice President?
(4) What qualities of leadership and character must a President
have?
(5) What must the President do to recover from the effects of
Watergate?
Do you believe that he will recover?
LIBRARY GERALD R. FORD
XI GRF's INVESTMENTS
(1). Explain how you could purchase your Vail condominium?
(2) Did you purchase the stock in The Old Kent Bank yourself
which you later sold?
GERRAL R. FORD LIBRAND
Proposed questions of Rep Ford by Sen RPG:
Rep. Ford, the other members of this committee and myself are with
you necessarily familiar with the processes of political fund raising and
accounting for the funds we receive, their sources and how they are
expended. But I think it may be said that the general public is not
as acquainted with those processes and regards, sometimes with very
good reason, political fund raising and campaign expenditures with
suspicion. In this reppect, one columnist in particular has madexxmme
reported certain matters regarding your campaign funds in 1970 and 1972
in a light which appears to cast them in a questionable light. I'd like
to ask some questions about these matters so that all of us may be fully
infommed about them.
a. First of all, in respect to 1970 it is said that you failed to
report ***** $11,500 received from 5 contributors to your candidacy for
re-el ection to the Congress. Id this true?
4.
Would you explain what was done in xmpas respect to those 5 contributions?
in
To your knowledge were these contributions, then, ultimately reported
by the actual receipient of the funds?
3.
In fact, was there something unique about this process
of endorsing over SEX excess contributions received by you to other
Republican candidates in need of such funds? Had you done the same
thing in other years Can you state other years in which you had done
so?
*
It has been said that you went through this process in 1970 as a means
of "laundering" these funds because, it is claimed, you subsequently received
a like amount of funds from the same or similar committee for your own
use in campaigning this year. The claim is, apparently, therefore, that
you were using these funds but did not wish to disclose their sources in
any report you might make. Is it true that this was a process contrived
to hide these contributions from disclosure by you? Was there a connection
between the checks you endorsed over to this committee and the funds
received by from the other committee for your candidacy?
FORD
lay
It is claimed that you received substantially
A
LIBRARY
more financial support from this national committee than other Republican
GERALD
congressional candidates. Is there an explanation for this?
transfer of
in
Did you do anything in 1970 with regard to funds/excess contributions
to other congressional candidates or concerning receipt of funds from nakin
national committees that was xigni different from what you had done in other
campaign years? To your knowledge were all contributions actually
received by you reported as the law required? Is there any claim or do you
know of any violation of the law allegedly committed by you arising out of
this issue of the 1970 c ontribution?
b. In 1972, mudax some $38,000 was raised on behalf of your candidacy
kyxa
by a committee here in Wax the District of Columbia. That money was then
transmitted by the D.C. Committee to another committee in Grand Rapids
supporting your re-election. The same col umnist has raised certain issues
about that incident.
1. Xxxxx Since the monies contributed to the D.C. Committee were raised
before April 7, 1972 it was not necessary under the law
at that time to list the contributors on any report in the Distrist, is
that not true? And so no such list has been in fact filed with any public
body, isn't that a fact as well?
Xx
, however,
2. Was the receipt/of this $38,000 reported by you and by the Grand Rapids
committee to whom it was transmitted? To whom was that fact reported?
3. In other words, is it your understanding and belief that you and the
committees supporting your candidacy complied in every respect with thexleg
all legal requirments in reporting the receipt of these funds?
know
4.
Do you the names of the contributors to the D.C.
Committee? Why is that so? Who would know the names of these persons?
5. Do you have any objection to the release of the names of these contributors
of those names can be determined, for example, by an examination of the
D.C. Committee's bank records here in Washington? Can that be done? Have
you assisted in attempting to obtain the names of these contributors from
the bank?
5. To your knowledge, in any event, there was nothing either unlawful nor
improper in the 1972 fund raising event ? To your knowledge, Rep Ford,
such fund raising committees were commonly created for to support the
candidacy of a great many candidates for political office, isn't that so?
C. Rep. Ford, for a short period of time in 1968 were you a member of
the Board of Directors of Old Kent Bank & Trust of Grand Rapids, Michigan?
What was the period of your membership?
1. Did you attend any Board meetings within that 46 day period. ?
2x
2. Were you paid any directors fees or any other remuneration for servi
upon that Board?
3. Ino order to serve upon the Bank Board, as I understand it, it was
GERALD THE
necessary for you to purchase a certain number of bank shares of Old Kent
bank stock, isn't that so? Did you purchase that stock out of
your own funds or did the Bank or the Bank Board Chairman, Mr. Gillette, loan
you the funds for that purpose?
4.
Can you tell us, Rep. Ford, what why you originally accepted appointment
to the Board of Directors of the Old Kent Bank and what led you so shortly to
resign from that Board?
5. To your knowledge, did your membership on that Board in any way constitute
any violation of state or federal, law?
6. Did you, then, sell your/stock bank several months later! in 1968?
d. Rep Ford it has been claimed that you received a series of personal loans
over a period of three years - from 1966 through 1969 - amounting to $15,000,
that these loans were made to you by a lobbyist in sums of from $50 to 25 $250
for each loan and that you never paid these monies back to the man claiming to
have loaned such sums to you. Are these assertions the truth?
1. It is claimed that you needed these sums to help with meet medical
costs of caring for your wife in her then illness. Did you need such financial
assistance for in fact?
2. Were you and your family then covered by government wide medical and
hospital indurance? Did that insurance cover the mards financial costs incurred
to care for your wife?
mi
Incidentally, isn't this the same period when you purchased the bank stock out
1.
Do you, in fact, owe this man any monies, loaned to you or otherwise? of your
own funds
5. Did you ever personally receive any monies from this man?
?
6. It is true that he purchased 5 tickets to a fund raising event for
the Republican party held in Grand Rapids, isn't that so? And you wrote
acknowledgeng his contributions to this event as you did to others who likewise
did so, is that not true? Can you tell us approximately how many persons
contributed kka to that fund raising affair? Your letter to him, therefore,
was not a singular or significant communication but simply a letter acknowledging
his contribution, isn't that correct?
EX
e. The gentlemen, Robert N. Winter-Berger has, as we all know, authored
a book in which he claims to be your very close friend and associate. He states
in that book that
FORD A. LIBRARY GERALD
The following is a list of potential questions and possible proposed
adjustments by IRS as they have indicated to me:-
1. Depreciation method of the Vail condominium, the question being whether or
not this property qualifies as residential property. At issue is the accelerated
difference between double declining and 1½ method totalling for years 1970 - 1972
$ 1,700.00.
2. Possible disallowance of 50 % of one automobile, depreciation and related
expenses in view of Mr. Ford being furnished transportation by the government,
it is questionable whether or not he needs his own automobile for business
purposes. Depreciation in auto operating expenses for 1967 through 1972 total
$ 5,055.16. - GAS used
3. The possibility of additional income being charged to Mr. Ford due to
personal expenses being paid from the Fifth District Account. The purchase
of airline tickets and related travelling and entertainment expenses are
numerous and may include personal travel for Mr. Ford, his wife and children.
IRS wants to attempt to identify the purchase of individual tickets and relate
to the receipt of an honorarium. Airline tickets purchased, not related to
a specific receipt of income will be charged to him as personal income. IRS
has indicated the total travel to average about $ 9,000.00 for each year under
review.
4. The Fifth District account has received political contributions in 1972
alone of at least $ 9,000.00. This money was retained in the Fifth District
account and used for travel and other general expenses. I expect IRS to contend
that a part, or all, of this $ 9,000.00 should be charged to Mr. Ford as personal
income. The exact nature of this account is unclear to me. It appears that it
is being used for both political purposes and as a business account relating to
his honorariums and expenses. Before too long, someone is going to ask what
this account is all about and we should be prepared to classify it one way or the
other.
5. I.R.S. is questioning Mr. Ford's cash withdrawals for living expenses for
several years, but is paying particular attention to 1972. The records indicate
that approximately $ 2,900.00 was obtained through checks written to cash. We
have already been told by Mr. Ford that during 1972 he paid their maid in cash.
According to him this amounted to $ 2,000.00 for the year, leaving only $ 900.00
for groceries and general spending. I.R.S. is obviously looking for another
source of cash in this year.
The following is a list of potential questions and possible proposed
adjustments by IRS as they have indicated to me:-
1.
Depreciation method of the Vail condominium, the question being whether or
not this property qualifies as residential property. At issue is the accelerated
difference between double declining and 1½ method totalling for years 1970 - 1972
$ 1,700.00.
2. Possible disallowance of 50 % of one automobile, depreciation and related
expenses in view of Mr. Ford being furnished transportation by the government,
it is questionable whether or not he needs his own automobile for business
purposes. Depreciation in auto operating expenses for 1967 through 1972 total
$ 5,055.16.
3. The possibility of additional income being charged to Mr. Ford due to
personal expenses being paid from the Fifth District Account. The purchase
of airline tickets and related travelling and entertainment expenses are
numerous and may include personal travel for Mr. Ford, his wife and children.
IRS wants to attempt to identify the purchase of individual tickets and relate
to the receipt of an honorarium. Airline tickets purchased, not related to
Jos
a specific receipt of income will be charged to him as personal income. IRS
windos
has indicated the total travel to average about $ 9,000.00 for each year under
review.
4. The Fifth District account has received political contributions in 1972
alone of at least $ 9,000.00. This money was retained in the Fifth District
account and used for travel and other general expenses. I expect IRS to contend
that a part, or all, of this $ 9,000.00 should be charged to Mr. Ford as personal
income. The exact nature of this account is unclear to me. It appears that it
is being used for both political purposes and as a business account relating to
his honorariums and expenses. Before too long, someone is going to ask what
this account is all about and we should be prepared to classify it one way or the
other.
5. I.R.S. is questioning Mr. Ford's cash withdrawals for living expenses for
several years, but is paying particular attention to 1972. The records indicate
that approximately $ 2,900.00 was obtained through checks written to cash. We
have already been told by Mr. Ford that during 1972 he paid their maid in cash.
According to him this amounted to $ 2,000.00 for the year, leaving only $ 900.00
for groceries and general spending. I.R.S. is obviously looking for another
source of cash in this year.
R.
GERALD
1972- 5,000- mr condidate- - Doctor
45 sev year
Name cliping
Condidate in May -
April 7
GERALD in FORD