Conversation 005-156

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 Do not cite this transcript as authoritative.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.

Well, I didn't want to miss the opportunity to tell you that that was really a wonderful job on that HR-1.

I was just delighted you came through.

I know the final vote, of course, was so big.

I looked at the paper, and then I looked, I saw the other vote, but you really, well, it was really 47 on the critical one, was it?

Yes, it was.

Well, that was a little more than I thought you'd get.

I was, some of our boys thought you were down to 20.

Well, Jerry Ford thought that, too.

I told Jerry all the time I thought we'd get between 35 and 50, depending on how many of our folks were there.

It was a great job.

Now, let me ask you this.

Anything, and I would like to know that anything you feel that I can do on the Senate side, where as you know we have our pitfalls, I will be glad to work.

Now, naturally, I'll be in touch with Russell and Bennett and so forth as the thing develops.

But you know the moves there better than anybody else.

And if you'll just let me know, I...

I'll sure do it.

What is your anticipation?

When do they think they'll bring it up?

They begin the hearings right after we get back in July, so Russell says.

Uh-huh.

Well, at least they have a pretty good chance, Wilbur, it seems to me, to get through before the end of the year.

Oh, certainly they do.

Do you?

It isn't like last year when it came so late, huh?

If they'll just keep moving, if they'll just not lay it aside.

Yeah.

I read in the paper where he said he thought he'd have it on the floor of the Senate in November.

Well, now, that's beyond the time that Mike and Carl have in mind for the Congress to stay in session even.

Okay.

So I think it might be well to get him and Bennett down and just talk to them.

All right.

I'll do that.

Didn't he tell you, as he told me, that he separated this 10% early, that he'd see to it that the Senate had a chance to vote on this proposition?

He did, yes.

I'd remind him of that.

I'm going to remind him of it.

Yes, sir.

And that's what you've done.

He made a speech in Louisiana just prior to the time I was down speaking to the joint session, maybe the night before, in which he blasted the devil out of it as being nothing but a guaranteed annual wage.

Yeah, I know.

He's on that kick.

And of course, he'll want to put in a stronger work requirement.

That doesn't bother me.

No, that doesn't bother me.

Why don't you face it with this proposition?

Call it whatever you want to.

But it's a guaranteed annual wage.

It's different from what we've got.

We've got a guaranteed annual wage now for people to remain in idleness, but this is a guaranteed annual wage to work.

Very good point.

That's very good point.

That really is the difference, isn't it?

One is you guarantee it for them to remain in idleness, and the other is it's a guaranteed wage if they work.

That's right.

But only if they work.

Let me ask you this.

Right, right.

Sure.

This involves a friend of yours and mine, but Governor Reagan has been so far away from you and me on this.

Yeah, I know, I know.

Do you think it would be helpful if I, I'm not going out for politics, but if I went, I have an invitation from the,

legislature of California to speak to a joint session on welfare.

Good.

Explain to us what it means to California.

Good.

Do you think that would be helpful to our program?

Sure.

I think it would.

And I think that, of course, this will bring us sort of a direct deal with him.

But that's perfectly all right.

I don't need to mention his name.

Yeah.

No, no.

You can go out and say you really respect his views.

You're glad to see that he has taken such

strong leadership, you know, to get this offer, you know, rolls down out there, that it's a major problem you hope to work with California and so forth.

Heck, I don't, I think it never hurts a bit.

And particularly if you can do it and then have a good talk with him.

That's the main thing.

He's showing, because he's got chapter and verse, you know, on stuff that he doesn't like.

And he's a very decent fellow.

And he's a real gentleman, and I think it'd be worthwhile.

You better be watching him.

I say you better be watching in between us.

Okay.

Don't go overboard now.

Okay.

All right.

And while I've got you.

Yeah, sure.

Don't pay any attention to what you read in the papers.

I wouldn't have that job of yours if you'd give it to me.

Yeah.

Well, look.

I know too much about it.

Yeah.

Well, I'll tell you, I appreciate that.

But I was telling somebody the other day, just for your information, and don't let it go over.

They asked me about that.

Of course, I never say anything politically, but I was saying, I said, you know, that there are really only two fellows, and of course, I won't get into the domestic issues with anybody, but there are only two fellows of the people that have been mentioned on the other side that could handle the foreign policy, and one is you and the other is Jackson.

You know what I mean?

It seems to me, Wilbur, that just...

I mean, clearly, this whole business, I'm not asking you to get into it, but this whole business of the way they're handling these secret papers and so on, and the way, too, that Johnson's people are ratting on him, and it's just unconscionable.

You know, I had my differences, basically, with Johnson on a political basis, but...

Damn it, he's a former president of the United States.

This son of a bitch Ellsberg, he's a left-winger who apparently carried all these papers out.

He's much further left than McNamara was on the thing.

And then what the papers are printing are his views about Johnson.

Now, they talked about McCarthy.

This is worse than McCarthy.

Oh, absolutely.

Don't you think so?

Oh, absolutely.

And, you know, a lot, of course, we're getting heat.

People say we're trying to cover up.

Hell, we're not trying to cover up.

We've got nothing to cover up.

This doesn't involve us.

It involves Johnson and Kennedy.

Well, of course it does.

But we've got to do it.

I think, as you realize, we've got to protect the security system.

I said to a fellow this morning, and you might, if you get a chance, use this.

I said, look.

First, let's understand this involves actions of the previous administrations, not ours.

Second, as far as the papers are concerned, they were classified by the previous administration.

Third, as far as those papers are concerned, we have an obligation to protect that system, because otherwise we could imperil the ability to govern and security of the country.

Then I pointed this out, and people said, well, a lot of the papers shouldn't have been classified.

But then I make this point.

Do you realize there were 5,200 original documents in this?

Do you realize that a man trying to get intelligence information, if he gets the right paper, one paper is enough.

to break a code.

One paper is enough.

See, I found all this out in his case many years ago.

That's what it's all about.

That's why you have a classification system.

So I've taken a strong hand on this thing, and we're going to continue to.

We've turned the papers over, as we should, to Mike and to the Speaker, and then they've got to pick up a good committee.

It would be good on your side, but they bear.

And on the other side...

If they come out tomorrow, I'm going to speak to a greater

I think you could say this.

You could say that the whole thing really gets down to this.

that the, sure, nobody's trying to cover up past history, but we are trying to protect the security of Americans of the present, and also the ability of any administration to conduct foreign policy.

And there must be some classification.

There is probably over-classification.

But, and oh, there's the other thing.

You understand, it's a law of Congress, Wilbur, that sets up classification.

We didn't set this damn thing up.

Now, the second point is,

But no one, no matter how we dislike the law, no matter how much they're against this war, and a lot of people don't like the war and a lot don't like the law, but no one should put himself above the law, not a newspaper editor or not a worker in the government.

If you allow a worker in the government, because he doesn't like a war or doesn't like a law, if you say that he has the right to go out

and put himself above the law, then you destroy orderly government.

Now, that's what you have here, you see.

But anyway, apart from that, I do want you to know we've appreciated your help on this.

I'll get a hold of Russell.

I've told it's Adlai Schultz and the rest.

We'll continue to try to work out something on that revenue sharing.

I know that's a tough one.

I've been working on it.

Your proposal is one that I'm going to Chicago tomorrow, tonight, and so I'll see Daley out there.

But it may be that we can work out some modus vivendi there.

Well, Mr. President, I have.

said anything other than that I could understand that some of our cities have some very acute problems.

I have had some difficulty in understanding that the problems in the states are as acute as the cities.

And from that, they jumped to a conclusion that I want to help the cities and not anybody else.

But that isn't it.

We can figure something out.

Well, look, I told, as a matter of fact, I was meeting last night with Shultz and Conley on this thing, and I said, look, on this thing, sit down at the proper time

and work with you and whoever you to work out, of course with Johnny, and let's work out something where, if we can, that is, that accommodates some of these things.

We don't, we aren't, you know, pushing for every jot and tittle.

We understand how the thing has to work.

I know you've never been streaming it in on it.

Well, we'll, anyway, I'll, I'll,

proceed to get out to the hinterlands i'm going to indiana and to illinois and then back i'll tell you the other haven't you found as you go around the country you get out of washington it's a hell of a lot different country doesn't make you feel good though wonderful people i was out for example to oklahoma just a couple weeks then i was up to atlantic city gee you see the kids on the street and the folks and most of the people wilbur they aren't down on this country they aren't ready to throw in the sponge don't you agree

It's a few people that are talking, and they're talking so loud.

The others are not being heard.

That's right.

Most of them want to be proud of the country.

Absolutely.

Most of them are very patriotic, as much so as they've ever been.

Well, good to talk to you.

And as I say, now, one thing, I know you never post, but whenever you think there's something I can do on this, you pick up the phone and call me.

You understand?

I'll do it.

Because, you know, I use the phone a lot, and whenever your call comes in, I'll take it and

But in the meantime, I understand the present thing is, on H.R.

1, I'll work directly with the two top senators.

With regard to the other thing, I'm leaving it in the hands of Schultz and, to a certain extent, Connolly, and let them talk to you about it.

Or if something can work out, I'd appreciate it.

All right, sir.

All right.

Have a good trip.

Thanks a lot.

Thank you.