Conversation 502-020

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 Do not cite this transcript as authoritative.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.

We'll get a white paper around it.

It won't be attributable to the White House.

I don't know how he did on that.

I shouldn't say.

Of course, he was with us on NASA.

I don't know whether he went with us on the other side.

All right.

But the feeling he would stay in line, you know, for 30 days, he has done nothing.

Yeah.

He's really, he's really tried to be a very good soldier.

I thought about it.

I would love to be in the most vulnerable situation.

Yeah, we must have talked about it.

The President's been glad to know that it's all mine.

And I'll, uh, I'll stick with him.

I'll give him a chance.

I'm so happy to have you.

Yeah, I think it's sort of cool, the likes of Cooper.

Cool.

Cooper.

Yeah.

Well, Aiden, people who voted for Pansy will vote.

Well, he voted.

He answered very closely.

On the other hand, 61, 13, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12, 13, 12,

Your strong support made possible is we've got to

Old firm, you know, don't get up late, but we get through here.

Sir, I called Jay Loveson and Wilson.

He's got, he's got a candidate against me before the announcement, sir.

Okay, very pleased.

Thank you, sir.

It's a great thrill to think that that much progress is being made.

Well, you know how it is.

Well, a systematic confirmation could be had of the importance of maintaining a posture of strength that you're going to get an evaluation of so that you can have something to give based on what you're getting.

I don't understand this at all.

I watched your answer on TV, and I apologize for this, but it happened that the station was turned to CBS as it came on.

That's great.

I thought you stole it.

Dan Rouser.

commented afterwards.

He immediately picked up this point about the defensive and the offensive, the nature of the debate, and that this, in effect, meant that the negotiations were going forward on the basis that you wanted, rather than the basis they wanted.

And that, he just bought the background around that.

Calvin did not.

He was very ineffective.

He floundered around.

Rather ask him a question he couldn't answer, so he answered another question that wasn't asked.

Well, at least that's where it would start.

I think there was a net plus in that, don't you think?

Sort of a very strong feeling about that cognitive performance system.

And that has come through on TV.

It's come through in the hour and a half years.

It doesn't matter.

It doesn't matter to your experience.

I think if out of all this railroad bargaining we can get what seems to be within range, then we get the whole thing tied up by the end of this year so that there won't be anything coming open next year.

The next will be in 73 or so.

One of the most small ingredients out of the collective bargaining scene.

Actually, in 72, we have a big bargaining year this year, and we have long, short at the end of the year.

The only really big negotiation is the G.E.

Wessinghouse.

What do we do?

How did Peterson get along with the guys you saw the other day?

But he told me that he thought it went along all right.

And I haven't heard any feedback by her client about how they reacted to it at all.

But your session with them was just...

In fact, if I had been one of those fellows, I would have felt, gee, I really have got a tremendous number of ideas to work with.

They were just coming out one after the other.

I don't know whether they picked them up, but I suspect at least many of them did.

One point that's been made that I have felt calmly about for the last four o'clock that I think is

I think you really need to manage that.

Now, my view is that the man that ought to be in charge of it is not because he knows anything about economics, but because of his discipline, his fans, which actually you and the rest of you all sit down and say, I don't know, out of mind, you're bothered about being able to do whatever you can say, whatever you can say.

You can't control art, you're not part of the education.

But I do think that this is the question.

I think there have been incidents that have been troubled from the time the prime rate was raised.

One or two things of that kind I think would be useful to have people checking.

How would that be?

How is it?

How do we, do we have, do we have a format?

We've got the domestic council, we've still got the tax committee, we've got the policy council, we have homework.

Could it, would it not be possible for you to have, have a race?

The only reason I suggested Kala as a man is that he's a tough son of a bitch.

He's got this stature in the rest of the world.

You know what I'm saying?

Well, in our way, I'm going to do that, and that is to get that group together very rigorously.

Well, we set the line.

We get together now, every two weeks, we get together in Connolly's office, or his dining room, or Connolly, McCracken, or his replacement, Peterson, and myself.

And then, I can make a statement about you.

Well, from the standpoint of the volume of economic material coming up, labor, of course, but that crisis, and employment and unemployment,

to make sure Congress puts that in place.

Maybe you have to put two of them together.

Add it to that group now.

It makes an awful lot of sense.

It was pretty big.

How do you handle spans and march spans?

I think you've identified a problem that we haven't dealt with all of.

I don't think that Hudson's been any problem at all.

The only question with me is what about spans?

Sam, we need to work with Robert Flanagan.

That does the best with him.

All right.

But we see that this is a...

So, Flanagan is to be responsible for what you're saying.

Is that how it is?

I will talk to him.

I don't expect... Oh, well, you're correct.

I also don't... Again, I don't want to... Keep arguing.

I think Tom can have as much influence with Arthur as anybody can.

I've been working up, following your request, a little bit more formal agenda for the quadriad tomorrow.

And one thing you could do is put a final item on it, namely this one.

It would hurt Arthur to listen to that.

I had from McCracken or so, depending on who's here, some review of the album,

and then to ask Arthur directly for the second item about monetary policy and interest rates.

Arthur, incidentally, made a very good statement, I think, on this general topic yesterday in his testimony.

There are some parts of the testimony that I don't like, but the general theme on interest rates and so on, and his analysis of the international monetary business, which was a class, I thought.

Well, he didn't put the blame all on the dollar.

No, he didn't.

He put it on speculative flows and the way in which the Germans handled their...

Isn't, correct me if I'm wrong on this one, because I'm going to continue to take it, is it not proper to say that as far as the international monetary situation is concerned, the idea of having a conference

right at a time when the crisis is wrong.

And we should have a conference only after we have determined what we want to have come out of it.

It should be well-planned and then go.

Right?

Do you agree with that?

I certainly do.

And I think we've got to be part of our mission not to devalue it.

That was the one thing that worried me about that meeting in here where we all sat down here running into the stairs together and so forth.

And I just wonder what's going on for you guys.

And...

I agree with that.

We just had another...

I came from a lunch at the French Embassy with De Stang there.

He was there.

The saying in the view is that the mark will continue to float probably until December.

As distinct from what Arthur has wisely been telling us, he says they're never going to go back to the old parity.

They're going to have to stabilize at some new rate, and once it becomes stable, they'll go on that parity, which is the saying in the view.

Which is the saying?

That it will float?

That it will.

The mark just will not float.

until around December, certainly will still be floating next fall.

And as distinct from what the Germans have been putting out, they've been saying, well, it's a temporary float, and sometime soon we'll go back to the old Paris.

In other words, to freeze it at a level below where it is now floating to.

And I think most people have felt that's just not possible.

because they'll start all the movements of capital all over again if they try to do that.

And I was interested to note that that's the same for you also, that they'll just have to swallow up what they've said and set their new market rate at a different level.

The record that scared me, frankly, is that he changes so often, and he has.

He has a great sort of feeling of wisdom and sort of gives you this considered judgment.

Yeah.

But it's different.

He was more or less tackling hate at this meeting on the grounds of exercising fiscal restraint.

Well, two months ago, he was the fellow.

that was saying the economy needs stimulation.

So he's now gone completely over on the other side.

And there is a growing line of discussion, which I would say is something to find mover on the idea that fiscal policy should carry

There's more and more of a load in this.

And I think that's what they say.

Let us recognize that the reality is impossible to explain.

I don't believe I can believe we can stop all this stuff.

You're going to have a hell of a time if this Congress is a spending Congress.

And it's a political Congress.

And there are no comparisons.

And a hell of a lot of Republicans aren't going to be voting any year before you have a better appointment.

They're just not, a lot of these guys are like women.

They're not sure.

what the thing is going to be like in 72.

And they don't want to risk everything for us.

And so they're going to look after their own in the next.

And so we can't count on them.

That's right.

They're going to go down there and vote to sustain people.

Our estimate for the fiscal 71 deficit is now on the order of $21 billion.

We believe the expenditures will be within the full employment revenue zone, right?

although that's going to be close.

The budget goes forward as proposed, and then we take into account what's happened, plus the Treasury's re-estimates of income, even holding the 1065 number.

The fiscal 72 deficit gets up in the range of $18 billion, and it is well beyond the full employment revenues.

That's my way of saying I don't think people

have anywhere near an appreciation on how stimulative the fiscal policy is.

And when you move that to a more expansionary posture well over a year ago, well, it really has moved.

And it's time for people to be a little more cautious.

My own judgment is, as we move through into mid-'72,

that there isn't going to be any real question in anybody's mind about the fact the economy has been expanding and that it's expanding at a good pace.

Our problem is going to be inflation.

I just think that's going to turn around that way, and the position to be in is the position that you're in right now.

You're the person who's been...

being steady.

I think they're the direct counterpart to the ABM.

It's all tough business.

You have a strategy.

And you hang in there.

Are you saying... No, sir.

I'm saying the budget...

The budget is...

The budget is all right.

It's a look on the expansive side.

And I think we have to be very...

careful about all of the additions that are coming about.

There are a tremendous number of them and we're trying to keep track and add them up and bring you the bill here at one of these fundraisers.

Because I think that there is a need for an exercise of discipline on the budget.

I don't disagree with Arthur on that.

My problem with Arthur is that two months ago he triggered off a lot of this stuff.

He triggered off that Social Security tax change.

Why?

by the other kind of talk.

Now he's come on to this other side, and I think we should just stick with the strategy we've got.

We'll know our CPI figure.

It'll be announced tomorrow.

I don't have it, but as soon as I get it, which it probably will be when I go back upstairs, I'll let you know right away.

Probably be bad news, but who knows?

I just don't have a clue, other than that the food prices went up again at a pretty good rate.

Yes, and I went up about a percent.

That's about 15% of the index, however.

I'll crack the ad and I'll have this.

Your agenda would be that you... Well, I think you're right.

It tends to be a bull session.

Well, I think a review of economic developments by whoever is the council, then I think

to put it to Arthur, right, directly, what he thinks about monetary policy and interest rates, and I can talk about that.

I think it would be useful for everybody if you called on me to discuss the budget and what's happening to the budget as we see it, the budget problem.

And from John Connolly on international, at the end, international monetary developments,

And they're all going to Munich for this big bankers' meeting.

And I should think it might be well for you to give them, not instructions in any kind of a formal way, but let it be understood that we should be postured, if you feel this way, that sort of the linchpin of our policy is the domestic economy comes first, and everybody might as well understand that.

They go over to this meeting, and then maybe you could bring at the end of the question of all these voices speaking.

Hey, Mr. Burns, let me ask you, what about this economic policy or something like that?

Why do we have this equity problem?

There are people who stand.

I do see how you stand on that.

I just never have any reason to see stands.

I don't want to rob you there.

I'm a bull in the hills and turned out a fool in a cave up there.

See what I mean, John?

But I'm just, some way or other, I'd like to get some kind of economic meeting.

How do you feel, John?

Do you see the problem?

I do.

Or are you just going to go out and bring sands in?

I think that's better.

We see sands a lot.

I mean, it's a lot of White House actions.

But I think his time with you, I really think that there's a danger in making him feel that he's a participant in these economic things.

He's not really qualified.

He's got some very serious biases.

And I just wonder if you really want to include him.

All right.

Well, I see your point.

Bring him in.

He makes inputs to plant guns, so you get the benefit of those that are in the East End, I'm talking about.

Arthur has softened his attitude on people meeting in the so-called quadriads other than the designated people.

And we have brought, remember I talked with you when he first came here, we brought Peterson into the meetings with Connolly and McCracken and myself and Flanagan.

And I think that Arthur is as unbending as he was at one time.

So that's...

I mentioned something to you the last time we met and didn't get a chance to make it clear.

Having to do with balance of payment statistics.

This is something that Stan has been about and talked to you about last fall, apparently.

Senator Long has been trying to get us to change the method of computing the trade balance.

And following the

the discussions last fall.

We have conducted a very extensive review of the trade statistics and the balance of payment statistics, and we have now ready to go as of June.

Some rearrangements and some additional balances, so to speak, that help distinguish short-term movements from long-term movements and various things of that kind.

I felt that there were

The statistics are not solid enough, nor is the concept developed in a proper way to make the explicit changes that Stan and Senator Long want.

And so we have resisted that, and it's somewhat of an issue.

I testify tomorrow before that international committee, and I'm sure there'll be fireworks about it.

There is one piece of correspondence that was leaked.

It must have been from Commerce, in which Stan wrote me a letter about this, saying that he had discussed it with you, and you had instructed him to proceed.

Oh.

And so then he gets back from this big statistical task force, no, these statistics aren't quite right.

So Long is making quite a thing out of the fact that that's probably what happened.

What I've said is that what the President directed was an intensive review of the statistical aspects of this subject as well as all the other aspects.

And that review has been conducted and here are the results in terms of a lot of changes

and yet there are still problems with this particular thing that you wanted.

See, what they wanted is to make an addition to the way you value imports so they become larger, and to take out of all the exports any element of government subsidy, so your A, your PL-480,

presumably your exium subsidy and all that could be removed.

So you make exports look a lot slower and imports look a lot bigger, and then you can make an even greater hullabaloo about the fact that we're losing out on international trade.

So that's what's involved in this process.

But I thought you should know that.

Regarding that meeting the other day,

I'm not a big advocate of subsidies.

I think the market does a better job, I hope.

But I would agree that Kearns has used this little subsidy, and it isn't very big, as a means to get people interested in talking about it.

making an effort to export.

And he's really quite a guy.

He gets around and he gets people stirred up.

So I think that's all for the good.

It has turned out that he didn't need anywhere near the budget that he said he needed.

In fact, he needed even less than we gave him.

And there's been some turn back.

And we had all that argument, if you remember, about the budget.

And I think our people turned out to be right on that.

He's going out of the budget probably pretty soon.

No, I don't think it's that big a thing.

I think it's something that ought to be around.

Subsidies always get you in this kind of conflict problem that the fellow brought out with respect to Lufthansa.

And any time when you subsidize something that might be in competition at some point with a domestic industry, you have a problem.

In a sense, the Rolls-Royce Lockheed is an example of that.

You get that all the time.

The value of getting that purchase is tremendous in comparison with the time and subsidy in the office.

I've got a few last minutes.

I'm in the circus business.

I guess we're out of SSG.

We're out of it.

Have you discussed the John Burns problem?

That's one of, I think, the other Burns problem.

No.

The Social Security.

I haven't.

Why don't you go ahead?

All right.

A little list of odds and ends, and then maybe we can wind up with that.

I had your friend Owings in yesterday and gave him a go-ahead to his elective tibling down the hall.

And he's got some ideas to get back in 90 days with a presentation for you on what he will do there.

We're going to Birmingham Tuesday for this regional background.

We have a real fighting chance of making a coup on manpower and special revenue sharing in three weeks' time.

And we need the southern congressmen desperately.

So we would like to make a major pitch for .

We're in the house right now.

Perkins laid it over for three weeks in the house, all right?

And he's gonna try and marshal a lot of opposition to it.

So we would like to really spotlight that one special argument sharing that will undoubtedly get some questions coming and comment.

What I'm leading to is a cast of characters who look like Romney on Urban Special Earthly Sharing, Hudson on Manpower Special Earthly Sharing, and somebody from the CDA, and I guess it'll have to be Herb Stein in comedy.

There isn't anybody else really available except Hunt Hector.

Hello, everybody else speaking German?

Stein is better than Hunt Hector.

Yeah, yeah.

So...

Uh, we will, we will precede you in there when you're up doing the, the dam.

Why don't we put on our sort of funny show for the press that will consist of the four of us.

And then you'll come in and tag it at the end with your

But what you'll say, basically, is the fact that we're getting movement.

And we have one area that has enormous potential at the moment.

We need support.

And what we need to determine, basically, is support.

So that's Birmingham.

I just finished talking to Reagan's man upstairs, and I think we're making some progress.

That training will support our legal assistance for legal services bill, number one.

Number two, that they are waiting.

They will say nothing about HR1 until we have had a chance to thoroughly brief them.

that he's holding a silent position now.

His lieutenant governor said something yesterday, he got off the reservation, and he tells me that they have lit on him now.

So we have a fighting chance of getting right on the border on each other.

So that's for the good.

We still want each other.

We got a new song.

I don't know what else.

Oh, I think we got it.

on balance, the one on the blue line.

You had a former partner, I guess, or he was a member of Adams, Duque, and Hazeltine by the name of Living.

He has won four candidates for two vacancies in the federal district bench.

He is not as well qualified in the ADA sense as a fellow named Barnes.

But if you would like him to go to Linnick, it is possible to do.

Oh, he's a winner of Atlanta.

I just want to call the church.

I don't care.

One guy's qualified.

I don't know whether Linnick is a good supporter or not.

Well, they're all politically clear.

They're politically clear.

Earl will know whether he really is.

All right.

He'll know whether he's up to it.

Earl is so honest that he

to tell you the truth.

Okay.

You probably know the other guy.

We have the straddle of the age on the court of military appeals.

I saw that.

I'm going to get Watson.

Albert Watson, one, and Black, the other.

We had two vacancies on Albert and Will.

Did you find the Black?

Yeah.

Do we have the two vacancies yet?

Well, no.

We're going to have to put Watson in the first one.

We've got another one.

What?

Yes, it's in the air in the future.

Police are told that blacks are going to get one, right?

I want to be sure that they know that they're not.

Second agency can be created by convincing Judge Quinn to retire.

This can be encouraged by promoting Judge Dargan to Quinn's position as chief judge.

So Malik is working a car line here.

He says it will take him about two months to accomplish.

I'm sure the blacks know what he has.

We're looking for a man.

Yeah, I talked to Ed Brook.

He said we've got to find another.

We've got another one coming in two months.

We're getting a certain amount of retirements.

my assistant secretaries and undersecretaries right now.

And it's a question of time.

Most of these fellows will come in and say, well, it's not going to get back.

I need to go now, or I can go here.

And the question is, do we want them to go sooner or later in terms of the election?

And I suppose it's an individual proposition.

Now, Van Dusen over at HCD would go any time he wanted to over 30 the next year.

But he does have to get back.

And I suppose if you don't want to have an ex-conservative, that sort of thing, I don't think there's a lot of difference in whether you run the departments or not.

That's right.

Well, now if I can recruit people or if we can move people up, then we can.

So I don't think that's too much of a problem.

If you have a harder and harder recruiting job, the closer you get to it.

I think you do.

Unless you take somebody out that you've got, an existing guy, and give it a job.

Either in the department or in the White House.

You get toward the notion that there's only a year and a half or so left, money-wise, too.

I understand that.

Some of it's also just time for them to step up and make their return while they're on top.

That's right.

She's had a talk with Ruger, this SST guy today, and he's been offered a $110,000 a year job out in the aerospace industry with the lobby and crazy deals coming down the line.

We'll monitor the lobbies.

That's about all I have.

I wish nobody was doing that.

Are we going to loan our cars?

In the close-in parts, you know, I haven't checked that way with the East-West.

East-West is, of course, the East is all set now, and it's moving through.

We're having problems with the Armed Services Committee.

I'm shaking some of this military down loose.

A-Bear is giving us an unmitigated hard time on Camp Pendleton.

And his 30 days are up, but he's asking for an extension.

And he's going to probably offer legislation to keep us from turning that over to the state.

That's it.

No, you see, we had to submit it to the Armed Services Committee, which is, what the hell does it cost to make it?

Is it got a debt warning card coming around?

Sure.

I suspect Laird is, too.

Well, I think it comes right from the top.

If I may be entitled to appeal, Laird is exterior defense.

Arnie Weber went down and talked to him the other day, and they had a discussion of the pros and the cons and whatnot.

And then Arnie got ready to go, he told me.

And as he was leaving, Hebert said, Mr. Weber, just one more thing.

Weber said, what's that, Mr. Chairman?

He said, don't do it, Mr. Weber.

It's threatening.

Well, the other thing he said, you know, we had our eyes on a piece of land in Louisiana.

And he poked his finger at Weber, and he said, young man, you stay out of my district.

So I don't know what we can do about it.

Well, you've got to come along.

You've got to get to California.

No, we're not.

We'll come along.

We've got to get to California, and everybody's got to understand that.

My God, they've already moved in.

Well, they will go to release.

They did, they did.

just so we don't give it away absolutely, and so they're compromised when they come back.

It's probably the police.

Yeah.

It wouldn't bother me too much.

Well, I'd rather have them.

I think we'll hang tough for a while, and we're turning on a little pressure from California to see if we can get some people on set about it.

I know Burns is, the next time you, the reason why it's important for you to know, particularly is that the next time you see Burns, he'll tackle you on it.

It has to do with H.R.

1.

The Republicans, with John Burns as the... Oh, on Social Security?

On social security.

Well, the biggest problem is that we didn't... there was a foul up and somebody tried to see him and he wasn't there and he called back and so on and there was no communication.

And so he is feeling very, very aggrieved, and I guess the other Republicans aren't.

And it's understated.

But I thought if we go along, we only went along after the fact in our statement, in which we said, well, this 5% is just for the old folks, in effect.

And...

So then firms naturally felt these were the way to ask us if they ought to put us on transit.

I don't know who the hell can talk to him.

I don't know if Mel Ayrton can.

Can you ask him to?

Sure.

I asked him.

I don't know if I can talk to him anyway this way.

I said, I'm General Revenue Sheriff.

I thought it was time for Mel to say to him, look, we can't wait around forever for John Burns to get aboard.

And if he doesn't get a board, and if we get any kind of motion out of the chairman, we're going to have to leave John Burns behind.

That's what we do better.

Well, the chairman at this point has definitely crossed the bridge that something's going to have to be done about cities particularly and also states.

And I think he pretty well buys the approach that we've outlined, but I'm not sure about that.

He is moderating a little bit his revenue-sharing speeches by inserting things about, well, he's against this and this principle and so on.

However, something is going to get done.

He's making a speech tonight in the North Carolina legislature.

And I'm sort of anxious to see what he says and whether or not he abuses the discussions that we've had

I wasn't there.

I saw one California Democrat took a slight mask by saying he was not here for false pretenses.

Because all we did was try and sell our legislative program to him.

I don't know why he was caught.

I can't imagine.

And everybody who attended that from around here said it was a superlative job on the campus.

That they really did a great job.

Well, they're done with it.

They're very good at it.

You know, Rocky and all the rest of them are just damn good.

I gave him a lunch in the State Department.

What the hell, that's worth a trip.

The other class has sent word that he will be in touch with me tomorrow.

Whenever you're ready, we'll talk.

Johnny Burns, I think, I think this, I think you ought to have talked to John with Mel Larson on how you would take him out and talk about it.

He is the man that looks this through.

He's got to tell Johnny Burns on that.

I did that this morning after the Kevin game.

I said, we cannot extend time to Johnny Burns anymore than

A malice for a record share, absolutely.

And he has talked concerns about it in the past.

And he said, I'm going to see him again this weekend.

And I said, well, tell him that this is the last weekend.

There's nobody to talk about this.

And that he's either got to get a board or we're going to be free agents to go our way.

And he thought, well, that would be the only guy.

He said, well, if you could just give him some kind of a tax credit giving in there, he could do it.

There's a tender going to be filed.

Can you do it?

Well, I think Burns was, if we could have brought off Mills at that breakfast time that we talked about a week or so ago, Burns would have been dragged in.

Well, he's missed, and that'll hurt us, but we'll still go back.

And I don't give up on Burns.

It's on the Social Security thing.

Just, Greg, you've got to go back.

He's already frustrated.

We've all apologized and everything.

I must say, I fell for it myself.

He asked me about it.

I said, gee, this is going to let those poor Republicans stood up.

They stood up against the old folks.

We came up for the old folks.

That's what we're using.

But even then, had the clearance thing gone as it was supposed to go with those fellows, I think it would have solved it.

Because we delayed that statement because we didn't put it out.

And there was time for clearance.

Right now, he's blaming OMB.

That's just as good a place to leave it as any.

We're having to sneak something over.

You know, 21.

That is, if we hold it, that'll be within full-blown revenues.

It's 21.

Is that because of the fallout revenues?

That is mainly because the revenues aren't as high as the Treasury previously estimated them to be.

Well, this is their best reading now that they've had their April 15th returns.

And the thing that I don't know the answer to is the extent to which that re-estimate affects

a proper estimate of the full employment revenues.

That is, the revenues that actually came from the tax system at a given level of GNP were less than they thought.

But we'll be sure that the estimate stays above our expenditures for 71.

That's why, and it's darn high, if we have that, and with CAP, we've discussed this, and we're trying to load as much into 71 as we can

on the grounds that that deficit is gone.

Absolutely.

That's why I let all these withheld funds as much as possible go down, rather than throw over the 72.

Well, there's a different issue there, and that really goes in the other direction.

The sooner you let the funds, the sooner the big buildup of the expenditures comes, and that's the fiscal 73 problem, which is just going to be wicked.

It's a possible problem, I think.

We can work out a way to keep it in the full employment revenues of the current tax system, but it's going to take a lot of thought before you'd want to buy that, I'm sure, in the 73 budget.

We'll be ready toward the end of June to talk to you about that.

Unless we change the tax system, the raised taxes.

Well, the health and grace model...

The question is who do you raise them on?

The question is whose taxes get raised?

This is part of the thing that in the middle of June we have to talk out in political terms is also whether we can do something in the property tax.

Well, that works for us.

It does involve raising taxes.

I know that.

So you raise taxes to get property tax.

It's not as high as it's pulled around.

Yes.

I don't know.

I think on any side of that, let's do a lot of things.

Well, we're doing it, and hopefully we'll be able to spread the RDS.

I've asked the Secretary to be ready by the middle of June.

And I think he and Mitchell and some others have got to look at this from a political standpoint, give us their opinions as to the political viability of it before you come to grips with it.

We talked about

which was, I believe, the 18th or 19th of June.

That may be about one week too soon for us in terms of getting all of our information together.

So I'll give that note to Bob Holman and discuss that all with David.

Does he have a cameo post?

An interview?

Something.

One way or the other.

We have a very hot controversy going on right now with child care.

There's something called the Bradyless Dellenbach Bill, which is a very grandiose federal program of child care centers.

ATW says we can't just be against child care centers.

We've got to have some kind of a child care program.

So they've cooked up kind of a revenue-sharing approach, where it's done by the states and so forth, but with federal leadership.

Here comes Kevin Phillips out in favor of the Raiders-Downback thing, and says the OMB is leaving President Donald Trimbrow's past and not letting him get into this very sexy political issue.

And I read that thing, and it just didn't make any sense.

Kevin Phillips in favor of a new social program.

So I had a meeting on it this morning when I had the guys from the Department of OMB and everybody in, and I said, what can I do for Kevin Phillips?

And he said, well, his wife works for the committee.

And...

Did he ever go?

I didn't know he had a wife.

Yes, he had a wife, and she's a, she's a, makes a hell of a difference.

She was the only one I told what child care was like.

Tom, can I just mention one thing on the black car list?

Yes, I'm going to give you a good one.

I see the Kissinger between, before he enters, 4 o'clock, 3 o'clock, he wants to see me in that box.

I've got a 4 o'clock meeting.

I know the guy who's left.

Yeah.

I think that a whole pretty good staff job has done all right, and there are all kinds of ins and outs and difficulties.

If you had a chance to call up, I know you call up people, the two people who really come to the audience.

John is the same person, and I've heard of that tremendous amount of members.

I could tell a lot of them, and I just signed it, period.

What's the other one?

Yeah, the other one.

A-L-G-E-R.

Well, the interesting thing about it, I believe, just as a matter of fact, that when you look at the things that have actually happened in the last two and a half years, employment, education, and housing, it is a stunning record.

Just stunning.

There's no doubt about it.

One of the points that we were tackled on as a briefing was, well, what did you do, what did you give the Black Caucus as a result of their suggestions?

And the answer was, well, nothing in particular.

Their suggestions were taken out of the review, but the impressive thing is the President going about it and his

by his own license, for his own purposes, has put down here a record that is present.

That isn't in response to anybody's demands.

It's just in response to his own efforts.

The Hesburgh Civil Rights Commission has set up for June 14th hearings on suburban integration housing.

And they've subpoenaed a whole lot of assistant secretaries.

Chris Lee from other places as well.

Jackson, Simmons, and so forth.

So that's our effective deadline for getting the challenging statement out.

And then this civil rights commissioner is going to appear.

And we're getting together tomorrow.

We'll have something for you within a week, I would think, before I have a statement.

Yeah, actually, next week.

The easy ones don't get to the line.

Sorry.

Incidentally, I'm your doctor, but I thought this was going to be a psychiatrist that we fired or tried to fire.

No, it's actually for an appointment.

Is that why you want to keep him?

Because he's his personal friend and a superb individual and a great human being.

Yeah.

And has Elliot persisted in his deployment requests since?

Two hours ago.

Since Dean and Krogh got to him with the record?

What is the record?

This is two hours ago.

And I wonder if they've gotten to a...

I told him that Dean Crowe made them and everybody over here go with any go.

They were going to go... What is the record?

Malcolm's going to move back to meet with him.

Oh, what is the record?

They have a long list of incidents.

He's been one of the real roadblocks in the archives.

Well, here's something.

John Dean Crowe feels very strongly about it.

Arnold Webber, our friend, Elliot, was over this morning.

I hate to put it in words on him, but he's got some giraffe's nest over there.

God damn it, we just cannot have a ball that's giving me the encouragement to still drive.

It feels so strong.

There are other problems.

I just happen to be square on that.

It's one of the few left, I guess.

They were all the actors.

Yeah, that's it.

Before this thing, they were ready in case.

Well, thank you very much.

Don't you love being square on drugs?

I must say, that is one thing.

The more you see it, I talked to you before, and it seemed to me that you people were very beforehand.

I had to talk with them again.

I didn't have a link letter here.

Oh, yeah, fine.

Yeah, yeah.

I'll talk to the secretary.

I was going to ask you, did you talk to Rumsfeld?

Is he going to think about it?

Is he going to do it?

Is he going to think about it?

Oh, Christ.

Stop and say yes, you know.

I think my cat does a fantastic job.

He doesn't know anything about it.

That's great.

You don't need to.

He's that type.

Do you know anything about OU?

He doesn't know anything about NSC either, does he?

That was my account.

I gave McCurry a strong conviction.

Well, I wouldn't have gone any further.

I've told him to stand or nothing.

I'm glad you did that.

I thought that was damn good.

And I said, he said, what, what, President Stargain came and we were interrupted.

He had something else in mind.

I said, he doesn't have anything else in mind, Don.

I said, he, he hasn't gone through this thing.

He had originally planned to, he had decided to make a change with Lincoln because he wanted a political man in there and he wanted somebody who would take full advantage of that office.

Mr. President, I can kiss you.

You said you would like to see me before four.

Would you like me to hold up for a couple of minutes?

Any time.

As soon as it's convenient because he's in and out of meetings.

Tell him he can come now.

I have to leave soon.

I have an appointment for him.

I thought I might drop him.

What I said is that one thing the president does to me, I said he didn't have anything else in mind.

As a matter of fact, he's not doing that.

He's ignoring it.

Mr. Lee, I wanted to tell Mr. Webber when he came back that all I called to was to tell him what a fine job he did on that Black Caucus statement.

I knew that was an enormous amount of work, and I bet you did a lot of the work yourself.

So I just told him that I called to thank him for it.

And a member of his staff will do that.

Well, yeah, it was a tough one.

It was a great job.

Thank you.

I walked over to C-Con for a change.

Sure, sure.

Good.

And, uh, I, uh, I'm still in the business.

Right.

I guess it's hard.

It's hard.

The President will call them personally.

It is in use for the USSR.

I want to ask you, just checking to see how it has gone on the internet, who do you agree with?

It's getting better with every transverse.

You take a look on the column and just say,

Tell him, just don't tell him I'm coming.

Just say the president's tied up right now, but he has somebody who would like to come over to see you and will be over at 4 o'clock.

Do you say that?

Yeah.

It's a very important visitor.

Why don't you say Cindy Henry over to see her?

Yeah.

No.

Just say that I have a very important, very, I don't want to talk about it, but I have a very important visitor that I'd like to have come see him at 4 o'clock at his office.

Okay.

The president's tied up right now that you're just calling him because of this thing.

I have a very important visitor.

Okay.

You want to check with Rood over there first?

I don't think there's any problem.

who will be in his office at 4 o'clock.

Okay, okay.

You've seen the headlines, this big break in house talks.

Tell me how you went with Chancellor.

Oh, Chancellor Severide Morgan.

Severide, how was he?

Terrific.

And Morgan?

Excellent.

He understood it.

Oh, he would understand it.

Well, they all understood it.

That's a good group.

Marvin Kalb.

Marvin Kalb, of all these guys, understood it best, strangely enough.

They told me that he was the one, when CBS was interviewed, rather was good, and Kalb sort of was... Well, I'm not saying that...

I won't bet on what he'll say, but he'll certainly be good at...

It's very, very important if you care.

Do you have a simple funeral?

Every one of them.

Yeah.

Oh, yeah.

It works out well because I said all the technical questions to him.

Good.

That's good.

In all my three moments, I'm calling people.

Great.

Tell me who you call.

Well, I've called...

I've called McGeorge Monday.

You know, I'm a little tired because I had a funny thing last night.

Okay.

I think the statement that we finally got was a little better.

Oh, much better.

I don't mean that's no reduction.

Oh, no, it is better.

It is better.

What did George Washington say?

Practically had an orgasm.

Yeah, he said he's going to use his influence with the Senate for a minute.

So the president's going to have to hold up on his appointment at 4 o'clock, and we'll give you a call as soon as he's free.

In the meantime, he has a guest over here he wants to send over to see you.

And so if you could be there at 4, he'll send him on over, and then we'll call as soon as the president's free, and you can come on over.

He said, who is it?

And I said, he wouldn't tell me.

Okay.

Good.

Well, that's it.

I think that's it.

Come on.

He's going to help establish relationships between us and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

That's what I told him.

Senator Hughes made a statement saying a historic moment.

I made a statement.

Aiken, I think, said something friendly.

But the Democrats are all right.

You know what a box he's in?

Did you?

Colson, with his Machiavellian, vicious, dirty mind.

Thank God.

I've got one guy around here who thinks like I do.

But anyway, he got in.

Had to be in a suit when he was on the show.

You know what Colson did?

He dug out Humphrey's speech.

He read it.

He's going to circulate it as a white paper, you know, in a column.

The President's policy of holding

The only way to get arms talks is for us to have a moratorium on him and a moratorium on her, and that way we will get talks.

He just walked out on that.

Oh, God, the hell is Trapper for?

That was the best move I've ever made.

Muskie hasn't done a thing right since late 2016.

You told me if I hadn't seen the text, the actual company.

I called Atchison, too, but he wouldn't.

Clyman of the New York Times.

I called him this year.

He says, congratulate, congratulate the president of Hillary Clinton.

They really do do that.

Oh, yeah.

They know, but you always talk for a hell of a long time.

Oh, yeah.

We've covered that.

My name, I'm off to the office.

Yeah.

Oh, Rose, bring us a poppy of gas.

Yes.

I don't know what I told you.

Dobrynin called when he sent this press release over and he said if any senators give you trouble on our announcement, give me their names and I'll call them too.

It's on there, isn't it?

Isn't it something where you can put up an address with it?

I sent this to those who attended the, this is a nice little thing, to all those that, I use this in a little talk, I made it a rules committee and they all want to be there.

and a copy of the talk, which of course I didn't have.

But I used this quote, and I think it's really quite good.

It's an historian, and I was in a few United States senators in the last couple of years, and it was a really, I think it was the first class historian, was Beverage.

He was like a margin, and he was completely black and white.

Bowers, Beverage, of course, was the one that read that.

Partisanship should only be a method of patriotism.

He who is a partisan merely for the sake of spoils is a buccaneer.

He who is a partisan merely for the sake of a party name is a ghost of the past among living events.

He who is merely the partisan of an ordinary organization is only a pebble in the sand of a boss.

But he who is the partisan of principle is a prince of citizenship.

I gave it to you this morning.

I think, Mr. President, I think it might be a good idea to have Bill Rogers tomorrow when you're sending out the coming troops.