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:
From Sedam to Mitchell RE: obstacles to Wallace's running for office in various key states. List of states and whether or not Wallace is eligible to run in them attached. 21 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/23/1972
From Higby to Strachan RE: Ehrlichman's relations with the Committee for the Re- Election of the President. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/21/1972
From Haldeman to Ehrlichman RE: Ehrlichman's strong criticisms of the CRP. 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/17/1972
From anonymous author to unknown recipient RE: Ehrlichman's treatment of the Committee for the Re-Election of the President. Handwritten notes added by unknown parties. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], no date
From Ehrlichman to Mitchell RE: poor relations between White House staff members and the CRP. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 2/23/1972
From Magruder to Ehrlichman RE: defining the campaign role of the CRP. 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/3/1972
From Herbert L. Porter to Magruder RE: athletes in support of RN. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 2/28/1972
Talking paper for a meeting with Mitchell generated by Haldeman relating to California and other key states. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], 4/3/1972
From Safire to Haldeman RE: the draft of a statement on campaign spending from Stans and Safire's recommendation that it not be approved. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/14/1972
From Chotiner to Haldeman RE: attached information. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/15/1972
From Chotiner to RN RE: projected 1972 Florida voting figures compared to those of 1968. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Letter], 3/15/1972
From Strachan to Haldeman RE: notes from a meeting on campaign finances. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/15/1972
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: campaign contributions and financial disclosure. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/14/1972
From Chotiner to Haldeman RE: an enclosed document. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/9/1972
From Chotiner to RN RE: analyzing the results of the New Hampshire primary. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Letter], 3/9/1972
From Buchanan to RN RE: information on McGovern's projected victory in the Wisconsin Democratic Primary. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/29/1972
From Higby to Strachan RE: developing a "line" for Wisconsin. Handwritten notes added by unknown. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/16/1972
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: attached information from Tom Girard on Wisconsin. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/28/1972
From Thomas E. Girard to Magruder RE: campaign fund disclosure in Wisconsin. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/28/1972
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: projections for the Wisconsin primary. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Report], 3/28/1972
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: plans for the Maryland primary. Map of Maryland attached. Graphical timeline of operating plan not scanned. 7 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/23/1972
From Nancy Brataas to Magruder RE: the use of telephone operations in the Maryland campaign. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/24/1972
From Robert Morgan, through Magruder, to Mitchell RE: direct mail planning for the Maryland primary. Graphical timeline of the state field organization schedule not scanned. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/23/1972
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: the CRP's operating plan for the California state primary. Graphs of various California political races and map attached. Graphical representation of California primary operating plan not scanned. 13 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/24/1972
From Nofziger to Flemming RE: problems with the California Committee for the Re- Election of the President budget. Budget and speaker schedule for California attached. 8 pgs. [Subject: Domestic Policy] [Memo], 3/9/1972
From Pat Hutar to Marik RE: volunteer programs for the California primary. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/23/1972
From Joanou to Dailey pointing out ways to improve the organization of California in the 1972 election. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/23/1972
From Brataas to Magruder RE: the use of a telephone campaign in the California primary. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/24/1972
From Morgan to Marik RE: plans for the use of direct mail in the California campaign. Proposed plans attached 6 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/22/1972
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: the Committee for the Re-Election of the President's operating plan for the Indiana primary. Map of Indiana included. Graphical operating plan not scanned. 9 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/27/1972
From anonymous author to unknown recipient RE: the CRP's operating plan for the primary in the State of Michigan. Handwritten notes added by unknown. Map included. Graphical operating plan not scanned. 5 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/15/1972
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: planning for the primaries in various states. Chart of primary activities in the same states attached. 6 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/23/1972
From Marik, through Magruder, to Mitchell summarizing primary activities in New Hampshire. 7 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Report], 3/16/1972
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: planning for the primaries in various states. Chart of primary activities in the same states attached. 7 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/14/1972
Handwritten notes relating to various campaign topics in California. 5 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 2/26/1972
Graphical operating schedule for primaries in various states. Not scanned. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], no date
From Magruder to unknown RE: planning for presidential primaries in various states. Handwritten notes added by unknown. Chart of proposed activities attached. 6 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 2/22/1972
Various documents bundled together to form a report on the Campaign Strategy Group's plan for the California Primary. Handwritten notes added by unknown. Charts and map of California included. 9 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Report], 2/26/1972
Graphical representation of the operating plan for the California primary. Not scanned. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], no date
Handwritten notes relating to the campaign in Oregon. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], 3/4/1972
Handwritten notes relating to the campaign in Indiana. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], 3/4/1972
Handwritten notes relating to the campaign primary activities. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], no date
From W. Richard Howard to Higby RE: an attached document from Magruder. Handwritten notes added from Higby to Strachan. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/21/1972
From G. Gordon Liddy to Mitchell RE: states permitting write-ins in presidential primaries. Information taken from "Political Reoprt" on those states included. 7 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/13/1972
From Colson to Higby RE: the role of writeins in presidential primaries. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/7/1972
From Higby to Haldeman summarizing Colson's meeting with RN. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/7/1972
From G. Gordon Liddy to Mitchell RE: states permitting write-ins in presidential primaries. Information taken from "Political Reoprt" on those states included. 7 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/13/1972
From Higby to Strachan RE: an attached document. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/14/1972
Talking paper for a meeting with the Attorney General generated by Haldeman relating to primary campaigning. Handwritten responses added by unknown. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], 3/7/1972
From Higby to Haldeman summarizing Colson's meeting with RN. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/7/1972
Talking paper for a meeting with the Attorney General generated by Haldeman relating to primary campaigning. Handwritten notes added by Higby and unknown. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], 3/7/1972
Talking paper for a meeting with the Attorney General generated by Haldeman relating to primary campaigning. Handwritten notes added by unknown. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], 3/7/1972
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: operating plans for the Michigan presidential primary. Map of Michigan included. Graphical representation of plan not scanned. 6 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/22/1972
From Robert Morgan, through Magruder, to Mitchell RE: a direct mail program for the Michigan presidential primary. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/23/1972
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: operating plans for the Massachusetts presidential primary. Map of Massachusetts included. 6 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/23/1972
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: operating plans for the Oregon presidential primary. Map of Oregon included. Graphical representation of plan not scanned. 8 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/21/1972
From Clifford A. Miller to Dailey and Joanou RE: Democrats' use of various media in their presidential campaigns. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/27/1972
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
26145954
label
WHSF: Contested, 30-4
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
26145954
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
WHSF: Contested, 30-4
description
This file contains:
From Sedam to Mitchell RE: obstacles to Wallace's running for office in various key states. List of states and whether or not Wallace is eligible to run in them attached. 21 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/23/1972
From Higby to Strachan RE: Ehrlichman's relations with the Committee for the Re- Election of the President. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/21/1972
From Haldeman to Ehrlichman RE: Ehrlichman's strong criticisms of the CRP. 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/17/1972
From anonymous author to unknown recipient RE: Ehrlichman's treatment of the Committee for the Re-Election of the President. Handwritten notes added by unknown parties. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], no date
From Ehrlichman to Mitchell RE: poor relations between White House staff members and the CRP. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 2/23/1972
From Magruder to Ehrlichman RE: defining the campaign role of the CRP. 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/3/1972
From Herbert L. Porter to Magruder RE: athletes in support of RN. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 2/28/1972
Talking paper for a meeting with Mitchell generated by Haldeman relating to California and other key states. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], 4/3/1972
From Safire to Haldeman RE: the draft of a statement on campaign spending from Stans and Safire's recommendation that it not be approved. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/14/1972
From Chotiner to Haldeman RE: attached information. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/15/1972
From Chotiner to RN RE: projected 1972 Florida voting figures compared to those of 1968. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Letter], 3/15/1972
From Strachan to Haldeman RE: notes from a meeting on campaign finances. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/15/1972
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: campaign contributions and financial disclosure. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/14/1972
From Chotiner to Haldeman RE: an enclosed document. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/9/1972
From Chotiner to RN RE: analyzing the results of the New Hampshire primary. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Letter], 3/9/1972
From Buchanan to RN RE: information on McGovern's projected victory in the Wisconsin Democratic Primary. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/29/1972
From Higby to Strachan RE: developing a "line" for Wisconsin. Handwritten notes added by unknown. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/16/1972
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: attached information from Tom Girard on Wisconsin. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/28/1972
From Thomas E. Girard to Magruder RE: campaign fund disclosure in Wisconsin. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/28/1972
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: projections for the Wisconsin primary. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Report], 3/28/1972
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: plans for the Maryland primary. Map of Maryland attached. Graphical timeline of operating plan not scanned. 7 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/23/1972
From Nancy Brataas to Magruder RE: the use of telephone operations in the Maryland campaign. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/24/1972
From Robert Morgan, through Magruder, to Mitchell RE: direct mail planning for the Maryland primary. Graphical timeline of the state field organization schedule not scanned. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/23/1972
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: the CRP's operating plan for the California state primary. Graphs of various California political races and map attached. Graphical representation of California primary operating plan not scanned. 13 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/24/1972
From Nofziger to Flemming RE: problems with the California Committee for the Re- Election of the President budget. Budget and speaker schedule for California attached. 8 pgs. [Subject: Domestic Policy] [Memo], 3/9/1972
From Pat Hutar to Marik RE: volunteer programs for the California primary. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/23/1972
From Joanou to Dailey pointing out ways to improve the organization of California in the 1972 election. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/23/1972
From Brataas to Magruder RE: the use of a telephone campaign in the California primary. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/24/1972
From Morgan to Marik RE: plans for the use of direct mail in the California campaign. Proposed plans attached 6 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/22/1972
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: the Committee for the Re-Election of the President's operating plan for the Indiana primary. Map of Indiana included. Graphical operating plan not scanned. 9 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/27/1972
From anonymous author to unknown recipient RE: the CRP's operating plan for the primary in the State of Michigan. Handwritten notes added by unknown. Map included. Graphical operating plan not scanned. 5 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/15/1972
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: planning for the primaries in various states. Chart of primary activities in the same states attached. 6 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/23/1972
From Marik, through Magruder, to Mitchell summarizing primary activities in New Hampshire. 7 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Report], 3/16/1972
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: planning for the primaries in various states. Chart of primary activities in the same states attached. 7 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/14/1972
Handwritten notes relating to various campaign topics in California. 5 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 2/26/1972
Graphical operating schedule for primaries in various states. Not scanned. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], no date
From Magruder to unknown RE: planning for presidential primaries in various states. Handwritten notes added by unknown. Chart of proposed activities attached. 6 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 2/22/1972
Various documents bundled together to form a report on the Campaign Strategy Group's plan for the California Primary. Handwritten notes added by unknown. Charts and map of California included. 9 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Report], 2/26/1972
Graphical representation of the operating plan for the California primary. Not scanned. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], no date
Handwritten notes relating to the campaign in Oregon. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], 3/4/1972
Handwritten notes relating to the campaign in Indiana. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], 3/4/1972
Handwritten notes relating to the campaign primary activities. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], no date
From W. Richard Howard to Higby RE: an attached document from Magruder. Handwritten notes added from Higby to Strachan. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/21/1972
From G. Gordon Liddy to Mitchell RE: states permitting write-ins in presidential primaries. Information taken from "Political Reoprt" on those states included. 7 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/13/1972
From Colson to Higby RE: the role of writeins in presidential primaries. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/7/1972
From Higby to Haldeman summarizing Colson's meeting with RN. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/7/1972
From G. Gordon Liddy to Mitchell RE: states permitting write-ins in presidential primaries. Information taken from "Political Reoprt" on those states included. 7 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/13/1972
From Higby to Strachan RE: an attached document. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/14/1972
Talking paper for a meeting with the Attorney General generated by Haldeman relating to primary campaigning. Handwritten responses added by unknown. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], 3/7/1972
From Higby to Haldeman summarizing Colson's meeting with RN. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/7/1972
Talking paper for a meeting with the Attorney General generated by Haldeman relating to primary campaigning. Handwritten notes added by Higby and unknown. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], 3/7/1972
Talking paper for a meeting with the Attorney General generated by Haldeman relating to primary campaigning. Handwritten notes added by unknown. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], 3/7/1972
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: operating plans for the Michigan presidential primary. Map of Michigan included. Graphical representation of plan not scanned. 6 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/22/1972
From Robert Morgan, through Magruder, to Mitchell RE: a direct mail program for the Michigan presidential primary. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/23/1972
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: operating plans for the Massachusetts presidential primary. Map of Massachusetts included. 6 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/23/1972
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: operating plans for the Oregon presidential primary. Map of Oregon included. Graphical representation of plan not scanned. 8 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/21/1972
From Clifford A. Miller to Dailey and Joanou RE: Democrats' use of various media in their presidential campaigns. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/27/1972
citationUrl
collections
Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection
Contested Materials Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
26145954
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
eb5785428c7d2b05
ocrText
Richard Nixon Presidential Library
Contested Materials Collection
Folder List
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
30
4
3/23/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Sedam to Mitchell RE: obstacles to
Wallace's running for office in various key
states. List of states and whether or not
Wallace is eligible to run in them attached.
21 pgs.
30
4
3/21/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Higby to Strachan RE: Ehrlichman's
relations with the Committee for the Re-
Election of the President. 2 pgs.
30
4
3/17/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Haldeman to Ehrlichman RE:
Ehrlichman's strong criticisms of the CRP. 3
pgs.
30
4
Campaign
Memo
Memo from anonymous author to unknown
recipient RE: Ehrlichman's treatment of the
Committee for the Re-Election of the
President. Handwritten notes added by
unknown parties. 2 pgs.
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Page 1 of 12
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
30
4
2/23/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Ehrlichman to Mitchell RE: poor
relations between White House staff
members and the CRP. 2 pgs.
30
4
3/3/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Magruder to Ehrlichman RE: defining
the campaign role of the CRP. 3 pgs.
30
4
2/28/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Herbert L. Porter to Magruder RE:
athletes in support of RN. 2 pgs.
30
4
4/3/1972
Campaign
Other Document
Talking paper for a meeting with Mitchell
generated by Haldeman relating to California
and other key states. 1 pg.
30
4
3/14/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Safire to Haldeman RE: the draft of a
statement on campaign spending from Stans
and Safire's recommendation that it not be
approved. 2 pgs.
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Page 2 of 12
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
30
4
3/15/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Chotiner to Haldeman RE: attached
information. 1 pg.
30
4
3/15/1972
Campaign
Letter
From Chotiner to RN RE: projected 1972
Florida voting figures compared to those of
1968. 1 pg.
30
4
3/15/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Strachan to Haldeman RE: notes from
a meeting on campaign finances. 1 pg.
30
4
3/14/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: campaign
contributions and financial disclosure. 2 pgs.
30
4
3/9/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Chotiner to Haldeman RE: an enclosed
document. 1 pg.
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Page 3 of 12
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
30
4
3/9/1972
Campaign
Letter
From Chotiner to RN RE: analyzing the
results of the New Hampshire primary. 1 pg.
30
4
3/29/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Buchanan to RN RE: information on
McGovern's projected victory in the
Wisconsin Democratic Primary. 2 pgs.
30
4
3/16/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Higby to Strachan RE: developing a
"line" for Wisconsin. Handwritten notes
added by unknown. 1 pg.
30
4
3/28/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: attached
information from Tom Girard on Wisconsin.
1 pg.
30
4
3/28/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Thomas E. Girard to Magruder RE:
campaign fund disclosure in Wisconsin. 1 pg.
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Page 4 of 12
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
30
4
3/28/1972
Campaign
Report
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: projections
for the Wisconsin primary. 2 pgs.
30
4
3/23/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: plans for the
Maryland primary. Map of Maryland
attached. Graphical timeline of operating
plan not scanned. 7 pgs.
30
4
3/24/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Nancy Brataas to Magruder RE: the
use of telephone operations in the Maryland
campaign. 2 pgs.
30
4
3/23/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Robert Morgan, through Magruder, to
Mitchell RE: direct mail planning for the
Maryland primary. Graphical timeline of the
state field organization schedule not scanned.
2 pgs.
30
4
3/24/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: the CRP's
operating plan for the California state
primary. Graphs of various California
political races and map attached. Graphical
representation of California primary
operating plan not scanned. 13 pgs.
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Page 5 of 12
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
30
4
3/9/1972
Domestic Policy
Memo
From Nofziger to Flemming RE: problems
with the California Committee for the Re-
Election of the President budget. Budget and
speaker schedule for California attached. 8
pgs.
30
4
3/23/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Pat Hutar to Marik RE: volunteer
programs for the California primary. 2 pgs.
30
4
3/23/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Joanou to Dailey pointing out ways to
improve the organization of California in the
1972 election. 2 pgs.
30
4
3/24/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Brataas to Magruder RE: the use of a
telephone campaign in the California
primary. 2 pgs.
30
4
3/22/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Morgan to Marik RE: plans for the use
of direct mail in the California campaign.
Proposed plans attached 6 pgs.
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Page 6 of 12
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
30
4
3/27/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: the
Committee for the Re-Election of the
President's operating plan for the Indiana
primary. Map of Indiana included.
Graphical operating plan not scanned. 9 pgs.
30
4
3/15/1972
Campaign
Memo
From anonymous author to unknown
recipient RE: the CRP's operating plan for
the primary in the State of Michigan.
Handwritten notes added by unknown. Map
included. Graphical operating plan not
scanned. 5 pgs.
30
4
3/23/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: planning for
the primaries in various states. Chart of
primary activities in the same states attached.
6 pgs.
30
4
3/16/1972
Campaign
Report
From Marik, through Magruder, to Mitchell
summarizing primary activities in New
Hampshire. 7 pgs.
30
4
3/14/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: planning for
the primaries in various states. Chart of
primary activities in the same states attached.
7 pgs.
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Page 7 of 12
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
30
4
2/26/1972
Campaign
Memo
Handwritten notes relating to various
campaign topics in California. 5 pgs.
30
4
Campaign
Other Document
Graphical operating schedule for primaries in
various states. Not scanned.
30
4
2/22/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Magruder to unknown RE: planning for
presidential primaries in various states.
Handwritten notes added by unknown. Chart
of proposed activities attached. 6 pgs.
30
4
2/26/1972
Campaign
Report
Various documents bundled together to form
a report on the Campaign Strategy Group's
plan for the California Primary. Handwritten
notes added by unknown. Charts and map of
California included. 9 pgs.
30
4
Campaign
Other Document
Graphical representation of the operating
plan for the California primary. Not scanned.
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Page 8 of 12
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
30
4
3/4/1972
Campaign
Other Document
Handwritten notes relating to the campaign
in Oregon. 1 pg.
30
4
3/4/1972
Campaign
Other Document
Handwritten notes relating to the campaign
in Indiana. 2 pgs.
30
4
Campaign
Other Document
Handwritten notes relating to the campaign
primary activities. 1 pg.
30
4
3/21/1972
Campaign
Memo
From W. Richard Howard to Higby RE: an
attached document from Magruder.
Handwritten notes added from Higby to
Strachan. 1 pg.
30
4
3/13/1972
Campaign
Memo
From G. Gordon Liddy to Mitchell RE:
states permitting write-ins in presidential
primaries. Information taken from "Political
Reoprt" on those states included. 7 pgs.
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Page 9 of 12
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
30
4
3/7/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Colson to Higby RE: the role of write-
ins in presidential primaries. 1 pg.
30
4
3/7/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Higby to Haldeman summarizing
Colson's meeting with RN. 1 pg.
30
4
3/13/1972
Campaign
Memo
From G. Gordon Liddy to Mitchell RE:
states permitting write-ins in presidential
primaries. Information taken from "Political
Reoprt" on those states included. 7 pgs.
30
4
3/14/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Higby to Strachan RE: an attached
document. 1 pg.
30
4
3/7/1972
Campaign
Other Document
Talking paper for a meeting with the
Attorney General generated by Haldeman
relating to primary campaigning.
Handwritten responses added by unknown. 1
pg.
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Page 10 of 12
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
30
4
3/7/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Higby to Haldeman summarizing
Colson's meeting with RN. 1 pg.
30
4
3/7/1972
Campaign
Other Document
Talking paper for a meeting with the
Attorney General generated by Haldeman
relating to primary campaigning.
Handwritten notes added by Higby and
unknown. 1 pg.
30
4
3/7/1972
Campaign
Other Document
Talking paper for a meeting with the
Attorney General generated by Haldeman
relating to primary campaigning.
Handwritten notes added by unknown. 1 pg.
30
4
3/22/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: operating
plans for the Michigan presidential primary.
Map of Michigan included. Graphical
representation of plan not scanned. 6 pgs.
30
4
3/23/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Robert Morgan, through Magruder, to
Mitchell RE: a direct mail program for the
Michigan presidential primary. 2 pgs.
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Page 11 of 12
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
30
4
3/23/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: operating
plans for the Massachusetts presidential
primary. Map of Massachusetts included. 6
pgs.
30
4
3/21/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Magruder to Mitchell RE: operating
plans for the Oregon presidential primary.
Map of Oregon included. Graphical
representation of plan not scanned. 8 pgs.
30
4
3/27/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Clifford A. Miller to Dailey and
Joanou RE: Democrats' use of various media
in their presidential campaigns. 1 pg.
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Page 12 of 12
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
March 23, 1972
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE N.W.
WASHINGTON D. C. 20006
(202) 333-0920
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR:
THE HONORABLE JOHN N. MITCHELL
FROM:
GLENN J. SEDAM, JR.
SUBJECT:
Legal Obstacles to Governor Wallace
Qualifying for the General Election
Ballot
We have reviewed the laws of the Presidential Primary states
(except the District of Columbia), the five states Governor
Wallace carried in 1968, and eight other states to determine
what legal obstacles may stand in his way. in qualifying for
the General Election Ballot after having run as a candidate
for nomination in several Democrat Primaries.
Further, we have reviewed the legal status of the American
Independent Party (sometimes called the American Party) in
each state, and where that party is not a qualified political
party we have reviewed the requirements a minor or new party
must meet to have their candidate placed on the General Election
Ballot. We have also reviewed the requirements an Independent
candidate (e.g. McCarthy) must meet to qualify for the Ballot.
The review of the Presidential Preference Primary states is
attached as Tab A. Governor Wallace, by having run in the
Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Nebraska, Oregon, Pennsylvania,
and South Dakota primaries, will be barred in those states from
running in the General Election. In Maryland, Nebraska, and
Pennsylvania, he is barred by having missed the General Election
filing deadlines. He will be barred in Indiana, Michigan, South
CONFIDENTIAL
The Honorable John N. Mitchell
March 23, 1972
Page 2
Dakota, and Oregon by statutory prohibitions against running in
the General Election after having run as a candidate in the
Primary. However, the Indiana statute will probably be given
an interpretation by the State Board of Elections which will
permit Governor Wallace's nomination by the AIP. The statutes
in Oregon, Michigan, and South Dakota may be challenged in
court, and if successfully so, then in only Maryland, Nebraska,
IX
and Pennsylvania will he be barred from the General Election
Ballot.
The review of the five states Governor Wallace carried in 1968
is attached as Tab B. The AIP would face no legal obstacles in
running the Governor as their candidate in these five states.
They are, however, facing a practical problem in Arkansas for
they must obtain 43,000 signatures which they apparently are
having difficulty doing. Furthermore, the filing deadline in
Arkansas is not yet established, and the Attorney General is
apparently delaying setting a deadline to give the AIP more
time. How long he can delay is unresolved.
In Georgia, 98,000 signatures will be required and that could
become a practical problem.
The review of eight other states (Arizona, Iowa, Kentucky,
Missouri, New York, South Carolina, Texas, and Virginia) is
attached as Tab C. Governor Wallace faces no legal obstacles
in qualifying in any of these states, but is facing practical
obstacles in Texas.
In Texas, the AIP must gather 23,000 signatures between May 6
and June 30 to qualify as a party, and it appears at this time
that they may have difficulty doing SO.
In conclusion, of the thirty-three states reviewed, Governor
Wallace cannot run as a third party candidate, or as an Independent,
in Maryland, Nebraska, and Pennsylvania. He is also barred from
running as a third party candidate or as an Independent, if
current statutory provisions are upheld, in Indiana, Michigan,
South Dakota, and Oregon. He appears to be facing practical diffi-
culties in Arkansas, Georgia, and Texas.
CONFIDENTIAL
The Honorable John N. Mitchell
March 23, 1972
Page 3
In all other of the thirty-three states reviewed he will
face no legal or practical obstacles in qualifying as a
third party candidate. It could be said, however, that
one gets the feeling in talking with Secretaries of State
and with persons in their offices, that Governor Wallace
and his supporters are not generally taking the steps they
should be taking to develop the momentum which will be
required to qualify the AIP as a party, or to qualify the
Governor as a candidate, and that should they later decide
to do so the momentum to gather the needed signatures may
not be easily developed.
CONFIDENTIAL
A
CALIFORNIA
Governor Wallace is not on the Democrat Primary Ballot in
California, and faces no legal obstacles in running as a
third party candidate in the General Election.
The AIP is a recognized party in California and can certify
Wallace as a candidate for President to the Secretary of
State after the national and state AIP conventions in July
(exact dates not yet set).
An Independent candidate faces a difficult practical obstacle
in that to be placed on the Ballot nomination papers, signed
by voters equal to not less than 5 percent of the entire
vote cast in the 1970 Gubernatorial Election (about 325,500
signatures), must be filed with the Secretary of State after
August 21, but not later than September 14.
FLORIDA
There are no legal obstacles to Governor Wallace running in
the Florida General Election as a candidate of any other party.
The AIP, not having 5 percent of the total registered voters
of the state on January 1, is not a recognized political party.
Therefore, to run Wallace as a candidate in the General Election,
the AIP must submit petitions signed by 1 percent of the regis-
tered voters in Florida (there must be a separate petition from
each county). Petitions must be submitted by August 15.
Any candidate to run as an Independent would follow the same
procedure.
ILLINOIS
Governor Wallace was not on the Democratic Primary Ballot in
Illinois, and faces no legal obstacles in running in the
General Election.
The AIP is not a recognized party in Illinois. Therefore, to
run Governor Wallace as a candidate, the AIP must form a new
political party by filing with the Secretary of State a peti-
tion declaring their intention to form such a party, signed
by not less than 25,000 voters, and by filing a certificate
of nomination with the State Election Board by August 7.
Independent candidates must file nomination papers signed by
25,000 voters with the State Election Board by August 7.
INDIANA
Governor Wallace is on the Democratic Primary Ballot in Indiana.
If he loses that primary, there is a legal obstaçle to his
running in the General Election.
An Indiana statute provides that no person who is defeated in
any primary may be eligible to become a candidate for the same
office in the next General Election (Burns Annotated Statutes,
Section 29-3620). However, this statutory provision is subject
to the interpretation that while a candidate may not be eligible
to run in the General Election after being defeated in a primary,
he may be permitted to run in the General Election as the nominee
of a party. Attorneys on Wallace's behalf have taken this issue
to the State Election Board. The State Election Board has reques-
ted an opinion from the State Attorney General, but we are told
no opinion will be issued. It will then be the responsibility of
the State Election Board to resolve the issue. While it is
impossible to know what the Board will decide, we have learned
that the attorney for the Board favors the interpretation that
Governor Wallace could run as the nominee of the AIP. A decision
by the Board is expected before the May 2 Primary.
The AIP is not a recognized political party in Indiana. Therefore,
should they attempt to run Governor Wallace as a candidate in the
General Election, they must file with the Governor of Indiana a
petition signed by voters equal in number to 1 percent of the total
vote cast in the last preceding General Election (approximately
9,000 signatures). That petition must be filed no later than
September 1.
Independent candidates follow the same petition procedure with the
deadline, September 1.
MARYLAND
Governor Wallace will be a candidate in the Democrat Primary in
Maryland. Whether he wins or loses that primary, the only way in
which he can be on the General Election Ballot in Maryland is
to be the nominee of the Democrat National Convention.
Independents and candidates of any party other than the Democrat
or GOP Parties must have filed a Certificate of Candidacy by
March 6. Even though the AIP is a recognized minority party in
Maryland they would have had to follow that procedure.
Consequently, the deadline having passed, there is no way Wallace
can run in the General Election in Maryland except as the National
Democrat Party nominee.
MASSACHUSETTS
Governor Wallace will be running in the Massachusetts Democrat
Presidential Primary, and will face no legal obstacles in running
in the General Election.
The AIP is not a recognized political party in Massachusetts;
hence, they must proceed as a new party and must file nomination
papers containing 56,038 signatures by July 11, 1972, with the
State Board of Elections.
Independent candidates proceed in the same manner.
MICHIGAN
Governor Wallace will be on the Democrat Presidential Primary
Ballot in Michigan, and will, therefore, be prohibited from
running in the General Election.
A Michigan statute provides that no person whose name has
been placed on the primary ballot shall be a candidate of an-
other party in the General Election.
There is no statutory provision for Independent candidates in
Michigan.
While the above statute, if not declared invalid, would pro-
hibit Wallace from running as a candidate of the AIP, the AIP
is a recognized major political party in Michigan and can
certify a candidate after their convention in August. They
will probably, therefore, challenge the statute.
NEBRASKA
Governor Wallace will be on the Democrat Primary Ballot in
Nebraska. Whether he wins or loses that Democratic Primary,
there is no way in which he can be on the Nebraska General
Election Ballot except to be the nominee of the National Demo-
crat Party.
The American Independent Party is not a recognized major party
in Nebraska. Parties other than recognized major parties, and
Independents, must have filed petitions by February 9 to be
candidates on the General Election Ballot. No parties and no
Independents have done SO. Consequently, the deadline having
passed, Governor Wallace cannot run in the General Election in
Nebraska except as the National Democrat Party nominee.
NEW HAMPSHIRE
Governor Wallace was not on the Primary Ballot in New Hampshire
and faces no legal obstacles in running in the New Hampshire
General Election.
The AIP is a recognized party in New Hampshire and, after hold-
ing a state convention, may certify Presidential candidates to
the Secretary of State. The state convention must be held not
later than October 3.
Independent candidates must file petitions with the Secretary
of State, signed by at least 1,000 voters, and must be sub-
mitted not later than September 28.
NEW JERSEY
Governor Wallace has not yet filed for the New Jersey Primary
(deadline will be April 27). Even if he files, however, and
is defeated, he will face no legal obstacles in running in the
General Election.
The AIP is not a recognized party in New Jersey. To run a
candidate in the General Election, the AIP will have to nomi-
nate by petition signed by voters equal to 2 percent of the
entire vote cast in the last General Election (approximately
43,000 signatures). Nominating petitions must be filed with
the Secretary of State not later than April 27.
An Independent candidate must follow the same petitioning procedures.
NEW MEXICO
Governor Wallace will be on the Democrat Primary Ballot in New
Mexico but will face no legal obstacles in running in the
General Election.
The AIP is not currently a qualified political party in New
Mexico and must proceed to re-qualify as a minor or new party
by filing its rules and regulations, and must file a Certifi-
cate of Nomination, signed by the chairman and secretary of the
state convention, with the Secretary of State not later than
September 8.
There are no statutory provisions for Independent candidates.
NORTH CAROLINA
Governor Wallace will be on the Democratic Primary Ballot in
North Carolina. Should he lose, there are no legal obstacles
to his running in the General Election.
The AIP is a recognized political party in North Carolina and
may certify a Presidential candidate to the Secretary of State
after the AIP's July convention. Certification must be made
by August 1.
Independent candidates face difficult practical obstacles in
that they must file with their nominating petition an affi-
davit stating that they are not affiliated with any political
party. This must be filed with the State Board of Elections
not later than May 31. As a further practical obstacle, the
petition must be signed by qualified voters equal to 25 percent
of the total 1968 Presidential vote (approximately 397,000
signatures).
OHIO
Governor Wallace is not on the Primary Ballot in Ohio but
would face no legal obstacles in running in the General
Election as a third party candidate. He would not, how-
ever, be permitted to run as an Independent for the filing
deadline has passed.
The AIP is recognized as a party in Ohio and can certify
candidates to the Secretary of State after a state conven-
tion (date not yet determined). The state AIP chairman has
informed the Ohio Board of Elections that the AIP will be
placing Governor Wallace's name on the Ballot as an AIP
candidate whether or not he receives the Democratic nomination.
Independent candidates were to have filed petitions by Febru-
ary 2. Only one minor state individual has filed as an
Independent.
OREGON
Governor Wallace will be on the Democrat Presidential Primary
Ballot and, consequently, will be prohibited by statute from
running in the General Election as a candidate for any other
party, or as an Independent.
We are informed by the Secretary of State's office, however,
that there is considerable discussion in Oregon concerning
this statutory prohibition and that it is anticipated that, be-
cause of the requirement that a candidate in the Primary cannot
remove himself from the Ballot once nominated by the Secretary
of State, a court challenge to the petition will be filed.
Were the AIP to attempt to run Governor Wallace, they would
have to proceed as a new political party and must file a peti-
tion signed by registered voters equal in number to 5 percent
of the vote cast in the last General Election (approximately
3,300 signatures), or proceed as an "organized group" and hold
a state-wide meeting with 1,000 voters present. In either case,
a Certificate of Nomination must be filed with the Secretary of
State not later than August 29.
Independent candidates must file a petition of nomination signed
by voters equal in number to not less than 3 percent of the state
vote in the last Presidential election (approximately 24,500
signatures). Such Certificate of Nomination must be filed not
later than August 29.
PENNSYLVANIA
Governor Wallace will be on the Democrat Primary Ballot in
Pennsylvania. Whether or not he wins that election, the
only way he can be on the General Election Ballot is as the
nominee of the National Democrat Party.
The AIP is not recognized as a qualified political party in
Pennsylvania. Candidates of political parties not so qualified
must have filed nomination papers with the Secretary of the
Commonwealth not later than March 8. No political parties have
done SO.
Independent candidates would also have had to file nomination
papers not later than March 8. None have done SO.
RHODE ISLAND
Governor Wallace will be on the Democrat Primary Ballot but will
face no legal obstacles in running in the General Election.
The AIP is not a recognized political party in Rhode Island
and must, therefore, proceed as a new party and must file nomina-
tion papers, signed by 500 voters, with the Secretary of State
not later than August 12.
Independent candidates petition in the same manner.
SOUTH DAKOTA
Governor Wallace has not yet filed for the Democratic Presi-
dential Primary (filing deadline April 21). Should he do so
he would be barred from running in the General Election by a
state statute which provides that an individual entering the
primary of one party cannot then file for the General Election
as a candidate of another party.
The AIP is not a recognized party in South Dakota. To have a
candidate for President on the ballot, they must file a Certifi-
cate of Nomination not later than April 27, signed by 10 per-
cent of the voters of the state (approximately 35,000 signatures).
An Independent candidate must file with the Secretary of State
not later than August 9 a Certificate of Nomination signed
by not less than 2 percent of the total vote in the last General
Election (approximately 5,000 signatures).
TENNESSEE
Governor Wallace is on the Democrat Primary Ballot in Tennessee
but will have no legal obstacles in running in the General Election.
The AIP is a recognized party in Tennessee and can certify a
candidate for President. They will do so after their convention
in July.
Independent candidates must file a petition, signed by 25 voters,
not later than September 1.
WEST VIRGINIA
Governor Wallace is on the Democrat Primary Ballot in West
Virginia. Should he lose, there will be no legal obstacle
to his being on the General Election Ballot.
The AIP is not a recognized party in West Virginia and must,
therefore, proceed as a new party and must circulate a petition
signed by voters equal to not less than one percent of the
total vote cast in the 1968 Presidential election (approximately
7,500 signatures). The petition must be filed not later than
May 8.
Independent candidates must proceed by the same petitioning
procedure, which petitions must be filed not later than April 10.
WISCONSIN
Governor Wallace is on the Democrat Primary Ballot in Wisconsin.
Should he lose, there will be no legal obstacle to his running
in the General Election.
The AIP is not a recognized political party in Wisconsin. To
nominate a candidate they must file nomination papers with the
Secretary of State not later than September 19, with signatures
of not less than 3,000 voters.
Independent candidates proceed in the same manner.
B
ALABAMA
There are no legal obstacles to Governor Wallace running in
the General Election.
The AIP is a recognized party in Alabama and can certify its
candidate for President to the Secretary of State. It must
do so not later than September 8.
Independent candidates must file a petition bearing the
signatures of 300 voters with the Secretary of State not
later than May 2.
ARKANSAS
There are no legal obstacles to Governor Wallace running in the
General Election, but there appears to be a practical problem
in gathering the required number of signatures.
The AIP is not now a qualified party in Arkansas, but they
are attempting to qualify. To do so they must file petitions
with signatures equaling 7% of the vote cast in the 1970
Gubernatorial Election (approximately 43,000 signatures).
The deadline for filing is not stated in the statute and will
be set by the Attorney General. The Secretary of State advised
us that "it's a damned mess, but we're doing everything we can
to get them qualified!"
An Independent candidate must file a petition with signatures
equal to 15% of the vote cast in the 1970 Gubernatorial
Election (approximately 91,300 signatures) by April 4 -- a
practical impossibility.
GEORGIA
There are no legal obstacles to Governor Wallace running in the
General Election.
The AIP is not recognized as a major political party in Georgia
and must therefore proceed as a minor or new party. To do so
they must have held a convention by May 9, and must also file
nominating petitions, signed by not less than 5% of the voters
eligible to vote (approximately 98,000 signatures), with the
Secretary of State by June 14.
Independent candidates must file nominating petitions with
about 98,000 signatures by June 14.
LOUISIANA
There are no legal obstacles to Governor Wallace running in the
General Election.
The AIP is a recognized party and may certify a candidate for
President to the Secretary of State not later than September 26.
An Independent candidate must file with the Secretary of State
nominating papers signed by 1,000 voters not later than September 26.
MISSISSIPPI
There are no legal obstacles to Governor Wallace running in the
General Election.
The AIP is not a registered party in Mississippi and must proceed
as an Independent candidate would proceed by filing petitions
with 10,000 signatures with the Secretary of State not later than
September 28.
C
ARIZONA
There are no legal obstacles to Governor Wallace running in
the General Election.
The AIP is not recognized as a party and they must file anew.
A new party must file petitions signed by not less than 2% of
the vote in the last General Election (approximately 8,000
signatures) with the Secretary of State by July 14.
An Independent candidate must file petitions with approximately
4,000 names by August 12.
IOWA
There are no legal obstacles to Governor Wallace running in a
General Election.
The AIP is recognized as a political party in Iowa and can,
therefore, nominate a candidate for President and Presidential
Electors at a state party convention. A date has not been set
for an AIP convention but the name of a candidate for President
must be certified to the Secretary of State not later than
September 4.
An Independent candidate may be nominated by petition signed
by not less than 1,000 voters. The petition must be filed with
the Secretary of State not later than September 4.
KENTUCKY
There are no legal obstacles to Governor Wallace running in the
General Election.
The American Independent Party is recognized in Kentucky as a
minor political party and may nominate candidates by convention.
After a convention, Certificates of Nomination must be filed with
the Secretary of State not later than September 13.
An Independent candidate can get on the ballot by filing a
nominating petition signed by 1,000 qualified voters. That
petition must be filed with the Secretary of State not later
than September 13.
MISSOURI
There are no legal obstacles to Governor Wallace running in the
General Election.
The American Independent Party is not a recognized major political
party. To run a candidate they must form a new political party
by filing with the Secretary of State a petition signed by 1% of
the vote cast in each Congressional District in the last General
Election declaring their intent to form a new party, not later
than August 31.
Independent candidates can also file by petition, such petitions
to be filed with the Secretary of State by August 8.
NEW YORK
There are no legal obstacles to Governor Wallace running in the
General Election.
Any candidate running as a nominee of any party other than
the Democrat or Republican parties, or as an Independent, must
file petitions signed by 20,000 voters with the Secretary of
State by August 31.
SOUTH CAROLINA
There are no legal obstacles to Governor Wallace running in the
General Election.
The AIP is a recognized political party in South Carolina and as
such may certify a Presidential candidate to the Secretary of
State after the AIP convention in July.
An Independent candidate must file a nominating petition signed
by 10,000 voters with the State Election Commission not later
than October 3.
TEXAS
There are no legal obstacles to Governor Wallace running in the
General Election in Texas, but there are practical obstacles.
The AIP lost its status as a party by not running a candidate in
the last Gubernatorial race. They are now attempting to re-
establish themselves as a party, but to do so they must collect
23,000 signatures on their petition between May 6 and June 30.
We are advised by the Secretary of State's office that the AIP
will have a serious problem in gathering those signatures.
Governor Wallace, in a visit to Texas, publicly asked his supporters
to support the Democratic delegate selection process. General
opinion seems to be that the AIP, unless soon given public encourage-
ment by Governor Wallace, will have great difficulty in gathering
the 23,000 required signatures.
If they are successful in gathering the signatures by June 30,
they will be permitted to nominate a candidate. The New Party,
and the Socialist Workers Party, will probably gather enough
signatures and will place a candidate on the ballot.
If the AIP is not successful in gathering the signatures, then it
will not be possible for them to nominate a candidate.
It is not possible for an Independent candidate to run in Texas
for to do so he must have filed by February 7.
VIRGINIA
There are no legal obstacles to Governor Wallace running in the
General Election.
The AIP is not a recognized party in Virginia. To run a candidate
they must do so as a new party by filing a petition with the
Secretary of the Commonwealth, signed by approximately 8,800
voters, not later than September 8.
Independent candidates follow the same procedure.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
DETERMINED TO BE AN
March 21, 1972
VS MARKING
E.O. INU Setson 6-102
By of
3-30-82
CONFIDENTIAL ONLY
MEMORANDUM FOR:
GORDON STRACHAN
FROM:
L. HIGBY
SUBJECT:
Ehrlichman V. the Committee for the
Re-Election of the President
When we take on Ehrlichman, we are naturally getting into a serious
and very delicate area. John has talked to Bob about the problems
that Bob mentioned in his memo to John and Bob, in turn, has talked
to me. Bob made the point that John vigorously denied several of
the charges. To be specific, with regards to charge 2, unless Cole
was playing games here, the situation that Magruder described is
not precisely correct.
Ehrlichman claims that he never made the statement that the ad-
vertising "stinks". This is something you may want to check out
a little more thoroughly.
Regarding item 4, about the briefing in the Roosevelt Room,
Ehrlichman says that the briefing was not arranged at his request.
It was a meeting that Magruder presided at, Magruder knew that
Ehrlichman had to leave ahead of time, and, yet, was unable to
change the meeting around. The purpose of the meeting was for
the advertising committee, not the whole committee staff.
Ehrlichman also said he never rejected Harper's offers to brief
and that he did not call Mitchell, that Mitchell called him and that
Ehrlichman simply mentioned the problem to Mitchell. Ehrlichman
claims, furthermore, that he has not set up a review committee. It
is interesting to note that in how many of these Ed Harper is directly
involved and perhaps this is part of the problem.
2
Anyway, Bob feels strongly that you as a good lawyer need to
keep in mind two things: 1) your total objectivity; and 2) a
complete passion for the truth -- the whole truth.
I think that we were probably sucked in, to some extent, by
Magruder on this thing although, I am sure that there really
is a problem. Ehrlichman's point in creating the problem is
to draw it to a head so that there are some substantial changes.
This may or may not be good. The point is, I don't think we
have provided with Bob, all the facts and all aspects of all the
facts before proceeding. This may or may not be the case, but
it is something I would like you to think about for a while.
Perhaps a day or two, and then after you have done that, lets
talk about it.
EYES ONLY
March 17, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR :
JOHN EMILICHMAN
FROM 1
H.R. HALDEMAN
You once wrote me a memo which you said was difficult to write,
but which contained some things you felt needed to be maid regarding
my operation and the general situation with regard to the planning
for the President.
I feel now that I should do likewise for you, regarding your relation-
ship with the Committee for the Re-Election of the President, and
the President's Camprica Manager. I realize I may be treading on
dangerous ground andtest this may be a fusile exercise, or even
counterproductive, but I have some concerns which I think should
be expressed.
In recent weeks, I've seen several examples of indications of a
problem, and have learned of several others, Perhaps they are
isoloted and insignificant, but on the other hend, if they are in-
éleativa of the present rituation in a growing trend, I think we need
to take some action to correct the problem.
I was quite disturbed with the results of the meeting we had in my
office awhile back with John Mitchel, Fred Malek, and Een Cole.
You will scentl that nt St meeting, you took a totally negative
position and quite seve) CAY criticized Mitchell directly, C.S well as
laying some strenuous objections and obstructions in the way of the
development of Malek's campaign role.
The role John 1.1 trying to develop for Malek may well not be the best
way to herate Change, DATE It is the result of an honest and sincere
effort to try to make the 0 beration as fully 08 effective as possible,
and it seems to me the all of us should appreach it in that constructive
scase, and to overyChing we can to make it succeed, railer than claply
to criticize 16.
2
Somewhat more disturbing, is the tone and possibly also the content,
of your February 23rd memorandum to John Mitchell regarding the
Committee. A memorandum, which I understand, was ultimately not
sent to John, but rether to Jeb Magruder, and was subsequently
answered by Jeb Magruder - only partially satisfactorily - I would
guess.
As to the substance of that letter, the challenge you make to Magruder's
involvement in the development of substantive policy, would be entirely
appropriate if, in fact, Job were involved. However, it's my under-
standing that Ken Cele has been working with Jeb for a long time and
has presumably kept you advised of his discussions and actions.
The Committee's material on issues may, indeed, be terrible. But,
we ought to at loast consider the possibility that that's a reflection of
the input they've been given from those better able to outline the issues
and our positions on them.
This seems to fall dangerously close to the old "we - they" situation
that has arisen in the past. I think it's imperative that we all consider
ourselves part of the Committee for the RebElection of the President
and not consider it as a separate entity which is in some way, an enemy
of the White Month,
1 understand there was some problem on the briefing sessions set up
in early March for members of the Committee in the Roosevelt Room.
I'm told that the musting was set up by Ed Harper, at your request,
that Stein and Krosa both briefed the group, that you arrived at the
meeting, dealined Herpez's onler to brief, left a half hour later, and
then told John Mitchell that "Magruder's meeting was poorly arranged
and hadu't permitted you an opportunity to speak". It's quite possible
that my Information is faulty, but whether it is or not, the fact that
there's 2 flap here at all, indicates some lack of positive coordination
and cooperation.
I also understand there's a problem regarding campaign advertising.
Job says that you've told him that the advertising sticks, and that
you've custed me as agreeing that it stinks. Pm not sure I went quite
that street. I have had some disagreements with some of the adver-
Living, although BOLAD of 10, I think, is very good. In every caso where
1 have diregreed, 1 1 ave told the people at the Committee, what my
disagreement was, why I felt that way, and what I thought should be
3
done to correct it. I feel that all of us should be free to criticize,
but should do it in a way that leads to a better result.
1 understand that Ed Harpor has told Jeb that you are setting up a
review committee to analyze campaign advertising and that this
committee consists of you, Ray Price and Bill Safire. I think this
is & good idea, If you are enslyring the adtertising on the bacis of
content. I this we're going to get into & problem if you decide to
analyze 1t on the basis of arpeal, and if that is your intention, you
should meet Jointly with the campaign advertising review group,
rather than separately. I'm sure that if this is approached right,
Pete Daley and the advertising people will welcome constructive
criticiem and review. On the other hand, if they are simply re-
quired to submit their product to a senior review committee, and
then told me that we aren't going to help them much.
Each of the above problems in probably petty and minor in itself,
but taken together, they may indicate & general problem of the
relationship between you and the Domestic Council vs. Mitchell
and the Re-Elocion Committee. If there is such A problem, I
would deeply hope that it can he ironed out quickly because cooper-
ation both ways is extremely important. If there is anything I can
do to help in the process, 1 would, of course, be most happy to do
so. is you WOLD profer Out 1 keep my nose out of the problem, I
would be happy to do that, and once again, 1 apologize for writing
this at all, but hope you will give it some serious consideration.
The principle thing that concerns me is tone and attitude. The
specifice can all be worked out If the basic approach is on the
right grounds.
HRH:pm
Ehrlichman V. the Committee for the Re-Election of the President
It may be wholly inappropriate for me to write this memorandum.
There must be aspects that I should know nothing about.
However, you should be aware of what seems to be the development
of a serious problem between John Ehrlichman and the Committee
for the Re-Election of the President.
Fred Malek and Jeb Magruder have attended meetings and seen
indications of Mr. Ehrlichman's actions that undercut the
effectiveness of the Campaign Committee. Six examples indicate
their assessment may be correct:
1) As Malek's new role in the Campaign was being defined
last month, most of the opposition came from Ehrlichman.
In the meeting in your office with John Mitchell and Ken
Cole. Ehrlichman criticized Mitchell and obstructed the
development of Malek's role;
2) Ehrlichman wrote John Mitchell the attached memorandum
which challenges Magruder's involvement in the political
use of substantive policy. This would.be an entirely
appropriate challenge were Magruder involved. However,
Ken Cole has been working with Magruder for months, has
kept Ehrlichman advised, and believes Ehrlichman is just
carping to aggravate the situation. The tone of Ehrlichman's
memorandum is indicative of the problem. Magruder's response
is also attached.
3) Ehrlichman has told Magruder that the Committee advertising
Not
"stinks." He quotes you as agreeing that the advertising
true
"stinks" and that when you express your opinion, the Committee
goes ahead regardless of your views;
On March 8, Ed Harper, at Ehrlichman's request, advtsg. arranged
Not
true
Mag
presided
a briefing in the Roosevelt Room for Members of the Committee
on
Stem
Tm
staff. Stein and Krogh briefed, Ehrlichman arrived at 10:30 a.m.,
Car
rejected Harper's offers to brief, left at 11:00 a.m., and
called Mitchell to complain that "Magruder's meeting" was poorly
arranged and didn't NOT permit him an opportunity to speak; Not Tuee
true
5) Ehrlichman, through Ed Harper, has informed Magruder that
not abodulely twe
a review committee -- John Ehrlichman, Ray Price and Bill
Safire -- will begin analyzing the Campaign advertising.
Magruder and Peter Dailey are reacting protectively citing
their own advertising review group of Len Garment, Cliff Miller
regist in any
and Dick Moore;
6) The Domestic Council slowed the production of "The Speakers
Manual" for Administration spokesmen to use during the primaries.
disaster ignoring all Domco mates
Right because it was al total
provided to Comm.
page 2
Len Garment, who is familiar with the advertising suggestion by
Ehrlichman, told me that some serious thought should be given to
Ehrlichman's real motives. Garment suggests Ehrlichman's desire
to become involved in the Campaign has been accentuated by his
alleged antipathy toward John Mitchell. The result is criticism
of the Committee.
Ken Cole confirms that the relationship between Ehrlichman and the
Committee is quite bad. Cole isn't sure why and has been meeting
with Magruder and Harper in attempting to ameliorate the problems.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
February 23, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR
Honorable John Mitchell
Attorney General
Department of Justice
I continue to see evidence that the Committee for the Re-election
staff and the White House staff are meshing very badly on matters
of substantive policy and how to use it politically.
As I said the other day, to those who have been long in this vine-
yard, it's as if, suddenly for the first time, what the Administration
favors, opposes, advocates and stands for is to receive some
political wisdom.
It is important that all Jeb's people know and understand what policy
is, why it is as it is, where our strengths and weaknesses are and,
for what it is worth, what our three years of experience has taught
us about presenting this material -- to veterans, the aged, youth,
minorities, etc.
They should bear in mind that our people really do know something
about this problem of presenting policy positions --
--
the issue
--
past performance
--
proposals
--
pay-out for the voter.
We have recently seen some CFTROTP (how's that for an acronym?)
copy on issues. To be very generous about it, it was very terrible.
Committee staff can't seem to stay away from calling everyone in the
government (plus Pete Rozelle) to ask for information on substantive
programs and policy. Departments, agencies, OMB, my staff all are
Page Two
getting calls from new people, just on the scene, determined to re-
invent the wheels which long ago have been thoroughly invented.
Moreover, they tactlessly seek to exploit "non-political" efforts in
the clumsiest kind of way. The call to Rozelle (about which Jeb
knows) is a classic example.
May I ask that all of the Committee people be thoroughly indoctrin-
ated and instructed as to --
1.
The existing policies and programs, and
their rationale (both substantive and political).
2.
How to make contact with government and non-
government people for information or help on
these subjects.
3.
What resources are already available to them,
and how to use them.
I am still uncertain as to the role Fred Malek will play. Will it be
limited to coordinating activities related to cultivating political
interest groups, or will his role be a broader one? How his efforts
relate to Jeb's? Perhaps you would be good enough to send me a
copy of his job description so we know where. he fits.
John D. Ehrlichman
COMMITTEE FOR ThE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE. N W.
March 3, 1972
WASHINGTON D. C. 20006
(202) 333-0920
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR:
MR. JOHN D. EHRLICHMAN
FROM:
JEB S. MAGRUDER
It.was very thoughtful of you to give me the memorandum you
had addressed to the Attorney General relating to some of the
problems you felt had been developing between our staff and
those in the government who are concerned with substantive
policy.
From the beginning we have emphasized to all of our staff
people (both those who have been in the government and those
from the outside) that this committee's role is not to set
policy. This has been emphasized continually at our weekly
staff meetings and has been further stressed by key White House
staffers, such as Ed Harper, who have appeared at those meetings.
We will continue to emphasize this and we agree completely that
there is no need to re-invent the wheel.
It is certainly true that when we began to develop some of our
programs here we did not have as smooth a working relationship
with your staff as I had hoped would develop. I think this is
primarily because there was a lack of understanding on both parts
as to each other's specific role and, also, a logistics problem
in working out how these things can best be handled.
Ken Cole, Ed Harper, and I have continued to discuss these sit-
uations and we feel that we now have the beginning of a good
working relationship. The only contact with the Domestic Council
will be through Ed Harper, and we have set up similar liaisons
with the staffs of the NSC and CEA. The main points of contact
here will be Phil Joanou, who is the second man in the advertising
agency, and Van Shumway, who is our press director. These are the
-2-
two people who will need substantive information on a con-
tinuing and day-to-day basis. These two campaign divisions
are very interested in working with your staff and in co-
operating to the fullest extent. I would personally appreciate
it if difficulties arise in the future that you have Ken or
Ed contact me directly.
As to the Pete Rozelle incident, I am enclosing for your informa-
tion a memorandum from Bart Porter. As you know, this incident
occurred in December. It is true that a young and over zealous
staff man here did not use good judgment in contacting Rozelle,
but I also can understand how it might have been difficult for
him to know that someone in the White House would have a direct
relationship with the NFL.
Another point you make relating to our issues area I think refers
to the work Dave Allen has been doing for us. In your reference
to people calling other agencies such as OMB, we have determined
most of this has been done by Dave and we are as strongly against
this type of activity as you are. I have .indicated to Ken and Ed
that we have not been pleased by Dave's performance and we have
transferred Dave out of this area.
I would hope that there would be some understanding, as the
campaign moves along with the influx of new people and the normal
confusions that occur in a campaign, that there will be situations
which develop that will need to be corrected as we approach Novem-
ber.
The "normal" confusion in a campaign is, in fact, magnified by
an incumbent's campaign: instead of one campaign headquarters
such as we had in New York in 1968, in 19.72 there is the White
House, Republican National Committee, and our operation, all of
which must coordinate in order to achieve the desired results.
This can add to the confusion inherent on a campaign -- but we
are going to do our best to hold it to a minimum. Furthermore, I
can assure you that our staff will be oriented towards working in
a positive manner with all of their contacts and I would hope
we could iron out any problems in the early stages rather then
waiting until they become a major problem.
-3-
In regard to Fred Malek's role, although we have not formalized
a job description, I can quote from a memorandum written to the
Attorney General detailing what we have agreed will be Fred's
basic responsibilities:
Fred Malek would have broad responsibilities cut-
ting across several areas. He would fulfill this
role while remaining a member of the White House
staff, and therefore, would not be shown officially
as a member of the Re-Election Committee. Fred will
provide overall direction to the various Citizens
groups in the campaign organization. His efforts
will be aimed toward helping them. to achieve the
desired results, assisting in setting goals, devel-
oping strategy and action plans, generating White
House cooperation and helping to insure that plans
are implemented on a timely and effective basis.
At the same time, Fred will fill a White House role
as General Manager of all Administration efforts in
support of the campaign (patronage, grantsmanship,
constituent groups and departmental efforts.) This
will provide you and each of the Citizens group
Directors with a senior agent in the White House who
can help determine the support and cooperation needed.
In another area, Fred will be responsible for the
development of a system to monitor important operating
variables in the states and in the overall campaign
so as to keep abreast of the status of the campaign,
and will identify weak areas at an early date. Fred
will provide you with results of this monitoring
system on a continuing basis.
This effort would be beyond the normal field monitoring
such as was done in the 1968 campaign. It would prob-
ably include several measurement systems which are built
into the operations at the earliest planning stage.
CONFIDENTIAL
February 28, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
MR. JEB S. MAGRUDER
FROM:
HERBERT L. PORTER
SUBJECT:
Pete Rozelle
In December, 1971, I instructed Bill Minshall to put together
a plan on how to build a list of sports celebrities and
athletes who might support the President. We. discussed the
fact that, like many people, athletes could be approached
on an "issue" basis. The President's drug abuse program was
cited as an example.
Minshall, in his eagerness to get a job done, felt that the
football players participating in the televised Drug Abuse
Program would be logical persons to add to the list. Bill
was not aware that the White House was directly or indirectly
involved in this program.
He telephoned the offices of Commissioner Pete Rozelle early
in December to inquire 1f he might be given certain information
about the NFL. The Commission office referred the call
(Bill never talked to Rozelle) to the Public Relations office.
lle spoke with a Mr. Don Weiss. Bill requested:
1) the names, locations, and owners of the various
stadiums used by the NFL,
2) the names of the top foothall writers in the press,
3) the names of the T.V. stations covering each team,
4) the names of the owners of each Club, and
5) the names of the players participating in the
drug abuse commercials.
Bill told Mr. Weiss who he was and for whom he worked. (I
might add here that Minshall's motivation for these specific
requests was a result of his secing a similar detailed study
on the American Racing Car Industry completed by Allen Hall
at the White House.)
Page 2
Weiss indicated that he would like to help Minshall and would
be in touch with him at a later date. This phone conversation
was the last contact Bill had with anyone at the NFL.
Subsequently, someone unknown at the NFL called another someone
unknown at the National Institutes of Mental Health "as a
courtesy" (Bill Rhatican's line) to inform the NIMH of the
phone call. This person from the NIMH (Rhatican refused to
say who) then called Rhatican, and presumably, Bud Krogh.
Rhatican then sent you a memo informang you of the situation.
I then wrote a small note to Bill Rhatican explaining the situation
as an "over-zealous" staff member.
Khatican seemed satisfied and said that he had "smoothed the
whole thing out". Rhatican also called the unaamed person
at the NIMH and told him to call the NFL and tell them "not
to give any information of any kind to anybody."
This is all I know.
Na
TALKING PAPER -- MEETING WITH MITCHELL
We need to work out some of the organizational details before
you meet with the President.
Mainly, the question is, "Who do we have running California that
reports directly to you, in other words is working for us as
contrasted to Nofziger who is basically working in California?"
We need a similar manager for Illinois, Ohio, Pennsylvania,
New York, New Jersey, Wisconsin, Missouri and Texas.
HRH
April 3, 1972
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 14, 1972
EYES ONLY
MEMORANDUM TO:
H. R. HALDEMAN
FROM:
BILL SAFIRE
SUBJECT:
Draft Statement by Stans on Campaign Spending
"President Nixon strongly supported and signed into law the Federal
Election Campaign Act of 1972. As President, he will enforce the law,
and as a candidate for re-election, he will obey the law.
This committee will report all contributions over $100 exactly as the
law requires and as Congress intended. The law calls for our first
report on June 30 of this year, and we have put into place the necessary
procedures to comply fully and promptly. "
POSSIBLE ADDITIONAL LINE: "The one-upmanship now under way between
the Democratic candidates to prove who can reveal most is something
to be expected in a hotly contested series of primaries. The President
is not personally engaged in primary campaigning, and his campaign
committee will nd go beyond the law in its fundraising or spending
procedures. "
RECOMMEND NOT USING THIS LINE.
The arguments for such a statement and such a policy:
1. The heat for us to follow the Democratic candidate's example will
fade after June, when we publish names of contributors since April 7.
2. If we were to follow their example and disclose names now, it would
provide a continuing series of stories blasting fatcats and their government
connections.
3. If we wanted to publish now, we would have to go back to contributors
and see if they would be willing, and thus lose substantial sums.
-2-
Arguments against sticking to the "letter of the law¹¹:
1.
The ITT controversy lays a public opinion base for suspicion of all
campaign contributions.
2.
One main Democratic campaign theme is likely to be "trust, " and
any coverup compared to their full disclosure gives them an opening.
3.
This issue will not go away after June. We will be charged with
having' 'the 20 million dollar hidden fund, collected before the deadline
from influence seekers, whom Nixon persists in refusing to name --
because he knows that the revelation of their names would be political
suicide. I have nothing to hide; I have named all my contributors -- but
the President has not. Why not? Why does he constantly harp on the letter
of the law, when he is clearly breaking the spirit of the law, the intent
of Congress which calls for full disclosure of campaign contributors?
My cards are all on the table -- come on, Mr. President, let's see your
cards -- let's give the American people a chance to see who bought a
secret piece of your campaign. Let's see who is really paying the bills
for those lavish TV commericals. " Etc., Etc.
4. Disclosure of the pre-April 7 names may be embarrassing, showing
more big contributors, and give the other side a few shots -- but not a
real theme of suspicion. And the most embarrassing could be returned
before disclosure. When these shots are taken in the summer, we could
counter with questions on labor union spending.
My basic point: we should not make the decision to "take the flak"
without reviewing the full consequences of the flak throughout the
campaign.
From the desk of
MURRAY M. CHOTINER
March 15, 1972
TO:
H. R. HALDEMAN
I cannot emphasize too strongly that
too many of our people are a bit too
smug about the November prospects.
timmay
MMC:a
Encl.
SUITE 500
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE. N.W.
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20006
TELEPHONE 202 298.9030
LAW OFFICES
REEVES & HARRISON
SUITE 500
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE. N.W.
MARION EDWYN HARRISON
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006
OF COUNSEL
ERNEST GENE REEVES
MURRAY M.CHOTINER
ROBERT F. SAGLE
TELEPHONE 202 298-9030
MYRON SOLTER
TELEX 440376 CRDK
CHARLES EMMET LUCEY
CABLE "REEVLAW"
March 15, 1972
The President
The White House
Washington, D. C. 20500
Dear Mr. President:
The percentages of the total vote in Florida yesterday show:
Democrats (except Wallace)
43.9%
Wallace
31.0%
Nixon (including 1/2 the Ashbrook and
23.5%
McCloskey vote)
Balance of Ashbrook and McCloskey vote
01.6%
Total:
100.0%
In 1968 the vote was:
Nixon
40.5%
Humphrey
30.9%
Wallace
28.5%
Total:
99.9%
Some of our people are being too sanguine about the Florida
primary results yesterday. It is true that most of the
people who did not vote will vote for you in the finals.
You will get some of the Jackson vote.
I am not being pessimistic. I am endeavoring to make the
point that the campaign needs a bit of shaking up.
Cordially,
Dermay
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Date:
3/15
TO:
H.R. HALDEMAN
FROM:
GORDON STRACHAN
This memorandum for John Mitchell
summarizes the meeting I attended
last night on whether to disclose
campaign finances.
You currently have a meeting pending
on this subject but have not set a
time. In light of the complexities
or returning contributions, should
the decision be to disclose, I
recommend a meeting as soon as
possible.
DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
E.V. 42005, Section 6-102
March 14, 1972
By ER NAR , Date 3-30-82
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR THE HONORABLE JOHN N. MITCHELL
FROM:
JEB S. MAGRUDER
SUBJECT:
Campaign Disclosure
In a meeting this afternoon with Messrs. Stans, Kalmbach, Finch,
Moore, LaRue, Shumway, and Aloan, we discussed whether it would
be appropriate for us to disclose contributions received before
the April 7 deadline set by the new law. It was the unanimous
opinion that we should not disclose, although we realize this
would be an issue that could be used against us in the campaign.
If we were to disclose, we would have to give each contributor
an opportunity to renege on his pledge which would reduce our
funds considerably. This, in turn, would probably create a dif-
ficult public relations situation if it were known we were return-
ing any funds, as well as be embarrassing to those donors who let
their contributions stand. It also could create an on-going press
barrage about our contributors since many of them are in sensitive
positions both within the Administration and the business community.
Even though this could be brought up as an issue in the general
election, we could bring up the fact that we began disclosing on
April 7 and it probably would not be an issue of the magnitude then
as it is now.
One point which should be stressed is this: when an incumbent
President, rather than a Presidential candidate, discloses, there
may be more political problems caused by the disclosure than by
non-disclosure. For example, if Muskie discloses that he received
$10,000 from the President of General Motors, that is one thing.
But if the incumbent President discloses such a contribution, he is
open to the charge that in return for the donation, General Motors
was promised something which it is within the power of the incumbent
President to grant. Hence, the charges which might be made as a
result of the disclosure might do more political damage than the
charges made as a result of non-disclosume.
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
-2-
If we do not disclose, it would be important to deploy funds raised
before April 7 into as many state committees as possible, as well
as prepaying any future bills that would be appropriate so that our
balance on hand at the first reporting date would be relatively
small. At the present time it is anticipated that we could have as
much as $12,000,000 on hand by April 7. If we do not disclose and
show that figure in June during the first reporting period, we could
create a tremendous backlash regarding our non-disclosure.
On the other hand, the arguments for disclosing are obvious. We
would increase our credibility with the public; no issue could be
raised about lack of disclosure; and we would not add to the credi-
bility problem that has been created by the ITT/Sheraton incident.
From the financial standpoint, it is obvious that it would be to our
advantage not to disclose. On the public relations side, it is much
more difficult to determine the public's reaction and 1s, therefore,
a decision that should be made at the highest level. Consequently,
our recommendation is that we tentatively agree not to disclose;
that Ziegler continue to refer any inquiries to this Committee; that
Van Shumway, if asked, continue to indicate that we are going to com-
ply with the law; and that a decision be made not later than next
Monday, so that in case there was a desire to disclose, the Financial
Division could do the paper work before the April 7 deadline.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
CONFIDENTIAL
From the desk of
MURRAY M. CHOTINER
y
March 9, 1972
TO:
H. R. HALDEMAN
The enclosed candid opinion is for
the President's benefit.
Let's not drop the ball.
Cordially,
laway
MMC:a
Encl.
SUITE 500
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, N.W.
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20006
TELEPHONE 202 298-9030
LAW OFFICES
REEVES & HARRISON
SUITE 500
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE N.W.
MARION EDWYN HARRISON
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20006
OF COUNSEL
ERNEST GENE REEVES
MURRAY M. CHOTINER
ROBERT F. SAGLE
TELEPHONE 202 298-9030
MYRON SOLTER
TELEX 440376 CRDK
CHARLES EMMET LUCEY
CABLE "REEVLAW"
March 9, 1972
The President
The White House
Washington, D. C. 20500
Dear Mr. President:
I refrained from sending this note immediately after the
New Hampshire election because I wanted to be certain in
my own mind that my observations were not the result of
snap judgment.
Obviously, the line is that we are all pleased with the
New Hampshire results; but I would be hypocritical if I
did not tell you that an effective campaign would have
produced a better showing.
We usually figure that a Republican candidate needs 80-85
percent of the Republican vote, plus 15-20 percent of the
Democratic vote in order to win in the finals.
It is anticipated that a good percentage of the 30 percent
cast for McCloskey and Ashbrook will return to the fold in
November. Most of the Republicans who did not vote in the
primary can be expected to vote for you in November. But
we cannot take this for granted.
However, strictly in the family, 69 percent of the Repub-
lican vote does not do justice to you.
May I respectfully suggest that an "agonizing reappraisal"
of the campaign is in order NOW.
As always, with my best wishes for your continued success,
Cordially,
Murray M. Chotiner
MMC:a
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 29, 1972
MEMORANDUM TO THE PRESIDENT
(Per HRH)
FROM:
PATRICK J. BUCHANAN
McGovern's Deputy Campaign Manager, a friend from my Soviet
trip, a level-headed fellow, called me today to say that McGovern
will win in Wisconsin. He gave me the following polls:
MCGOVERN'S PRIVATE POLLS
AFL-CIO
QUAYLE POLL
Humphrey
23
McGovern
24
McGovern
19
Humphrey
18
Muskie
14
Muskie
15
Jackson
13
Jackson
13
Wallace
9
Wallace
10
Lindsay
4
Lindsay
1
Other
3
Undecided
19
Undecided
14
My friend tells me that in the McGovern Poll, McGovern is carried
much lower than normal -- since it does not include the Second
District (Madison) where McGovern is conceded to be immensely
strong, compared with the other Democrats. Further, he says
that those polled were those who intended to vote in the Democratic
Primary, including Republicans.
-2-
This is hard to believe. Seems to me, even if these figures are
accurate, however, that George Wallace will pick up some of the
undecided -- he surely did in Florida.
But the McGovern fellow contends that Muskie could come in fourth
or even fifth in the race -- which would be a climactic disaster for
Big Ed.
Again, if these figures are accurate -- McGovern would be greatly
enhanced; the liberal press would fall all over him for the next two
weeks. Humphrey would be set back. Muskie would sustain a near
fatal blow. Big John Lindsay would be finished. The situation would
be more confused than ever. The likelihood of a first ballot
nomination for the Democrats would be increasingly remote. In short,
if this is the outcome, it would seem that the pressures on Kennedy
would be substantial to move.
Buchanan
NOTE: If we have some hard poll informa tion, and this is a possibility,
then we should have Republicans cross over and vote for George McGovern.
Word should go forth today.
PJB
+
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 16, 1972
ADMINISTRATIVELY CON FIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR:
MR. GORDON STRACHAN
FROM:
L. HIGBY L
I am sure you have already thought of this, but we probably
should have some line developed for Wisconsin as we did for
Florida and New Hampshire. The question will probably come
up some time within the next couple of weeks and you might
want to be ahead of it this time.
- We won big the Dems are
- cancelled advertising - all newsp, TVt radio
in disonay.
-lwfe ran + then pulled back
- -still direct mail.
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
March 28, 1972
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE. NW
WASHINGTON, D C. 20006
(202) 333 0920
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR THE HONORABLE JOHN N. MITCHELL
FROM:
JEB S. MAGRUDER
The attached memorandum was received from Tom Girard
concerning the campaign disclosure in Wisconsin which,
as you know, is required according to Wisconsin state
law.
CONFIDENTIAL
Committee for the Re-election of the President
MEMORANDUM
March 28, 1972
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR:
MR. JEB S. MAGRUDER
FROM:
THOMAS E. GIRARD Tow
SUBJECT:
Wisconsin Campaign Fund Disclosure
Under Wisconsin state law, political campaigns must disclose their contri-
butions of more than $5 and their total expenditures. This must be done
a week before and a week after the primary. In accordance with this law,
our chairman, John MacIver, will today send a letter to the Wisconsin
Secretary of State with the necessary figures.
This report will be sent by mail from Milwaukee to Madison, where it is
expected to be made public on Wednesday. MacIver will simultaneously
send you a copy.
I spoke with MacIver tonight at his home and received the following rough
breakdown. Income will be reported at about $70,000. Of this, $20,000 is
from the original Washington contribution to provide for operating expenses.
Another $33,000 is for media. MacIver explained that he originally received
$143,000 for the media program. Today, in line with the cutback in this
area, he returned $110,000 to Washington. Therefore, he is only reporting
the net contribution for media of $33,000. The additional money in the
income category, $17,000, comes from state contributions.
On the expenditure side, MacIver will report total expenses of about
$33,000. Of this approximately $17,000 has gone for television advertising
and $3,000 for newspaper ads. MacIver says an additional expenditure of
$10,000 on media will not show in this report, but will in the final report
a week after the election. There will therefore be an expected net expen-
diture on advertising of $30,000.
Other expenses include approximately $13,000 for campaign operations.
Another $10,000 to $15,000 for operating expenses will be shown in the
next report. Therefore, total operating expenses will exceed the $20,000
sent from Washington.
MacIver advises that he will be finalizing his report Tuesday morning at
his office (414/271-6560) or at Charlie Davis' office (414/273-2500). He
says if you have further questions, don't hesitate to call him.
cc: Mr. DeVan L. Shumway
Mr. Hugh W. Sloan, Jr.
CONFIDENTIAL
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE. NW
WASHINGTON, D C 20006
(202) 333 0920
March 28, 1972
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR THE HONORABLE JOHN N. MITCHELL
FROM:
JEB S. MAGRUDER
SUBJECT:
The Wisconsin Primary
In 1968 over 1,200,000 voters turned out for the Wisconsin Primary
Election. Of these, approximately 40% voted on the Republican side
and the remainder on the Democratic side. The Republican race was
a minor contest between Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and Harold
Stassen, with several other names written in. The Democratic race
was perceived by the voters to be a major contest between Lyndon
Johnson and Eugene McCarthy, with a minor write-in vote for Kennedy.
However, in the general election, Richard Nixon won the state with
48%, compared with 44% for Humphrey and 8% for Wallace.
In this year's primary election, the race on the Republican side
has evolved into almost no contest. Both McCloskey and Ashbrook
appear on the ballot by law, but neither has campaigned in the
state and McCloskey has formally withdrawn from the race. On the
Democratic side, all major candidates have been campaigning in
the state. The race is seen to be possibly the first one which
will force several candidates out of further running for the
Democratic nomination. Thus, with a race of lesser importance
on the Republican side and greater importance on the Democratic
side than in 1968, the turn out is expected to swing even more
than the favor of the Democrats.
Our estimate would be about 350,000 turn out on the Republican side
and about 850,000 on the Democratic side, for a total of 1,200,000.
There will probably be about 75,000 Republicans who will cross over
to support a Democratic candidate. The most likely beneficiaries
of such a cross over would be Wallace or Jackson. However, some
liberal Republicans might vote for a left-leaning candidate like
McGovern as a protest toward the Democratic Party establishment.
CONFIDENTIAL
- 2 -
There has been some concern that the crossover might deplete the
President's vote versus Ashbrook and McCloskey. We disagree and
feel that the crossover will affect the total number of Republican
ballots case much more than the percentage won by any Republican
candidate.
Despite the probable lower Republican turnout this time, it should
be noted that President Nixon will very likely receive more votes
than the leading Democrat. Assuming that the Democrat receives
a maximum of 30% of the vote, he will have about 250,000 votes.
The President may receive 90% of the Republican vote, or over
300,000 votes.
CONFIDENTIAL
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE. NW.
WASHINGTON D C. 20006
(202) 333-0920
March 23, 1972
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR:
THE HONORABLE JOHN N. MITCHELL
SUBJECT:
Operating Plan for the Maryland Primary
Maryland's Presidential Primary will be held on May 16. The names
of all recognized cnadidates, including the President, were placed
on the ballot by Maryland's Secretary of State on March 23.
General Background
In 1970 the population of Maryland was 3,953,698, of which 1,596,916
were registered voters. There were 422,552 Republicans (26.5%),
1,126,604 Democrats (70.4%), and other registrants accounted for the
remaining 3.1%. The Black population is 17%, highly concentrated in
Baltimore City. Total foreign stock is 12%, with a significant
number of Germans, Irish and Poles, The state is largely blue-
collar (54%) and is about one-quarter Catholic and over 4% Jewish.
Over three-quarters of Maryland's population is in the following five
major locations: Baltimore City, Baltimore County, Anne Arundel,
Prince Georges and Montgomery Counties. Close to one-fourth of the
state's population is located in Baltimore City. The city has a large
concentration of Blacks and ethnic groups. Baltimore County is 97%
white and considered somewhat conservative. Anne Arundel County is
traditionally conservative and Republican in voting habits. Montgomery
County, an area with a high degree of white-collar employment, has
one of the highest average incomes in the country. It is also one of
the most liberal areas of the state. Prince Georges County, the other
suburb of Washington, has less white-collar employment and is poorer
than Montgomery County. Its population is more conservative and
greatly concerned about crime.
Political Background
Both U.S. Senators from Maryland are Republican. Glenn Beall was
elected in 1970 with 51% of the vote. Charles Mathias won in a three-
way race in 1968 with 48% of the vote. The 1970 Governor's race was
CONFIDENTIAL
-2-
a low point for Republicans when Stanley Blair received only 32.3%
of the vote. The Democratic Governor, Marvin Mandel, received 65.7%
and was returned to office. The State Legislature has remained
consistently Democratic. Democrats control the Senate by a 33 to
10 margin and the House by 121 to 21. The Congressional delegation
consists of 3 Republicans and 5 Democrats. (Tab A) A list of the
Congressional districts follows:
Congressmen
1968 Presidential Vote*
1970 %
Nixon
Humphrey
Wallace
1st William Mills (R)
52.6
64,792
43,139
30,667
2nd Clarence E. Long (D)
68.0
81,707
52,384
24,248
3rd Edward A. Garmatz (D)
un,
31,373
56,078
21,423
4th Paul S. Sarbanes (D)
69.1
53,272
59,866
14,517
5th Lawrence J. Hogan (R)
61.5
77,914
75,771
36,040
6th Goodloe E. Byron (D)
50.7
77,686
52,978
23,667
7th Parren J. Mitchell (D)
58.3
35,116
97,023
10,399
8th Gilbert Gude (R)
61.3
90,507
96,344
16,989
*Districts altered substantially by
redistricting. Figures for old districts.
The Republican Party of Maryland has been concentrating on fund raising
in an attempt to put the state party back on its feet following the
unsuccessful gubernatorial campaign of 1970. This has been done at the
expense of precinct organization and voter turnout work. The Party
will have to place the emphasis on a nuts-and-bolts organizational
effort now to prepare for November.
Voting Analysis
Nixon lost the state in 1968 by 20,315 votes. Nixon received 517,995
(41.9%) ; Humphrey, 538,310 (43.6%) ; and Wallace, 178,734 (14.5%).
The five major counties of Maryland, which account for 77.4% of the
entire population of the state, gave Nixon 74% of his total vote.
The counties are shown below with vote totals given:
County
Nixon
Humphrey
Wallace
Baltimore
108,930
80,798
27,283
Montgomery
84,651
92,026
14,726
Baltimore City
80,146
178,450
31,288
Prince Georges
73,269
71,524
32,867
Anne Arundel
36,557
25,381
15,687
383,553
448,179
123,851
CONFIDENTIAL
-3-
The Wallace vote is particularly interesting in that he received
over 20% of the vote in the southern and eastern sections of the
state. In fact, it is only in Baltimore City and County and in
the west that Wallace vote totals fell under 20%.
In Anne Arundel, Wallace received a very significant 20.2% of the
vote. This is far more percentage wise than he received in the
other major counties. In Prince Georges County, Wallace received
18.5% of the vote, or 32,867 votes. Between Prince Georges, Anne
Arundel, Montgomery and Baltimore Counties and Baltimore City,
Wallace received a total of 123,851 votes. If all other vote totals
in the state were to remain as they were in 1968, then a 60% shift
in the Wallace vote in these five counties alone would give Nixon
a margin of victory. For the state as a whole, Nixon would only
have to receive 56% of the Wallace vote, with the rest of the vote
remaining stagnant, for Nixon to carry the state of Maryland.
Political Analysis
With the exception of the 1970 gubernatorial race, the Republican
Party has shown a steady increase in the last six years. If the
Presidential election were to be held today, it would be very close.
The President is running the strongest in the out state areas, doing
relatively well in the Washington suburbs and is very weak in the
greater Baltimore area. In 1972, particular attention should be
given to Maryland's ethnic vote, the large number of Wallace voters
and the crime issue in the Washington suburbs. In terms of trends
and potential, Maryland's 10 electoral votes could be won by Nixon
in 1972.
The Primary Election
Although the Secretary of State's office announced on March 23 that
Ashbrook and McCloskey will be on the ballot in the Maryland Primary,
there is no indication that either will actively campaign.
Our main objective in the primary will be to recruit and utilize a
large cadre of volunteers. The volunteers who work in the primary
will form a nucleus for the large organization necessary for the
General Election.
CONFIDENTIAL
-4-
Planned Activities
The primary campaign plan which follows was developed in
coordination with the Maryland Committee for the Re-Election of
the President. The recommendations were discussed in a meeting
on March 18, 1972, attended by Ed Thomas, chairman of the
Maryland Committee, Sandy Lankler, state G.O.P. chairman, and
Dave Neideffer, executive director of the Maryland Committee.
All directors of the appropriate activities at the Washington
Committee were also present.
Four areas of activity are contemplated:
1. State Organizational Activity
2. Appearance in the State by Pro-Administration Speakers
3. Targeted Telephone Operation
4. Targeted Volunteer Commitment Program
The time schedule for the total operating plan is given in Tab B.
The individual elements' are discussed in detail below:
1. State Organizational Activity
The Maryland Committee has established a headquarters and has been
receiving buttons, brochures and bumper stickers. A major volunteer
recruitment effort will be necessary to carry the telephone operation
and volunteer commitment program planned. These primary programs
will allow the Maryland Committee to recruit key personnel and test
them before the General Election campaign. Deadlines for selection
of key personnel will be established by the Washington Committee and
progress reports will be required. (See Tab E)
Recommendation
That you approve the state organizational activity as outlined above.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
CONFIDENTIAL
-5-
2. Appearance in the State by Pro-Administration Speakers
Due to the proximity to Washington, the Maryland Primary will afford
an excellent opportunity to use pro-Administration speakers to speak on
behalf of the President. The Maryland Committee expressed an interest
in having John Mitchell speak at the Headquarters opening in
Montgomery County. We do not feel that the headquarters site would
be an appropriate speaking event. The Washington Committee is re-
viewing other speaking requests, and will present a full schedule
of speakers and events at a later date.
3. Targeted Telephone Operation
The proposed telephone operation would be located in Montgomery
County and would make toll free calls to 50,000 households in both
Montgomery and Prince Georges Counties. The telephone operation
will identify favorable Nixon voters, recruit volunteers and turn
out the Nixon vote. A more detailed discussion of the telephone
operation can be found in Tab C.
Recommendation
That you approve the targeted telephone operation as outlined above
and in Tab C at a cost of $7,774.00.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
4. Targeted Volunteer Commitment Program
The Maryland Committee requested a direct mail program targeted in
Baltimore County as it would not be covered by the telephone
operation. It was further suggested that the direct mail piece be
a part of a volunteer commitment program similar to that used in
Florida. A more detailed account of the program can be found in
Tab D.
CONFIDENTIAL
-6-
Recommendation
That you approve the volunteer commitment program as outlined
above and in Tab D, at a cost of $18,670.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
JEB S. MAGRUDER
CONFIDENTIAL
Map of Congressional Districts, Counties, and Selected Cities
(8 Districts)
WASHINGTON
ALLEGANT
2
CELH
CUMBERLAND
HAGERSTOWN
GARNETT
6
HAMFORD
CARROLL
-
BALTIMORE
-
ABERDEEN
FREDERICK
4
BALTIMERE
RENT
HOWARD
3
MONTOR ML MINS
.
ANNI ARONDE
QUEEN ANNES
ROCKVILLE
TAKOMA PARK
COLLEGE
*
PARK
ANNAPOLIS
CAROLINE
-117-
PRINCE GEORGES
TALBOT
5
Districts Established May 3, 1966
MARYLAND
CHARLES
ALVERT
DORCHESTER
SALISBURY
&
00
WICOMICO
ST MARYS
WORCESTER
SOMERSET
County with two or more Congressional Districts
Tab A
U.S. Department of Commerce
Burrau of the Census
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE NW
WASHINGTON. D. C. 20006
(202) 333-0920
March 24, 1972
C
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR THE HONORABLE JOHN N. MITCHELL
THROUGH:
JEB S. MAGRUDER
FROM:
NANCY BRATAAS
SUBJECT:
Maryland Primary Telephone Operation
The Maryland telephone campaign provides an opportunity to organize
for the general campaign, and to train key people to operate tele-
phone centers in the fall.
Some volunteers in the D.C. area could be trained to assist Nancy
Brataas at 1701 Pennsylvania Avenue throughout the campaign
Implementation
Ten phones are to be installed in Montgomery County by April 10,
allowing one week for recruitment and four weeks of phone calls
to voters. Phone calls are to be made from April 17 through
May 16 to voters in both Montgomery and Prince Georges Counties.
Based upon a quota of 1,500 calls per day, operating five days
a week, 30,000 homes (approximately 50,000 voters) would be
reached. Operating six days a week, 36,000 homes (over 60,000
voters) would be contacted.
Message of Telephone Conversation
Purpose of the phone call would be to recruit Republicans to work
at the headquarters in the primary, either making phone calls or
doing clerical work.
Republicans who cannot work in the primary would be asked if they
would be willing to work during September and October for the
general election.
CONFIDENTIAL
- 2 -
Whatever the voter's response, the closing line to Republicans
would be, "Can the President count on you to go to the polls
on Tuesday, May 16?"
Projected Budget:
The cost of the telephone campaign to reach voters in Montgomery
and Prince Georges Counties follows:
Lists
List acquisition
$ 200.00
Software
1,500.00
Telephone printouts
3,000.00
Freight
200.00
$4,900.00
Phones: (10 lines)
Installation
275.00
Rental per month - 10 lines
98.00
Non-published númbers
11.00
Suspension fee (May 18 to August 18)
150.00
Toll charge @ 6.5c per call
2,340.00
$2,874.00
Total:
$7,774.00
Tab D
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE. N.W
WASHINGTON. D. C 20005
March 23, 1972
(202) 333-0920
CONF IDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR:
THE HONORABLE JOHN N. MITCHELL
THROUGH:
JEB S. MAGRUDER
FROM:
ROBERT MORGAN
SUBJECT:
Maryland Direct Mail Plan
The Presidential Commitment Program will be used in Baltimore County.
Changes in the Commitment Program based on our experience in Florida
are being immediately implemented in Maryland. The Commitment
Program is now used as a base to seed new volunteers at the precinct
level. It also gives an opportunity for the county chairmen to test
their organizational abilities down through the precincts.
1. This Commitment Program asks the volunteer to make 20 calls to the
closest Republicans in his precinct, get them to commit for the
President and vote in the Primary. The volunteer then follows up
with telephone calls on Election Day to remind his 20 people to
vote.
2. The volunteer is also asked to bring in 5 new volunteers who are
seeded into his precinct.
3. Since each county has a list of all Republicans printed out by
city, precinct and in street number order, it is an excellent
opportunity to have a volunteer telephone program. Each county
chairman will be asked to organize his precincts and have each
precinct captain call all of the registered Republicans using
precinct workers. Where captains or precinct workers do not
exist, their implementation will be watched closely.
In Maryland, we will be putting the telephone numbers into the
tape using a unique computer process which will allow the volunteers
to spend most of their time telephoning vis-a-vis looking up
numbers.
CONFIDENTIAL
-2-
Direct Mail Costs
List Acquisition
$ 570.00
Cleaning the Lists
2,500.00
Software Package
1,500.00
Telephone Number Selection
2,000.00
Presidential Commitment
Program Printouts
1,500.00
60,000 Ensembles @ $160/M
9,600.00
2,000 Commitment Kits
1,000.00
Total Direct Mail Costs
$18,670.00
The actual operating expenses for the Presidential Commitment
Program in Maryland are not included as they are part of the
field operation.
CONFIDENTIAL
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE. N.W.
WASHINGTON. D C. 20006
March 24, 1972
(202) 333-0920
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR:
THE HONORABLE JOHN N. MITCHELL
FROM:
JEB S. MAGRUDER
SUBJECT:
Operating Plan for the California Primary
The California Primary election will be held on June 6, 1972. It
is a state where there is an election of a pledged delegate slate.
The President will be opposed by Congressman John Ashbrook: As in
the past, the American public will watch both the Democratic and
Republican Primaries with a great deal of interest. Most important,
California, with its 45 electoral votes, is often considered the
key to the re-election of the President.
Background
Both the present political situation in California and past voting
patterns indicate that California would be rated as a toss-up for
the general election. President Nixon won California by 3.1% in
1968, lost to Pat Brown in 1962, and won by less than 1% in 1960.
The election of 1970 proved to be as contradictory and confusing as
California generally is. The defeat of incumbent Senator George
Murphy left California with two Democratic Senators. Governor Reagan,
however, was re-elected with 52.8% of the vote. One of the most
significant losses suffered by the Republicans was the loss of both
Houses in the Legislature. Democrats now control the Senate by a
21 to 19 margin and the Lower House by a 43 to 37 margin. Republicans
did hold the line on the Congressional races and even picked up a vacant
seat, giving the Democrats a 20 to 18 edge.
Due to the confusing outcome of the election of 1970, it is difficult
to draw firm conclusions. The voting trend in the U.S. Senate races
(Tab A) has fallen drastically for Republicans. Senator Kuchel
achieved a recent high point in 1960 with 56.5% of the vote for the
Republicans. This Republican percentage has decreased steadily to a low
point in 1970 when Senator Murphy received only 44.3%.
CONFIDENTIAL
-2-
Although there has also been a decline in the Republican vote for
Governor, it has not been so severe as the Senate vote. Governor
Reagan dropped from 57.6% in 1966 to 52.8% in 1970. (Tab B)
Factors other than trends and percentages must be considered in
analyzing California politics, California's political climate has
been one of throwing the "ins" out. Only three of nine incumbent
Senators have been re-elected since World War II. The defeat of the
ultra-conservative Max Rafferty in 1968 did not really reflect a
weakening of the Republican Party because he was simply too far to
the right and not a particularly strong candidate. Likewise, in
the 1970 race, Senator Murphy had been tainted with a scandal
and could not be considered a highly desirable candidate. In the
case of Governor Reagan, it would have been very difficult to
maintain as high a percentage as he achieved in his first election
in 1966.
Another major factor in the 1970 election was unemployment. This
is an especially difficult problem for Republicans as it has been
a white-collar recession that has affected Republicans employed in
the space industry and related businesses. This remains a key
issue in 1972 with the re-election of the President.
Demographic and Voting Analysis
California's population in 1970 was 19,696,840. It is the largest
state in the nation in terms of population. The state is 7% Black,
9% Mexican and Spanish, 2% Oriental. Total foreign stock is 25%,
with Mexicans 4%, Germans 2%, Canadians 2%, British 2%, Italians
2%, being the largest ethnic groups.
In political terms, California is very much a North versus South
state. The southern section of the state (Tab C), which is the
larger of the two, tends to be very conservative, while the northern
portion tends to be rather liberal. Orange and San Diego Counties
in the south, for example, were the only two heavily populated counties
in the country that gave Goldwater a plurality in 1964. The south-
ern part of the state has been described as the "Sun Belt State",
similar politically to southern Florida and central Texas. It was
settled by "Bible Belt types" and has taken on that political mold.
San Francisco, on the other hand, being the center of liberalism and
Democratic strength in California, is also the headquarters for many
CONFIDENTIAL
-3-
Far Left organizations, such as the Black Panthers. The Central Valley
of the state, generally agricultural and desert, was settled by people
coming from the Oklahoma plains during the Dust Bowl Era.
Nixon's greatest vote totals in 1968 came out of Los Angeles, Orange,
San Diego, Santa Clara and Alameda Counties. The President received
2,159,656 votes from these five counties, or 62.3% of his total
California vote. (Tab D)
Humphrey's best counties were northern counties of San Francisco
(plurality - 76,539), Alameda (66,260), Sacramento (21,592), Santa
Clara (10,065). These four best Humphrey counties, in terms of raw
vote, gave Humphrey a total plurality of 174,456 which is only
8,000 more than the plurality given Nixon vote from Orange County alone.
Wallace received 6.7% of the total vote in 1968. His vote appears to
have come most heavily, percentage wise, from that area of the state
north of Sacramento. This would make it appear that the Wallace
vote probably helped Nixon in 1968. A recent Field Poll in California
indicates that most of the vote which Wallace now receives in three-
man, head-to-head contests, would go to the Democrat in a two-man
race. (Tab E)
The conventional wisdom of the Republican politicians is that one must
get large portions of the vote downstate to offset the upstate margins
of the Democrats. In 1968, the Presidential contest followed that
pattern. Nixon carried southern California by about 376,000 votes,
lost northern California by about 143,000 votes and lost the Central
Valley by about 9,000 votes. (Tab C)
bjectives of the Primary Campaign
As California is a key state for the re-election of the President, it is
vital that we work toward the following two objectives in the primary.
1. Defeat Ashbrook by a large margin and still not split the Republican
Party.
2. Build and utilize a large cadre of volunteers in the primary in
order to have the personnel required for a general election effort.
CONFIDENTIAL
-4-
Planned Activities
The Primary campaign plan which follows was developed in coordination
with Lyn Nofziger, the Executive Director of the California Committee for
the Re-Election of the President. All directors of relevant activities
from the Washington Committee met with Mr. Nofziger on February 26, 1972.
As a result of the meeting, the following areas of activity are con-
templated: (The time schedule for the total operating plan is given in
Tab F.)
1. State Organizational Activities
The California Committee for the Re-Election of the President will
coordinate all activities in the state. Lyn Nofziger is presently
establishing headquarters and recruiting his key personnel. The primary
will allow the California Committee to test its key people before the
General Election campaign.
The preliminary budget for California was done for, the entire campaign.
Costs are not designated as to primary or general election expenditure.
The total cost of staff salaries is estimated to be $504,775. Expenses
of staff and volunteers total $737,285. Office expenses come to a total
of $405,550. The total cost of these three elements of the state
organization is $1,142,835. (Tab G)
Recommendation
That you approve the state organizational activity outlined above and in
Tab G at a cost of $1,142,835.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
2. Appearance in the State by Pro-Administration Speakers
Due to the importance of the state of California in the re-election cam-
paign, extensive use will be made of well-known Administration speakers
in the state. Between January 20 and June 6, there have been 28 different
Administration spokesmen scheduled in 66 events. (Tab H) Two rallies
occurring shortly before June 6 are being contemplated. The present plan
is for the Washington-based Committee to pay for one event and the California
Committee will be responsible for the second event.
CONFIDENTIAL
-5-
Recommendation
That you approve of the surrogate speaker program as outlined above
and in Tab H.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
3. Volunteer Activities
As previously stated, one of the major objectives of the California
Primary is to recruit and utilize a cadre of volunteers. Many of
the volunteers will be recruited through the telephone and direct mail
programs contemplated. They will be, in turn, recycled into the tele-
phone operation and the California Committee precinct organization.
In addition, Pat Hutar will work with Lyn Nofziger and his volunteer
chairman in additional recruitment of volunteers and other volunteer
activities. This volunteer program will stress precinct coffees,
recruitment of civic club activists, and petition programs that would
seek pledges of support for the President. (Tab I)
Recommendation
That you approve of the volunteer activities program as outlined above
and in Tab I.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
4. Media Advertising
Originally, an extensive media campaign including television, radio and
newspaper advertising was suggested for California. This plan was
under consideration because we thought that we were running much lower
in the polls than the Democratic contenders. There was also the possibility
that the Democrats would close ranks and coalesce support behind one
candidate. Furthermore, there was a possibility of a stronger challenge
than now anticipated by either Ashbrook or McCloskey. At this time,
we are doing better than expected in the polls. The Democrats are still
divided. Ashbrook and McCloskey have both failed to effectively challenge
the President. Therefore, our advertising people have advised against
the use of media in the California Primary. (Tab J)
CONFIDENTIAL
-6-
Recommendation
That you agree that we do not use media advertising in the California
Primary.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
5. Telephone Operation
A telephone program similar to that used in New Hampshire has been
developed for California. Due to the size of the California electorate,
only a targeted number of households will be contacted. The telephone
program will identify Nixon's supporters and turn them out on election
day. It will also recruit volunteers for the state organization.
Furthermore, it will train key people in California for the general election
telephone campaign. A more detailed discussion of the telephone plan can
be found in Tab K. A budget for the telephone operation will be
presented within the next several days.
Recommendation
That you approve the telephone operation as outlined above and in
Tab K.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
6. Direct Mail
The primary objective of the direct mail program is to communicate to the
voters the record and accomplishments of the President and to urge them
to support the President on June 6. As there has been a recommendation
that there be no media advertising, this will be the only means of com-
municating with the Republican voters of California. In addition, the
direct mail piece will ask for volunteers. The program is further dis-
cussed in Tab L.
CONFIDENTIAL
-7-
Recommendation
That you approve a direct mail program in California that would contact
all Republicans, as outlined in Tab L, at a cost of $473,895.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
7. Voter Bloc Activities
California will be the first opportunity to actively implement voter
bloc programs. The youth campaign is already engaged in a voter registra-
tion campaign, which will extend past the primary for the general election
campaign. The other voter blocs will present their plans in the near
future.
8. Control System
The California Primary affords the first opportunity to apply the
management control program which has been assigned to Jerry Jones. Jerry
has been involved in the development of all plans for activities in
California. He has had an opportunity to review the reporting and control
techniques used in the direct mail and telephone operation in the previous
primaries. He will place the most emphasis on measuring the effectiveness
of activites handled by the state organization. These activities are the
most important for winning votes, but the most difficult to measure or
control.
Recommendation
That you approve of the control system as outlined above.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
9. Post Election Evaluation of Campaign Activities
One of our objectives in the primaries has been to develop the campaign
capabilities of our total organization and to train all of the people
involved. The only measure that has been used to determine if our campaign
activities have been effective has been to review the votes. A more
scientific measuring technique of effectiveness ought to be applied in the
primary before we commit large sums of money for the general election. We
CONFIDENTIAL
-8-
feel California offers the best opportunity for testing because most
of the campaign activities will be in evidence. California is also
relatively representative of the American electorate.
Therefore, it is recommended that a project be authorized whereby a
scientific survey would be conducted among the voters before campaigning
actually begins and after the election. This in-depth survey would
attempt to measure the effect of each of the activities: telephone,
direct mail, and personal contact. If you approve this concept, Bob
Teeter will draw up a detailed plan and budget for the project.
Recommendation
That you authorize Bob Teetor to develop a detailed recommendation and
budget for the survey activities required for post election analysis.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
CONFIDENTIAL
TAB A
CALIFORNIA U.S. SENATE RACE
100. 0 (unopposed)
Knowland
60
5912
Nixor
56.5
Kuchel
55
542
53.9
Knchel
If
Kuchel
(special)
51.5
50%
50.0
Murphy
Knowland
47.5
Rafierty
'5
44. 3
Murphy
43.
Knight
40
'46
'50
'52
'54
'56
'58
'60
'64
'68
'70
TAB B
CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR'S RACE
91.6 (unopposed)
Warken
70
64.8
Warken
60
51.0
56.8
Reagin
Knght
52.8
50%
Reagan
46.8
Nixon
10.2
40
Knowland
30
'46
-
50
'54
'58
'62
'66
'70
(
CALIFORNIA
CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT DATA
92d Congre
Map of Congressional Districts, Counties, and Selected Cities
TAB C
(38 Districts)
(1968 VOTE TOTALS IN THOUSANDS)
DEL
NORTE
SISAUYOU
MOOOC
STATEWIDE RESULTS
NIXON
HUMBOLDT
3,468 (49%)
HUMPHREY 3,244 (44%)
SMASTA
EUREKA
WALLACE
LASSEN
487 ( 7%)
TRINTY
REDDING
TEMAMA
PLUMAS
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
1
CHICO
(27% OF TOTAL VOTE)
GLENN
BUTTE
SIERRA
MENDOCINO
NIXON
NEVADA
830 (43%)
COLUSA
HUMPHREY
SUTTER
YUBA
973 (50%)
PLACER
LAKE
WALLACE
132 ( 7%)
SACRAMENTO
SONOMA
TOLD
EL DORN
ALMINE
NAPA
SANTA ROSA
-
MADOR
CENTRAL VALLEY
SOLAND
(15% OF TOTAL VOTE)
MARIN
SAY
CALAVERAS
-
6 PART
SOADUIN
TOOLUME
4
o
MONO
NIXON
STOCKTON
479 (45%)
SAN FRANCISCO
5,6PART
S
-
HUMPHREY
488 (46%)
ALAMED
7
MARIPOSA
-
STANISLAUS
WALLACE
90 ( 9%)
U
11
CLARA
MADERA
MERCED
SANTA
CRUZ
2
FRESNO
FRESNO
©
SAY
*
INTO
SALINAS
BENITO
TULARE
MONTEREY
KINGS
&
5
Land
of
BAKERSFIELD
SAN LUIS 08:520
KERN
33
I
ANAHEIM
LIM
SAM BERNARD-NO
2
105 ANGELES
3
OAKLAND
SANTA
"
ONTARIO
3
LOS INCELES
5
RICHMOND
SANTA BARBARA
RENTURA
SAN BERNARDINO
SAN JOSE
o
REDLANDS
7
SAN MATEO
SANTA ANA
0
0
RIVERSIDE
VALLEJO
19-26
RIVERSIDE
PASM
28-32
O
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
(58% OF TOTAL VOTE)
IMPERIAL
4
3AM DIESO
37
NIXON
2,159 (51%)
HUMPHREY 1,783 (43%)
36
SAN DIECO
WALLACE
265 ( 6%)
2
TAB D
1968 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION
( California Counties Providing the Largest Number of Votes for Richard Nixon )
CANDIDATES
COUNTY
NIXON
HUMPHREY
WALLACE
PLURALITY
Los Angeles *
1,266,480
1,223,251
151,050
43,229 (R)
(47.6%)
(46.0%)
(5.7%)
Orange
314,905
148,869
33,034
166,036 (R)
(63.1%)
(29.9%)
(6.6%)
San Diego
261,540
167,669
33,340
93,871 (R)
(56.3%)
(36.1%)
(7.2%)
Santa Clara
163,446
173,511
18,754
10,065 (D)
(45.6%)
(48.4%)
(5.2%)
Alameda
153,285
219,545
28,426
66,260 (D)
(37.6%)
(53.9%)
(7.0%)
*
Nixon's plurality vote from Los Angeles accounted for 36.5% of his total
Republican vote.
CALIFORNIA POLL President Nixon Holds Margin
TAB E
Over Democratic Contenders
President Nixon leads all Democratic contenders in
California when the American Independent Party and the Peoples Party
candidates are added to the ballot. When these candidates are not
listed, the President remains ahead of all candidates except Senator
Muskie.
ALL VOTERS -- STATEWIDE
FEBRUARY
WALLACE AND SPOCK
1972
OUT
NIXON
44%
45%
MUSKIE
40
48
WALLACE
9
SPOCK
2
UNDECIDED
5
7
Tab G
March 9, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR HARRY FLEMMING
FROM LYN NOFZIGER
Rn
RE: California Campaign Budget
Per your letter of March 3 regarding the campaign budget for the
California Committee for the Re-Election of the President, I must
point out that this budget only covers the activities of the state
committee and to some extent the Los Angeles County committee. Nothing
has been included to cover the costs that we possibly will have to pay
to support the various county committees for the re-election of the
President in view of the new legislation affecting campaign spending
and reporting.
The situation is such that we do not believe that a strong campaign
can be mounted in the key counties on contributions of $100 or less.
We estimate that we will have to supply at least some of the funds that
will be needed for the registration effort in many counties. We feel
that this could be upwards of $500,000. Further, any state-wide or
even major county telephone-bank operation will have to be supported.
Based on the best estimate that we can arrive at, this will come to
an additional $300,000.
Finally, you should realize that we have not taken into account the
costs of any direct-mail efforts, rallies or other advertising.
Enclosure
CALIFORNIA COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
Page 1
Salaries/Expenses
Y-D
March
April
May*
June
July
August
September
October
November
TOTAL
Salaries
Exec Dir & Staff
7600
7600
7600
7600
7600
7600
7600
7600
7600
7600
76000
Exec Assts
5550
14700
14700
14700
14700
14700
14700
14700
14700
14700
137850
Field Directors
700
5000
5000
to
5000
5000
5000
5000
5000
5000
5000
45700
Communication Dir
1000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
19000
Field Staff
4700
5800
5800
5800
4700
4700
5800
8000
4750
50050
Technical Assts
650
8050
8050
8050
8050
8050
8050
8050
8050
7050
72100
Headquarters
250
1000
1000
1000
1000
111
1000
1000
1000
1000
8250
Admin Assts
1500
4750
4750
4750
4750
4750
4750
4750
4750
4750
44250
Secretarial
725
5650
5650
5650
5650
5650
5650
5650
5650
5650
51575
TOTAL SALARIES
17975
53450
54550
54550
54550
52450
53450
54550
56750
52500
504775
Expenses
Payroll (FICA)
1510
4500
4580
4580
4580
4400
4500
4580
4780
4400
42410
Travel
11600
18300
19000
19000
15550
10850
12800
18300
20400
12300
158100
Reimbursement
to RNC
--
5000
---
---
---
----
---
5000
Volunteer Expenses
3000
3000
3000
3000
3000
3000
3000
3000
3000
27000
TOTAL
13110
25800
31580
26580
23130
18250
20300
25880
28180
19700
232510
SUB TOTAL
31085
79250
86130
81130
77680
70700
73750
80430
84930
72200
737285
*Additional expenses may be incurred due to the cost of utilizing
volunteers recruited through direct mail.
CALIFORNIA COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
Page 2
OFFICE EXPENSES
Y-D
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
TOTAL
Rent
10200
7100
7100
7100
7100
7100
7100
7100
7100
3000
70000
Equip. & Supplies
6450
8450
8450
8950
8450
7950
7950
8450
8950
7650
81700
Telephone
2100
2600
4600
8000
5000
4500
4500
6000
9000
3000
49300
:
Telephone Banks
50000
50000
50000
150000
Special Programs
5300
2300
2800
800
2800
2800
1800
18600
Contract Services
250
2150
2650
2650
2150
1850
1850
2650
2650
1600
20450
Radio/TV/News Equip
1500
1000
500
500
500
500
500
500
100
5600
Insurance
700
700
700
700
700
700
700
700
700
6300
Utilities
400
400
400
400
400
400
400
400
400
3600
TOTAL
19000
28200
27200
31100
25100
23000
73000
786000
82100
18250
405550
GRAND TOTAL
50085
107450
113330
112230
102780
93700
146750
159030
167030
90450
1142835
APPROVED BY
Lyn Nofziger
March 16, 1972
Tab H
11:00 a.m.
SPEAKING EVENTS IN CALIFORNIA
Date
Event
Speaker
January 20
Jess Hill Testimonial Dinner,
Mr. Klein
Los Angeles
January 27
Ground Breaking Ceremony for
Sec. Morton
Sea Water Distillation Module,
Santa Ana
February 1
Nixon Legacy of Parks Ceremonies,
Mr. Finch
San Fernando Valley
February 1
San Fernando Valley Annual
Mr. Finch
Service Clubs Meeting,
Tujunga
February 2
United Republican Finance
Mr. Finch
Committee of Los Angeles County
Stateman's Club Reception, Los
Angeles
February 2
Western Fairs Association 49th
Mr. Finch
Annual Meeting, Anaheim
February 4
Urban Growth Policy Conference,
Sec. Romney
San Diego
February 10
Lincoln Day Dinner Aboard the
Sen. Dole
Queen Mary, Long Beach
February 10
Lincoln Club of Orange County,
Mr. Klein
Los Angeles
February 11
Orange County Lincoln Day
Sen. Dole
Dinner, Newport Beach
February 11
Civic Clubs Luncheon, San Diego
Sec. Laird
February 17
Association of General Contractors,
Mr. Klein
Los Angeles
February 18
American College Public Relations
Mr. Klein
Association, Newport Beach
February 23
Dinah Shore Show Taping
Julie Eisenhower
-2-
Date
Event
Speaker
February 24
Association of Bay Area
Mr. Finch
Governments Symposium on
Population Growth and the Bay
Area's Future, San Francisco
February 25
Cabinet Committee on Opportunity
Mr. Finch
for Spanish Speaking, Regional
Meeting, San Francisco
March 2
Los Angeles Chapter, American
Mr. Finch
Ordinance Association 36th
Annual Dinner Meeting Honoring
Mr. Finch, Los Angeles
March 3
West Adams Community Hospital
Mr. Finch
Dedication, Los Angeles
March 4
Sacramento
Mrs. Nixon
March 4
California Industrial Education
Mr. Finch
Association Annual Convention,
Anaheim
March 6
Oakland Kiwanis Club, Oakland
Mr. Weinberger
March 13
Ground Breaking Ceremony, Los
Sec. Hodgson
Angeles Economic Resources Corp.,
Asst. Sec. Podesta
Los Angeles
March 13
California State College, San
Mr. Blatchford
Francisco
March 14
Agricultural Council of
Asst. Sec. Lyng
California, Palm Springs
(U.S.D.A.)
March 15
National Medical Association,
Asst. Sec. Cowden
San Francisco
(U.S.D.A.)
March 15
American Legion, Ontario
Mr. Johnson
(V:A.)
March 15
San Diego Hospital Dedication,
Mr. Johnson
San Diego
(V.A.)
-3-
Date
Event
Speaker
March 16
California Certified Public
Mr. Jobe
Accountants Foundation for
(Commerce)
Education and Research,
Monterey
March 16
American Medical Association
Mr. Duval
Conference, San Francisco
(H.E.W.)
March 16
Ground Breaking for City Center
Mr. Hyde
Project, Oakland
(H.U.D.)
March 16
Tulare County Fund Raising Dinner,
Sec. Romney
Visalia
March 16
National Security Industrialist
Mr. Wm. Magruder
Association, Los Angeles
March 17
Clairmont College Trustees,
Sec. Romney
Los Angeles
March 17
Reception for Cong. Wiggins,
Sec. Romney
West Covina
March 17
National Association of Counties,
Mr. Hyde
Los Angeles
(H.U.D.)
March 17
Claremont Men's College
Sec. Romney
West Covina
March 17
American Medical Association,
Mr. Dowden
San Francisco
(U.S.D.A.)
March 18
San Diego Evening Tribune Teen
Mr. Franklin
Seminar, San Diego
March 21
Scholastic Press Corp.,
The Vice President
Los Angeles
March 22
Anaheim Chamber of Commerce,
Mr. Podesta
Anaheim
(Commerce)
March 27
Association of California School
Mr. Klein
Administrators, Anaheim
March 27 - 31
President's Air and Water
Mr. Ruckelshaus
Pollution Advisory Board, Los
Angeles and San Francisco
!
-4-
Date
Event
Speaker
March 29
The Comstock Club, Sacramento
Mr. Finch
March 29
Order of the Rainbow for Girls,
Mr. Finch
Sacramento
March 30
Boy Scouts of American Golden
Mr. Finch
Empire Council 22nd Annual Eagle
Scout Recognition, Sacramento
March 30
Luncheon Honoring State of
Mr. Finch
California Employees, Sacramento
March 30
Fund Raising Reception for the
Mr. Finch
Boy Scouts of America, Sacramento
April 7 - 10
Del Monte Spring Conference,
Sec. Shultz
Pebble Beach
April 8
California Republican Assembly
The Vice President
Convention, Palo Alto
April 14
California Grain and Feed
Sec. Butz
Association, Palm Springs
(Invitation pending)
April 25
Bechtel Directors Advisory Group,
Sec. Shultz
San Francisco
April 28
California Contract Cities
Mr. Finch
Association, San Diego
May 1
Santa Monica Bar Association Law
(Awaiting invitation)
Day Luncheon, Santa Monica
May 13
California Jaycee Annual State
Mr. Finch
Convention, Oakland
May 22
California Peace Officers
Mr. Kleindienst
Association, Anaheim
May 22
California Bankers Association,
Sec. Peterson
Los Angeles
May 22
Los Angeles World Trade Council,
Sec. Peterson
Los Angeles
May 22
Cal. Tech. Association, Los Angeles
Sec. Peterson
-5-
Date
Event
Speaker
May 30
Twilight Club, Pasadena
Mr. Finch
June 2
Southwest Regional Laboratory
Mr. Finch
for Educational Research and
Development Dedication Ceremonies,
Los Angeles
June 2
Los Angeles World Affairs Council,
Sec. Connally
Los Angeles
June 10
Palomar College, San Marcos
Mr. Finch
June 11
Occidental College, Los Angeles
Mr. Finch
June 24
Western State University College
Mr. Finch
Law Commencement, Anaheim
June 25
California Livestock Symposium,
Sec. Butz
Fresno
(Invitation pending)
Open May
Bay Area Republican Alliance
Sec. Morton
Special Membership Meeting,
(Invitation pending)
San Francisco
Tab I
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
MEMORANDUM
March 23, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
BOB MARIK
FROM:
PAT HUTAR
SUBJECT:
Volunteer Programs for California
Major volunteer efforts should be channeled into the telephone operations
and Presidential commitment programs. In areas of the state not affected
by these programs, the Pledged to the President "petition" program could
be utilized or the "Ten for R.N." Also, Precinct Coffees could be pro-
grammed in all areas to help with the recruitment of volunteers for all
of the above mentioned projects and other campaign work.
NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND STATE ADVISORY COMMITTEES
(Only partially operational for the Primary)
The concept of the National Advisory and State Advisory Committees is to
create a vehicle by which we can work through existing organizations to
gain support for the President from persons who might not otherwise take an
active interest in the campaign and might not vote. Also, working within
an existing group allows us to multiply our efforts to get votes without
the necessity of creating an additional organizational structure to accom-
plish the task.
The leadership for the National Advisory Committee will be recruited from
past presidents of such organizations as the American Legion, the American
Legion Auxiliary, League of Women Voters, Business and Professional Women,
Kiwanis, General Federated Clubs, Zonta. Still others would be drawn from
Boy and Girl Scout Councils, YWCA and YMCA leaders, labor unions, school
teachers, to name a few.
The past national presidents would serve at the national level and would
help in the recruitment of past state presidents or officers who would in
turn work through leadership in the local clubs. The contact person(s) in
each local unit would recruit support for the President from members on a
personal and private basis. There would be no attempt made to get endorsements
or to interject partisanship into the meetings. This would be contrary to the
rules governing most of these organizations. This part of the program has to
be low key.
State Advisory Committees would work directly with the State Re-election
Committees. There would be no need for a burdensome schedule of meetings
with the State Advisory Committee since much of their work will be done di-
rectly with their particular non-partisan organization.
- 2 -
Here are a few of the ways in which the Advisory Committees will be valuable:
(1) Publicity value of prestige names released at the national
and state levels as supporters of the President.
(2) Develop opportunities for pro-administration speakers to address
national and state organizations, i.e., women appointees and
other Administration officials.
(3) Individuals within clubs could be recruited to work directly
with their local Re-election Committee.
(4) Individuals would be asked to participate in small fund-raising
projects such as Presidential Pledge Petitions and other easy-
to-do fund-raising programs.
(5) Key persons within clubs could provide campaign literature, buttons,
bumper strips to members who are for the President.
(6) National and state leaders could write to their friends within
their own states and around the country urging them to support
the President. Special stationery with the volunteer logo
would be provided.
(7) Utilize articulate national and state non-partisan leaders as
speakers in appropriate situations.
(8) Include non-partisan leaders in all special events at national,
state and local levels as a means of identification of non-
partisan organization support for the President. This also
gives special recognition to the non-partisan leader.
(9) Include outstanding non-partisan workers in the volunteer recog-
nition program.
The idea here is not to set up a separate super-structure but to work through
existing organizations. Any positive participation and action that can be
derived from this approach will be a plus.
TAB J
Committee for the Re-election of the President
MEMORANDUM
March 23, 1972
CONFIDENTIAL
TO:
PETE DAILEY
FROM:
PHIL JOANOU
SUBJECT:
California Primary
This morning I had a conversation with Bob Teeter concerning
recommendations for this primary. We reviewed current polling
data which shows the following:
The Field Poll, conducted in February shows, (with Wallace and
Spock in the race) Nixon leading Muskie 44% to 40%, Humphrey
43% to 38%, and Kennedy 44% to 41%. Further, a DMI poll
conducted in Los Angeles and Orange Counties in late February
and early March, had Nixon over Muskie by 7. points, over
Humphrey by 18, and under Kennedy by 2. Ashbrook had 9%. We
concluded from reviewing this research that the President has
a fair lead in California, and that his trend in the Field
Poll is up. (39% in August 1971; 44% in February, 1972).
Bob also pointed out that there is a smaller undecided vote in
California, and that i would be difficult to move this vote
with advertising in the primary. Major issues are unemployment,
high state taxes, and the environment.
A four week campaign consisting of radio, TV, and newspaper,
similar to the Wisconsin plan, would cost $750,000 plus production.
I recommend that we do not spend this money during the primary.
We are ahead and the California primary on the Democratic side
could be very hot. We may be better off letting the Democrats
cut each other up in this last primary, contrasted with Nixon in
Russia. He will be getting plenty of prime time exposure. Bob
pointed out, however, that he believes that we should have a
strong effort in California, but that a strong political effort does
not necessarily include advertising. We could have a strong sur-
rogate program with rallies in San Francisco, Los Angeles, and
San Diego, and a strong press program for the primary.
One of the major problems in California is organization. A
major direct mail program to all registered Republicans soliciting
volunteers, and perhaps contributions, should be conducted. This
letter could also present a strong case for supporting the Presi-
dent. A letter to conservatives (perhaps from Goldwater) would
help counter any Ashbrook activity.
-2-
CONFIDENTIAL
The next subject we discussed was mass advertising to Blacks
and Mexican-Americans in California. Bob feels, and I agree,
that we should not conduct a mass media effort with Blacks.
The split there is about 90-10 against us, and we run a risk
of increasing the militancy against us more than we stand to
gain in increasing our own small base. This seems to be a
better job for a well placed direct mail effort during the
primary. On the other hand, we have a better chance with
the Mexican-American voter, and a program there could be
implemented on Spanish language TV and radio, for about
$60,000. As with Blacks, there is another school of thought
which says this is better done with direct mail and speakers.
In summary:
1. We should not advertise in the California Primary.
2. We should invest, instead, in a strong direct mail,
surrogate candidate and PR program.
3. We should raise the issue of testing advertising
with Mexican-Americans at the next strategy meeting.
CC: Bob Teeter
CONFIDENTIAL
TAB K
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE. N.W
WASHINGTON. D C. 20006
March 24, 1972
(202) 333-0920
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR THE HONORABLE JOHN N. MITCHELL
THROUGH:
JEB S. MAGRUDER
FROM:
NANCY BRATAAS
SUBJECT:
California Primary Telephone Operating Plan
The California telephone campaign has three objectives;
1. To defeat Ashbrook by a large majority while avoiding a
split in the Party.
2. To identify and train key leaders at the state level for the
Fall campaign.
3. To recruit and train a large number of volunteers willing
to work in the Fall.
General Plan
The following plan has been developed through discussions between Lyn
Nofziger and Nancy Brataas, and reflects what Mr. Nofziger thinks would
be the most effective use of telephones in the state for the Primary.
Centers will be located in each of the four regions into which the
state has been divided for the campaign. There will be one center in
Stockton, one in Santa Clara, one in Orange County and one in San
Diego County. Los Angeles County will have two centers and possibly
two more, for a total of 6 to 8 centers. There will be ten phones
per center, each center capable of completing approximately 50,000
calls, so that a total of 300,000 to 400,000 households can be con-
tacted (500,000 to 700,000 voters).
CONFIDENTIAL
- 2 -
Telephone Message and Follow-up Procedure
The format will be based on the New Hampshire Plan:
1. The voter will be asked if his vote can be counted upon on
June 6th.
2. The responses will be separated into three major categories:
Those supporting the President, those opposed, and those undecided.
3. The follow-up plan will be:
a. The supporters will be next contacted during the
Get-out-the-vote operation.
b. The unfavorables will not be contacted again.
C. The undecided voters will receive a personalized
computer letter, along with the appropriate issue brochure.
d. A follow-up telephone call will be made to all un-
decideds to assure that the brochure was received, and to deter-
mine if they now support the President. If so, they will be
included in the Get-out-the-vote list.
4. The data handling operation to accomplish this activity will
utilize separate name cards for each household. They can be physically
sorted according to the results of the telephone call. For the follow-
up mailing to undecided voters, the cards will be processed by computer
to generate the personalized letter.
Operational Plan
Nancy Brataas is leaving for California on Tuesday night, March 28th.
She will meet with Lyn Nofziger and other state leaders on March 29th
and 30th to discuss and develop the specific plan of operation.
It is not possible to include the projected budget at this time because
the pertinent information regarding telephone costs will not be available
until Nancy's arrival in the state. The budget recommendation will be
submitted immediately upon her return to Washington, D. C.
CONFIDENTIAL
Tab L
Committee for the Re-election of the President
MEMORANDUM
March 22, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
DR. ROBERT MARIK
FROM:
ROBERT MORGAN/A
SUBJECT:
California Primary Direct Mail
Alternatives
Keeping in mind the two stated objectives of the California
Primary and with a basic budget limitation, a recommended
plan is suggested along with two alternatives. A general
discussion on direction is also included.
General Discussion
Keeping the objectives in mind a direct mail effort has to
be made to 90% of the registered Republicans who are on
magnetic tape. This is the only effective way to cover
the state and test all of the county organizations. By
implementing the Presidential Commitment Program as outlined
below, it forces each county chairman to organize down to
the precinct level to accomplish the goal. Granted it takes
tighter control and more people but anything less than this
coverage does not really satisfy the stated goals. Our
primary recommendation includes mailing to 3,000,000
registered Republicans which cover the counties on magnetic
tape. The program would work as follows:
1. Seed new volunteers directly into the precincts
from the direct mail response
A. To add precinct workers
B. To establish new precinct captains
where none exist.
2. Give the new volunteers a list of 20 Republican
voters in their precinct to contact for a get
out the vote program on June 4.
3. Use the volunteers to bring in 5 new volunteers
each.
-2-
4. Initiate a telephone get out the vote campaign
based on the lists provided to supplement the
volunteers coming in. It would be operated out
of homes by volunteers.
Three copies of the list will be provided in
the following sequence -- by county, city and
precinct, and then in alphabetical by street
in descending numerical order. This would be
used organizationally for the county chairman
to develop precinct captains and precinct
workers throughout his county.
Our direct mail efforts would go to 90% of the registered
Republicans in the larger counties where the list is on
magnetic tape. The mailing ensemble would emphasize
believability to help bridge the credibility gap. A
completely personalized computer letter would be used with
the volunteer card on the bottom, along with a revised
issue brochure for the record. A BRE and non-personalized
contributor card would also be included.
The letter would emphasize volunteers for Nixon now, touch
on accomplishments and ask for contributions as a tag on.
By the time California tests start we will know if asking
for contributions and volunteers at the same time takes
away from the percent of volunteer response.
The suggested program is based on accomplishing the specific
objectives. It does' not meet the fixed budget requirements
I was given, but the fixed budget requirements do not
accomplish the objectives. (See exhibit I.)
Alternative plan 1 is taking every third household and
printing out all of the data in all of the counties but
seeding fewer volunteers in the precincts. This plan will
generate less enthusiasm by the county chairmen. (See Exhibit II.)
Alternative plan 2 concentrates our direct mail efforts
in --
San Diego
Orange
Santa Clara
Stanislaus
Los Angeles
in that order of priority. We will give a concentrated effort
but it will not accomplish the goal of testing the California
organization nor will it give the California organization the
opportunity to be tested. (See exhibit III).
-3-
Voter blocs will be identified wherever they can and special
paragraphs will be inserted to fit their interests. These
will be coded to measure the response. If alternative plan
1 or 2 is used, only 30,000 voter bloc mailings will be
tested. No effort in the primary will be made to reach
agricultural voters if alternative plan 1 or 2 is used.
With the suggested plan we will identify and mail to Blacks,
Spanish speaking, Elderly, Jewish and Agricultural segments.
Lyn Nofziger, the California Executive Director, is in favor
of the suggested plan as stated.
Substantial field activity will be required in connection
with utilizing the volunteers acquired through the direct
mail program. Pro forma budgets are shown in Exhibit 4,
but that expense would be a part of the state organization
budget, rather than the direct mail program. Expenses
would be considerably lower if existing state organization
field men and local volunteers were used.
Exhibit I
Suggested Plan
1 Mailing Only
3,000,000 ensembles @ $133/M
=
$ 399,000
2 color window envelope
1 color BRE
14" letter with volunteer
and contributor card
Brochure on the record
List acquisition and software
30,000
Subtotal Direct Mail Costs
429,000
$ 429,000
Material Expenses
Commitment Kit1
525
Presentation Boards
1,875
Letters
1,425
Commitment Cards
3,150
Printed Envelopes
1,500
Mailing Envelopes
1,460
Issue Brochures
11,250
Inserting, Collating & Boxing
7,090
Freight
1,880
Working Lists for the Counties
14,740
44,895
44,895
$ 473,895
1
The plan includes 56,000 kits
Exhibit II
Alternative Plan 1
1 Mailing Only
800,000 ensembles @ $145/M
=
$ 116,000
2 color window envelope
1 color BRE
14" letter with volunteer
and contributor card
Brochure on the record
List acquisition and software
10,000
Subtotal - Direct Mail Costs
126,000
$ 126,000
Material Expenses
Commitment Kit
140
Presentation Boards
500
Letters
380
Commitment Cards
840
Printed Envelopes
400
Mailing Envelopes
390
Issue Brochures
3,000
Inserting, Collating & Boxing
1,890
Freight
500
Working Lists for the Counties
3,930
11,970
11,970
$ 137,970
1
The plan includes 15,000 kits
Exhibit III
Alternative Plan 2
1 Mailing Only
800,000 ensembles @ $145/M
=
$ 116,000
2 color window envelope
1 color BRE
14" letter with volunteer
and contributor card
Brochure on the record
List acquisition and software
10,000
Subtotal - Direct Mail Costs
126,000
$ 126,000
Material Expenses
Commitment Kit1
140
Presentation Boards
500
Letters
380
Commitment Cards
840
Printed Envelopes
400
Mailing Envelopes
390
Issue Brochures
3,000
Inserting, Collating & Boxing
1,890
Freight
500
Working Lists for the Counties
3,930
11,970
11,970
$137.970
1
The plan includes 15,000 kits
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE NW
WASHINGTON D C 20006
(202) 333-0920
March 27, 1972
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR: THE HONORABLE JOHN N. MITCHELL
SUBJECT:
Operating Plan for the Indiana Primary
Indiana state law provides for a direct, closed, binding Presidential
Preference Primary on May 2. There is no party registration in
Indiana. Therefore, any voter may vote in the Republican Primary.
District delegates must support on the first ballot at the National
Convention the Presidential candidate who won in their respective
districts. Delegates at large must support the statewide Presidential
Preference Poll winner on the first ballot.
After John Ashbrook filed on March 23 with the total number of names
on the petition as required, the Secretary of State indicated that
Ashbrook would be on the ballot. When the Secretary of State
scrutinized the petitions more closely on March 25, it was determined
that Ashbrook did not have the required number of signatures in each
Congressional district. Therefore, Ashbrook will not be on the ballot
in the Indiana Primary:
General Background
As of 1970, Indiana was the 11th largest state in the nation. It will
cast 13 electoral votes in 1972. Indiana's 5,193,669 population con-
sists of 7% Black and 8% foreign stock. A particularly heavy concen-
tration of Blacks exists in Lake County (Gary, East Chicago) and
Marion County (Indianapolis). Between the 1960 census and 1972 election,
there will have been an increase of 17.8% in the total voting age
population in Indiana. The Black population over 18 years of age rose
44.2% while the white population increased only 16.3%.
In 1968, Indiana turned out 80% of the registered voters. In that
year, Indiana rated third in the nation in the highest turnout of voting
age persons. 72% of the voting age population participated in the election.
Political Background
Although Indiana has a good Republican tradition, U.S. Senate candidates
have not fared well. Since 1958, both Senate seats have been held
CONFIDENTIAL
-2-
by Democrats. But, like many state elections in Indiana, the last
two Senate races have been close, with Hartke winning by 50.1%
(still contested) and Bayh, by 51,7%.
The Governorship has gone back and forth between the Parties. At
present, the Governorship is held by a Republican, Governor
Whitcomb, who cannot succeed himself.
Republicans control both Houses of the Legislature. The make-up of
the Senate is 29 Republicans to 21 Democrats. In the House, there
are 54 Republicans to 46 Democrats. However, it is important to
note that Republicans lost a total of 6 House seats and 19 Senate
seats in the 1970 election.
In the past thirty years, Republicans have, for the most part, held
a majority of the Congressional seats, There are presently six
Republicans and five Democrats in the Congressional delegation. A
brief discussion of the Congressional districts follows: (Tab A)
1st District - Democrat - Ray Madden - The 1st is a heavy industrial
area located in the northwest corner of the state. It takes in the
part of Lake County with the cities of Gary, Hammond, East Chicago
and Whiting.
2nd District - Republican - Earl Landgrebe - The 2nd contains the
suburbs of Gary, the remaining rural areas of Lake County and other
northwestern counties. A traditional G.O.P. stronghold.
3rd District - Democrat - John Brademas - The 3rd district centers
around South Bend in St. Joseph County. A politically marginal
district.
4th District - Democrat - J. Edward Roush - The 4th centers on Fort
Wayne in Allen County. A politically marginal seat formerly held
by Ross Adair.
5th District - Republican - Elwood Hillis - The 5th is in the heart-
land of Indiana and includes Kokomo and Marion, This was the former
seat of Richard Roudebush.
6th District - Republican - William Bray - The 6th takes in part of
Indianapolis and suburban counties. A conservative Republican
district.
CONFIDENTIAL
-3-
7th District - Republican - John Myers - The 7th includes Bloomington
and Terre Haute in central Indiana.
8th District - Republican - Roger Zion - The 8th is in the southwest
corner of the state and includes Evansville.
9th District - Democrat - Lee Hamilton - Located in the southeast
corner of the state, the 9th is rural and agricultural.
10th District - Republican - David Dennis - The 10th district contains
Anderson and Muncie in the east-central part of the state.
11th District - Democrat - Andrew Jacobs - Jacobs, a liberal, repre-
sents an area which includes a part of Indianapolis.
Indiana at one time was known as a state with good Republican Party
performance. However, Party in-fighting in the last several years
has seriously hurt the G.O.P. Recent activity indicates that an
effort is being made to reunite the Party.
Presidential Voting Trends
Since 1940, Indiana has voted for the Republican Presidential candidate
in every election but 1964. In 1960, Indiana delivered the next-to-
highest plurality of all states for the President, second only to Ohio.
In the 1968 Presidential Primary, Richard Nixon as the only Republican
candidate received 508,362 votes. The Democrats cast a total vote
of 776,513 for Kennedy, McCarthy and Brannigan.
Indiana is the state in which Nixon rolled up his largest plurality
in 1968. In total, Nixon carried the state by 261,226 votes.
Nixon
1,067,885
50.3%
Humphrey
806,659
38.0%
Wallace
243,108
11.4%
Other
5,945
0. 3%
Nixon, in 1968, won pluralities in every county except nine. Five of
those counties lie in the rural south; two small counties surrounding
Vigo County (Terre Haute) and two large northern counties, Lake and
St. Joseph, containing the cities of Gary and South Bend.
CONFIDENTIAL
-4-
Nixon's best counties in terms of pluralities are as follows:
Marion (Indianapolis)
46,788
Allen (Fort Wayne)
18,800
Elkhart
10,262
Total
75,850
These three counties accounted for 29% of Nixon's total plurality.
Nixon's 1968 success, then, really wasn't very concentrated in any
one area. The population of the state and the voting inclinations
make that effectively impossible.
In terms of vote contribution, the following counties are most
significant:
Total
Votes
Nixon
Humphrey
Wallace
Contribution
Cummulative
Marion
310,922
52.3
37.2
10.3
14.0
14.0
Lake
213,574
36.5
46.8
16.4
10.0
24.0
Allen
108,954
54.3
37.1
8.4
5.1
29.1
St. Joseph
106,864
44.1
44.4
11.2
5.0
34.1
Thirty-four percent of the state's total vote came from these four
counties in 1968. Nixon carried two counties, Marion and Allen, lost
Lake County by a wide margin and just about broke even in St. Joseph.
Nixon received 46.8% of the vote actually cast in these four counties,
which is considered less than the 50.3% he garnered in the states as
a whole. It also suggests a possible future deficit from these four
counties.
Political Analysis
One of the most important considerations of the Committee for the Re-
Election of the President is to insure a unified effort behind President
Nixon. Internal struggles in the Party can do nothing but hurt the
campaign. The Republican vote is in Indiana. We must provide a
unified effort to get the President's vote out,
Another trouble spot for Nixon could be the Wallace voter. In 1968,
Wallace received 8.4% in Allen, 10.3% in Marion, 11.2% in St. Joseph
and 16.4% in Lake. The heavy Wallace vote in Lake comes from the
large blue-collar population in that area. This would appear to be
a basic Democratic vote that would swing back to the Democratic column
if Wallace does not run.
CONFIDENTIAL
-5-
The increasing Black population and greater Black participation in
Marion and Lake may hold back the Nixon plurality. However, Major
Lugar won an impressive percentage of the Black vote in his recent
race in Indianapolis (Marion).
The youth vote certainly has to receive consideration. This is
especially true in St. Joseph where South Bend is the home of Notre
Dame. The campus is becoming increasingly more liberal. This vote
could make a considerable difference.
One of the keys, it would appear, to a Nixon victory in Indiana would
be to hold down the Democratic margins in both Lake and St. Joseph
in an attempt to maintain Nixon's 43,302 total plurality in Marion,
Lake, Allen and St. Joseph Counties.
Survey results indicate that the President is doing reasonably well
in the southern part of the state. The approval is much better than
expected in the Lake area. The northern part of the state around
Fort Wayne is not giving the President the support that should be
expected.
The Primary Election
Due to the uncontested nature of the Indiana Primary, our objective
should be to recruit key personnel in the primary so that we will have
a strong Nixon organization in the General Election.
Planned Activities
The Primary campaign plan which follows was developed in coordination
with the Indiana Committee for the Re-Election of the President. The
recommendations were discussed in a meeting on March 4, 1972, attended
by Will Hays, chairman of the Indiana Committee, L. Keith Bulen,
Marion County chairman and Jim Neal, state G.O.P. chairman. All
directors from the Washington Committee who are involved with relevant
activities were also present.
At the time of the meeting, it was thought that Ashbrook would be in
the Indiana Primary. Therefore, there were five areas of activity
contemplated:
CONFIDENTIAL
-6-
1. State Organizational Activity
2. Appearance in the State by Pro-Administration Speakers
3. Targeted Telephone Operation
4. Youth Campaign Activity
5. Targeted Direct Mail
The time schedule for the total operating plan is given in Tab B.
The individual elements are discussed in detail below:
1. State Organizational Activity
The Indiana Committee has established a headquarters for the Primary
and has been receiving buttons, brochures and bumper stickers. The
primary will provide an opportunity to recruit key personnel and test
them before the General Election campaign. Deadlines for selection
of key personnel will be established by the Washington Committee and
progress reports will be required.
Recommendation
That you approve the state organizational activities outlined above.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
2. Appearance in the State by Pro-Administration Speakers
Well-known, pro-Administration speakers will visit the state on behalf
of the President. The list of speakers scheduled at this time
follows:
Date
Event
Speaker
April 19
Republican Women's
Mrs. Mitchell
Federation, Indianapolis
April 22
Gridiron Dinner,
Mr. Ruckelshaus
Fort Wayne
CONFIDENTIAL
-7-
Date
Event
Speaker
Open Date:
April or May
Fort Wayne Press Club
Sec. Connally
Luncheon, Fort Wayne
(Invitation Pending)
Recommendation
That you approve the program for surrogate speakers outlined above.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
3. Targeted Telephone Operation
The Indiana Committee expressed an interest in establishing a
telephone operation in several counties. Due to the telephone
operation commitments in other states and the present political
situation in Indiana, we do not feel that it is practical to use
a targeted telephone operation in the Indiana Primary.
Recommendation
That you agree that we should not use a targeted telephone operation.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
4. Youth Campaign Activity
Harry McNaught has been named youth chairman in Indiana. He is pre-
sently planning a limited registration effort for the primary and a
more extensive drive for the General Election. The youth campaign
will also be preparing for mock elections on Indiana campuses.
Recommendation
That you approve the youth campaign activities outlined above.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
CONFIDENTIAL
-8-
5. Targeted Direct Mail
The Indiana Committee leadership requested a 135,000 household
direct mail program for the primary. The mailing would be targeted
in Marion and Allen Counties. Although Republican strength has
eroded in Allen County, the President still runs very strong state-
wide. In light of the present political situation, it would be
difficult to justify the expenditure of $24,000 for a 135,000 house-
hold mailing as an investment for the General Election.
Recommendation
That you agree that we should not use a direct mail program in the
Indiana Primary.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
JEB S. MAGRUDER
CONFIDENTIAL
Tab A
INDIANA
Districts Established February 15, 1968
EAST CHICAGO
MICHIGAN CITY
ELKHART
be
SOUTH BEND
MISHAWAKA
LAGRANGE
STEUBEN
9
51 JOSEPH
ELKHART
HAMMOND
GARY
LA PORTE
PORTER
Map of Congressional
LAKE
3
NOBLE
DE MALE
Districts, Counties, and
MARSHALL
STARKE
KOSCIUSNO
Selected Cities
2
WHITLEY
FORT WAYNE
(11 Districts)
ALLEN
PULASKI
FULTON
JASPER
NEWTON
WABASH
HUNTINGTON
CASS
M'AMI
WHITE
WELLS
ADAMS
BENTON
5
MARION
CARROLL
KoKoMo
LAFAYETTE
.
GRANT
HOWARD
BLACKFORD
JAY
WARREN
TIPPECANOE
CLINTON
TIPTON
MUNCIE
FRANKFORT
DELAWARE
NONTGOMERY
MADISON
RANDOLPH
FOUNTAIN
ANDERSON
MAMILTON
BOONE
CRAWFORDSVILLE
VERMILLION
HENRY
MARCH
WAYNE
1
PARKE
HENDRICKS
RA
HAND
CA
INDIANAPOLIS
RICHMOND
Insury
PUTNAM
RUSH
FAYETTE
UNION
TERRE HAUTE
SHELBY
MORGAN
JOHNSON
VIGO
CLAY
FRANKLIN
OWEN
DECATOR
BARTHOLOMEW
BLOOMINGTON
BROWN
COLUMBUS
MONROE
DEARSORY
SULLIVAN
RIPLEY
GREENE
JENNINGS
CHIO
JACKSON
LAWRENCE
SWITZERLAND
JEFFERSON
DAVIESS
MARTIN
KNOX
SCOTT
WASHINGTON
ORANGE
CLARK
PIKE
DUBOIS
GIBSON
CRAWFORD
FLOYD
o
NEW ALBANY
JEFFERSONVILLE
MARRISON
WARRICK
PERRT
POSEY
SPENCER
EVANSVILLE
U.S. Department of Commerce
County with two or more Congressional Districts
Bureau of the Census
# 13 of 29 copies
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE. N.W.
WASHINGTON. D. C. 20006
(202) 333-0920
March 15, 1972
CONFIDENTIAL
SUBJECT:
Preliminary Operating Plan for the Michigan Primary
Michigan's Presidential Preference Primary will be held on May 16.
me ce
Each candidate will receive a share of the 48 delegate votes in
only needs
proportion to the primary vote. Delegates are bound until released.
5% to,
General Background
get contals
In 1970 the population was 8,875,083, of which 4,059,807 were re-
gistered to vote. Of the total population, 26.6% is considered to
be rural and 73.8% urban.
The SMSAs are as follows:
Ann Arbor
234,103
Bay City
117,339
Detroit
4,199,931
Flint
496,658
Grand Rapids
539,225
Jackson
143,274
Kalamazoo
201,550
Lansing
378,423
Muskegon-Muskegon Heights
157,426
Saginaw
219,743
Toledo, Ohio-Mich. (part)
118,479
Michigan has a Black population of 11%, which is centered in major
southeastern cities, particularly Detroit. Total foreign stock is
24% with a significant number of Poles, Italians, Germans, Swedes
and Eastern Europeans. Catholics comprise 27% of the population.
The state has 60% blue-collar employment and is very union oriented.
Political Background
The 1970 U.S. Senate race in Michigan represented a continued upswing
by Democrats and a low point for Republicans. Lenore Romney only
polled 33% against incumbent Senator Philip Hart. Governor Milliken
fared better in 1970, but he still won only with 50.6% of the vote.
CONFIDENTIAL
-2-
The 1970 election had little effect on the State Legislature. The
Senate is divided evenly between 19 Republicans and 19 Democrats.
Democrats control the House by a 58 to 52 margin.
Republicans control the Congressional delegation with a 12 to 7
margin over the Democrats. A list of the Congressional delegation
follows: (Tab A)
Congressmen
1968 Presidential Vote *
1970 %
RN
HHH
GCW
1st John Conyers (D)
86.9
16,655
134,437
5,743
2nd Marvin Esch (R)
62.6
85,262
74,021
18,158
3rd Gary. E. Brown (R)
56.2
95,522
66,035
18,244
4th Edward Hutchinson (R)
61.9
90,599
55,196
20,422
5th Gerald Ford (R)
61.5
94,435
67,946
12,845
6th C. Chamberlain (R)
60.3
88,645
66,322
15,113
7th D.W. Riegle, Jr. (R)
70.3
72,814
80,373
26,620
8th James Harvey (R)
65.4
87,375
60,015
16,719
9th G. Vander Jagt (R)
64.6
100,798
61,539
14,763
10th E.A. Cederberg (R)
59.2
93,778
63,392
13,043
11th Philip Ruppe (R)
61.7
78,025
79,327
9,241
12th J.G. O'Hara (D)
76.9
63,837
115,903
29,634
13th Charles Diggs (D)
87,9
11,302
88,625
5,313
14th Lucien Nedzi (D)
70.0
59,930
96,737
20,717
15th William Ford (D)
80.0
59,930
93,045
27,022
16th John Dingell (D)
78.2
47,202
95,603
20,268
17th Martha Griffiths (D)
79.7
43,432
106,860
17,695
18th William Broomfield (R)
64.5
55,093
102,817
17,150
19th Jack McDonald (R)
58.5
100,114
84,889
23,238
* Districts subject to boundary
changes for reapportionment.
Figures are for '70 districts.
Senator Griffin is up for re-election in 1972. His race was, until
recently, considered to be a very difficult, uphill battle. In the last
several months, his position has improved considerably.
Voting Analysis
In relation to the 1968 Presidential vote, the Republican Party fell
rather drastically throughout the state. In 1960, Kennedy received
1,687,269 (51%), Nixon received 1,620,428 (49%). In 1968, Humphrey
carried the state by 222,417, receiving 1,593,082 or 48%, Nixon received
CONFIDENTIAL
-3-
1,370,665 or 42%, and Wallace received 331,968 or 10%. Nixon's
totals fell throughout the state in every county. Traditional
Republican areas in the mid-section of the state and in the south-
western part of the state gave Nixon much smaller margins than in
1960. Meanwhile, in Wayne County (Detroit), Nixon received only
26.2% of the vote to 63.2% for Humphrey and 10.2% for Wallace.
Humphrey received a plurality of 383,591 and 41% of his total vote
in Wayne County. In Detroit proper, Nixon received only 20% of
the vote to 71.2% for Humphrey. In Black districts of Detroit,
Nixon lost by as much as 96%.
Political Analysis
The Democratic majorities in many of the major counties were so
large in 1968 and the overall trend in Michigan so Democratic
that the state looks very difficult for 1972. There are two areas on
which the Committee should concentrate its efforts. An attempt
should be made to reassert Republican loyalties in the out state
areas. The other tactic would be to seek votes on the fringes of
the major cities. Many of these voters are ethnic and quite con-
cious of the social issues.
The Primary Election
Until filing closes on March 17, it will not be established whether
the President will have opposition in the Michigan Primary. Regard-
less, the primary will give the Committee for the Re-Election of the
President an opportunity to organize for what will surely be an
extremely difficult election.
Our objectives in the primary will be to recruit volunteers and build
an organization for the General Election.
Planned Activities (Tab B)
1. State Organization: The Michigan Committee for the Re-Election
of the President will establish headquarters for the primary. A
volunteer recruitment effort will be required in order to develop
a statewide organization. Deadlines for selection of the personnèl
will be established by the Washington-based political division.
2. Appearances in the State by Pro-Administration Speakers: Maximum
use should be made of the surrogate speakers program as little other
activity will be used in the Michigan Primary.
CONFIDENTIAL
-4-
The Political Division recommends the following additional
activities:
1. A Volunteer Commitment Program in selected counties. (This
would be contingent upon the availability of Republican
lists and our standing in the polls.)
2. The use of appropriate voter bloc directors in an effort to
build an organization.
CONFIDENTIAL
Districts Established August 28, 1964
Tab A
Map of Congressional Districts, Counties, and Selected Cities
(19 Districts)
REWEENAW
HOUSENTON
ONTORASON
BARAGE
MARQUETTE
LUCE
BOGEBIC
SAULT STE. MARIE
MARQUETTE
ALGER
CHIPPENA
MOR
SCHOOLLRANT
PART
BACKINAC
DICEINSON
DELTA
DO
of
0
RENOMINE
EMMET
CHESOYGAN
SCALE
o
01
20
30
40
30 MILES
PRESOUE ISLE
CHARLEVOIS
1
PART
MONT
ALPENA
ANTIMN
OISEGO
MORENCY
County with two or more Congressional Districts
CELLANAU
GRAND
BALKASAA
CRAWFORD
OSCODA
ALCOMA
BENZIE
TRAVERSE
WANSTER
5
WEAFORD
MISSAUREE
BOSCOMBOR
OGENAW
IOSCO
AREMAC
BASON
LAKE
OSCEOLA
CLAIM
CLADWIN
MURON
BAY
BAY CITY
BABELLA
NIQLAND
OCEANA
NECOSTA
MEWAYGO
TUSCOLA
SAGINAW
SANILAC
SAGINAW
BONTCAL
GRATION
MUSKEGON
MUSKEGON
LAPTER
PORT
KENT
perm
HURON
IONIA
CURTON
SHAWASSEE
FLINT
OTTAWA
18
CLAIM
GENESEE
©
GRAND RAPIDS
19
12
LANSING
OWLAND
MACOME
PONTIAC
ALLIGAN
BARRY
LATON
INGHAM
)
CROYAL-OAK
COMESTON
FERNDALE
)
.
0 BATTLE CREEK
ANN ARBOR
DETROIT
KALAMAZOO
warm
VAR BURER
JACKSON
BENTON HARBOR
WASHINAR
KALAMAZOO
CALHOUN
1,13-17
JACKSON
2
BERRIER
F.
CASS
$1 JOSEPH
MONROS
BRANCH
MILLSBALE
LENAWED
U.S. Department of Commerce
Bureau of the Census
-129-
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE. N.W
WASHINGTON. D. C. 20006
March 23, 1972
(202) 333-0920
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR:
THE HONORABLE JOHN N. MITCHELL
SUBJECT:
Planning for the Primary States
You have set the guidelines that we will participate in all primaries
where the President's name must appear on the ballot, or where the
results of the primary are binding on the delegation for at least
one vote at the convention. There are 17 such states in all. Plans
have already been developed in detail for New Hampshire, Florida,
Wisconsin, California, Oregon, Indiana, Maryland, Michigan and Massa-
chusetts.
The following review covers the remaining eight states. In most of
the states, it is recommended that we use the primary as an opportunity
to begin building a strong volunteer organization. In some states,
the use of surrogate speakers to speak on behalf of the President is
proposed. Other activities, such as the use of media, telephone
operations or direct mail, are not generally recommended. However,
direct mail will be held as a contingency in one state where delegate
slates opposed to the President may receive organized support.
A summary of the recommendations by state, ranked in chronological
order of primary, is shown in Tab A.
STATES WHERE THE PRESIDENT'S NAME IS ON THE BALLOT BY LAW
Tennessee (May 4) - There appears to be no serious problem in the
Republican Party in Tennessee. Like most other border states, Nixon
has great potential strength. As Tennessee has a Republican Governor
and two Republican Senators who can campaign for the President, a
high level campaign will not be necessary. A joint press conference
with Senator Baker, Senator Brock and Governor Dunn endorsing the
President would be appropriate.
CONFIDENTIAL
-2-
Recommendations
1. Encourage the State Re-Election Committee to begin building
a volunteer organization.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
2. Arrange joint press conference with Senator Baker, Senator
Brock and Governor Dunn.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
Nebraska (May 9) - Nebraska is the most Republican state in the
nation. Nixon received his best percentage in 1960 (62%) and 1968
(60%) in Nebraska. With the improving farm situation, 1972 should
be a good year for Nixon, too. Little primary activity is required.
Recommendation
Encourage the State Re-Election Committee to begin building a
volunteer organization.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
STATES WHERE THE PRESIDENTIAL PREFERENCE PRIMARY IS BINDING ON THE
DELEGATION
North Carolina (May 6) - Any candidate receiving 15% or more in the
primary will receive a proportionate share of the delegates, This
should not present any real problems as only McCloskey is opposing
the President. Ashbrook did not make the March 10 filing deadline.
The Democratic party has dominated politics in North Carolina in the
past. The Governor, both Senators and seven of the eleven Congress-
men are Democrats. This year, however, Republicans have a good
chance of winning the Governor's race if the Republican primary is
not divisive. The Presidential Preference Primary affords us an
excellent opportunity to build an organization to provide a large
Nixon margin which will benefit the gubernatorial candidate.
CONFIDENTIAL
- 3 -
Recommendations
1. Encourage the State Re-election Committee to begin building a
volunteer organization.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
2. Use Administration Speakers
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
South Dakota (June 6) - Nixon did very well in South Dakota in both 1968
(53%) and 1960 (58%). However, the Republican Party has eroded considerably
in the past several years. A battle is beginning to develop to determine
who will run for Senator Mundt's seat. One of the most important issues
in South Dakota has always been farm policy. This should always be kept
in mind when sending Administration speakers into the state. Due to the
fact that Republican Party strength is eroding, a strong organizational
effort should be made in the Primary.
Recommendations
1. Encourage the State Re-election Committee to begin building a volunteer
organization.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
2. Use Administration spokesmen.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
New Mexico (June 6) - Delegates shall be allotted to the two top candidates
in proportion to the vote received in the primary. McCloskey will also be
on the ballot. Particular attention should be given to the U.S. Senate
race. A strong Nixon effort will certainly improve our chances of taking
a Democrat-held seat.
Recommendations
1. Encourage the State Re-election to begin building a volunteer
organization.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
2. Use Administration spokesmen.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
CONFIDENTIAL
4-
STATES WHERE THERE IS AN ELECTION OF PLEDGED DELEGATE SLATES
Ohio (May 2) - We have worked closely with the state organization
in the selection process to assure a strong delegation. No actual
primary involvement is required in Ohio. However, the state
Republican party is fractured between the Taft and Rhodes forces.
All efforts should be made to build an organization that will not
alienate either side, We should be alert to this deep split and
avoid any activity that could be construed as favoritism.
Recommendations
1. Encourage the State Re-Election Committee to begin building
a volunteer organization.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
2. Use Administration spokesmen.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
District of Columbia (May 2) - We will work closely with the party
in delegation selection. No primary involvement is required.
Recommendation
No activity.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
Rhode Island (May 23) - We have worked closely with the state
organization in selecting a pledged delegate slate. Just as in
Massachusetts, little activity will be required unless McCloskey
forces attempt a protest campaign, even though McCloskey has with-
drawn. A targeted direct mail campaign and Administration spokesmen
should be held as a contingency.
Recommendations
1. Encourage the State Re-Election Committee to begin building
CONFIDENTIAL
_5_
-
a volunteer organization.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
2. Contingency plan to use Administration spokesmen.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
3. Contingency plan for targeted direct mail.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
JEB S MAGRUDER
CONFIDENTIAL
TAB A
A
PROPOSED PRIMARY ACTIVITY
Volunteer
Date
State
Organization
Spokesmen
Direct Mail
May 2
Ohio
X
X
0
May 2
D. C.
0
0
0
May 4
Tennessee
X
0
0
May 6
North Carolina
X
X
0
May 9
Nebraska
X
0
0
May 23
Rhode Island
X
(c)
(c)
June 6
South Dakota
X
X
0
June 6
New Mexico
X
X
0
X - Activity
0
- No Activity
(c) - Hold as a contingency plan.
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE. N.W
WASHINGTON. D. C. 20006
March 16, 1972
(202) 333-0920
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR:
THE HONORABLE JOHN N. MITCHELL
THROUGH:
JEB S. MAGRUDER
FROM:
ROBERT H. MARIK
2HM
SUBJECT:
Review of the New Hampshire Primary Campaign
The Strategy Planning Group met last week to review and discuss the
activities of the New Hampshire campaign for the purpose of gain-
ing insight into the strengths and weaknesses of that performance.
This memorandum summarizes the salient observations on each facet
of the campaign.
Overall Objectives
There were three major political objectives which could be hoped
for in the New Hampshire Primary campaign:
1. An overwhelming win for the President that would be so
recognized by the press.
2. A victory decisive enough to force McCloskey out of the
race.
3. An indecisive result on the Democratic side (although not
within the control of our campaign activities).
Although there were some recognized shortcomings in our New Hampshire
campaign, these must be viewed against the fact that all of our
stated political objectives were realized.
Overall Planning
In general, the planning process did provide useful guidelines for
the New Hampshire Primary. There was, however, insufficient plan-
ing lead time allowed for major activities of the campaign. In
part, this was caused by the fact that key managers, such as those
IDENTIAL
-2-
for telephone and direct mail, did not join the Washington
Committee until after the first of the year. Better coordination
in the planning stage could have been achieved between Washington
and the New Hampshire campaign.
The Strategy Meetings which we are now having between the Strategy
Planning Group and the Re-Election Committee leadership of in-
dividual states have proven to be quite effective in developing
coordination between the national and state levels. This plan-
ning technique had not been perfected at the time the New Hampshire
plan was developed. As a result, the New Hampshire Committee,
in several instances, did not fully realize the scope of various
activities that were being proposed. They' did not recruit enough
key people to direct the various activities in the state, and an
excessive management burden fell on Allan Walker.
As the campaign progressed, two distinct efforts evolved: the
Washington-based efforts, primarily Youth activities and the tele-
phone operations, and the New Hampshire-based activities directed
by Allan Walker. There was not sufficient coordination between
the two, and, as a result, neither one was as effective as it might
have been. The situation can be rectified in the future by more
thorough planning at the start and by conducting meetings on a re-
gular basis between the political people and the program people
when the campaign activities are in high gear.
State Organization
Although New Hampshire is a small state, there are several factions
within the Republican Party which had to be taken into account in
developing the State Re-Election Committee leadership. For that
reason, Lane Dwinell, an elder statesman of the party with close
ties to no faction, was chosen as the Chairman, and Allan Walker, a
relative newcomer to politics, was chosen as Executive Director.
It was generally agreed that Governor Dwinell did a fine job as
spokesman for the Committee and as liaison with important political
people in the state. Allan Walker devoted a great deal of personal
effort to managing the campaign but met with a variety of operating
difficulties along the way. Many of these difficulties stemmed
from the fact that Allan's style was to retain all line responsibility
directly to himself rather than to recruit capable people and
CONFIDENTIAL
-3-
delegate meaningful portions of the job to them. Thus, at one
stage, he was taking calls from several functional directors
in Washington at the same time. Later on, a conscientious effort
was made to consolidate the number of calls made from Washington
to New Hampshire, and Allan was persuaded to delegate some of
his responsibilities to others in the New Hampshire organization.
Even so, the coordination with Washington-based activities never
reached the level which will be necessary for important states
in the general campaign. As the state organization was built,
there was.not sufficient opportunity for the involvement of
representatives of the various factions within the state. There-
fore, when volunteers were needed for the telephone operation
and other activities, many were not immediately available because
they "had no ready access to the Committee through their normal
political leaders. Several weeks were lost while liaison was
established with some of these factions.
In addition, Senator Cotton, Congressman Wyman and Congressman
Cleveland were not involved in the campaign at an early date, and
some political leaders who have been associated with their
campaigns did not become fully involved in the President's effort.
Delegation Selection
The delegate selection resulted in a better balanced slate than
had ever before been sent to the Convention from New Hampshire.
They included 4 women and a good representation of young people.
Most important, all pledged delegates were elected. On the negative
side, the delegates did not involve themselves actively or visibly
in the campaign.
Budget and Fund Raising
The budget which was forecast by the New Hampshire Committee was
unrealistically low. There probably should have been more
technical help from Washington to assure that the true operating
expenses would be accurately anticipated.
In the early weeks of the campaign, there were significant delays
in transferring funds from Washington to the New Hampshire
Committee. This caused problems in meeting payrolls and operating
CONFIDENTIAL
-4-
expenses and necessitated large cash advances from the personal
funds of Lane Dwinell and Allan Walker.
The rund raising activities in New Hampshire were moderately
successful, particularly in a state which traditionally views
the Presidential Primary as a source of income. The financial
objective of the dinner with Rogers Morton was substantially
reduced, and, as a result, it was a successful political event
with revenues more than covering the costs involved.
As of March 10, $7,730 was collected\ as a result of a low-key
appeal for funds in a letter which was sent out primarily for
the purpose of asking for votes.
A breakdown of the expenses of the New Hampshire Primary
follows:
Spokesmen Resources
$43,000
Youth
5,000
Direct Mail
56,000
Field Operations
34,850
Telephone Operation
33,700
Advertising
56,500
Advertising
Advertising was limited to newspapers and radio. The decision
to maintain the image of a low-profile campaign without television,
conducted primarily by a grass-roots effort within the state,
proved to be the correct course of action. Moreover, the theme
of the advertising was successful in that it presented a positive
image of the President without providing a target for the Demo-
crats to attack.
Surrogate Speakers
There is no substitute for the presence of the candidate in the
states, particularly in the case of New Hampshire where voters are
CONFIDENTIAL
-5-
used to the presence of those seeking the Presidential nomi-
nation. However, the participation of important political
speakers appearing in behalf of the President went far toward
gaining the publicity and voter attention which, otherwise,
would have gone to other contenders by default.
Some very good techniques were developed for making maximum
use of speakers while they were in the state. They were
programmed for several events in one day, including major
speaking engagements, press conferences, walking appearances
through towns, etc. The program was difficult to coordinate
from the New Hampshire point of view, largely because of the
time required to advance each of the speaking engagements.
As a result of this experience, it will be recommended that
a full-time advance man from the Washington Committee be
placed in each important primary state to coordinate the
series of visits of the surrogate speakers. It would be the
job of this person to achieve coordination with the local
people for the events and to otherwise provide liaison between
various activities in the state and the Washington Committee.
The Appreciation Day activities, for which several speakers
were brought into the state in one large, coordinated event,
had substantial impact within the state. Each of the speakers
gained a great deal of voter and media attention by his day-
long activities. It may have been that the climaxing rally
in the evening featured too many of these speakers. However,
it was the severe snowstorm during the day which greatly re-
duced the crowd that was most responsible for any negative
aspects of that event.
Some thought will be given to involving more youth-oriented
entertainment at future rallies.
Direct Mail
The direct mail was thought to have been well-timed and well-
executed to have the best possible effect on the campaign. The
relatively concise format of our letters contrasted favorably
with the several-page letters which were sent by Ashbrook.
CONFIDENTIAL
-6-
Telephone Operation
The telephone operation had a positive effect on the campaign,
both by its contact with large numbers of voters and by its
involvement of many volunteers throughout the state, It was
put into operation with a shorter lead time than would have
been desirable, and, therefore, caused considerable stress,
both on Nancy Brataas who directed the operation and on
Allan Walker. Because the scope of the operation had not been
fully appreciated during the early planning, many of the key
people who had originally been assigned other jobs had to be
utilized. In the end, however, it achieved the involvement
of a large number of people who had not previously participated
in a political campaign and found it to be a rewarding ex-
perience.
One of the early deficiencies in the telephone campaign which
caused difficulty later on was that the delegated state telephone
chairman was not technically capable of directing the planned
activities. We feel that in the key states it will be necessary
for Nancy Brataas to participate with each state chairman in
the selection of the director of telephone operations.
Press Relations
Substantial difficulties were experienced in this area because
the individual responsible for communications in New Hampshire
did not perform well. The experience pointed out clearly the
absolute necessity of selecting a top-quality person for this
job in each state organization. He must be able to handle all
public relations and communications activities well in a
technical sense, but, in addition, have the judgment to know
when to seek advice from Washington on what line to take re-
garding issues and political positions throughout the campaign.
We feel that Van Shumway should be actively involved with the
state chairmen in selecting the public relations director of
each key state.
Youth
The objectives of the Youth Campaign were to supply volunteers
to other campaign activities within the state, such as telephone and
headquarters operations and door-to-door canvassing, and to attract
coverage by the media of young people supporting the President.
Those objectives were realized; in particular, the favorable mock
CONFIDENTIAL
-7-
election results on several college campuses had a very
positive effect.
On the negative side, the Youth Campaign did not meet its
objective on the initial plan for obtaining enough signatures
from first-time voters to put the President on the ballot.
Further, there was less coordination than desirable between
the youth activities and those of Allan Walker's organization.
Volunteer Activities
The volunteer activities as programmed to, be directed by the
state co-chairman never became a factor in the campaign. This
was a direct result of the fact that the person selected to
be cb-chairman turned out to be ineffective in that role.
Volunteers were recruited directly by the activities requiring
their services, such as the telephone operation.
Acknowledgement by the President
By Friday night, the leadership for the New Hampshire campaign
had received no communication from the President acknowledging
the favorable results of the primary election. A letter was
sent out by the President on Thursday, which probably arrived
Saturday morning. However, by that time, much of the campaign
organization had been disbanded and many had been disappointed
by no official word from Washington. A telephone call or a
much more rapidly delivered letter would have a much greater
effect on the New Hampshire organization.
CONFIDENTIAL
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE. NW
WASHINGTON D C 20006
March 14, 1972
(202) 333-0920
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR THE HONORABLE JOHN N. MITCHELL
SUBJECT:
Planning for the Primary States
You have set the guidelines that we will participate in all primaries
where the President's name must appear on the ballot, or where the
results of the primary are binding on the delegation for at least
one vote at the convention. There are 17 such states in all. Plans
have already been developed in detail for New Hampshire, Florida and
Wisconsin. After meeting with the respective State Re-Election
Committee leadership, separate plans will be submitted for California,
Oregon, Indiana, Maryland and Michigan.
The following review covers the remaining nine states. In most of
the states, it is recommended that we use the primary as an opportunity
to begin building a strong volunteer organization. In some states,
the use of surrogate speakers to speak on behalf of the President is
proposed. Other activities, such as the use of media, telephone
operations or direct mail, are not generally recommended. However,
direct mail will be held as a contingency in two states where delegate
slates opposed to the President may receive organized support.
A summary of the recommendations by state, ranked in chronological
order of primary, is shown in Tab A.
STATES WHERE THE PRESIDENT'S NAME IS ON THE BALLOT BY LAW
Tennessee (May 4) - There is no serious problem in the Republican
party in Tennessee. Like most other border states, Nixon has
great potential strength. As Tennessee has a Republican Governor
and two Republican Senators who can campaign for the President, a
high level campaign will not be necessary. A joint press conference
with Senator Baker, Senator Brock and Governor Dunn endorsing the
President would be appropriate.
CONFIDENTIAL
-2-
Recommendations
1. Encourage the State Re-Election Committee to begin building
a volunteer organization.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
2. Arrange joint press conference with Senator Baker, Senator
Brock and Governor Dunn.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
Nebraska (May 9) - Nebraska is the most Republican state in the
nation. Nixon received his best percentage in 1960 (62%) and 1968
(60%) in Nebraska. With the improving farm situation, 1972 should
be a good year for Nixon, too. Little primary activity is required.
Recommendation
Encourage the State Re-Election Committee to begin building a
volunteer organization.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
STATES WHERE THE PRESIDENTIAL PREFERENCE PRIMARY IS BINDING ON THE
DELEGATION
North Carolina (May 6) - Any candidate receiving 15% or more in the
primary will receive a proportionate share of the delegates, This
should not present any real problems as only McCloskey is opposing
the President. Ashbrook did not make the March 10 filing deadline.
The Democratic party has dominated politics in North Carolina in the
past. The Governor, both Senators and seven of the eleven Congress-
men are Democrats. This year, however, Republicans have a good
chance of winning the Governor's race if the Republican primary is
not divisive. The Presidential Preference Primary affords us an
excellent opportunity to build an organization to provide a large
Nixon margin which will benefit the gubernatorial candidate.
CONFIDENTIAL
-3-
Recommendations
1. Encourage the State Re-Election Committee to begin building
a volunteer organization.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
2. Use Administration spokesmen.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
South Dakota (June 6) - Nixon did very well in South Dakota in both
1968 (53%) and 1960 (58%). However, the Republican party has eroded
considerably in the past several years. A battle is beginning to
develop to determine who will run for Senator Mundt's seat. One of
the most important issues in South Dakota has always been farm policy.
This should always be kept in mind when sending Administration
speakers into the state. Due to the fact that Republican party
strength is eroding, a strong organizational effort should be made
in the primary.
Recommendations
1. Encourage the State Re-Election Committee to begin building
a volunteer organization.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
2. Use Administration spokesmen.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
New Mexico (June 6) - Delegates shall be allotted to the two top
candidates in proportion to the vote received in the primary.
McCloskey is on the ballot. Ashbrook has not filed yet but is
considering the possibility of running in New Mexico. Particular
attention should be given the U.S. Senate race. A strong Nixon
effort will certainly improve our chances of taking a Democrat-
held Senate seat,
CONFIDENTIAL
-4-
Recommendations
1. Encourage the State Re-Election Committee to begin building
a volunteer organization.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
2. Use Administration spokesmen.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
STATES WHERE THERE IS AN ELECTION OF PLEDGED DELEGATE SLATES
Massachusetts (April 25) - Under a new law, the Presidential con-
tender polling the most support in each of the state's 12 Congression-
al districts will gain control of the elected delegation from the
district, no matter how he fares in the statewide contest.
We have worked closely with the state organization in the selection
process to assure a strong delegation. Little activity will be
required unless McCloskey's residual forces surface in a strong
effort to embarrass the President. In an effort to avoid this type
of situation, we should hold targeted direct mail and Administration
spokesmen as contingencies.
Recommendations
1. Encourage the State Re-Election Committee to begin building
a volunteer organization.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
2. Contingency plan to use Administration spokesmen.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
3. Contingency plan for targeted direct mail.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
CONFIDENTIAL
-5-
Ohio (May 2) - We have worked closely with the state organization
in the selection process to assure a strong delegation. No actual
primary involvement is required in Ohio. However, the state
Republican party is fractured between the Taft and Rhodes forces.
All efforts should be made to build an organization that will not
alienate either side, We should be alert to this deep split and
avoid any activity that could be construed as favoritism.
Recommendations
1. Encourage the State Re-Election Committee to begin building
a volunteer organization.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
2. Use Administration spokesmen.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
District of Columbia (May 2) - We will work closely with the party
in delegation selection. No primary involvement is required.
Recommendation
No activity.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
Rhode Island (May 23) - We have worked closely with the state
organization in selecting a pledged delegate slate. Just as in
Massachusetts, little activity will be required unless McCloskey
forces attempt a protest campaign, even though McCloskey has with-
drawn. A targeted direct mail campaign and Administration spokesmen
should be held as a contingency.
Recommendations
1. Encourage the State Re-Election Committee to begin building
CONFIDENTIAL
-6-
a volunteer organization.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
2. Contingency plan to use Administration spokesmen.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
3. Contingency plan for targeted direct mail.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
JEB S. MAGRUDER
CONFIDENTIAL
Tab A
A
PROPOSED PRIMARY ACTIVITY
Volunteer
Date
State
Organization
Spokesmen
Direct Mail
April 25
Massachusetts
X
(C)
(c)
May 2
Ohio
X
X
0
May 2
D.C.
0
0
0
May 4
Tennessee
X
0
0
May 6
North Carolina
X
X
0
May 9
Nebraska
X
0'
0
May 23
Rhode Island
X
(C)
(C)
June 6
South Dakota
X
X
0
June 6
New Mexico
X
X
0
X - Activity
0 - No Activity
(C) - Hold as a contingency plan
magruder, malel, LaRue, Hutar, marik, nots, Shermay,
Kaupenen, Mergan, Eeans, Porter, Rutz, Flemoing
Bill novelli (Quileys)
2/26
California
J8m
Poll- - notone of our strongest
states, muslie does quite well
as does E MK
- more prolis in So Cal than
usual due to aerospace +
it winy descontent
- approval rating St Clectro
officers have fallen - RR ele
ashbiook definitely in beel
not
of $
me ce - probably not in P
primary - could run
in his long + P sumory
beefno people or $
Rietz
G
Voter Regis drive - -12 dus
begin 3/15 - LA enty + SDlate
2
6 mil unregis voters
3
St Party will not do adequate
jol but Reetz H 50,000
special fund.
Lyn - Mixon camp has tallen
over regis the the partes cnty org's
- come unhappy people
2
must regis Rep whe support Rorns
3
CRA + UROC well not do
separate Regis Drive
J8M Emphasize So Colif in punay
evel pwe w/ ashbrook, votes
there, ,t + we have proes
Lyn
- -Reagan camp in 1970 not
a good indicator-
Malex-
Media - There is no existing Organization
why Daily not
Bill nevelli
- Lyn apposed to heavy TU
or media, rather
$ into org
-maybe a Sp TV plan
no spe max by Cal Centr Ga
1, 360 - media
max.
10 & per coter
Wise level of camp = 650,000
Minimum level
- Whe # 3 of Objee -hi visibilits
to protect ag/further Dem leav
May
ad - package like RH - newsy
radio, option but precal
no TV w/ Rees an Togd
hep grps span-sp, llacks, Young
nofziger - Organization
400,000 toprimory
C
800,000 - to november.
100 paid people-
St - 5 Esee 3 Feed 6
Irmn 1
corn 10
Reg 8
Reg 7-13
450,000
40-46 people - Mar-Je
Theee Je - 438, -eveyoring
thru nor - 889,000 -eveything 1
Y2 for peoplet money
Y2 for media
Direct mail
- very Eargeted to Oil Rep. precent
plus voter blers
-use voter regis lists +only to Reps
Lyn reseuationoregarding
target to Jewish cote.
- -nH + Fla - better Oranee
of getting # bad than
bodies when dir mail
- wheto sign - in do Cal -not RR;
-P'tial commit program.
Telephone - nancy Bratass? ?
if Te so we RR;
Sun Speakers
Lyn - diversified at so need
liverse spars
1
non. partion gips
Town Itall, Commonweally
2
who, backup, notice
3
Zan Thompson - now
words for byn trouble
u/ Funch - Klin.
Malell 1 Voter Bloc activity
bean in cal
Autar - women's groupsin Cal.
S.D. real probs - back he/commit
screwing us
AG concerned
Slans uptigal on $
F prol - Cole 158m/male
Cole, Calson, Gifferel, malel - Mon's
regular Esse Review of Camp.
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE. NW
WASHINGTON D. C. 20006
February 22, 1972
(202) 333.0920
CONFIDENTIAL
SUBJECT: Planning for the Primary States
You have set the guidelines that we will participate in all primaries
where the President's name must appear on the ballot, or where the
results of the primary are binding on the delegation for at least
one vote at the convention. There are 17 such states in all. Plans
have already been developed in detail for New Hampshire, Florida and
Wisconsin.
The following review covers the remaining 14 states. After you have
indicated your decision on the strategy proposed for each state, we
will proceed to develop the plans in more detail.
For each state, five possible areas of activity are reviewed: media
advertising, direct mail, telephone operations, volunteer organization
and surrogate speakers. The recommendations are indicated by
X
activity recommended
0
no activity
(C)
hold as a contingency plan in the event
that the President is challenged strongly
by one or both of the Republican contenders.
(The recommendations have been made on the
assumption that after Wisconsin, McCloskey
and Ashbrook will not continue to mount
strong campaigns in other states.)
In most states some volunteer organization activity is recommended. If
the President is not strongly challenged, it might be confined to a few
areas of the state. The important consideration is that the Primary
should be used as an opportunity to test the ability of key state people
to perform in a campaign situation.
CONFIDENTIAL
- 2 -
A summary of the recommendations by state, ranked in chronological order
of primary is shown in Tab A.
STATES WHERE THE PRESIDENT'S NAME IS ON THE BALLOT BY LAW
Tennessee (May 4) - There is no serious problem in the Republican
party in Tennessee. Like most other border states, Nixon has great
potential strength. As Tennessee has a Republican Governor and two
Republican Senators who can campaign for the President, a high level
campaign will not be necessary.
Recommendation
Media 0 Direct Mail 0 Telephone 0 Volunteer Organization X Spokesmen 0
Nebraska (May 9) -- Nebraska is the most Republican state in the nation.
Nixon received his best percentage in 1960 (62%) and 1968 (60%) in
Nebraska.
Recommendation
Media 0 Direct Mail 0 Telephone 0 Volunteer Organization X Spokesmen
Maryland (May 16) - Many people write off Maryland as a probable
loser for Nixon. The President, however, only lost Maryland by 2%
in 1968. Serious attention should be given to the primary in pre-
paration for the general election campaign. 'Maryland's two Republican
Senators should offer a great deal of assistance as they both have
their own constituency. Both Mathias and Beall should be mobilized,
from pre-primary to Election Day, in an effort to encourage Maryland
voters to vote for the President.
Recommendation
Media 0 Direct Mail X Telephone X Volunteer Organization X Spokesmen X
mcCall
Oregon (May 23) -- Oregon has a Republican Governor and two Republican
Senators. However, the relationship between these office holders has
not been harmonious. Governor McCall has threatened to run against
&
Flaming
Senator Hatfield in the Republican Primary. Regardless of whether
McCall runs, a significant split in the party is apparent. The Oregon
Wendall Wyatt
CONFIDENTIAL
-3-
Primary will also receive national attention because Senator Kennedy's
name will be on the ballot.
Recommendation
Media 0 Direct Mail Telephone 0 Volunteer Organization X Spokesmen X
STATES WHERE THE PRESIDENTIAL PREFERENCE PRIMARY IS BINDING ON THE
DELEGATION
Hays
Indiana (May 2) - A high level campaign should not be required to
Balen
assure victory for the President. However, the Republican party is
neal
badly split. Our primary activity should be geared toward building
a strong organization for the General Election.
Recommendation
Media 0 Direct Mail Telephone 0 Volunteer Organization X Spokesmen X
North Carolina (May 6) - Any candidate receiving 15% or more in the
-Gardnerv.
primary will receive a proportionate share of the delegates. This
Holshouse
factor would make the North Carolina primary attractive to the Ashbrook
for Gov
forces,
very Decrease
The Democratic party has dominated politics in North Carolina in the
- Spokesmen
past. The Governor, both Senators and seven of the eleven Congress-
- Dirmail
men are Democrats. This year, however, Republicans have a good chance
of winning the Governor's race if the Republican primary is not divisive.
The Presidential Preference Primary affords us an excellent opportunity
to build an organization to provide a large Nixon margin which will
benefit the gubernatorial candidate.
Recommendation
Media 0 Direct Mail (C) Telephone (C) Volunteer Organization X Spokesmen X
NotaRN
Michigan (This primary was just approved and will be held on May 16.
state
Each candidate will receive a share of the delegate votes in proportion
some
to the primary vote.) As Michigan is considered an anti-Nixon state,
newsp
the primary may be appealing to McCloskey forces. Regardless of our
ass
effort in the primary, it would be unlikely that Nixon could carry the
CONFIDENTIAL
- 4 -
state in the General Election.
Recommendation
Media 0 Direct Mail Telephone 0 Volunteer Organization X Spokesmen X
South Dakota (June 6) - Nixon did very well in South Dakota in both
1968 (53%) and June (58%). However, the Republican party has eroded
considerably in the past several years. A battle is beginning to de-
velop to determine who will run for Senator Mundt's seat. One of the
most important issues in South Dakota has always been farm policy.
This should always be kept in mind when sending Administration speakers
into South Dakota. Due to the fact that Republican party strength is
eroding, a strong organizational effort should be made in the primary.
Recommendation
Media 0 Direct Mail 0 Telephone 0 Volunteer Organization X Spokesmen X
New Mexico (June 6) - Delegates shall be allotted to the two top
candidates in proportion to the vote received in the primary.
Recommendation
Media 0 Direct Mail 0 Television 0 Volunteer Organization X Spokesmen X
STATES WHERE THERE IS AN ELECTION OF PLEDGED DELEGATE SLATES
Massachusetts (April 25) - We will work closely with the state
organization in selecting the delegates to assure a strong delegation.
No actual primary involvement is required unless McCloskey enters the
race. The President is unlikely to carry the state in the General Election.
Recommendation
Media 0 Direct Mail (c) Telephone 0 Volunteer Organization X Spokesmen X
Special
Ohio (May 2) - We will work closely with the state organization in
stu/
selecting the delegates to guarantee success in the election. No
special
actual primary involvement is required in Ohio. However, the Republican
org
so
party in Ohio is fractured between the Taft and Rhodes forces. All
ndda
efforts should be made to build an organization that will not alienate
com by fab-ll
note
either side. We should be alert to this deep split and avoid any acti-
vity that could be construed as favoritism.
Recommendation
Media 0 Direct Mail 0 Telephone 0 Volunteer Organization X Spokesmen X
CONFIDENTIAL
- 5 -
District of Columbia (May 2) - We will work. closely with the party
in delegation selection. No primary involvement is required.
Recommendation
Media 0 Direct Mail 0 Telephone 0 Volunteer Organization 0 Spokesmen 0
hold
Rhode Island (May 23) - We will work closely with the state organization
in selecting a pledged delegate slate. No actual primary involvement is
necessary unless McCloskey enters. As the President received only 32%
in 1968 and 34% in 1960, there is very little hope for Rhode Island in
the General Election.
Recommendation
Media 0 Direct Mail (c) Telephone 0 Volunteer Organization X Spokesmen X
California (June 6) - We have worked closely with the state organization
in selecting the delegates in order to guarantee a representative group
at the convention. California's 45 `electoral votes could well be the
key to the re-election of the President. Nixon won California by 3.1%
in 1968 and by less than 1% in 1960. He lost the Governor's race to
Pat Brown in 1962. The southern section of the state is where Re-
publicans must get their vote. This area has a high degree of techno-
logical and white collar employment. Therefore, it was hit the hardest
by the white collar recessions of recent years. California is the state
where Muskie forces claim they will beat Nixon. The Committee for the
Re-election of the President should utilize all of its resources, be-
ginning in the primary, to win California. If we do not show this high
degree of visibility in the primary and an impressive Democrat wins in
California, we will be hard pressed to close the gap created between
the highly visible Democrat who has momentum, and the President.
Recommendation
Media X Direct Mail X Telephone X Volunteer Organization X Spokesmen X
JEB S. MAGRUDER
CONFIDENTIAL
PROPOSED PRIMARY ACTIVITY
Volunteer
Date
State
Media
Direct Mail
Telephone
Organization
Spokesmen
Apr 25
Mass.
0
(C)
0
X
X
May 2
Indiana
0
(C)
0
X
X
May 2
Ohio
0
0
0
X
X
May 2
Dist. of Col
0
0
0
X
0
May 4
Tennessee
0
0
0
0
0
May 6
No. Carolina
0
(C)
(C)
X
X
May 9
Nebraska
0
0
0
X
X
May 16
Maryland
0
0
X
X
X
May 16
Michigan
0
(c)
0
X
X
May 23
Rhode Island
0
(C)
0
X
X
May 23
Oregon
0
(C)
0
X
X
June 6
So. Dakota
0
0
0
X
X
June 6
California
X
X
X
X
X
June 6
N. Mexico
0
0
0
X
X
X - - activity
0 - no activity
(C) - hold as a contingency plan
MEETING OF THE STRATEGY PLANNING GROUP
February 26, 1972
The attached draft plan for the California Primary has been prepared
to serve as an agenda for this planning meeting. It reflects the
scope of the campaign activities which are being contemplated.
However, detailed plans and commitments have not yet been developed
by the State Re-election Committee or by the directors of functional
activities in Washington. Therefore, the events on the attached
operating schedule are tentative and are intended only to serve
as a basis for the discussions today.
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE N.W
WASHINGTON. D C. 20006
February 25, 1972
(202) 333.0920
CONFIDENTIAL
(DRAFT)
SUBJECT: Preliminary Operating Plan for the California Primary
The California Primary election will be held on June 6, 1972. It
is a state where there is an election of a pledged delegate slate.
From all indications, the President will have opposition in the
ash
Republican Primary. As in the past, the American public will watch
mill?
both the Democratic and Republican Primaries with a great deal of
interest. Most important, California, with its 45 electoral votes,
is often considered the key to the re-election of the President.
Background
Both the present political situation in California and past voting
patterns indicate that California would be rated as a toss-up for
the general election. President Nixon won California by 3.1% in
68
+3.1
1968, lost to Pat Brown in 1962, and won by less than 1% in 1960.
The election of 1970 proved to be as contradictory and confusing as
California generally is. The defeat of incumbent Senator George
Murphy left California with two Democratic Senators. Governor Reagan,
however, was re-elected with 52.8% of the vote. One of the most
significant losses suffered by the Republicans was the loss of both
Houses in the State Assembly. Democrats now. control the Senate by
a 21 to 19 margin and the House by a 43 to 37 margin. Republicans did
hold the line on the Congressional races and even picked up a vacant
seat, giving the Democrats a 20 to 18 edge.
Due to the confusing outcome of the election of 1970, it is difficult
to draw firm conclusions. The voting trend in the U.S. Senate races
(Tab A) has fallen drastically for Republicans. Senator Kuchel
achieved a recent high point in 1960 with 56.5% of the vote for the
Republicans. This Republican percentage has decreased steadily to a
low point in 1970 when Senator Murphy received only 44.3%.
Although there has also been a decline in the Republican vote for
Governor, it has not been so severe as the Senate vote. Governor
Reagan dropped from 57.6% in 1966 to 52.8% in 1970.
Factors other than trends and percentages must be considered in analyzing
California politics. California's political climate has been one of
CONFIDENTIAL
-2-
throwing the "ins" out. Only three of nine incumbent Senators
have been re-elected since World War II. The defeat of the
ultra-conservative Max Rafferty in 1968 did not really reflect a
weakening of the Republican Party because he was simply too far
to the right and not a particularly strong candidate. Likewise, in
the 1970 race, Senator Murphy had been tainted with a scandal
and could not be considered a highly desirable candidate. In the
case of Governor Reagan, it would have been very difficult to
maintain as high a percentage as he achieved in his first election
in 1966.
Another major factor in the 1970 election was unemployment. This
is an especially difficult problem for Republicans as it has been
a white-collar recession that has affected Republicans employed in
the space industry and related businesses. This remains a key
issue in 1972 with the re-election of the President.
Demographic and Voting Analysis
California's population in 1970 was 19,696,840. It is the largest
state in the nation in terms of population. The state is 7% Black,
9% Mexican and Spanish, 2% Oriental. Total foreign stock is 25%,
with Mexicans 4%, Germans 2%, Canadians 2%, British 2%, Italians
2%, being the largest ethnic groups.
In political terms, California is very much a North versus South
state. The southern section of the state (Tab C), which is the
larger of the two, tends to be very conservative, while the northern
portion tends to be rather liberal. Orange and San Diego counties
in the south, for example, were the only two heavily populated counties
in the country that gave Goldwater a plurality in 1964. The south-
ern part of the state has been described as the "Sun Belt State",
similar politically to Southern Florida and Central Texas. It was
settled by "Bible Belt types" and has taken on that political mold.
San Francisco, on the other hand, being the center of liberalism and
Democratic strength in California, is also the headquarters for many
far left organizations, such as the Black Panthers. The Central
Valley of the state, generally agricultural and desert, was settled
from Oklahoma plains during the Dust Bowl Era.
Nixon's greatest vote totals in 1968 came out of Los Angeles, Orange,
San Diego, Santa Clara and Alameda counties. The President received
2,159,656 votes from these five counties, or 62.3% of his total
California vote (Tab D).
Humphrey's best counties were northern counties of San Francisco
(plurality - 76,539), Alameda (66,260), Sacramento (21,592), Santa
CONFIDENTIAL
- 3 -
Clara (10,065). These four best Humphrey counties, in terms of raw
vote, gave Humphrey a total plurality of 174,456 which is only
8,000 more than the plurality given Nixon from Orange County alone.
Wallace received 6.7% of the total vote in 1968. His vote appears to
have come most heavily. percentage wise, from that area of the state
north of Sacramento. This would make it appear that the Wallace
vote probably helped Nixon in 1968. A recent field poll in California
indicates that most of the vote which Wallace now receives in three-
man head-to-head contests, would go to the Democrat in a two-man race.
The conventional wisdom of the Republican politicians is that one
must get large portions of the vote downstate to offset the upstate
margins of the Democrats. In 1968 the Presidential contest followed
that pattern. Nixon carried Southern California by about 376,000
votes, lost Northern California by about 143,000 votes and lost the
Central Valley by about 9,000 votes (Tab C).
The Primary Election
At this time it is not clear who the President will face in the
Republican primary. Ashbrook looks as if he will be one Republican
contender. Almost all the Democratic contenders will be in the
California primary.
Objectives of the Primary Campaign
As California is a key state for the re-election of the President,
it is vital that we work toward the following three objectives in
the primary:
1. Defeat any Republican opposition by a large margin and still not
split the Republican Party.
2. Build and utilize test a large cadre of volunteers in the primary in
The
order to have the personnel required for a general election effort.
3. Conduct an active and highly visible campaign SO that a gap will
not occur between Nixon and the winner of a highly publicized Demo-
cratic primary, who will possibly have a great deal of momentum.
CONFIDENTIAL
- 4 --
Planned Activities
1. State Organization: The California Committee for the Re-election
of the President will coordinate all of the activities in the state.
They will establish headquarters and attract volunteers in the primary,
who will be instrumental in building an organization for the General
Election. The Primary will also allow the State Organization to test
its key people before the November election effort.
Media Advertising: TV, Radio, Newspapers
3. Direct Mail: It is the present thinking that there would be
a target mailing into Republican areas. The targeting program
will be coordinated with the state organization. The direct mail
program would probably consist of two pieces. The first would be
a personalized computer letter that would convey a message to per-
suade the voter to vote for Nixon. The second would be a get-out-
the-vote mailing designed to increase the Nixon turnout at the polls.
4. Appearances in the State by Pro-Administration Speakers
5. Voter Registration by the Youth Campaign: This program is
already under way and will extend past the primary in order to
register Nixon supporters for the General Election.
6. Telephone Operation: The telephone operation would be centered
in targeted areas and would be run by the California organization.
It would identify the favorable Nixon vote via a telephone canvass
and turn out the Nixon vote by recalling all of the favorables to
remind them to vote. Technical assistance and advice will be
available from Washington.
TAB A
CALIFORNIA U.S. SENATE RACE
100. 0 (unopposed)
Knowland
60
5912
Nixon
56. 5
Kuchel
55
54 2
53.9
Kuchel
Kudael
(special)
51.5
50%
50.0
Murphy
Knowland
47 47.5
Rafferty
45
44. 3
Murphy
43.
Knight
40
'46
'50
'52
'54
'56
'58
'60
'64
'68
'70
TAB B
CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR'S RACE
91.6 (unopposed)
Warren
70
64.8
Warken
60
57.6
Ct
56.8
Reagan
Kright
52.8
50%
Reagan
46.8
Nixon
10.2
40
Knowland
30
'46
' 50
'54
' 58
' 62
' 66
'70
(
CALIFORNIA
CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT DATA
92d Congre
Map of Congressional Districts, Counties, and Selected Cities
TAB C
(38 Districts)
(1968 VOTE TOTALS IN THOUSANDS)
DEL
MORTE
SISTUYOU
MODOC
STATEWIDE RESULTS
NIXON
HUMBOLDT
3,468 (49%)
HUMPHREY 3,244 (44%)
SMASTA
EUREKA
WALLACE
LASSEN
487 ( 7%)
TRINITY
REDDING
C
TEMAMA
PLUMAS
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
x
0
CHICO
(27% OF TOTAL VOTE)
GLENN
BUTTE
SHERRA
MERDOCINO
NIXON
NEVADA
830 (43%)
COLUSA
HUMPHREY
SUFFER
YU82
973 (50%)
PLACER
LAKE
WALLACE
132 ( 7%)
-
SACRAMENTO
SONOMA
YOLO
EL DORN
ALMNE
MAPA
1
SANTA ROSA
MADER
CENTRAL VALLEY
SOLANO
(15% OF TOTAL VOTE)
in
sit
CALAVERAS
1
6 PART
/CAQUIN
TOOLUMN
4
o
MONO
NIXON
STOCKTON
479 (45%)
SAN FRANCISCO
-
5,6PART.
S
HUMPHREY
488 (46%)
ALAMIC
7
MARIPOSA
have
STANISLAUS
WALLACE
90 ( 9%)
11
U
CLARA
MADERA
MERCED
SANTA
CRUZ
FRESNO
©
FRESNO
0
SAY
INYO
SALINAS
BENITO
TUCARE
MONTEREY
KINGS
"I
Law
M
BAKERSFIELD
SAN LUIS 08:50
KERN
33
1
ANAHEIM
-
SAM BERNANDING
2
LOS ANGELES
OAKLAND
SANTA 3128491
100 is
3
ONTARIO
LOS ANGELES
5
RICHMOND
SANTA BARBARA
VENTURA
SAN BERNARDINO
a
SAN JOSE
o
REDLANDS
7
SAN MATEO
8
SANTA ANA
0
0
1
RIVERSIDE
9
VALLEJO
RIVERSIDE
19-26
PANA
28-32
O
-
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
-
(58% OF TOTAL VOTE)
IMPERIAL
4
SAN new
37
NIXON
2,159 (51%)
HUMPHREY 1,783 (43%)
36
SAN DIEGO
WALLACE
265 ( 6%)
2
TAB D
1968 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION
( California Counties Providing the Largest Number of Votes for Richard Nixon )
CANDIDATES
COUNTY
NIXON
HUMPHREY
WALLACE
PLURALITY
Los Angeles *
1,266,480
1,223,251
151,050
43,229 (R)
(47.6%)
(46.0%)
(5.7%)
Orange
314,905
148,869
33,034
166,036 (R)
(63.1%)
(29.9%)
(6.6%)
San Diego
261,540
167,669
33,340
93,871 (R)
(56.3%)
(36.1%)
(7.2%)
Santa Clara
163,446
173,511
18,754
10,065 (D)
(45.6%)
(48.4%)
(5.2%)
Alameda
153,285
219,545
28,426
66,260 (D)
(37.6%)
(53.9%)
(7.0%)
*
Nixon's plurality vote from Los Angeles accounted for 36.5% of his total
Republican vote.
a
3/4
Oregon
long Wendoll Wyatt, Waven , Anna
Teeter - polls: gent elee - much
doser than in -68; poll
done strike in Jan during doca
- mus the strengest cand &
very will among Twet Spl
- Econ Digger is in Orellan other sts
Odle - Gcontinue meet to be hired
eap among Chose 45-65 yrs do
-2090 people will cote On
mina party cand
- P approval lower natlly.
- Credibility a proe
-UP approval as lias P's
one of peu sts where that Oi
-Goo - very hi apt Hatfield low
me Kee - top for Ouna up.
- Filing -are. Flemming
W yatt File for a news Event,
next Fri
Wyatt
- UP not abail for primaries + not wantedinus
Boe O' Dell- - finance mty w Slans, grp.
no storepront lidgtrs beclol theat of bombings,
3/4
Indiana
4 ads under Darley, 6 And under Balen,
/ RNC, Magurder, Porter Flemming,
haRve, Porter, malell
nH Rally - excellent coverage attubatable
to Tom Grave - 1500
J8M
- Men nile mty + nH 90 on Black Bel
Wisc + Cal- - a major effort
in spite m.cl + ash being out
- Ind. youth compaign in n.H.
but lo hey
Bulen - can't get 1/2 mil
in primary as in -68,
but ashlrook will get 75,000
votes w/ no expendilure of $
Pulliam will support ashbrook
-Rn must pall more
than Aem winner
Flemming - Test push certain
primary org prolis
Teeter arrive + 58m opens "reasgd shape"
that will be in better shape than
we are; mus strongest. Pderng letter in no
Teeter -must unify Pcamp + One
Gubern comps
- wallace help's P in Incl
when on ballot
- St Issues Econ + Tax have
cany over
- Der
probal will
be cand per Goo bat
Balen an elect proe
need Ruck.
- Goo marginal w/ best horse,
hugar, who went be wen
Bralen - decision in 2 weeks
will
Finance + Funds - hee Nunn & 2nd
Flemming projected budget forms
- all contrib's of 101 above to natex
w/a St quota
applied agl quota - this
were Stans surooping in u/
hearres in st
- Each st will not report
And keep records of gross
receipts on $100 and below
- no credit for past expenses
- Lee nunn - St Finance
orgs control + separate In Pol
/ no write - in
can cross -over
over mail Demog's
not to Repis beef
no list of Regis Reps
no party reges in Wise
Ament mail 2 pieces
400,000
- all activity in primories
minimal
- -Jm - not opend
&
genlly
no comp Decision in in
4 wells - -00er70
1
Counter activities
Decisions pending
2
Calif operating plan
-otther primary.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 21, 1972
DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMI
SKING
E.O. 120 5, 6-102
By CP
3-30-82
story Place Hamilate
July
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR LARRY HIGBY
The attached is the list Jeb put together
of the states that permit write-ins. Let
us know if you want us to take any further
action.
-Dik-
W. Richard Howard
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
MEMORANDUM
March 13, 1972
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR:
THE HONORABLE JOHN N. MITCHELL
FROM:
G. GORDON LIDDY
4
SUBJECT:
Write-In Opportunities in Remaining
Primary States
The following is submitted at your request as relayed by
Mr. Magruder.
Of the 22 remaining presidential primary elections, state law
permits write-ins in the following states:
California
Illinois
Massachusetts
Nebraska
New Jersey
New York - Write-in votes allowed. only when delegate is unopposed
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Tennessee
West Virginia
Wisconsin - Open
Note that all but Wisconsin are "closed" primaries. This means that
voters must have established membership or connection with the party
in whose primary they wish to vote. For this reason it is only in
Wisconsin that Republicans could vote in the Democratic primary and
write in the name of a particular Democratic candidate.
In the remainder of the states should we wish Democrat write-ins,
we would be limited to working with Democrat voters only.
Attached at Tab A is an excellent summary of the dates and details
on state primaries which appeared in the Congressional Quarterly
Weekly Report for January 22, 1972.
CONFIDENTIAL
Political
Report
CAMPAIGN '72: DATES, DETAILS ON STATE PRIMARIES
Twenty-two states and the District of Columbia will
woman); 17 R alternates)-13 or 14 congressional
have some form of presidential primary in 1972. All 50
district delegates, three or four at-large delegates elected
states will have a primary of some kind.
in primary.
Types of primary and election rules differ widely
from state to state. So do methods for selecting delegates
CONGRESSIONAL STATE
and alternates to the national political conventions. Some
states have yet to complete their plans.
Primary date: May 2; runoff May 30.
Democrats and Republicans differ in their systems
Filing deadline: March 1.
for choosing convention delegates. In small states that
Voter registration deadline: April 21.
are entitled to fewer than 20 convention votes, the
Democrats permit a minimum of 20 delegates. Larger
Arkansas'
states have the same number of Democratic delegates as
PRESIDENTIAL
convention votes for those states. The Republicans base
the size of their convention delegations on the number
of votes for each state. without minimums.
Primary date: June 27.
Details on the primaries. current through mid-January,
Filing deadline: April 18.
are contained in the alphabetical list below. States with
Voter registration deadline: June 6.
presidential primaries are first, followed by non-presi-
Type of primary: Non-binding, closed election of un-
dential-primary states.
pledged delegates; write-in votes not allowed.
Candidate consent: Candidates' names do not appear
on ballot.
PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY STATES
Number of delegates: 27 D (24 alternates)-22
elected in primary, five chosen by elected delegates:
Alabama
18 R (18 alternates)-15 elected in primary. three au-
tomatic delegates (national committeeman, committee-
PRESIDENTIAL
woman, state chairman).
CONGRESSIONAL, STATE
Primary date: May 2.
Filing deadline: March 1.
Primary date: June 27; runoff July 11.
Voter registration deadline: April 21.
Filing deadline: April 18.
Type of primary: Non-binding. open election of
Voter registration deadline: June 6.
-delegates who may be informally pledged to candidates;
write-in votes not allowed.
California
Candidate consent: Candidates' names do not appear
on ballot.
PRESIDENTIAL
Number of delegates: 37 D (29 alternates)-at least
29 single-member district delegates elected in primary,
Primary date: June 6.
six at-large delegates chosen by elected delegates, two
Filing deadline: March 24.
automatic delegates (national committeeman, committee-
Voter registration deadline: April 13.
Type of primary: Closed presidential preference poll,
binding on delegates until released; election of slates
Definitions
of delegates who may be pledged to a cancidate; write-
in votes allowed.
Closed Primary. Voters must have established
Candidate consent: Required.
Number of delegates: 271 D (117 alternates)-
membership in or connection with the party in whose
238 delegates elected in primary, 11 congressional dis-
primary they wish to vote.
trict delegates, 22 at-large delegates chosen by elected
Open Primary. Any voter may participate in
either party's primary.
delegates: 96 R (96 alternates)-S6 congress.onal district
Binding Primary. Delegates to the national
delegates. 10 at-large delegates elected in primary.
1968 Democratic results: Kennedy slate, 46.3 per-
conventions are obligated to vote, on a designated
cent; McCarthy slate, 41.8 percent; Thomas C. Lynch
number of convention votes. for the candidate who
wins their state (or congressional district).
slate, 11.9 percent.
1968 Republican results: Reagan slate. 100 percent.
Non-binding Primary. Delegates are not ob-
ligated to vote for any candidate at a national con-
1 The Democratic National Committee has specified that all "
vention.
the national convention should be chesen hi June 20 The Arrinsas Les later i
expected to meet in special session at the end of January to change of date.
COPYRIGHT 1972 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
PAGE 136-Jan. 22, 1972
Reproduction prohibited - whole or with part except by and cheers
Political Report 2
CONGRESSIONAL STATE
CONGRESSIONAL STATE
Primary date: June 6.
Primary date: Sept. 12; runcff Oct. 3.
Filing deadline: March 10.
Filing deadline: July 25.
Voter registration deadline: April 13.
Voter registration deadline: Aug. 12.
District of Columbia
Illinois
PRESIDENTIAL
PRESIDENTIAL
Primary date: May 2.
Primary date: March 21.
Filing deadline: March 18.
Filing deadline: Jan. 3.
Voter registration deadline: April 2.
Voter registration deadline: Feb. 21.
Type of primary: Closed presidential preference
Type of primary: Non-binding, closed presidential
poll. binding on delegates for two ballots; election of
preference poll; election of delegates who may be
slates or individual delegates who may be pledged to
pledged to candidates: write-in votes allowed.
candidates: write-in votes not allowed.
Candidate consent: Required.
Candidate consent: Required.
Number of delegates: 170 D (84 alternates)-160
Number of delegates: 20 D (15 alternates); nine R
congressional district delegates elected in primary. 10
(nine alternates)-all elected in primary.
at-large delegates chosen by elected delegates; 53 R
1968 Democratic results: Full slate of delegates
(58 alternates)-48 congressional district delegates
pledged to Kennedy defeated organization slate pledged
elected in primary, 10 at-large delegates chosen by state
to Humphrey and a third slate also favoring Humphrey.
convention.
1968 Republican results: District Republican organi-
1968 Democratic results: McCarthy*, 38.6 percent:
zation agreed before primary to divide the nine delegate
Edward M. Kennedy* and Robert F. Kennedy* (to-
votes, with six for Nixon. three for Rockefeller.
gether), 33.7 percent; Humphrey*, 17.1 percent; Wallace
6.4 percent; Johnson*, 1.3 percent; others* 2.9 percent.
CONGRESSIONAL
1968 Republican results: Nixon*, 78.1 percent; Rocke-
feller*, 9.7 percent; Reagan*, 7.1 percent: Wallace*, 2.6
percent; McCarthy*, 0.7 percent; Percy*, 0.5 percent;
Primary date: May 2; runoff two to six weeks after
Romney*, 0.1 percent; others*, 1.2 percent.
primary.
Filing deadline: March 18.
Voter registration deadline: April 2.
CONGRESSIONAL STATE
Florida
Primary date: March 21.
Filing deadline: Dec. 20, 1971.
PRESIDENTIAL
Voter registration deadline: Feb. 21.
Indiana
Primary date: March 14.
Filing deadline: Feb. 10.
Voter registration deadline: Feb. 12.
PRESIDENTIAL
Type of primary: Closed presidential preference poll,
binding on delegates for two ballots unless candidate is
Primary date: May 2.
nominated. receives less than 35 percent of convention
Filing deadline: March 23.
vote or releases delegates: candidates may submit slates
Voter registration deadline: April 3.
of delegates by March 1: write-in votes not allowed.
Type of primary: Closed presidential preference
Candidate consent: Not required: may withdraw
poll, binding on delegates for one ballot; write-in votes
by Feb. 15: secretary of state places candidates' names
not allowed.
on ballot.
Candidate consent: Required.
Number of delegates: 81 D (51 alternates)-6 con-
Number of delegates: 76 D (48 alternates)- 57
gressional district delegates chosen at district caucuses.
congressional district delegates chosen by district
12 at-large delegates chosen at state caucus, eight at-
caucuses, 19 at-large delegates chosen by state con-
large delegates chosen by State Democratic Committee;
vention; 32 R (32 alternates)-22 congressional district
40 R (40 alternates)-30 congressional district delegates
delegates chosen by district caucuses, 10 at-large dele-
chosen by State Republican Committee and other state
gates chosen by state convention.
party officials. four at-large delegates chosen by chair-
1968 Democratic results: Kennedy. 42.3 percent:
man of State Republican Committee with approval of
Gov. Roger D. Branigin, 30.7 percent; McCarthy.
executive board. six at-large delegates chosen by state
27 percent.
and other state party officials.
1968 Republican results: Nixon, 100 percent.
1968 Democratic results: George A. Smathers
slate. 46.1 percent: McCarthy slate. 28.7 percent; un-
CONGRESSIONAL STATE
pledged slate headed by former State Sen. Scott Kelly,
25.2 percent.
Primary date: May 2.
1968 Republican results: Unpledged Republican or-
Filing deadline: March 23.
ganization slate. 100 percent.
Voter registration deadline: April 3.
Write-in
COPYRIGHT 1972 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
Reproduction prof. bird 5 whole of part except by editor of (lients
Jan. 22. 1972-PAGE 137
Political Report 3
Maryland
Nebraska
PRESIDENTIAL
PRESIDENTIAL
Primary date: May 16.
Primary date: May 9.
Filing deadline: March 23.
Filing deadline: March 10.
Voter registration deadline: April 17.
Voter registration deadline: April 28.
Type of primary: Closed presidential preference
Type of primary: Non-binding, closed presidential
poll. binding on delegates for two ballots unless candi-
preference poll; election of delegates who may be
date releases delegation or receives less than 35 percent
pledged to candidates: pledged delegates bound for two
of convention vote: election of delegates who may be
ballots, unless candidate receives less than 35 percent of
pledged to candidates; write-in votes not allowed.
vote or releases delegates; other- delegates not bound;
Candidate consent: Not required; may withdraw
write-in votes allowed.
by April 3; secretary of state places candidates' names
Candidate consent: Not required; may withdraw
on ballot.
by March 10; secretary of state places candidates'
Number of delegates: 53 D (37 alternates)-48
names on ballot.
congressional district delegates elected in primary, five
Number of delegates: 24 D (22 alternates)-six
at-large delegates chosen by elected delegates; 26 R
congressional district delegates, 16 at-large delegates
(26 alternates)-24 congressional district delegates
elected in primary; 16 R (16 alternates)- congres:
elected in primary, two at-large delegates chosen by
sional district delegates, 10 at-large delegates elected
elected delegates.
in primary.
1968 Democratic results: Kennedy. 51.7 percent;
CONGRESSIONAL STATE
McCarthy, 31.2 percent; Humphrey*, 7.4 percent; John-
son,' 5.6 percent; Nixon*, 1.7 percent; Reagan*
Primary date: May 16.
1.2 percent; Wallace*, 0.8 percent; Rockefeller*
Filing deadline: March 6.
0.3 percent; others 0.1 percent.
Voter registration deadline: April 17.
1968 Republican results: Nixon. 70 percent; Reagan,
21.3 percent: Rockefeller* 5.1 percent: Stassen, 1.3
Massachusetts
percent; McCarthy*, 0.8 percent: Americus Liberator, 0.7
percent; Kennedy 0.4 percent; Wallace* 0.3 percent;
PRESIDENTIAL
Humphrey* 0.1 percent.
Primary date: April 25.
CONGRESSIONAL, STATE
Filing deadline: Feb. 8.
Voter registration deadline: March 25.
Primary date: May 9.
Type of primary: Closed presidential preference
Filing deadline: March 10.
poll. binding on delegates for one ballot; election of
Voter registration deadline: April 28.
delegates who may be pledged to candidates; write-in
votes allowed.
New Harnpshire
Candidate consent: Not required; may withdraw
by Feb. 11; secretary of state places candidates' names
PRESIDENTIAL
on ballot.
Number of delegates: 102 D (61 alternates)-
Primary date: March 7.
82 congressional district delegates. 20 at-large dele-
Filing deadline: Jan. 6.
gates elected in primary; 34 R (34 alternates)-24 con-
Voter registration deadline: March 1, large towns;
gressional district delegates, 10 at-large delegates
March 6, small towns.
elected in primary.
Type of primary: Non-binding. closed presidential
1968 Democratic results: McCarthy, 49.3 percent;
preference poll: election of delegates who may be
Kennedy*. 27.6 percent; Humphrey*. 17.7 percent;
pledged. favorable to candidates or unpledged: binding
Johnson* 2.8 percent: Rockefeller*, 0.9 percent;
on pledged delegates until released; write-in votes al-
Wallace*, 0.7 percent; Nixon*. 0.2 percent; others*,
lowed.
0.8 percent.
Candidate consent: Required.
1968 Republican results: Rockefeller* 30 percent;
Number of delegates: 20 D (18 alternates)-all
Gov. John A. Volpe. 29.5 percent; Nixon* 25.8 percent;
congressional district delegates elected in primary:
McCarthy 9.2 percent: Reagan*. 1.7 percent: Kennedy*,
14 R (14 alternates)-four congressional district dele-
1.1 percent; Humphrey*. 0.8 percent; Wallace*, 0.3
gates, 10 at-large delegates elected in primary.
percent; others* 1.6 percent.
1968 Democratic results: Johnson 49.4 percent;
McCarthy, 42.2 percent; Nixon* 4.6 percent; Kennedy
1.1 percent: Rockefeller*, 0.4 percent: Wallace 0.4
CONGRESSIONAL STATE
percent; others*. 1.9 percent.
1968 Republican results: Nixon. 77.6 percent:
Primary date: Sept. 19.
Rockefeller* 10.8 percent: McCarthy*, 5.3 percent:
Filing deadline: July 11.
Johnson 1.7 percent; Romney, 1.7 percent: Reagan*
Voter registration deadline: Aug. 19.
0.3 percent: others' 2.6 percent.
in Lotes
COPYRIGHT 1972 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
PAGE 138-Jan. 22, 1972
Reproduction prohibited * whole or part **** by editorial clients
CONGRESSIONAL STATE
Voter registration deadline: Oct. 2. 1971.
Type of primary: Non-binding. closed election of
Primary date: Sept. 12.
unpledged delegates: write-in votes allowed when dele-
Filing deadline: July 13.
gate is unopposed.
Voter registration deadline: Sept. 6, large towns;
Candidate consent: Candidates' names do not ap-
Sept. 11, small towns.
pear on ballot.
Number of delegates: 278 D (120 alternates)-all
New Jersey
congressional district delegates elected in primary: S8
R (88 alternates)-78 congressional district delegates
PRESIDENTIAL
elected in primary, 10 at-large delegates chosen by
Republican State Central Committee.
Primary date: June 6.
Filing deadline: April 27.
CONGRESSIONAL STATE
Voter registration deadline: April 27.
Type of primary: Non-binding. closed presidential
Primary date: June 20.
preference poll; election of delegates who may be pledged
Filing deadline: May 4.
to candidates: write-in votes allowed.
Voter registration deadline: Oct. 2, 1971.
Candidate consent: Not required; may withdraw by
May 3; candidate's supporters may submit a petition
North Carolina
for him without his permission.
Number of delegates: 109 D (63 alternates)-all
PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY
elected in primary; 40 R (40 alternates)-30 congres-
sional district delegates, 10 at-large delegates elected
Primary date: May 6.
in primary.
Filing deadline: March 7.
1968 Democratic results: McCarthy*. 40.5 percent;
Voter registration deadline: April 7.
Kennedy*, 35.2 percent; Humphrey* 22.8 percent; John-
Type of primary: Closed presidential preference poll.
son*, 1.5 percent.
binding on delegates for one ballot; write-in votes not
allowed.
1968 Republican results: Nixon 83.4 percent: Rocke-
feller 13.4 percent; Reagan*, 3.2 percent.
Candidate consent: Required; state board of elec-
tions places candidates' names on ballot: must submit
CONGRESSIONAL STATE
filing fee.
Number of delegates: 64 D (42 alternates)-43
Primary date: June 6.
congressional district delegates chosen at district con-
Filing deadline: April 27.
ventions, 14 at-large delegates chosen by state conven-
Voter registration deadline: April 27.
tion, two automatic, delegates (national committeeman.
committeewoman); 32 R (32 alternates)-22 congres-
New Mexico
sional district delegates chosen by district conventions.
PRESIDENTIAL
10 at-large delegates chosen by state convention.
CONGRESSIONAL STATE
Primary date: June 6.
Filing deadline: March 15.
Primary date: May 6; runoff June 3.
Voter registration deadline: April 25.
Filing deadline: Feb. 21.
Type of primary: Closed presidential preference poll.
Voter registration deadline: April 7.
binding on delegates for one ballot: write-in votes not
allowed.
Ohio
Candidate consent: Required: state nominating
committee places candidates' names on ballot; must sub-
PRESIDENTIAL
mit filing fee.
Number of delegates: 20 D (18 alternates)-all
Primary date: May 2.
chosen by state convention: 14 R (14 alternates)-four
Filing deadline: Feb. 2.
congressional district delegates chosen by district cau-
Voter registration deadline: April 2.
cuses, 10 at-large delegates chosen by state convention.
Type of primary: Non-binding. closed election of
delegates who specify their first and second candidate
CONGRESSIONAL STATE
choices; write-in votes not allowed.
Candidate consent: Required.
Primary date: June 6.
Number of delegates: 153 D (78 alternates)-115
Filing deadline: April 4.
congressional district delegates, 38 at-large delegates
Voter registration deadline: April 25.
elected in primary: 56 R (56 alternates)-46 congres-
sional district delegates, 10 at-large delegates elected
New York
in primary.
1968 Democratic results: 125 delegates pledged to
PRESIDENTIAL
Sen. Stephen M. Young. a favorite-son candidate, and one
delegate pledged to Kennedy elected.
Primary date: June 20.
1968 Republican results: 55 delegates pledged to Gov.
Filing deadline: May 4.
James A. Rhodes. a favorite-son candidate. elected: one
delegate pledged to Harold Stassen elected by default.
COPYRIGHT
Reproduction
in
port
Jan. 22, 1972-PAGE 139
Political Report 5
CONGRESSIONAL, STATE
Wallace* 4.0 percent: Johnson* 3.6 percent: Nixon* 0.6
percent; Rockefeller*, 0.3 percent: Reagan' 0.1 percent
Primary date: May 2.
others*, 0.4 percent.
Filing deadline: Feb. 2.
1968 Republican results: Nixon* 59.4 percent
Voter registration deadline: April 2.
Rockefeller*. 18.3 percent; McCarthy*, 6.5 percent:
Wallace*, 4.6 percent: Kennedy*. 3.6 percent: Reagan*,
Oregon
2.8 percent: Humphrey*, 1.6 percent: Johnson* 1.1
percent; Gov. Raymond P. Shafer* 0.4 percent; others*
1.7 percent.
PRESIDENTIAL
CONGRESSIONAL STATE
Primary date: May 23.
Filing deadline: March 14.
Primary date: April 25.
Voter registration deadline: April 22.
Filing deadline: Feb. 15.
Type of primary: Closed presidential preference poll,
Voter registration deadline: March 6.
binding on delegates for two ballots unless candidate
releases them or he receives less. than 35 percent of
Rhode Islandi
convention vote: election of delegates who may be
pledged to candidates; write-in votes allowed.
PRESIDENTIAL
Candidate consent: Not required: no withdrawal;
secretary of state places candidates' names on ballot.
Primary date: April 11.
Number of delegates: 34 D (27 alternates)-32 con-
Filing deadline: Jan. 31.
gressional district delegates elected in primary. two
Voter registration deadline: Feb. 11.
automatic delègates (national committeeman. commit-
Type of primary: Non-binding. closed presiden-
teewoman): 1S R (18 alternates)-14 congressional dis-
tial preference poll: election of delegates who may be
trict delegates elected in primary. four automatic dele-
pledged to a candidate: pledged delegates bound for one
gates (national committeeman, committeewoman, state
ballot: write-in votes not allowed.
party chairman. vice chairman).
Candidate consent: Required.
1968 Democratic results: McCarthy, 44.1 percent;
Number of delegates: 22 D (21 alternates)-all at-
Kennedy, 38.1 percent: Johnson, 12.1 percent: Hum-
large delegates elected in primary: eight R (eight
phrey* 3.3 percent; Nixon*, 0.8 percent; Reagan* 0.8
alternates) at-large delegates elected in primary.
percent: Rockefeller* 0.8 percent.
196S Republican results: Nixon. 65.1 percent;
CONGRESSIONAL, STATE
Reagan. 20.4 percent: Rockefeller* 11.6 percent; Mc-
Carthy* 2.3 percent; Kennedy*, 0.6 percent.
Primary date: Sept. 12.
Filing deadline: June 30.
CONGRESSIONAL STATE
Voter registration deadline: July 14.
South Dakota
Primary date: May 23.
Filing deadline: March 14.
PRESIDENTIAL
Voter registration deadline: April 22.
Pennsylvania
Primary date: June 6.
Filing deadline: April 21.
Voter registration deadline: May 22.
PRESIDENTIAL
Type of primary: Closed election of slates of dele-
gates who may be pledged to a candidate: pledged dele-
Primary date: April 25.
gates bound for three ballots: write-in votes not allowed.
Filing deadline: Feb. 15.
Candidate consent: Required.
Voter registration deadline: March 6.
Number of delegates: 20 D (17 alternates)--all at
Type of primary: Closed. non-binding presidential
large delegates elected in primary: 14 R (14 alter-
preference poll: election of delegates who may be pledged
nates)-four congressional district delegates. 10 at-large
to candidates: Democratic pledged candidates bound
delegates elected in primary.
for one ballot: Republican delegates not bound; write-
1968 Democratic results: Kennedy slate, 49.5 per-
in votes allowed.
cent; Johnson slate, 30.1 percent: McCarthy slate, 20.4
Candidate consent: Required.
percent.
Number of delegates: 182 D (88 alternates)-137
1968 Republican results: Nixon slate, 100 percent.
state senatorial district delegates elected in primary,
27 at-large delegates chosen by elected delegates. 18
CONGRESSIONAL STATE
at-large delegates chosen by state committee: 60 R (60
alternates)-50 congressional district delegates elected
Primary date: June 6.
in primary, 10 at-large delegates chosen by state com-
Filing deadline: April 21.
mittee.
Voter registration deadline: May 22.
1968 Democratic results: McCarthy. 71.6 percent;
2A hill is pending in the Rhade Island Legislature to change me of the --
Kennedy*. 10.9 percent; Humphrey*, 8.7 percent;
cedures relating to the presidential primary If the his places. the presidential
my will be held on Moy 21 and condidates will be i and on the bollet in :
Writesin
Rhode Hand seen for of state
COPYRIGHT 1972 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
PAGE 140-Jan. 22, 1972
Reproduction prohibited . whole or port except editorial chenis
Tennessee³
vention vote; election of slates of delegates who may be
pledged to a candidate; write-in votes allowed.,
PRESIDENTIAL
Candidate consent: Not required: may withdraw
by Feb. 29; 11-member commission places candidates'
Primary date: May 4.
names on ballot.
Filing deadline: March 9.
Number of delegates: 67 D (44 alternates)-56
Voter registration deadline: April 4.
congressional district delegates, 11 at-large delegates
Type of primary: Closed presidential preference
elected in primary: 28 R (28 alternates)-18 congres-
poll. binding on delegates for two ballots unless can-
sional district delegates chosen by district caucuses, 10
didate receives less than 20 percent of convention vote
at-large delegates chosen by state convention.
or releases delegates; write-in votes allowed.
1968 Democratic returns: McCarthy, 56.2 percent;
Candidate consent: Not required: no specific with-
Johnson, 34.6 percent; Kennedy*, 6.3 percent; Hum-
drawal date; secretary of state places candidates' names
phrey*, 0.5 percent; Wallace*, 0.5 percent; "None," 1.6
on ballot.
percent; others*, 0.2 percent.
Number of delegates: 49 D (35 alternates)-39
1968 Republican results: Nixon. 79.7 percent;
congressional district delegates chosen by district con-
Reagan, 10.4 percent; Stassen, 10.4 percent; Rockefeller*,
ventions, 10 at-large delegates chosen by state conven-
1.6 percent; Romney*, 0.4 percent; Wallace*, 0.1 per-
tion: 26 R (26 alternates)-16 congressional district
cent; Kennedy*, .06 percent; "None," 1.4 percent;
delegates chosen by district conventions, 10 at-large dele-
others*, 0.5 percent.
gates chosen by state convention.
CONGRESSIONAL STATE
CONGRESSIONAL STATE
Primary date: Sept. 12.
Primary date: Aug. 3.
Filing deadline: July 11.
Filing deadline: June 1.
Voter registration deadline: Aug. 23, Milwaukee;
Voter registration deadline: July 4.
Aug. 30, rest of state.
West Virginia
NON-PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY STATES
PRESIDENTIAL
Primary date: May 9.
Filing deadline: Feb. 5.
Alaska
Voter registration deadline: April 8.
Type of primary: Non-binding, closed presidential
preference poll; election of unpledged delegates; write-
Primary date: Aug. 22.
in votes allowed.
Filing deadline: June 1.
Candidate consent: Required.
Voter registration deadline: Mail, July 23; in per-
Number of delegates: 35 D (28 alternates)-26
son, Aug. 8.
congressional district delegates, nine at-large dele-
Number of delegates: 20 D (10 alternates)-selection
gates elected in primary; 18 R (18 alternates)-eight
procedure not yet decided: 12 R (12 alternates)-all at-
congressional district delegates, 10 at-large delegates
large delegates chosen by state convention.
elected in primary.
1968 Democratic, Republican results: No candi-
Arizona
dates entered either party's preference poll. Uncom-
mitted slates were elected.
Primary date: Sept. 12.
Filing deadline: July 13.
CONGRESSIONAL, STATE
Voter registration deadline: July 11.
Number of delegates: 25 D (23 alternates)-19 con-
Primary date: May 9.
gressional district delegates chosen by district caucuses.
Filing deadline: Feb. 5.
six at-large delegates chosen by state convention: 18 R
Voter registration deadline: April 8.
(18 alternates)-eight congressional district delegates
Wisconsin
chosen by district conventions, 10 at-large delegates
chosen by state convention.
PRESIDENTIAL
Colorado
Primary date: April 4.
Primary date: Sept. 12.
Filing deadline: March 7.
Filing deadline: July 28.
Voter registration deadline: March 15, Milwaukee;
Voter registration deadline: Aug. 11.
March 22. rest of state.
Number of delegates: 36 D (23 alternates)-selection
Type of primary: Open presidential preference
procedure not yet decided: 20 R (20 alternates)-10 con-
poll, binding on delegates for one vote or until candi-
gressional district delegates chosen by district conventions,
date releases them or receives less than one-third of con-
10 at-large delegates chosen by state convention.
J primary date and consequently nl. ther had datest may be
and
Write-in cotes
COPYRIGHT O ARTERLY INC
Repraduction
port
clients
Jan. 22, 1972-PAGE 141
March 7, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
LARRY HIGBY
FROM:
CHARLES COLSON
Per our conversation Dick Howard reports from the attached
that we did not do anything in New Hampshire although most
reporters predict that there will be a Democratic write-in for
Nixon. According to Magruder, there are no write-ins possible
in Florida and in Wisconsin it is handled by cross-overs. I
would think for very good reasons that we would not want to
encourage cross-overs.
In the event this should be pursued as far as other states are
concerned, I have asked Jeb to compile a list of those primaries
where write-ins are possible.
Dick
March 7, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR H.R. HALDEMAN
FROM :
L. HIGBY
Chuck Colson called to report that he had talked with the President
last night and the President raised the following subjects:
1. Did we have a write-in campaign going in New Hampshire to
get Democrats to write in RN. Colson said he didn't know but he
would check. The President said that Colson should report to you
what he found out.
Colson found out that there was no write-in effort going. He had
told the AG that the President had requested this a month ago but
Colson guesses the AG decided it shouldn't be done.
2. The President then raised the question of whether or not we had
white-in efforts going in Florida and Wisconsin.
Colson checked on these and finds that we can't have write-ins in
Florida, and that in Wisconsin you can't write in but you can cross
over. He indicates, however that we probably don't want Democrate
for Nixon crossing over, but voting for candidates that will hurt the
Muskie vote.
3. The President said he told you that he wanted write-in efforts
on behalf of Democrats for Nixon in every state. Is there something
that should be done here?
The President also indicated to Colson that he wanted to see Sidlinger
today when Sidlinger was in seeing Colson. Colsm said he would work
this out with Parker.
LH:pm
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
MEMORANDUM
March 13, 1972
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR:
THE HONORABLE JOHN N. MITCHELL
FROM:
G. GORDON LIDDY
4
SUBJECT:
Write-In Opportunities in Remaining
Primary States
The following is submitted at your request as relayed by
Mr. Magruder.
Of the 22 remaining presidential primary elections, state law
permits write-ins in the following states:
California
Illinois
Massachusetts
Nebraska
New Jersey
New York - Write-in votes allowed only when delegate is unopposed
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Tennessee
West Virginia
Wisconsin - Open
Note that all but Wisconsin are "closed" primaries. This means that
voters must have established membership or connection with the party
in whose primary they wish to vote. For this reason it is only in
Wisconsin that Republicans could vote in the Democratic primary and
write in the name of a particular Democratic candidate.
In the remainder of the states should we wish Democrat write-ins,
we would be limited to working with Democrat voters only.
Attached at Tab A is an excellent summary of the dates and details
on state primaries which appeared in the Congressional Quarterly
Weekly Report for January 22, 1972.
CONFIDENTIAL
Political
Report
CAMPAIGN '72: DATES, DETAILS ON STATE PRIMARIES
Twenty-two states and the District of Columbia will
woman); 17 R alternates)-13 or 14 congressional
have some form of presidential primary in 1972. All 50
district delegates, three or four at-large delegates elected
states will have a primary of some kind.
in primary.
Types of primary and election rules differ widely
from state to state. So do methods for selecting delegates
CONGRESSIONAL, STATE
and alternates to the national political conventions. Some
states have yet to complete their plans.
Primary date: May 2; runoff May 30.
Democrats and Republicans differ in their systems
Filing deadline: March 1.
for choosing convention delegates. In small states that
Voter registration deadline: April 21.
are entitled to fewer than 20 convention votes, the
Democrats permit a minimum of 20 delegates. Larger
Arkansas'
states have the same number of Democratic delegates\a
PRESIDENTIAL
convention votes for those states. The Republicans base
the size of their convention delegations on the number
of votes for each state, without minimums.
Primary date: June 27.
Details on the primaries. current through mid-January,
Filing deadline: April 18.
are contained in the alphabetical list below. States with
Voter registration deadline: June 6.
presidential primaries are first, followed by non-presi-
Type of primary: Non-binding, closed election of ùn-
dential-primary states.
pledged delegates; write-in votes not allowed.
Candidate consent: Candidates' names do not appear
on ballot.
PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY STATES
Number of delegates: 27 D (24 alternates)-22
elected in primary, five chosen by elected delegates;
Alabama
18 R (18 alternates)-15 elected in primary, three au-
tomatic delegates (national committeeman, committee-
PRESIDENTIAL
woman, state chairman).
CONGRESSIONAL, STATE
Primary date: May 2.
Filing deadline: March 1.
Primary date: June 27; runoff July 11.
Voter registration deadline: April 21.
Filing deadline: April 18.
Type of primary: Non-binding. open election of
Voter registration deadline: June 6.
delegates who may be informally pledged to candidates;
write-in votes not allowed.
California
Candidate consent: Candidates' names do not appear
on ballot.
PRESIDENTIAL
Number of delegates: 37 D (29 alternates)-at least
29 single-member district delegates elected in primary,
Primary date: June 6.
six at-large delegates chosen by elected delegates, two
Filing deadline: March 24.
automatic delegates (national committeeman, committee-
Voter registration deadline: April 13.
Type of primary: Closed presidential preference poll,
binding on delegates until released; election of slates
Definitions
of delegates who may be pledged to a candidate; write-
in votes allowed.
Candidate consent: Required.
Closed Primary. Voters must have established
Number of delegates: 271 D (117 alternates)-
membership in or connection with the party in whose
primary they wish to vote.
238 delegates elected in primary, 11 congressional dis-
trict delegates, 22 at-large delegates chosen by elected
Open Primary. Any voter may participate in
either party's primary.
delegates: 96 R (96 alternates)- congressional district
Binding Primary. Delegates to the national
delegates. 10 at-large delegates elected in primary.
conventions are obligated to vote, on a designated
1968 Democratic results: Kennedy slate, 46.3 per-
number of convention votes, for the candidate who
cent; McCarthy slate, 41.8 percent; Thomas C. Lynch
wins their state (or congressional district).
slate, 11.9 percent.
1968 Republican results: Reagan slate. 100 percent.
Non-binding Primary. Delegates are not ob-
ligated to vote for any candidate at a national con-
'I The Democratic National Committee has specified the all delegates to
vention.
the national convention should be chosen by June 20 The Ari JASON Legislature in
expected to meet in special session at the end of January to change se date.
COPYRIGHT 1972 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
PAGE 136-Jan. 22, 1972
Reproduction prohibited in whole or in port except by ed Torial clients
Political Report 2
CONGRESSIONAL STATE
CONGRESSIONAL STATE
Primary date: June 6.
Primary date: Sept. 12; runoff Oct. 3.
Filing deadline: March 10.
Filing deadline: July 25.
Voter registration deadline: April 13.
Voter registration deadline: Aug. 12.
District of Columbia
Illinois
PRESIDENTIAL
PRESIDENTIAL
Primary date: May 2.
Primary date: March 21.
Filing deadline: March 18.
Filing deadline: Jan. 3.
Voter registration deadline: April 2.
Voter registration deadline: Feb. 21.
Type of primary: Closed presidential preference
Type of primary: Non-binding, closed presidential
poll, binding on delegates for two ballots; election of
preference poll; election of delegates who may be
slates or individual delegates who may be pledged to
pledged to candidates: write-in votes allowed.
candidates; write-in votes not allowed.
Candidate consent: Required.
Candidate consent: Required.
Number of delegates: 170 D (84 alternates)-160
Number of delegates: 20 D (15 alternates); nine R
congressional district delegates elected in primary, 10
(nine alternates)-all elected in primary.
at-large delegates chosen by elected delegates; 58 R
1968 Democratic results: Full slate of delegates
(58 alternates)-48 congressional district delegates
pledged to Kennedy defeated organization slate pledged
elected in primary, 10 at-large delegates chosen by state
to Humphrey and a third slate also favoring Humphrey.
convention.
1968 Republican, results: District Republican organi-
1968 Democratic results: McCarthy*, 38.6 percent;
zation agreed before primary to divide the nine delegate
Edward M. Kennedy* and Robert F. Kennedy* (to-
votes, with six for Nixon, three for Rockefeller.
gether), 33.7 percent; Humphrey*, 17.1 percent; Wallace*,
6.4 percent; Johnson*, 1.3 percent: others*, 2.9 percent.
CONGRESSIONAL
1968 Republican results: Nixon*, 78.1 percent; Rocke-
feller*, 9.7 percent; Reagan*, 7.1 percent; Wallace*, 2.6
Primary date: May 2; runoff two to six weeks after
percent; McGarthy*, 0.7 percent; Percy*, 0.5 percent;
Romney*, 0.1 percent; others*, 1.2 percent.
primary.
Filing deadline: March 18.
Voter registration deadline: April 2.
CONGRESSIONAL, STATE
Florida
Primary date: March 21.
Filing deadline: Dec. 20. 1971.
PRESIDENTIAL
Voter registration deadline: Feb. 21.
Primary date: March 14.
Indiana
Filing deadline: Feb. 10.
Voter registration deadline: Feb. 12.
PRESIDENTIAL
Type of primary: Closed presidential preference poll,
binding on delegates for two ballots unless candidate is
Primary date: May 2.
nominated. receives less than 35 percent of convention
Filing deadline: March 23.
vote or releases delegates: candidates may submit slates
Voter registration April 3.
of delegates by March 1: write-in votes not allowed.
Type of primary: Closed presidential preference
Candidate consent: Not required: may withdraw
poll, binding on delegates for one ballot; write-in votes
by Feb. 15; secretary of state places candidates' names
not allowed.
on ballot.
Candidate consent: Required.
Number of delegates: 81 D (51 alternates)-61 con-
Number of delegates: 76 D (48 alternates)- 57
gressional district delegates chosen at district caucuses.
congressional district delegates chosen by district
12 at-large delegates chosen at state caucus, eight at-
caucuses, 19 at-large delegates chosen by state con-
large delegates chosen by State Democratic Committee;
vention; 32 R (32 alternates)-22 congressional district
40 R (40 alternates)-30 congressional district delegates
delegates chosen by district caucuses. 10 at-large dele-
chosen by State Republican Committee and other state
gates chosen by state convention.
party officials. four at-large delegates chosen by chair-
1968 Democratic results: Kennedy, 42.3 percent;
man of State Republican Committee with approval of
Gov. Roger D. Branigin, 30.7 percent; McCarthy.
executive board. six at-large delegates chosen by state
27 percent.
and other state party officials.
1968 Republican results: Nixon, 100 percent.
1968 Democratic results: George A. Smathers
slate. 46.1 percent: McCarthy slate, 28.7 percent: un-
CONGRESSIONAL STATE
pledged slate headed by former State Sen. Scott Kelly,
25.2 percent.
Primary date: May 2.
1968 Republican results: Unpledged Republican or-
Filing deadline: March 23.
ganization slate. 100 percent.
Voter registration deadline: April 3.
Write-in votes
COPYRIGHT 1972 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
Reproduction profibited in whole or in part except by editorial clients
Jan. 22. 1972-PAGE 137
Political Report 3
Maryland
Nebraska
PRESIDENTIAL
PRESIDENTIAL
Primary date: May 16.
Primary date: May 9.
Filing deadline: March 23.
Filing deadline: March 10.
Voter registration deadline: April 17.
Voter registration deadline: April 28.
Type of primary: Closed presidential preference
Type of primary: Non-binding, closed presidential
poll. binding on delegates for two ballots unless candi-
preference poll; election of delegates who may be
date releases delegation or receives less than 35 percent
pledged to candidates: pledged delegates bound for two
of convention vote; election of delegates who may be
ballots, unless candidate receives less than 35 percent of
pledged to candidates; write-in votes not allowed.
vote or releases delegates; other. delegates not bound;
Candidate consent: Not required; may withdraw
write-in votes allowed.
by April 3; secretary of state places candidates' names
Candidate consent: Not required; may withdraw
on ballot.
by March 10; secretary of state places candidates'
Number of delegates: 53 D (37 alternates)-48
names on ballot.
congressional district delegates elected in primary, five
Number of delegates: 24 D (22 alternates)-six
at-large delegates chosen by elected delegates; 26 R
congressional district delegates, 16 at-large delegates
(26 alternates)-24 congressional district delegates
elected in primary: 16 R (16 alternates)-six congres-
elected in primary, two at-large delegates chosen by
sional district delegates, 10 at-large delegates elected
elected delegates.
in primary.
1968 Democratic results: Kennedy. 51.7 percent;
CONGRESSIONAL STATE
McCarthy, 31.2 percent; Humphrey*, 7.4 percent; John-
son, 5.6 percent; Nixon*, 1.7 percent; Reagan*,
Primary date: May 16.
1.2 percent; Wallace*, 0.8 percent; Rockefeller*,
Filing deadline: March 6.
0.3 percent; others*, 0.1 percent.
Voter registration deadline: April 17.
1968 Republican results: Nixon. 70 percent; Reagan,
21.3 percent: Rockefeller* 5.1 percent: Stassen, 1.3
Massachusetts
percent; McCarthy*, 0.8 percent; Americus Liberator, 0.7
percent; Kennedy*, 0.4 percent; Wallace*, 0.3 percent;
PRESIDENTIAL
Humphrey*, 0.1 percent.
Primary date: April 25.
CONGRESSIONAL STATE
Filing deadline: Feb. 8.
Voter registration deadline: March 25.
Primary date: May 9.
Type of primary: Closed presidential preference
Filing deadline: March 10.
poll, binding on delegates for one ballot; election of
Voter registration deadline: April 28.
delegates who may be pledged to candidates; write-in
votes allowed.
New Hampshire
Candidate consent: Not required; may withdraw
by Feb. 11; secretary of state places candidates' names
PRESIDENTIAL
on ballot.
Number of delegates: 102 D (61 alternates)-
Primary date: March 7.
82 congressional district delegates, 20 at-large dele-
Filing deadline: Jan. 6.
gates elected in primary; 34 R (34 alternates)-24 con-
Voter registration deadline: March 1, large towns;
gressional district delegates, 10 at-large delegates
March 6, small towns.
elected in primary.
Type of primary: Non-binding, closed presidential
1968 Democratic results: McCarthy, 49.3 percent;
preference poll: election of delegates who may be
Kennedy*, 27.6 percent: Humphrey*. 17.7 percent;
pledged, favorable to candidates or unpledged; binding
Johnson* 2.8 percent: Rockefeller*, 0.9 percent;
on pledged delegates until released; write-in votes al-
Wallace* 0.7 percent; Nixon* 0.2 percent; others*,
lowed.
0.8 percent.
Candidate consent: Required.
1968 Republican results: Rockefeller*. 30 percent;
Number of delegates: 20 D (18 alternates)-all
Gov. John A. Volpe. 29.5 percent; Nixon* 25.8 percent;
congressional district delegates elected in primary;
McCarthy* 9.2 percent: Reagan*. 1.7 percent: Kennedy*,
14 R (14 alternates)-four congressional district dele-
1.1 percent; Humphrey* 0.8 percent; Wallace*, 0.3
gates, 10 at-large delegates elected in primary.
percent; others* 1.6 percent.
1968 Democratic results: Johnson*. 49.4 percent;
McCarthy, 42.2 percent; Nixon*, 4.6 percent; Kennedy*,
1.1 percent: Rockefeller*. 0.4 percent; Wallace*, 0.4
CONGRESSIONAL STATE
percent; others*. 1.9 percent.
1968 Republican results: Nixon. 77.6 percent:
Primary date: Sept. 19.
Rockefeller*. 10.8 percent; McCarthy*. 5.3 percent;
Filing deadline: July 11.
Johnson* 1.7 percent: Romney, 1.7 percent: Reagan*.
Voter registration deadline: Aug. 19.
0.3 percent; others* 2.6 percent.
Writesin Codes
COPYRIGHT 1972 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
PAGE 138-Jan. 22, 1972
Reproduction prohibited in whole or in part except by editorial clients
Political Report - 4
CONGRESSIONAL STATE
Voter registration deadline: Oct. 2. 1971.
Type of primary: Non-binding, closed election of
Primary date: Sept. 12.
unpledged delegates: write-in votes allowed when dele-
Filing deadline: July 13.
gate is unopposed.
Voter registration deadline: Sept. 6, large towns;
Candidate consent: Candidates' names do not ap-
Sept. 11, small towns.
pear on ballot.
Number of delegates: 278 D (120 alternates)-all
New Jersey
congressional district delegates elected in primary: S8
R (88 alternates)-78 congressional district delegates
PRESIDENTIAL
elected in primary, 10 at-large delegates chosen by
Republican State Central Committee.
Primary date: June 6.
Filing deadline: April 27.
CONGRESSIONAL STATE
Voter registration deadline: April 27.
Type of primary: Non-binding, closed presidential
Primary date: June 20.
preference poll; election of delegates who may be pledged
Filing deadline: May 4.
to candidates; write-in votes allowed.
Voter registration deadline: Oct. 2, 1971.
Candidate consent: Not required; may withdraw by
May 3; candidate's supporters may submit a petition
North Carolina
for him without his permission.
Number of delegates: 109 D (63 alternates)-all
PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY
elected in primary; 40 R (40 alternates)-30 congres-
sional district delegates, 10 at-large delegates elected
Primary date: May 6.
in primary.
Filing deadline: March 7.
1968 Democratic results: McCarthy*. 40.5 percent;
Voter registration deadline: April 7.
Kennedy*, 35.2 percent; Humphrey*, 22.8 percent; John-
Type of primary: Closed presidential preference poll.
son*, 1.5 percent.
binding on delegates for one ballot; write-in votes not
allowed.
1968 Republican results: Nixon* 83.4 percent; Rocke-
feller* 13.4 percent; Reagan* 3.2 percent.
Candidate consent: Required; state board of elec-
tions places candidates' names on ballot; must submit
CONGRESSIONAL STATE
filing fee.
Number of delegates: 64 D (42 alternates)-48
Primary date: June 6.
congressional district delegates chosen at district con-
Filing deadline: April 27.
ventions, 14 at-large delegates chosen by state conven-
Voter registration deadline: April 27.
tion, two automatic delegates (national committeeman.
committeewoman); 32 R (32 alternates)-22 congres-
New Mexico
sional district delegates chosen by district conventions.
PRESIDENTIAL
10 at-large delegates chosen by state convention.
CONGRESSIONAL STATE
Primary date: June 6.
Filing deadline: March 15.
Primary date: May 6; runoff June 3.
Voter registration deadline: April 25.
Filing deadline: Feb. 21.
Type of primary: Closed presidential preference poll.
Voter registration deadline: April 7.
binding on delegates for one ballot; write-in votes not
allowed.
Ohio
Candidate consent: Required: state nominating
committee places candidates' names on ballot; must sub-
PRESIDENTIAL
mit filing fee.
Number of delegates: 20 D (18 alternates)-all
Primary date: May 2.
chosen by state convention; 14 R (14 alternates)-four
Filing deadline: Feb. 2.
congressional district delegates chosen by district cau-
Voter registration deadline: April 2.
cuses, 10 at-large delegates chosen by state convention.
Type of primary: Non-binding. closed election of
delegates who specify their first and second candidate
CONGRESSIONAL, STATE
choices; write-in votes not allowed.
Candidate consent: Required.
Primary date: June 6.
Number of delegates: 153 D (78 alternates)-115
Filing deadline: April 4.
congressional district delegates, 38 at-large delegates
Voter registration deadline: April 25.
elected in primary: 56 R (56 alternates)-46 congres-
sional district delegates, 10 at-large delegates elected
New York
in primary.
1968 Democratic results: 125 delegates pledged to
PRESIDENTIAL
Sen. Stephen M. Young. a favorite-son candidate, and one
delegate pledged to Kennedy elected.
Primary date: June 20.
1968 Republican results: 55 delegates pledged to Gov.
Filing deadline: May 4.
James A. Rhodes, a favorite-son candidate. elected: one
delegate pledged to Harold Stassen elected by default.
COPYRIGHT 1972 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
Reproduction in whole Oc part by cartonal clients
Jan. 22, 1972-PAGE 139
Political Report 5
CONGRESSIONAL, STATE
Wallace*, 4.0 percent: Johnson*, 3.6 percent: Nixon* 0.6
percent; Rockefeller*, 0.3 percent; Reagan' 0.1 percent;
Primary date: May 2.
others*, 0.4 percent.
Filing deadline: Feb. 2.
1968 Republican results: Nixon*, 59.4 percent;
Voter registration deadline: April 2.
Rockefeller*. 18.3 percent; McCarthy*. 6.5 percent;
Wallace*, 4.6 percent; Kennedy*. 3.6 percent: Reagan*,
Oregon
2.8 percent: Humphrey*. 1.6 percent: Johnson*, 1.1
percent; Gov. Raymond P. Shafer*, 0.4 percent; others*,
1.7 percent.
PRESIDENTIAL
CONGRESSIONAL STATE
Primary date: May 23.
Filing deadline: March 14.
Primary date: April 25.
Voter registration deadline: April 22.
Filing deadline: Feb. 15.
Type of primary: Closed presidential preference poll,
Voter registration deadline: March 6.
binding on delegates for two ballots unless candidate
releases them or he receives less. than 35 percent of
Rhode Island
convention vote: election of delegates who may be
pledged to candidates; write-in votes allowed.
PRESIDENTIAL
Candidate consent: Not required; no withdrawal;
secretary of state places candidates' names on ballot.
Primary date: April 11.
Number of delegates: 34 D (27 alternates)-32 con-
Filing deadline: Jan. 31.
gressional district delegates elected in primary, two
Voter registration deadline: Feb. 11.
automatic delegates (national committeeman, commit-
Type of primary: Non-binding. closed presiden-
teewoman): 18 R (18 alternates)-14 congressional dis-
tial preference poll: election of delegates who may be
trict delegates elected in primary. four automatic dele-
pledged to a candidate: pledged delegates bound for one
gates (national committeeman, committeewoman, state
ballot: write-in votes not allowed.
party chairman. vice chairman).
Candidate consent: Required.
1968 Democratic results: McCarthy, 44.1 percent;
Number of delegates: 22 D (21 alternates)-all at-
Kennedy, 38.1 percent: Johnson, 12.1 percent; Hum-
large delegates elected in primary: eight R (eight
phrey*, 3.3 percent; Nixon*, 0.8 percent; Reagan*, 0.8
alternates)-all at-large delegates elected in primary.
percent; Rockefeller*. 0.8 percent.
1968 Republican results: Nixon. 65.1 percent;
CONGRESSIONAL, STATE
Reagan. 20.4 percent: Rockefeller*, 11.6 percent; Mc-
Carthy*, 2.3 percent; Kennedy* 0.6 percent.
Primary date: Sept. 12.
Filing deadline: June 30.
CONGRESSIONAL STATE
Voter registration deadline: July 14.
South Dakota
Primary date: May 23.
Filing deadline: March 14.
PRESIDENTIAL
Voter registration deadline: April 22.
Pennsylvania
Primary date: June 6.
Filing deadline: April 21.
Voter registration deadline: May 22.
PRESIDENTIAL
Type of primary: Closed election of slates of dele-
gates who may be pledged to a candidate; pledged dele-
Primary date: April 25.
gates bound for three ballots: write-in votes not allowed.
Filing deadline: Feb. 15.
Candidate consent: Required.
Voter registration deadline: March 6.
Number of delegates: 20 D (17 alternates)-all at-
Type of primary: Closed. non-binding presidential
large delegates elected in primary; 14 R (14 alter-
preference poll; election of delegates who may be pledged
nates)-four congressional district delegates. 10 at-large
to candidates: Democratic pledged candidates bound
delegates elected in primary.
for one ballot: Republican delegates not bound; write-
1968 Democratic results: Kennedy slate, 49.5 per-
in votes allowed.
cent; Johnson slate, 30.1 percent; McCarthy slate, 20.4
Candidate consent: Required.
percent.
Number of delegates: 182 D (88 alternates)-137
1968 Republican results: Nixon slate, 100 percent.
state senatorial district delegates elected in primary,
27 at-large delegates chosen by elected delegates. 18
CONGRESSIONAL STATE
at-large delegates chosen by state committee: 60 R (60
alternates)-50 congressional district delegates elected
Primary date: June 6.
in primary, 10 at-large delegates chosen by state com-
Filing deadline: April 21.
mittee.
Voter registration deadline: May 22.
1968 Democratic results: McCarthy, 71.6 percent;
2 A bill is pending in the Rhude Island Legislature to change some of the par
Kennedy*. 10.9 percent; Humphrey*, 8.7 percent;
cedures relating to the presidential primary. If the bill passes. the presidential print 3-
- will be held on May 23 and condidates will be placed on the ballut by the
Write-in cotes
Rhode Island secretary of state.
COPYRIGHT 1972 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
PAGE 140-Jan. 22, 1972
Reproduction prohibited in whole in part except by editoring clients
Political Report 6
Tennessee³
vention vote; election of slates of delegates who may be
pledged to a candidate; write-in votes allowed.
PRESIDENTIAL
Candidate consent: Not required; may withdraw
by Feb. 29; 11-member commission places candidates'
names on ballot.
Primary date: May 4.
Filing deadline: March 9.
Number of delegates: 67 D (44 alternates)-56
Voter registration deadline: April 4.
congressional district delegates, 11 at-large delegates
Type of primary: Closed presidential preference
elected in primary; 28 R (28 alternates)-18 congres-
poll. binding on delegates for two ballots unless can-
sional district delegates chosen by district caucuses, 10
didate receives less than 20 percent of convention vote
at-large delegates chosen by state convention.
or releases delegates; write-in votes allowed.
1968 Democratic returns: McCarthy, 56.2 percent;
Candidate consent: Not required; no specific with-
Johnson, 34.6 percent; Kennedy*, 6.3 percent; Hum-
drawal date; secretary of state places candidates' names
phrey*, 0.5 percent; Wallace*, 0.5 percent; "None," 1.6
on ballot.
percent; others*, 0.2 percent.
Number of delegates: 49 D (35 alternates)-39
1968 Republican results: Nixon, 79.7 percent;
congressional district delegates chosen by district con-
Reagan, 10.4 percent; Stassen, 10.4 percent; Rockefeller*,
ventions, 10 at-large delegates chosen by state conven-
1.6 percent; Romney*, 0.4 percent; Wallace*, 0.1 per-
tion; 26 R (26 alternates)-16 congressional district
cent; Kennedy*, .06 percent; "None," 1.4 percent;
delegates chosen by district conventions, 10 at-large dele-
others*, 0.5 percent.
gates chosen by state convention.
CONGRESSIONAL, STATE
CONGRESSIONAL, STATE
Primary date: Sept. 12.
Primary date: Aug. 3.
Filing deadline: July 11.
Filing deadline: June 1.
Voter registration deadline: Aug. 23, Milwaukee;
Voter registration deadline: July 4.
Aug. 30, rest of state.
West Virginia
NON-PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY STATES
PRESIDENTIAL
Primary date: May 9.
Filing deadline: Feb. 5.
Alaska
Voter registration deadline: April 8.
Type of primary: Non-binding, closed presidential
preference poll; election of unpledged delegates; write-
Primary date: Aug. 22.
in votes allowed.
Filing deadline: June 1.
Candidate consent: Required.
Voter registration deadline: Mail, July 23; in per-
Number of delegates: 35 D (28 alternates)-26
son, Aug. 8.
congressional district delegates, nine at-large dele-
Number of delegates: 20 D (10 alternates)-selection
gates elected in primary; 18 R (18 alternates)-eight
procedure not yet decided; 12 R (12 alternates)- at-
congressional district delegates, 10 at-large delegates
large delegates chosen by state convention.
elected in primary.
1968 Democratic, Republican results: No candi-
Arizona
dates entered either party's preference poll. Uncom-
mitted slates were elected.
Primary date: Sept. 12.
Filing deadline: July 13.
CONGRESSIONAL, STATE
Voter registration deadline: July 11.
Number of delegates: 25 D (23 alternates)-19 con-
Primary date: May 9.
gressional district delegates chosen by district caucuses,
Filing deadline: Feb. 5.
six at-large delegates chosen by state convention: 18 R
Voter registration deadline: April 8.
(18 alternates)-eight congressional district delegates
Wisconsin
chosen by district conventions, 10 at-large delegates
chosen by state convention.
PRESIDENTIAL
Colorado
Primary date: April 4.
Primary date: Sept. 12.
Filing deadline: March 7.
Filing deadline: July 28.
Voter registration deadline: March 15, Milwaukee;
Voter registration deadline: Aug. 11.
March 22. rest of state.
Number of delegates: 36 D (28 alternates)-selection
Type of primary: Open presidential preference
procedure not yet decided; 20 R (20 alternates)-10 con-
poll. binding on delegates for one vote or until candi-
gressional district delegates chosen by district conventions,
date releases them or receives less than one-third of con-
10 at-large delegates chosen by state convention.
3 Tenn primary date (and consequently all other related dates) may be
min ed forward
Write-in cotes
COPYRIGHT 1972 CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC
Reproduction on whole or in port except by editorial clients
Jan. 22, 1972-PAGE 141
H-FU 3/10
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
3/14
Date: 3/7/22
To : AS
From :
L. Higby
Please talle to Jeb re:
the attached. dt's to
late for N.H. + Fla-make
swethir is done where oppropriate
in the other - fu 1 week
G mauth 3/8 + Jam 3/9
TALKING PAPER - ATTORNEY GENERAL
Has there been a mail campaign for Democratic write-ins in
Florida? No
Was there one in New Hampshire?
No
It's important that we build the importance of Democratic support
in the key primary states, and certainly in Indiana and some of the
other places where there is already considerable strength. There
should be a Democratic mailing in all primaries as a good investment
for the general.
HRH
3/7/72
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 7, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR H. R. HALDEMAN
FROM :
L. HIGBY
L
Chuck Colson called to report that he had talked with the President
last night and the President raised the following subjects:
1. 'Did we have a write-in campaign going in New Hampshire to
get Democrats to write in RN. Colson said he didn't know but he
would check. The President said that Colson should report to you
what he found out.
Colson found out that there was no write-in effort going. He had
told the AG that the President had requested this a month ago but
Colson guesses the AG decided it shouldn't be done.
2. The President then raised the question of whether or not we had
write-in efforts going in Florida and Wisconsin.
Colson checked on these and finds that we can't have write-ins in
Florida, and that in Wisconsin you can't write in but you can cross
over. He indicates, however that we probably don't want Democrats
for Nixon crossing over, but voting for candidates that will hurt the
Muskie vote.
3. The President said he told you that he wanted write-in efforts
on behalf of Democrats for Nixon in every state. Is there something
that should be done here?
The President also indicated to Colson that he wanted to see Sidlinger
today when Sidlinger was in seeing Colson. Colsm said he would work
this out with Parker.
you have the
answer to past
of then ISS
TALKING PAPER - ATTORNEY GENERAL
camfollow upul
Magrader. OK
Has there been a mail campaign for Democratic write-ins in
Florida?
Was there one in New Hampshire?
It's important that we build the importance of Democratic support
in the key primary states, and certainly in Indiana and some of the
other places where there is already considerable strength. There
should be a Democratic mailing in all primaries as a good investment
for the general.
HRH :pm
3/7/72
001
Two
315
TALKING PAPER - ATTORNEY GENERAL
Has there been a mail campaign for Democratic write-ins in
Florida?
Was there one in New Hampshire?
Report
It's important that we build the importance of Democratic support
due
in the key primary states, and certainly in Indiana and some of the
3/15
other places where there is already considerable strength. There
by
should be a Democratic mailing in all primaries as a good investment
For w/costs
for the general.
HRH:pm
3/7/72
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE. N.W
WASHINGTON. D. C. 20006
March 22, 1972
(202) 333-0920
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR:
THE HONORABLE JOHN N. MITCHELL
FROM:
JEB S. MAGRUDER
SUBJECT:
Operating Plan for the Michigan Primary
Michigan's Presidential Preference Primary will be held on May 16.
Each candidate who receives over 5% of the primary vote will re-
ceive a proportionate share of 48 delegate votes. Delegates are
bound until released.
General Background
In 1970 the population was 8,875,083, of which 4,059,807 were
registered to vote. Of the total population, 26.6% is considered
to be rural and 73.8% urban.
The SMSAs are as follows:
Ann Arbor
234,103
Bay City
117,339
Detroit
4,199,931
Flint
496,658
Grand Rapids
539,225
Jackson
143,274
Kalamazoo
201,550
Lansing
378,423
Muskegon-Muskegon Heights
157,426
Saginaw
219,743
Toledo, Ohio-Mich. (part)
118,479
Michigan has a Black population of 11%, which is centered in major
southeastern cities, particularly Detroit. Total foreign stock is
24% with a significant number of Italians, Poles, Germans, Swedes
and Eastern Europeans. Catholics comprise 27% of the population.
The state has 60% blue-collar employment and is very union oriented.
CONFIDENTIAL
- 2 -
Political Background
The 1970 U.S. Senate race in Michigan represented a continued upswing
by Democrats and a low point for Republicans. Lenore Romney only
polled 33% against incumbent Senator Philip Hart. Governor Milliken
fared better in 1970, but he still won only with 50.6% of the vote.
The 1970 election had little effect on the State Legislature. The
Senate is divided evenly between 19 Republicans and 19 Democrats.
Democrats control the House by a 58 to 52 margin.
Republicans control the Congressional delegation with a 12 to 7
margin over the Democrats. A list of the Congressional delegation
follows: (Tab A is a map showing Congressional districts.)
Congressmen
1968 Presidential Vote*
1970 %
RN
HHH
GCW
1st John Conyers (D)
86.9
16,655
134,437
5,743
2nd Marvin Esch (R)
62.6
85,262
74,021
18,158
3rd Gary E. Brown (R)
56.2
95,522
66,035
18,244
4th Edward Hutchinson (R)
61.9
90,599
55,196
20,422
5th Gerald Ford (R)
61.5
94,435
67,946
12,845
6th C. Chamberlain (R)
60.3
88,645
66,322
15,113
7th D. W. Riegle, Jr. (R)
70.3
72,814
80,373
26,620
8th James Harvey (R)
65.4
87,375
60,015
16,719
9th G. Vander Jagt (R)
64.6
100,798
61,539
14,763
10th E. A. Cederberg (R)
59.2
93,778
63,392
13,043
11th Philip Ruppe (R)
61.7
78,025
79,327
9,241
12th J. G. O'Hara (D)
76.9
63,837
115,903
29,634
13th Charles Diggs (D)
87.9
11,302
88,625
5,313
14th Lucien Nedzi (D)
70.0
59,930
96,737
20,717
15th William Ford (D)
80.0
59,930
93,045
27,022
16th John Dingell (D)
78.2
47,202
95,603
20,268
17th Martha Griffiths (D)
79.7
43,432
106,860
17,695
18th William Broomfield (R)
64.5
55,093
102,817
17,150
19th Jack McDonald (R)
58.5
100,114
84,889
23,238
* Districts subject to boundary
changes for reapportionment.
Figures are for '70 districts.
CONFIDENTIAL
- 3 -
Senator Griffin is up for re-election in 1972. His race was, until
recently, considered to be a very difficult, uphill battle. In the
last several months, his position has improved considerably.
Voting Analysis
In relation to the 1968 Presidential vote, the Republican Party fell
rather drastically throughout the state. In 1960, Kennedy received
1,687,269 (51%), Nixon received 1,620,428 (49%). In 1968, Humphrey
carried the state by 222,417, receiving 1,593,082 or 48%, Nixon received
1,370,665 or 42%, and Wallace received 331,968 or 10%. Nixon's
totals fell throughout the state in every county. Traditional
Republican areas in the mid-section of the state and in the south-
western part of the state gave Nixon much smaller margins than in
1960. Meanwhile, in Wayne County (Detroit), Nixon received only
26.2% of the vote to 63.2% for Humphrey and 10.2% for Wallace.
Humphrey received a plurality of 383,591 and 41% of his total vote
in Wayne County, In Detroit proper, Nixon received only 20% of
the vote to 71.2% for Humphrey. In Black districts of Detroit, Nixon
lost by as much as 96%.
Political Analysis
Due to the fact that the Democratic majorities in many of the major
counties were so large in 1968 and the overall trend in Michigan so
Democratic, the state originally looked very difficult for 1972.
However, more recent survey information indicates that the Michigan
election would be a close one. There are two areas on which the
Committee should concentrate its efforts. An attempt should be
made to reassert Republican loyalties in the out state areas. The other
tactic would be to seek votes on the fringes of the major cities. Many
of these voters are ethnic and quite concious of the social issues.
The Primary Election
Although McCloskey formally announced that he was terminating his
bid for the Presidential nomination, he did file for the Michigan
Primary on March 17th. At this time, McCloskey should not pose a
serious threat. Regardless, the Primary will give the Michigan
Committee an opportunity to organize for what will surely be a
close general election.
Our objectives in the primary are as follows:
1. Defeat McCloskey by an impressive margin.
2. Recruit key personnel and a cadre of volunteers in the
Primary so that we will have a strong Nixon organization
for the general election.
CONFIDENTIAL
- 4 -
Planned Activities
The Primary Campaign plan which follows was developed in coordination
with Jack Gibbs, Chairman of the Michigan Re-election Committee, in a
meeting on March 18, 1972. All Directors of relevent activities from
the Washington Committee were also present.
Four areas of activity are contemplated:
1. State organizational activity
2. Appearances in the state by pro-Administration speakers
3. Targeted volunteer commitment program
4. Voter bloc activities
The time schedule for the total operating plan is given in Tab B. The
individual elements are discussed in more detail below:
1. State Organizational Activity - The Michigan Committee for the Re-
election of the President will have headquarters for the primary. Key
campaign personnel will be recruited and tested during the primary cam-
paign. Deadlines for selection of the personnel will be established
by the Washington Committee. Volunteers will be recruited and utilized
in the Volunteer Commitment program. This will provide a cadre of
volunteers for the General Election.
Recommendation
That you approve the state organizational activity plan as outlined above.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
2. Appearance in the State by Pro-Administration Speakers - Well known
Administration speakers will visit Michigan to speak on behalf of the
President. A headquarters grand opening in Detroit is planned for
April 13. A speaker has not been scheduled for April 13th as yet.
The Washington Committee is presently awaiting speaking requests.
Therefore, a full schedule of speakers and events will be presented
at a later date.
CONFIDENTIAL
- 5 -
Recommendation
That you approve the utilization of surrogate speakers in Michigan.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
3. Targeted Volunteer Commitment Program - The Michigan Committee has
requested a direct mail program for this primary. It was further
recommended that the direct mail piece be part of a volunteer commit-
ment program similar to that used in Florida. A more detailed account
of the program can be found in Tab C.
Recommendation
That you approve the volunteer commitment program outlined in Tab C at
a cost of $56,100.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
4. Voter Bloc Activities - Due to the large number of ethnics, Blacks
and union workers, it was suggested that we send the appropriate voter
bloc directors to Michigan during the primary, in an effort to increase
the President's standing aLong these various groups. A more detailed
plan for the voter bloc activities will be presented at a later date.
CONFIDENTIAL
MICHIGAN
Districts Established August 28, 1964
Tab A
Map of Congressional Districts, Counties, and Selected Cities
(19 Districts)
quime
HOUSITON
INTORATOR
-
MARQUETTE
LUCE
BOSESIC
SAULT STE. MARIE
MARQUETTE
ALSES
CHIPPENS
-
11
SCHOOLCRAFT
PART
.
DICARSON
DELTA
,
0
*
0
CHEROYGAN
SCALE
o
10
20
30
40
to MILES
PRESOUR HAS
CHARLEVOIX
PART
MONT
ALPENA
ANTRIC
OFFICE
MORENCY
County with two or more Congressional Districts
LEELANAU
CRIND
KALKASKA
CRAWFORD
BENZIE
OSCORA
ALCOMA
TRAVERSE
WANSTEE
WESFORD
ROSCOMMON
OGERAW
IOSCO
10
ARENAC
BASON
LAKE
OSCEOLA
CLARE
CLAIMIN
HURDS
BAY
BAY CITY
RECOSTA
TRABELLA
MIOLAND
OCEANA
NEWATGO
TUSCOLA
8
SAGINAW
SAMILAC
SAGINAR
MONTCALM
GRATIOT
RUSKEGON
MUSKEGON
LAPEER
PORT
.
HURON
KENT
ICHIA
CLINTON
SHIAMASSEE
FLINT
OITAWA
18
1" CLAIR
GENESEE
.
GRAND RAPIDS
19
1
12
LANSING
ARM
******
3
PONTIAC
1
ALLEGAN
BARRY
CATOR
INCHAM
ROYAL OAK
LIVINGSTON
FERNDALE
9
BATTLE CREEK ANN ARBOR
DETROIT
YAN BURER
KALAMAZOO
.
WAYNE
JACKSON
BENTON HARBOR
WASHTENAW
RALAMAZOO
CALHOUR
1,13-17
JACKSON
BERRIER
2
CABS
ST 1054PM
NONDOE
BRANCH
WILSDALE
LENAWER
U.S. Department of Commerce
Bureau of the Census
-129-
Tab C
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, N W.
WASHINGTON D C 20006
(202) 333-0920
March 23, 1972
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR:
THE HONORABLE JOHN N. MITCHELL
THROUGH:
JEB S. MAGRUDER
FROM:
ROBERT MORGAN
SUBJECT:
Michigan Direct Mail Program
In the meeting on Saturday, March 18, 1972, with the Michigan
Committee for the Re-election of the President organization,
a direct mail effort was unanimously recommended. Since
Michigan does not have a registered voter list, a universal
list will be used. Therefore, the Commitment Program will
be similar to Wisconsin. Our experience in Wisconsin shows
that about 40% of the response is negative (the hard core
Democrat) -- this indicates some minor changes to the program.
It is recommended that 350,000 mailings be sent out in
Michigan to be arrayed in census tracts with the highest
incidence of Republican voters. This information will be
acquired with the assistance of Bob Teeter who will provide
the historical polling data.
The mailing will include a 14" letter discussing the merits
of the present Administration and will put emphasis on
volunteers. It will be worded so that a bipartisan
suggestion will be felt. A place on the volunteer card
will be left for contributors if the respondent does not
feel that he can actively participate. The mailing will
also include a brochure on the President's record and a
pre-addressed return envelope. The envelope will not have
postage prepaid but will require a stamp. We strongly feel
that this will cut down on the number of negative responses
while not hurting our volunteer effort that much.
CONFIDENTIAL
- 2 -
When the volunteer returns his card to the state headquarters,
he will receive a letter asking him to contact twenty friends
and get them committed to vote for President Nixon. The
volunteer will then call these twenty people on Election Day
to remind them to vote. The names, addresses and telephone
numbers of the committed voters would be returned on a
commitment form to state headquarters.
At the end of the program, a computer letter with a personalized
Presidential Commitment certificate will be sent from our data
center to each volunteer. The certificate will be suitable
for framing. The volunteers will be told that the Michigan
Committee looks forward to their help in the General Election
and that they will be kept informed of developments with
follow-up newsletters.
MICHIGAN PRIMARY BUDGET
350,000 Mailings
610,000 Voter
Contacts
Direct Mail
1st Mailing - 350,000 @ $142.20/M
(Window envelope, computer letter
with attached volunteer card, BRE
and brochure)
=
$50,000
Assume 2% volunteer response: (7,000)
1st Kit Mailing @ $250/M
=
1,750
Follow-up Certificates @ $250/M
=
1,750
3 Newsletters @ $125/M
=
2,600
Total
$56,100
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE. NW
WASHINGTON D. C. 20006
March 23, 1972
(202) 333-0920
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR: THE HONORABLE JOHN N. MITCHELL
FROM:
JEB S. MAGRUDER
SUBJECT:
Operating Plan for the Massachusetts Primary
The Massachusetts Primary election will be held on April 25. Ashbrook,
McCloskey and Nixon will be on the ballot. Under a new law, the
Presidential contender polling the most support in each of the state's
12 Congressional districts will gain control of the elected delegation
from the district, no matter how he fares in the statewide contest.
General Background
As of 1970, Massachusetts' population was 5,630,224. It will cast 14
electoral votes in 1972. Massachusetts' population has a large
percentage of foreign stock (40%) and few Blacks (3%). The ethnic
population consists of a significant number of French Canadians, Italians,
Irish, British, Poles and Russians. Much of the Black population is
concentrated in Boston (13% of Boston is Black). Catholics comprise
52% of the state's population.
Political Background
The total voting registration in Massachusetts is 2,628,581. There are
1,135,103 (43%) Democrats, 547,393 (21%) Republicans and 946,085 (36%)
Independents. Most of the Republican strength in Massachusetts is located
outside of Boston in the Commonwealth's 300 cities and towns. In general,
the state is regarded to be very liberal and Democratic.
However, Republicans do have one of the U.S. Senate seats (Brooke) and
the Governor's office (Sargent). The State Legislature is controlled
by the Democrats with a 178 to 62 ratio in the House and a 30 to 10
margin in the Senate. Democrats also outnumber Republicans in the
Congressional delegation by an 8 to 4 ratio. A listing of Congressmen
follows: (Tab A is a map of Massachusetts showing Congressional districts).
CONFIDENTIAL
--2-
1968 Presidential Vote*
Congressmen
1970 %
RN
HHH
GCW
1st Silvio O. Conte (R)
un.
71,702
110,313
8,546
2nd Edward Boland (D)
un.
56,157
114,530
9,000
3rd Robert Drinan (D) (3-way)
37.7
67,648
124,927
5,051
4th Harold Donohue (D)
54.2
70,871
127,882
5,725
5th F. Bradford Morse (R)
63.0
70,760
134,795
6,869
6th Michael Harrington (D)
61.7
79,134
128,141
6,734
7th T.H. MacDonald (D)
72.8
60,258
34,490
6,619
8th T.P. O'Neill (D)
un.
32,246
119,205
5,547
9th L.D. Hicks (D)
59.2
18,194
93,954
7,555
10th Margaret Heckler (R)
57.0
80,088
122,626
6,863
11th James Burke (D)
un,
63,338
139,835
10,066
12th Hastings Keith (R)
50.4
95,529
118,184
8,504
*Figures for old districts.
Reapportionment not completed.
Presidential Voting Trends
Nixon did not fare well in 1960 or 1968 in Massachusetts. In 1968,
Humphrey carried the state with 63% (1,469,218); Nixon received
33% (766,844); and Wallace took 4% (87,088). In 1960, Kennedy re-
ceived 60% (1,487,174) and Nixon, 40% (976,750).
In the 1968 election, Humphrey carried all twelve Congressional
districts and ten of the fourteen counties, Nixon carried four
relatively small counties: Nantucket, Dukes, Barnstable and
Franklin. In the larger counties, Humphrey received hugh pluralities.
Middlesex and Suffolk provided the Democratic candidate a 336,400
plurality.
The Primary Election
Although McCloskey and Ashbrook are on the ballot, polls show
that they do not present a serious challenge to the President.
(Tab B) Little activity will be required unless McCloskey's
residual forces surface in a strong effort to embarass the
President,
CONFIDENTIAL
-3-
Planned Activities
The Primary campaign plan which follows was developed in coordination
with representatives of Secretary Volpe, Secretary Richardson, Senator
Brooke, Governor Sargent and Bob Hahn, state G.O.P. chairman, The
recommendations were discussed in a meeting on March 20, which was
attended by the aforementioned parties and Paul Cronin who will act as
coordinator. All directors of relevant activities at the Washington-
based Committee were also in attendance.
Four areas of activity are contemplated:
1. State Organizational Activities
An effort will be made to utilize the personal political organizations
of Volpe, Richardson, Brooke and Sargent in the Republican Primary.
All campaign activity will be coordinated through Bob Hahn of the
State Republican Party with the help of Paul Cronin. Pat Hutar is
scheduled to work with Paul Cronin in the recruitment of volunteers
from the Republican Women's Federation.
Recommendation
That you approve the state organizational activities as described above.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
2. Appearance in the State by Pro-Administration Speakers
It was recommended that we use Administration spokesmen in Massachusetts
in a fashion that would maximize media coverage. At this time we are
awaiting the determination of appropriate events,
Recommendation
That you approve the use of surrogate speakers in Massachusetts.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
CONFIDENTIAL
- 4 -
3. Targeted Direct Mail
At the suggestion of the various representatives of Massachusetts officials,
a direct mail program targeted to 10,000 Republican Town Committee
members has been developed. The total mailing ensemble will include
a personalized letter, a window envelope, and a Re-elect the President
brochure. The letter will be signed by Senator Brooke, Governor Sargent,
Secretary Volpe, and Secretary Richardson. The letter will ask the
committee member for the following:
1. Accept the responsibility for a get-out-the-vote program
for President Nixon in the Primary.
2. Call 20 fellow Republicans to show support for the President
and to vote in the Primary on April 25.
Recommendation
That you approve. the direct mail plans as outlined above, at a cost of $2,500.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
4. Youth Campaign Activities
Over 200 of the young people who were involved in our New Hampshire
campaign reside in Massachusetts. They will be active in attending
Republican events and preparing for mock elections on the Massachusetts
campuses.
Recommendation
That you approve of the youth campaign activities outlined above.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
CONFIDENTIAL
Map of Congressional Districts and Counties
(12 Districts)
ESSEX
FRANKLIN
5
all
MIDDLESER
8
0
BERKSHIRE
WORCESTER
HAMPSHIRE
BOSTON
-
NORFOLK
HAMPDEN
1
-123-
10
PLYMOUTH
Districts ESTABLISHED July 20, 1967
12
BRISTOL
WARNSTABLE
DUKES
County with two or more Congressional Districts
52rs
MANTUCKET
U.S. Department of Commerce
Tab A
Bureau of the Census
L/VI
Tab B
STATE REPUBLICANT AND INDEPENDENTS, PRESIDENT NIXON AGAIN OUTPOLLED
HIS TWO CHALLENGING REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMEN:
HOW BAY STATE REPUBLICANS WOULD VOTE --
QUESTIONS VOTERS WERE ASKED:
"I'm going to reed you the names of the people the 810 listed 83 cendidates in the Messa-
checells Repullican Presidential Frimary on April 2511. Please listen carefully and foll me
"Suppose the candidates were
which one YOU would vote for if that primary were being held today. If the Massachusetts
Foul McClaskey and Richard Niz-
Republican primary election for President were being held today end the condidates were
on. Then which one would you
John Ashbreet, Paul McCleskey and Richard Nison which one would you voto for?"
vote for?"
NIXON
MeCLOSKEY %
DEGIOBER
NIXON
CONDECTION %
PERCENTAGE
BASE
TOTAL MASS. VOTERS MANNING
10 VOTE IN MASS. MUSLICAN
%
% 2
%
%
%
PRESIDENTIAL PREMARY
February, 1972
86
6
6
88
7
5
(577)
COUNTY
Esser
83
9
4
&
Es
10
6
( 12)
DB
5
3
4
81
6
3
(102)
Middlesex
06
7
1
6
B7
9
4
(129)
85
7
2
5
86
10
4
115)
Watcher
18
3
0
Y
90
2
8
66)
81
2
I
6
so
4
6
83)
TOUTICAL PARTY (REGISTRATION)
Republican
88
4
I
7
70
5
5
(401)
Inde, of-rol registered 10 voto yot
D3
10
3
4
06
11
3
(159)
NIXON
MCCLOSKEY
ASHBROOK
CECIDEGNA
NIXON
MCCLOSKEY
UNDECIDED
PERCENTAGE
BASE
TONTICAL OUTLOCK
Liberal
73
3
3
79
19
2
(88)
16
(203)
92
3
I
/,
93
4
3
Conservative
4
I
7
18
in
&
(224)
88
SEX
&
90
8
2
(307)
19
2
3
Men
8
07
6
7
(263)
Weaten
85
5
2
AGE
76
13
5
6
79
14
7
( 87)
Under 30 years
89
1,
I
4
to
8
3
(150)
30 is 44 your
91
I
4
31
6
3
(214)
4
45 to 8 y.**
05
3
1
11
89
4
7
(117)
25 your and GYOT
ANNUAL INCOME
S
i
11
23
11
6
E3)
79
8
83
13
4
54)
83
6
2
I
3
85
3
2
( 85)
94
2
$7000-2009
88
6
2
4
[9
8
3
(142)
7
0
4
89
6
E
(137)
89
$16,000 0.00
PROCEDICANS WHO VOTED IN
87
4
in
6
so
$
5
(332)
753 PRESIDENTIAL HUMANY
THE FOLL COMPLETED BY THE PACKER ELSTAPCH CORPORATION FOR THE
my AREP :: PRIMPONS OF THE PARTICIPANS G THE
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE. N.W.
WASHINGTON. D. C. 20006
(202) 333-0920
March 21, 1972
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR: THE HONORABLE JOHN N. MITCHELL
SUBJECT:
Operating Plan for the Oregon Primary
The Oregon Primary election will be held on May 23, The
President's name as well as those of Ashbrook and McCloskey
are on the ballot by law. Traditionally, Oregon has been one
of the most important primaries. This year should prove to be
no exception as all of the Democratic candidates, including
Senator Kennedy, will have their names on the ballot.
General Background
As of 1970, Oregon's population was 2,110,810: The population
is clustered in a line that runs from Portland through Salem
to Eugene. Most of the remaining parts of the State are sparsely
populated.
Oregon is a state virtually all white and all Protestant. The
Black population totals only 1%. Foreign stock is 17%; however,
much of this foreign stock is Canadian and English and really
not ethnic in the political-ethnic sense.
There were 955,459 registered voters in Oregon as of 1970.
Republican registrants numbered 410,693 (43%). The Democratic
Party had 521,662 (54.6%) registered voters. All other voters totaled
23,104 (2.4%).
Political Background
The Republican Party in Oregon has had a relatively successful
record. In the last 25 years, Republicans lost the Governor's chair
only once. The Democrats did win the U.S. Senate races in 1954,
1956, 1960 and 1962. More recently, however, Republicans regained
the Senate seats with the election of Senator Hatfield in 1966 and
Senator Packwood in 1968. The State Legislature is split with the
Democrats controlling the Senate 16 to 14, and the Republicans
controlling the House 34 to 26.
CONFIDENTIAL
-2-
The four Congressional seats are divided evenly between Democrats
and Republicans. A brief description of the Congressional Districts
follows. (Tab A)
1st District - Republican - Wendall Wyatt - Most of the district's
population is in the Portland metropolitan area. Congressman Wyatt
has proven to be quite popular as he received 72% of the vote in
1970.
2nd District - Democrat - Al Ullman - This district includes the
sparsely populated eastern two-thirds of the state.
3rd District - Democrat - Edith Green - This district includes most'
of the city of Portland and the eastern suburbs.
4th District - Republican - John Dellenback - This district has
the southwest corner of the state, which includes the University of
Oregon in Eugene. As the 4th has alternated between Democratic
and Republican Congressmen, it would be considered a marginal seat.
Even though Republicans won the last two U.S. Senate races, there
certainly was not a strong Republican showing. Hatfield won with
only 51.7% of the vote and Packwood received even less, 50.2%.
Senator Hatfield has announced that he is running for re-election
in 1972. Governor McCall has indicated that he will not run against
Hatfield in the primary. On the Democratic side, former Senator
Wayne Morse and several others are presently seeking the nomination.
U.S. Representative Edith Green has decided not to run.
The state of Republican politics in Oregon is far from good. The
relationship between Governor McCall and Senator Hatfield is not
harmonious. The Republican Party is weak and poorly organized.
In addition, the Party has a splinter right-wing faction controlling
several counties. The Committee for the Re-Election of the President
should be aware of these problems in both planning and implementation
of programs.
Presidential Voting Statistics
Oregon has given Nixon a good vote in both 1960 and 1968 primaries
and General Elections. In the 1960 Republican Primary, Nixon ran
CONFIDENTIAL
-3-
as the only candidate and received 211,276 (93%) of the 227,033
votes cast. In the 1968 Republican Primary, Nixon again ran as
the only candidate on the ballot and received 203,037 (65%) of
312,159 votes cast. The drop-off in percentage was due to the
increased primary activity and the write-in campaigns staged.
In Oregon, Nixon won rather handily in the 1968 General Election,
receiving 49.8% of the vote (408,433) to Humphrey's 43.8% (358,866)
to Wallace's 6.1% (49,683). The Nixon vote margin was 116 votes
less than the total Wallace and Humphrey votes combined. Nixon's
strongest raw vote counties were as follows:
1. Multnomah
106,832
2. Lane
39,563
3. Washington
34,105
4. Clackamas
32,363
5. Marion
30,417
These five counties accounted for 243,279 Nixon votes of his state
total of 408,433 and represented 59.5% of his' state total.
Multnomah, the county in which Portland is, is by far the largest
county and gave Nixon 26.1% of his state total. This county,
however, was carried by Humphrey, giving the Democratic candidate
a plurality of 17,820. It is the only county of the five largest
counties which gave a plurality to the Democratic candidate.
The five counties which gave Nixon the largest raw vote plurality
are as follows:
County
Nixon Percentage
Plurality
Washington
57.0
11,162
Marion
54.8
8,090
Jackson
56.2
6,863
Benton
61.3
5,116
Lane
49.1
5,042
36,273 - 73.1% of
total plurality
Only six counties in the state were carried by Humphrey. These
counties form a line for the most part around the very northern and
CONFIDENTIAL
-4-
and western portions of the state, Multnomah gave Humphrey his
largest plurality of 17,820. After that, Coos gave him a plurality
of 2,654; Columbia, 1,856; Clatsop, 433; Tillamook, 348; and Wasco,
76. Only in the first three counties mentioned did Humphrey receive
more than 50% of the vote, and only in Coos and Columbia did
Nixon receive less than 40% of the vote.
Political Analysis
Preliminary polling information indicates that the most important
issues in Oregon are:
1. Economy
2. Unemployment (The poll was taken during the dock strike.)
3. Ecology
The survey also shows that Senator Packwood and Governor McCall have
high approval ratings. Senator Hatfield's approval rating is much
lower, and he may have trouble in the General Election.
The President's approval rating is substantially lower than his
national average. In particular, the President is not receiving
the normal Democratic support. This, combined with the disorganization
of the Republican Party, suggests that Oregon cannot be considered a
solid state for 1972.
The Primary Election
Due to recent developments with the McCloskey and Ashbrook campaigns,
the President will probably not be seriously challenged in the Oregon
Primary. However, we should be aware of the possibility of residual
Ashbrook or McCloskey forces surfacing in an attempt to embarrass the
President.
Our objectives in the primary are as follows:
1. Defeat any Republican opposition by an impressive margin.
2. Recruit key personnel in the primary so that we will have a
strong Nixon organization in the General Election. This is
particularly critical in light of the problems within the
Republican Party in Oregon.
CONFIDENTIAL
-5-
Planned Activities
The primary campaign plan which follows was developed in coordina-
tion with the Oregon Committee for the Re-Election of the President.
The recommendations were discussed in a meeting on March 4, 1972,
attended by the Oregon Committee for the Re-Election of the Presi-
dent chairman, Congressman Wendall Wyatt, and the executive
director, Warne Nunn. All directors of the relevant activities
from the Washington Committee were also present.
Five areas of activity are contemplated:
1. State Organizational Activity
2. Appearance in the State by Pro-Administration Speakers
3. Targeted Telephone Operation
4. Contingent Plan for Radio Advertising
5. Youth Campaign Activity
The time schedule for the total operating plan is given in Tab B.
The individual elements are discussed in more detail below:
1. State Organizational Activity
The Oregon Committee for the Re-Election of the President has
established a headquarters for the primary, but they do not plan
store front headquarters or high profile headquarters activity as
there have been several headquarter bombings in Oregon. The
primary should afford an opportunity to recruit key personnel for
the General Election. Pat Hutar is scheduled to work with the
Committee on establishing a volunteer program for the state. Dead-
lines for selection of key personnel will be established by the
Washington Committee and progress reports will be required.
Recommendation
That you approve the state organizational activities as described above.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
CONFIDENTIAL
-6-
2. Appearance in the State by Pro-Administration Speakers
As in other primary states, well-known pro-Administration speakers
will visit the state on behalf of the President. At the request
of the Oregon Committee, the state will not be flooded with
speakers. No rally activity is planned at this time. If Governor
McCall, Senator Hatfield and Senator Packwood will participate,
a joint press conference to endorse the President will be scheduled.
The list of speakers scheduled up to this time follows:
Date
Event
Speaker
February 25
Republican Party Dorchester
Sec. Richardson
Conference, Lincoln City
April 15-25
Girl Scout Council, Fund
(Invitation Pending)
Raising Event
May 5
Oregon Cattlemen's Association, Sec. Butz
Pendleton
(Invitation Pending)
May 6
Ad-Man of the Year Banquet,
Mr. Klein
Portland
(Invitation Pending)
May 10
Oregon Federation of
Sec. Butz
Republican Women, Medford
(Invitation Pending)
Date Open:
Early May
Republican State Central
Senator Goldwater
Committee, Fund Raising
(Invitation Pending)
Dinner, Portland
-
Lane County Republican
Sec. Romney
Central Committee, Fund
Sec. Peterson
Raising Dinner, Eugene
Recommendation
That you approve the program for surrogate speakers as outlined above.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
CONFIDENTIAL
-7-
3. Targeted Telephone Operation
The Oregon Committee expressed an interest in establishing a tele-
phone operation in four areas of the Willamette Valley: Portland,
Salem, Corvallis and Eugene. Due to the limited opposition in the
Oregon Primary and telephone operation commitments in other states,
we do not feel that it is practical to use a targeted telephone
operation in the Oregon Primary.
Recommendation
That you agree that we should not use a targeted telephone operation.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
4. Contingent Plan for Radio or Newspaper Advertising
In the event that McCloskey or Ashbrook does begin to actively
organize and campaign, a contingent plan will be necessary. Radio
or newspaper advertising would serve as the most practical plan
because of the short lead time required. The contingent radio or
newspaper plan developed would be concentrated in the area of Salem,
Portland, Eugene, Corvallis and Kalmath Falls. This advertising
would run for a maximum of four weeks at a cost of $23,000.
Recommendation
That you approve the contingent plan for radio or newspaper advertising.
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
5. Youth Campaign Activity
The youth campaign now has a field man, Ted Wigger, in Oregon. He will
be working with the state organization in an attempt to organize regis-
stration drives and to prepare for mock elections on Oregon campuses.
Recommendation
Approve
Disapprove
Comment
CONFIDENTIAL
Map of Congressional Districts, Counties, and Selected Cities
(4 Districts)
CLATSOP
COLUMBIA
3
Willomette
PENDLETON
River
PORTLAND
1
WASHINGTON
WALLOWA
HOOD
UMATILLA
MUL TNOMAH
RIVER
TILLAMOOK
Willamette River
SHERMAN
GILLIAM
MORROW
UNION
YAMHILL
CLACKAMAS
WASCO
*
SALEM
POLK
MARION
BAKER
CORVALLIS
WHEELER
©
JEFFERSON
LINCOLN
BENTON
LINN
GRANT
2
CROCK
EUGENE
DESCHUTES
LANE
MALHEUR
coos
DOUGLAS
HARNEY
LAKE
KLAMATH
CURRY
JOSEPHINE
JACKSON
KLAMATH FALLS
U.S. Department of Commerce
Bureau of the Census
COMMITTEE FOR THE RE-ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT
MEMORANDUM
CONFIDENTIAL
TO:
Mr. Peter H. Dailey & Mr. Phillip Joanou
Copy to:
FROM: Clifford A. Miller
Jeb S. Magruder
DATE: March 27, 1972
As we have discussed, I think it would be helpful if the
strategy committee could review at one of its future meetings
the television, radio, newspaper and direct mail being used
in the primary states by the major opposition candidates --
Muskie, Humphrey, Jackson, Lindsay, Wallace and McGovern.
If it is possible, the committee should examine the actual
product -- the film, tape, tear sheet, or whatever -- as
opposed to receiving a verbal or written. report. In this
way, the strategy group can have a very specific idea of the
type and flavor of impressions being received by the voters.
For those of us not out in the field it would be useful to
evaluate the objectives and techniques being used by the
opposition at this early date and analyze the changes in media
strategy from primary to primary.
Please call me if you would like to discuss this at further
length.
CAM
bcc: Mr. John N. Mitchell
Mr. Gordon Strachan