Conversation 099-012

Transcript (AI-Generated)

This transcript was generated automatically by AI and has not been reviewed for accuracy. Do not cite this transcript as authoritative. Consult the Finding Aid above for verified information.

These are the kind of problems that you get when people say, well, we don't know what the president's domestic accomplishments have been.

So we're going to deal here mostly with hard facts, mostly with accomplishments.

And you'll see that they're not only presidential accomplishments, but also congressional accomplishments.

So there's something for everybody.

I'd like to talk very quickly about the three in this order.

Exploiting, crime, and not employment.

I can draw your attention to the one-armed employee who has had a few facts on the economy, because there have been several aspects of the economy growth.

I'm sure you're fully aware of all the facts that have been verified that you can use.

And of course, this business of the inflation change is where I have some more numbers out on Friday.

When those come out, we'll update this.

And then you'll receive an updated version of some of these facts.

And now, you can confidently say the rate of inflation has been stopped cold.

It has zero increase.

New prices have leveled off.

Fruit and vegetable prices have declined.

Cost of consumer services has risen only by 0.2% for the second consecutive month.

The inflation rate since the freeze, 2.8%, as you see in the graph at the bottom.

But the really important number in this whole thing is under the heading wages, and it's the second line.

Real earnings for workers from 1970 to the present has been 6%.

Those are real in-pocket gains after inflation has taken half of it, so that the worker now gets that dollar to have for the first time since 1966.

That's the other list for five years.

Workers thought they were getting wage increases.

They didn't.

Their wage increases were totally eaten up by price increases.

Now, by raising up our program to find a degree, million American workers have begun to get off the treadmill and make some progress.

Now, of course, we'll have various people, so many workers, that say, we did better than that, and that this is an act, but this shows that when it shows a 6% increase, it deters real, suspendable earnings.

It's quite a good thing to use if you're talking to an audience that can take advantage of it.

Now, just to give you an example, the graph at the bottom of the page is lifted right out of the budget documents.

Do you remember when the budget came out of this anywhere?

It was a book of charts called Budget Highlights.

I encourage you all to use this book.

Obviously it spoke as of January.

We'll try and update a lot of the numbers that are in here.

But the graph you see at the bottom is this graph out of the budget highlights, updated to today.

And you see the trend in the consumer price index, which is a very favorable trend.

It's something that we encourage you to use to talk about.

Let's turn quickly to the vaccine on crime.

The top of the number one paragraph deals with the crime rate globally in cities across the country, the national crime rate and the D.C. crime rate.

The reason the D.C. crime rate is important is because this city is the only one in which the administration has direct linkage.

In all the other cities across the country, we send the money out, but it's a question of global administration, global control, local application of the money.

Here in D.C., this administration, with the help of Congress and various reforms that have been passed, has direct linkage and has proved on a model city basis that you can achieve a net reduction in the crime rate.

In fact, in the district, of course, the crime rate has been cut in half since this administration came into office.

But over a third of our major cities in the United States have expressed net decreases in their local crime rates, and the national crime rate is the lowest since six years.

So when you hear this business about this law and order administration not getting themselves, here are the facts to put that falling line up.

The dollars that Congress has appropriated, I think, speak as loud as any other single factor.

With the President's leadership, the amount of federal dollars applied to the crime problem in the United States has gone from $22 million in three years under the previous administration to $1.5 billion in three years under this administration.

In other words, $22 million against $1,500 million under the previous administration.

You make that point, it's altogether valid, but you invite your opponent to point out that there were only a few months remaining in the fiscal year just before the end of the Johnson administration in which the 22 million dollars could have been spent.

That's a dangerous fact.

Well, I think the important point here, Congressman Powell, is that there was no leadership in the Johnson administration

That there wasn't any reason why this kind of a program couldn't have been applied to meet the problem three years before.

But they fiddled around until the very end of that administration, before they got this program, with very strong Republican support, I might say, in the Congress.

And that this administration and this Congress have very vigorously attacked this problem during the first three years of this administration.

Now, I agree with your point, but you can take appropriations outside of the LEA as a specific program, and ask them, well, did you get the same kind of regulations?

I agree, John.

In a similar context,

I think it suggests that you have to be careful with the phrase you often use to speak of the crime rate.

You just made a classic mistake.

You said that the crime rate was lowest for six years.

That is not correct.

I think that's what I said, but if I didn't, I'd stand corrected.

What we're talking about here always is increase and decrease.

We have expressed net increase in the district of Colonia and in a third of the cities around the country nationally.

We're still dealing with a net increase rate.

And that increased rate is below what you can see here.

It's basically like a budget.

So I completely press that as the best example because for the first month, six years, we had no increase in the adjustment basis of the CDI.

So the price has changed.

We're always talking about the rate of increase, whether inflation has gone up or down, and as population increases, it's inevitable that crime has gone up, but it's the rate of increase of crime that we're always talking about.

If we can slow that down, we're gaining on the problem.

This district, let me say, is a flat, cut in half of crime area, whereas the major crimes are running at 200.

It wasn't 200, it was 22.

It's now less than 100.

It's not that bad.

Summarize that the bottom of that vaccine are three important pieces of legislation that this Congress has enacted as the President's request.

The third vaccine are unemployment.

I might say generically that as a group I promise you that there will be two ways of it.

Talking about unemployment.

One is to say, well, unemployment is as bad a problem as the opposition says it is, and you can break it down demographically.

And there is some material on this back sheet that could take that approach.

Do you feel that the best approach to take in talking about unemployment is to say, unemployment remains a problem?

If it is the way that we are, yes, that's right.

With the results that we have,

We're doing everything we know how to do to solve the problem.

We're optimistic that we're going to make even greater gains.

The gains that we have made are extraordinary considering the great turnaround that we've had in this country from a defense and war economy to a peacetime economy.

Many, many, many civilian jobs have been created in the fact that you get to those numbers.

And you can talk either about employment, where the numbers are very, very good, or unemployment, where the numbers still aren't good enough.

And you can run against unemployment so speedy by saying, we're not satisfied, it's so intense for this country, we're doing everything we know how to do, we're panning ourselves, we're going to get better results in the future, and so you're not put in the position of apologizing for such and such a ring of unemployment in particular.

...moment of time.

This summarizes, in fact, it summarizes the employment side, it summarizes the success that are being figured out on the unemployment side, and it's intended to be a foundation for whatever statistic of that is going to earn a few times.

Well, you'll be seeing more of these fact sheets in the very short run.

If you have suggestions for topics, or if you have suggestions for improvements, we think we have.

Our criteria are that we give you only provable facts, and that we keep it on one page.

But beyond that, we're wide open.

These are very excellent, Mr. President, and there'll be more.

We'll get some better rhetoric and so on.

But they're very beneficial if you're going out to the mountains.

You can have them available and use them.

But I suggest a honey plant.

John Connolly, by the street, is on the page.

I mean, I wouldn't get a call from you.

First, I think you can talk about the possibility that since the new economic policy and all this, that a million, whatever it is, a million men have jobs.

Second, with regard to what I'm finding among breadwinners and so forth, I think it's as low as it has been in the last five years.

I mean, the problem is that we come from a labor market where people have to come out of the armed services and out of defense lines, which should always be made available.

et cetera.

And obviously, at least in the United States of America.

Then I would, I also would, I'm sorry if I leave you.

There's those of you who can't do this in some areas, and I think you should.

It's John Collins saying that they know.

Every in a large city, you might just pick up your newspaper and take along the help wanted ads.

Whether it's Los Angeles, Miami, New York, Nebraska, you'll find pages and pages of help wanted ads from the same unemployment.

And I think you should make the point that part of the unemployment problem, not all part of the unemployment problem, is that there's this attitude of our people.

They will not take a job if they consider their job to be meaningful.

And this should not be the case.

Their job doesn't make any sense.

They have help wanted at a very, very high level, and on a fundamentally high level.

Perhaps some of it starts with demagoguery, but it's their point of view.

And that also gets you into the welfare thing.

Mr. President, you may be interested that we're putting these fact sheets into a loose-loop binder with indexed divisions of our stakeholders, and having them available at our Kennedy's Congress.

Thank you very much.

Well, let's see.

We have a brief report from the Senate House today.

Well, in the House of Representatives, we have another rather slow week this week.

It's anticipated, however, that revenue sharing will get a rule probably next week sometime, and it'll be on the floor of the House either in the week of the 15th, which is a week from Monday, or the 27th, which is the following week.

I think it will pass the House with a very substantial margin.

We also have for the Rules Committee now, and the rule probably will be granted, the minimum wage legislation.

The committee reported out, typically in that committee, very bad legislation.

It not only goes to two dollars immediately, but it includes about five extra provisions for extended coverage, all of which are bad.

There's one that is a very definite protectionist provision,

It's our strategy to come up with a substitute.

John Irwin Board will offer the substitute.

It calls for a straight $2 package from Greece, and it knocks out all of the extended coverage, including the protectionist provision.

It does, however, add a provision which we think is very desirable for youth differential.

The argument always is minimum wage increases knock out the job opportunities for younger people.

We allegedly have in the law now a use differential, but it is rather meaningless.

The Erlenborn substitute will have a really beneficial use differential.

Now, we've been trying to get John Erlenborn to reduce his $2 figure, but John's stuck with it.

John Anderson's going to offer an amendment to the substitute to take the increase from $1.60 to $1.80,

And then 12 months later, we've always done before, whenever we've had increases in weight, we've fixed it in rather than going to the top figure meeting.

Now we've taken a whip check to see whether our members would support John Anderson's substitute, or the amendments to the Ireland Board's substitute.

The WIP check is encouraging, but certainly it means we've got some work to do if we're going to get the amendment to prevail.

We are negotiating with some friends on the other side, trying to convince them that the Anderson amendment is desirable.

It'll be a very close vote on that.

I would strongly urge you to just be sure you have time for a veto.

I think there are many of us, including myself, if we are unsuccessful in our substitute or hand as an amendment, many of us will vote against the committee bill.

It's really bad legislation.

I guess the sound of the money has gone to my forehead.

I just wanted to say it before you did.

But those two are the major proposals that will come before the House prior to Memorial Day weekend recess.

After that, we hope to have the first, probably the only, reorganization proposal, the one that Chef Hollowfield has been working quite conscientiously on.

If we can get the community development

The rest of them are so controversial, I don't think they're going to be done in 1972.

Health insurance...

John Burns reported to me yesterday that he thinks it's helpful for humanity action in 1972.

John was optimistic about some action in private pension field in 1972.

On the House side at least, I can't speak for the Senate, but John Burns thinks there is a chance on the House side for such action.

Other than

I would say that...

The Committee on Appropriations is about ready to move on a number of those appropriation bills, and I told on the Senate side that we're in pretty good shape once we get them over there.

So this may move more rapidly than is apparent at this time.

We have the authorization bill for...

So, that will come to the floor of the House publicly after Memorial Day.

After those rules committees

The time is getting short.

Perhaps the military situation will be clarified.

I don't think this will come to the floor of the House before the 1st of June.

I think that will either be way ahead or we'll be in trouble.

So I think they're putting in a hurry on our part to expedite the districts that are killed.

Could I suggest one thing to the leaders and so forth that have these problems with regard to the war and the resolution and so forth and so on?

At this critical point, at this critical point, with, as you know,

The negotiating craft as well as a time of decision for South Vietnam and for the Congress to undercut the President would in my view completely destroy our negotiating position and would lead to

It would destroy the president's negotiating position, and the Congress would have to take responsibility for the destruction of the negotiating position at this point in time.

The enemy is just looking for that.

And we've taken a strong hand.

Actually, they followed the ORC poll, but they held it in Congress.

The Congress takes the position.

It will undercut the negotiations.

It will give the enemy enormous courage.

It could be the critical factor in destroying...

And we did the South Vietnamese will to recession.

So, I think we can put it right on the line.

We had fun last week.

Our fellow asked us about the...

I think we'll be in as good shape as the House in the future if we get something like that.

That's about where we are legislatively in the House.

But I also suggest that both the House and Senate, despite the fact that they do not expect to get results, keep hammering for the bus and monitoring, keep hammering for it, because that will be a critical issue as time goes on.

I might make a comment on that, but...

We are continuing to try and get people to sign the discharge petition, and I know four or five who are about to do it, and will sometime this week, once you get over that 170 mark in the whole class, so it starts to go on its own.

We're also opening negotiations with Bill Comer to see if we can't get the full committee to...

take away from the House Committee on Education under that legislation, which they are obviously not going to act on.

I can't really report on it, except that there's nothing to report anyway, about what happened yesterday in that stupid session.

I mentioned a lot in the room here, we're sorry to hear about Senator Fulbright's setback earlier in the week when he only got 15 votes, and then Secretary of State, he had all the Republicans except one voting with us on that.

That was the Canadian courts of the fight on the State of Portland USA authorization bill, which is now on the floor.

And the painting business is the amendment by John Stennis to strike out what's referred to as the church's language in the bill, reported by the committee, which would end all U.S. function for all military operations in Indochina by this year.

With the support of George Aiken, John Cooper and others, right now, frankly, we think we've got the votes to win the Senate.

Unfortunately, I expect the vote to be a little closer than I would like to see, but I think we've got the votes.

We're going to try to get us to a vote this week.

If we could get back to a boat, I think we're then going to be faced, however, with the ministry of America over here, which will be offered by Byrd this week, if we get that far, or by the ministry next week.

Once we get by the end-of-war boats, I think we'll quickly wind up at the State Department-USI opposition bill, and then the next thing on the calendar

We're going to start with John on that today, but I think that's a good change, and it's good for both.

Well, there's one thing that I should have mentioned.

You know the Democrats had a caucus about ten days ago, and after a very bloody two-day fast, they came up with a directive to Dr. Martin, chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, to report out legislation that would conform to their...

Well, I've been in California for about four days.

I didn't talk to Doc.

I did talk to him just before I left.

He was then trying to get us around in some way or other.

But it didn't sort of affect me how he was going to do it.

You're fine with that?

Wayne Hayes, who's not often our ally, and we can say when he is, he's fine.

...told me that he was going to do everything he could to thwart any action here at any time.

He's a pretty agile, imaginative fellow when he feels that way.

So maybe we've got an ally that can help us, even though most of us don't like what he does often. ...

Well, I have nothing to add to that.

I think that in this case,

I understand they will offer the backfield amendment, whether that fixes the date.

I'm not taking pictures a day, but as far as I'm concerned, it's like some of the other days that I used to go to New York office.

It's like, I always ask them to fix a date.

So I don't understand the conditions that might be approved.

I'm not sure about that.

But certainly we have to thank Russia for the one-sided vote the other day on the 27th of 15th.

And that's all.

And incidentally, Russia's stock is not going up very high, as I see it, either in the economy store or within public.

And unless you bring back some pretty good proposals from Moscow, or...

I think they can send it to Kenya.

I hope they realize that.

The supplement was in that state authorization bill, which took them out.

But I didn't find too many of that bill, and I was torn.

I had to constantly take care of them, and...

When they get into concerts, and that was probably the easiest way to get them out, they might come out with a pretty good bail time.

A couple days in front of the bowl.

Thank you.

Yesterday, you sent me a message of default action.

I wound up recommending the absentees, but... You're doing such a good job in comparison to those who are not absentees.

I'd ask you to check it out if you want.

Thank you.

Mr. President, I hope you will encourage, keep encouraging the Vice President to take off and do nothing in Congress.

I think I was very encouraged by the things the report is telling me.

This is a good way to attack on this weapon.

How is that?

I don't think he needs to be encouraged.

Mr President, along the lines of Senator Aiken's statement, it seems to me to be a good thing if the people of the country knew that Russia is still supplying the North Vietnamese people during this offensive.

With the figures which the Admiral gave us as the number of ships that are in those harbors,

I have the feeling that for some reason other people in the country think that because we bombed Taichung once, then maybe once, that the Russians have backed away from serving us.

Are you suggesting, George, that I should not go to Russia?

No.

I'm asking you just as an opinion.

I don't know why this is happening.

I think your point is that you go, but of course the plan is still off.

You're sure that you'll go.

The air talk, depending on the contractor, is not as benign as it might be.

Maybe it's not as much as it ought to be.

Why don't you say something about that?

Not enough.

It's in the front of me right now, and there is a change, I think, in the public sentiment towards voting.

Yes, that's me.

But here's one other suggestion.

Two weeks ago, some of the New York Times had a story, you know, on page 16 or 18 or somewhere, showing how the homeowners in South Vietnam were fighting back.

And even among that, we're joining them.

And I think you know that, but the Catholics just don't want that sort of contact.

And it seems to me that, I don't know how much progress has been made, but I'm glad to be a good sign for Moritz.

It's one of the reasons that this house being banned would only speed up some of those things, and get some publicity out of it.

I think they have set it up, George.

Yes, but your search is right, it doesn't get out of it.

You have all the publicity coming out of Saigon.

Correct.

Well, we don't have to do this.

I wanted to say one thing, that you will have to keep in confidence until 11 o'clock, because the announcement will not be made until then.

But I think I should share with the leaders my thoughts on the FBI.

And you know I'm doing something somewhat unprecedented.

Senator Pearson.

which I don't believe in the exceptions.

I'm excited that I will deliver the village to the ruler tomorrow morning.

It'll be a break in ten minutes, but I've got them.

So, I'm sure there's 380 presidents, but the president ought to be able to do it rather than having to take on this in the office.

And Dr.

Latch, it's a very simple subject.

As a ceremony, Dr.

Latch will give the invitation, and Dr. Elson will give the invitation.

She probably noted that by his parents' endowment, what is now a jury in Section 1, Latin America, was born.

With regard to the successor, I've been doing a great deal of giving a great deal of thought to it, and what Bob said certainly bears out the wisdom of the decision I made in regard to it.

When we consider the fact that the director of the FBI, Hoover, one director, served under eight presidents, two republicans and six democrats, three republicans and five democrats,

We're all with equal loyalty and with non-partisanship.

It seems to me that it's enormously important to keep that position.

And the confirmation and the direction it is confirmed by this time, however, is not partisan.

Political debate in an election year.

I have found that by checking the law, that in the event of the incapacity of the directors to operate, the Attorney General has the right to appoint active directors.

...for a period of time, which was not limited.

And consequently, I have authorized claims to make an appointment of an acting director and interim director, and it will be announced today that the president will, having, I will set forth these facts about what we need, and that the director of the FBI, who is the president of the department,

That he'd be appointed after the election.

By, of course, whoever is president at that point.

The elected president.

He'd be appointed after the election, and his name would be submitted to the Senate for confirmation of that.

Otherwise, you see what could happen.

What could happen is he'd be appointed directly to now.

Not to the point...

Shall we say, the land beyond repute is the greatest law enforcement officer in the world, and it would get better partisan debate down there in the Senate, and the Bureau would be in turmoil after November, when his name would happen to be incidentally.

It's like an appointment to the Supreme Court.

He has to submit his resignation the minute the election occurs.

And a new president, if he did not happen to be meeting with somebody else, we cannot have it that way.

So the decision that I made is that we will have an acting director, which will not be submitted because he does not need to be.

He will be a good man, I'm sure.

He will serve through the record.

And that act of the record, on a political level, is ruled out in the great tradition in which Hooger was appointed.

But that's not my job.

That's a decision I've made, and I trust that you will all support it.

But I think they have to steer their animations that way.

Well, I had thought all the time, if you're making a point to tell, I can't have such a wonderful... No, I had thought that that might be a problem.

I know you and your experience will see that.

Mr. President, I...

I haven't seen some problems in that.

But I didn't have a...

I don't think you're in the position that Lyndon Johnson was when he was going around again.

It is a Supreme Court nomination.

You see, if it were a Supreme Court nomination, there would be no question.

Send it right now.

And of course, you're not going to have the cabinet.

Send it right now.

You see, this is a very...

It's a very special appointment.

The director of the FBI should serve through administration after administration.

It should have continuity.

It shouldn't be subject to a political change.

That's why, for example, when Hoover came in after my election, he submitted his resignation.

I reappointed him.

Of course, I would have because of my personal respect and affection for him.

But I didn't consider that there was any choice, because I just felt that under the circumstances, it shouldn't be treated as one of those political problems like the others.

No, I realize that, but I think we have to distinguish this position from the others.

Mr. President, I'm worried it has to be casual here.

Chairman Seller is planning to introduce legislation to establish a good enough commission to investigate the FBI this week.

Was that an option?

Was that a plan before you directed that?

No.

We were waiting for an opportune moment to make this decision.

Well, it's been investigated before.

We'll see what happens.

It's a little late.

I must say that I got my clothes as clean as I could.

What I'm saying is that I was in Texas the other day.

I went to a lot of places in Florida.

It's great.

I know it's a hard time for you.

I mean, you pick up his mind, you look at the television, and you say, my God, this is what he did.

And when he comes to say, you end up with a picture of a shark tail swiping around with the antelopes.

My view is that we're doing the right thing.

It's impressive.

And there's stories from...

I greatly appreciate it, as, of course, it's the support of some of those sterling fellows in the Democratic side, like Sam Smithers, who stood up strongly against George May on any event.

So as long as we've got your support, I believe we're okay.

Mr. President, you may have one more problem.

You have a bill coming out of our committee which will encompass about 3.9 billion dollars in child development camps, daycare camps.

Oh, that's nice.

But you know, you should know, it's coming out probably today, maybe tomorrow.

I've tried to do some things with it, but I've been beaten with it.

Two votes or three votes on my side.

You remember I put up.

I said we'll have to carry it before.

I hope that the House will sit down and do nothing.

May I ask, is that tied to the OEO authorization?

No, it's the second bill.

It's the second bill.

Well, Peter, we do appreciate it.

I know you have those.

You have such a tough debate.

I just wowed on that.

Anyway, I'm sorry.

Those fights are appreciated.

All I can say here is I think we should be greater players than the people that fell there against us.

Just get out of here like that.

Don't pay it up too much.

All right, thank you.