Nixon, Haldeman & Connally on US economy and Wage and price controls

Transcript (AI-generated)

This transcript was generated automatically by AI (WhisperX) and has not been reviewed for accuracy. Names and numbers are often wrong; speakers are not identified. Do not cite it as authoritative — verify against the audio and the finding aid.

Download transcript (.txt) · JSON data

Click a timestamp to play from that point; the page address then links to that moment (e.g. #t=125).

Shooting pictures while you're talking, that's what ruins it.

I'm also going to take what you said and have it edited and think there may be something useful there.

I don't mind that.

One of the things because there were a lot of useful things that were said.

There's this degree of...

They want to be like men.

But most women don't want to be like men.

And most men don't want their women to be like men.

Bob, that's your index for men.

All right, I'll be right back.

Oh, God.

You must have a reason to forget about this.

This is a move that we're going to make to see if we're all on the same wavelength.

And also to see whether you believe, and this is really tough, whether you believe we're going to cut in harder at an earlier date or wait until very, very late to cut in.

Now, secrecy is, of course, in the highest order here.

There is, of course, the possibility that you could cut the man by scaring him to death and telling him he couldn't do it.

I just want to let her know that he's perfectly fine.

Let's see what you got at the moment.

She said, how can I do it at all?

And so forth.

He's fine.

The thing is, he was lost there.

So here's my game.

I don't want to come up with a half-assed deal.

When you make a move, it's like a giant.

It's the way I always operate it.

When you make a move, just knock your goddamn brakes off.

Also, I read the thing.

I saw the letter here and read it.

There's a lot of good things in that letter.

There really are.

A lot of good things.

And I wish you would keep the letter and some of the things.

Yeah.

I mean, I'll take this letter.

I think there's something we might do.

Or we need.

I don't know what we want, but... Is there anything that we might do in terms of...

Thank you.

You would just say that the President has asked you to

You were jacking all the proposals in terms of the way you tried to work and so forth and made the recommendation to the president.

Since Congress, you've been frozen for 300 years.

I'm back.

I do that hard to hear you say October 1st.

I guess I mean, it's something to indicate some bullshit is going on.

Now, they've already got that in my press and I don't see it in your statement, which is all right, I think.

Don't you think?

Or I don't know, or do you think so?

I'm going to bring these, all these, these appointees out on the State Department, George and I, both of them, that you're going to do whatever is necessary, that you constantly watch this thing, by the hour.

That's right.

And that you're going to do whatever is necessary to stop this situation and provide these jobs.

What I'm creating is specific to the class I'll be out and trying to indicate a change.

and so forth, that indicates a change in policy.

You can determine it any way you want to.

If you determine it's a change, that's not all I'm saying to you.

It's change or no change.

The president's going to do whatever he needs to do to accomplish his objectives.

And his objectives are to continue this fight against suppression, to provide a job for everybody that wants to hold a job.

So they're going to play this as easy.

Larry Mellick is going to write that this is a changing policy.

This hopefully will be in the Times story.

The only thing that I would hope we wouldn't do is telegraph our punch too much so that everybody will die.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Yeah.

Now, the other point, I don't think he rationally ought to make it.

You know, as I noticed in the Times this morning,

John, look, the way anybody in China, now, you know, it was, it was our goddamned country.

It was wise that it turned out to let us to take our ratchets a year or two, three.

Ah, true.

Now, if that is true, then maybe we must better take our ratchets now.

And then, and then come up and slug the hell out of them once they've come to this town.

Mr. Burleson, I have to tell you this, but I want you to check it well with my heart.

My judgment is that I find good things, and I hope it gets a little worse.

I hope you take more rest.

I hope we get to the point where you all have a crisis.

a real, I mean, a wave of concern, real concern, to be right about this country.

Very frankly, because what you then do is have a further impact and a more lasting effect.

And if people are not concerned, if people are not worried, if people are not talking, then

place for your progress.

I don't really want to hear that.

No, right.

Yeah.

Well, let me say this.

I have done a lot of thinking about it in terms of the, and frankly, you know, you and I were both involved

And your thought is very well taken.

We go with the way that Bryce reads and then have a board.

Sure.

But call it something else.

He says, the way that Bryce wrote is bad name.

He said, you need a new name.

And I said, all right.

The other thing is that the way that Christ breathes is ascension.

Now, that's the way we see it.

Now, on the import tax, you think we have a good chance to get that through?

Yes.

Not sure.

Well, can we get it through the Senate?

Yes.

Oh, I'd love that.

You know, the import tax has great appeal because

All right, I told you one thing.

He said he called you also about it.

He said the Japanese are talking about us, the Japanese ambassador, about their orders to sit down about the end.

I don't think that means a thing to you.

No.

He wrote you a letter, sent me a copy of what that said.

Well, I haven't talked to him.

He's got this Japanese there.

Smart thing going on.

and then having the tax.

We, your guard, we have not.

The only thing, I think the tax has to be written in a way that if we want, we can remove it, I guess.

This would be a guarantee, but we have to ask for it.

I think we can get it to the Congress.

I think we can get it to that flexible, and that's certainly what we all go for.

And also, I think the tax has to be across the board.

I don't think that you can start being selective.

And they'll say, well, why don't you keep this?

Why don't you do that?

What about medical supplies?

What about sugar?

And what about this country?

What about this brand?

What about this family?

You just cross the board.

Correct.

I think you have to be currently selected going in.

Right.

Now, after it's been a while, you might want to be considered possibly selectively removing it.

But that depends on what authority you get from the Congress and whether or not there's an override.

The reason that I have come to this is basically

Not on the merits.

I mean, whether it's this or the wage price board.

I mean, the wage price freeze.

The reason I got a job is, and this is just politics, it's basically psychology.

The country needs a psychological lift, no question.

And a psychological lift can only come from doing something.

Now, I know a written phrase suggests that I go on.

so forth and so on.

Speeches be fine.

That will not change this.

You've got to make my view, unless you disagree.

I think speeches are fine.

I admit that you must do something in order for the letter to come.

I agree with that 1,000%.

You have to do something.

You have to jerk this country up and, in fact, hate it a little bit.

And so that they say, we've got a leader here.

I mean, you know, we sit back and relax.

We don't say other people's stuff.

Also, people of this race probably say, we've got to shave.

I can say, look, you people have got to get off your ass and go to work.

That's right.

We've got to stop this.

That's right.

You've got labor and management both have to exercise a responsibility.

You can lay it for all, anything you want, but at the time you can pull it away for that reason.

It's heard about that at the present time that we say not to anybody about studies or so forth, but I wouldn't.

All right.

I don't think you should hurt the game, but I would be glad if it works.

Sure.

Oh, sure.

I would be glad if it works.

Plus, if anybody did that by choice, you're not going to get any impact now on anything you do anyway.

No.

When the Congresswoman, in August and all this, your timing of kicking them in the ass just when they come back can be beautiful, but people are back paying attention again.

That's right.

After later, they aren't.

Frankly, they're not.

That's right.

They really aren't.

No, I don't think they are.

No, they really are not.

We've got an international problem.

But if we do, we may both have to come back here and do it on 24-hour notice.

Yeah, that's why I think maybe we go gun-full and get it ready now.

But if we could, if we could set up a meeting between you and me, and I guess you better make sure also two or three of us should meet in the 23rd of August and get some directions.

I don't want to.

I mean, maybe.

Oh, I don't want you to take off until you get down there.

Oh, I'm sorry.

21st, 28th, you know.

Oh, yeah, Michael.

No, I'm not sure.

But, you know, I want you to get up and come up here.

You've got to go back and make a manager for the ranch.

You're going to stay down until you leave, sir?

No.

We're going to announce, if it's ours, we will announce that it's ours.

What do you need?

You're not legal.

I'll help you.

You know, 16.

Well, so.

I see.

That's right.

I'll put it on for you, John.

Well, that's...

I don't have to go next week.

If you want me to be here all next week, I can sure be.

No, no.

Next week's pretty surprising, God.

Next week's a good time for me to get my guts running.

You go next week.

They will hold on to the little boys and say, well, we'll raise this, that, and that, and that, and that.

Let's take a few risks.

I mean, God damn it.

First, there are risks.

God damn it.

There's not a word to be sure.

But God damn it.

Look at the additional work.

Do you think so?

Yes, sir.

You've seen that with the people in the population, guys.

I just don't see any other downsides to it.

Now, we're going to pick up an international funeral.

That's all right.

That's fine.

And you're going to get something invested.

The problem is, you know, we do.

Whether it's a change of mind or not, we know all our converter conditions.

It's not all that.

But I will tell you, the international funeral doesn't bother me.

I mean, I will let people get one man, but I'll let there be a little man with regard

See, notice that what it does for you, brother, is more than just these actions.

It says to the American people, it seems to me, in very clear and concise terms, number one, that you really believe and are going to fight for the fiscal responsibility which has been inherently a part of the Republican philosophy throughout the history of this country.

And this means the frugality in the economy and so forth.

This means this action is going to telegraph to them that you're tired of messing around with wages and prices, that these people are going to stay in line or you're going to force them in line.

Now, this just indicates a very great strength.

Number three, it says, to clear out of the state of the term, we're going to protect the American economy, the American businessmen, the American labor against deprivation and the rage of these pirates overseas.

Now, it says all of these things.

That's correct.

Very good.

That's correct.

I said that I used a term, which I think you might find useful in your conversations in the next speech.

I used it privately off the record in the business meeting yesterday.

I said, I want you to know about our economic policies with regard to our foreign competition.

I said, it's very, we don't complain about the competition.

These countries, by our health, are now competitors when they used to be past these scores.

the barriers against us, and they're fighting us hard in all the world.

And as the Secretary, if you read the Secretary of Trade's speech, the new policy of the United States and the people of trade is not alone.

I'm simply saying we're breaking down the barriers and all that sort of thing.

We're going to do unto others as they do unto us.

That's the golden rule of our policy.

Another move that you might just keep in mind, I don't necessarily recommend it at this point in time, I have not tweeted it, but I think there has to be a basic change in the State Department.

And our operations overseas, I think we ought to have, in every principal embassy around the world, an economic minister who is second only to the ambassador in writing.

I know you have, but I'm not trying to get them to struggle.

I'm simply saying that in this decade, I firmly believe that the study of economics, the awareness of economics, the international economics is more important to us than the political and military also.

on the basis that I raised the question that I believe there should be an economic minister.

They've got these little political assholes as ministers all over the place, and all of them are handled from the other side.

But I think there should be an economic minister in every major embassy department.

And with the right next to the ambassador, I think he's got to do it.

But I think Roberts is telling me that this is the biggest role the State Department can play.

And what was he prepared to say?

Yeah, he'll buy it.

Right.

appointed by the president.

That's correct.

You see, there, the man here, he almost don't have the rank of him.

Why do you think the rank of the minister created?

Who ranked him?

Sure, not maybe the minister, not the minister.

Well, I can't tell Bill the greatest thing that could happen would be for him to make this an entity that none of the businessmen have spoken about it, but that he ought to have, and that I want him to vote rather than having me vote.

But then, the key thing is, every one of those guys, he ought to make it a basic rule, right?

Has got to be the man who is not a foreign service man.

and I don't know anything about it.

I don't know enough about it.

So I go in there to the lawyer, and the lawyer says, he's back.

Don't come in there.

policy is do what others say you want to do.

Now that is the way it's going to be done from now on.

Do you still have the car tax in that package?

Yes.

That will be about 100% more effective on September 8th than it would have been today because it's the key of the launching of the new car in us.

Every company has a new car and they drop it right now.

which, of course, you probably already guessed.

I'm looking at television.

All the car companies now are having huge television campaigns.

Sell it.

They're last year's models, so the sales will be good now anyway.

This is a clean-up period.

This is a clean-up.

But if we get it at the end of the new model season and they drop their cars at $150, it may give a toll to the level of industry such as we could possibly have.

Well, plus, they'll be on what you think they're advertising right now.

What do you see in the last?

Let's give the business some mudder where it gets.

I've got a note here.

We should have a real good job on it.

I don't know any business.

God damn it.

I heard about your business.

I don't know your tax bill.

I don't know what's the job.

Unfortunately, it's true.

And I'm here with you.

So I'm going to ask you a question.

We walked out to the office.

We talked about that.

Well, I didn't interview you.

And we didn't have that kind of money.

Should we?

We met by the fire.

The best way to do it is to let the son of a bitch cut into that great big linebacker and have him get kind of clipping the back of his three-yard time.

Once you want to get over to Peterson, he's reporting to you.

You want to set up the line-up.

Well, that's nice.

What is that?

Let's see.

What the hell is he going to do to the human?

I don't know.

You want to be sure that he, you know, that, uh, that, uh, that his, his, his, his, his, his, his, his, his, his,

I've got to commemorate this event.

John, you sit here.

Rudy, you sit right there.

And Jordan, you sit there.

Here, John.

Right here.

What do you think we can do tonight?

I should know.

Well, Paul has suggested that he like to set about the end of the year.

And so we talked it up.

I produce some preliminary work for that part of the year.

As you know, once you're in the cell or something of this sort, there are a lot of things you don't get around to.

And I certainly found that in the bank.

And I happened to have a few months ahead of time there, so I got out in the grass roots and got a deal of it.

And I talked to Paul about this meeting.

some of these situations on the ground and see what was going on.

Because there'll be a limited amount of that once you take over.

That may give you quite candidly some thoughts on this subject that I would never express publicly, but that I can express privately.

And I want George to hear it.

I know neither of you really need to hear it, because I'm sure you would know how I feel anyway.

The trend is for more multilateral aid programs and less bilateral aid programs.

That's the trend.

On the other hand at the present time,

to many instances that it loses much of its stroke in comparison to the influence that we need politically around the world.

That's inevitable, of course.

Now, we look at that situation, and if you're going to find

is a great citizen, you know, is a total international asset.

Now, frankly, you are not.

I mean, you believe, as I do, as John does, and George does, we lead good international relations, but you basically are a man who, perhaps, knows the reality.

You've worked with that congressman up there.

You know that how much problems we've got with getting money for foreign aid and the reorganization and all that.

Well, thanks for the rest.

And really, we're reaching a point in this country, and George, you were probably able to talk about reaching a point in Congress in a country where at all an increasing number of people who have been facing orders from the UN and all those people who are saying, by God, the United States is just taking too much of a living around the world, and we want to be sure that we're putting up the money, that our voice is heard, and heard more vigorously than it's been heard previously.

I would say, I would express, and have John and I are going to have a meeting with him, very same views to Matt and the same views to others in these organizations in which we participate.

This is something that, not that publicly you've got to take the line, but you should about one hundred and eight years and so forth, and I just don't think I have time to do that, and I wish to distribute that, but believe me,

We have a situation around the world where many countries, the Japanese, Western Europe, the three of them, people getting gathered together, not to mention many other areas in the world, are bringing South Africa and will be involved even more because they play the whole world diplomacy as far as their economics is concerned.

And we're playing some closely-headed, nice diplomacy.

is that the only place that we can, the only way we can record and hear and serve you first and to either, the only place we can record and the only place where our guard can speak is through really the Secretary of Treasury.

John is a member of the National Security Council.

I'm a designated member of the National Security Council.

So he is totally aware of all the political things.

are most aware of are absolutely almost cracking their name from the United States.

A lot of this isn't concerning you, it won't concern this organization.

So what I'm only saying is this, it would mean a great deal, it would mean, in fact it's indispensable to this country

that Tomlin and you have a very close relationship.

So, you know, we may be doing something for one country, or you do something for another country.

We may have a bi-model program that we're trying to move in, or something like that.

So that's the kind of, you see what I'm getting at.

And John, if you want to speak to that just a moment, maybe the people, you know, because I think if you two could be in the same way, it would be very helpful.

I was surprised that, as you have discussed, you've told me so many times, but really what concerns the President, I think, more than anything else is the position, frankly, the Treasury has taken with respect to these multilateral institutions.

We've been the force within the government, primarily the government, and I have taken, I have not tried to stop him this year, Senator, because I haven't had a board along here

I think we have to continue to fund the multilevel institutions such as the World Bank, the Inter-American Development Bank, and so on.

But time and time again, when we wanted something, when we needed something, we had no influence in those organizations.

Herrera goes out and says, directly, the Inter-American Development Bank.

That's nice.

I think I've got to turn Treasury around before next year.

And I said to our Treasury people, as I told the President, that, well, we go through this round of hearings, but hereafter.

We're going to start low-key our treasured position that these ought to be the dominant institutions that we've got to go back to a bilateral relationship.

For instance, the United States of America, in fact, the whole concept of it is that we treat every country in Latin America the same.

Now, we might not.

Brazil is one or two different countries.

You know better than I, so this is what, that's what I'm proud to talk about.

And this is why I'm trying to get you involved, because under this section, we are, I'm the director of these institutions, and I'm chair of the board of the export and import financial control, and I do have the responsibility, obviously delegated to the president, to direct these fellows how they hope.

And so we're, the net of it is we're trying to run it out.

But it's just a key policy.

Now, your organization obviously is in a different category than the U.S. or so.

What I'm really saying is this.

What I'm really saying is you are in some current position.

That's why I was so delighted that you came to that conference.

Here's the point.

You are in a superb position.

If you would, if you couldn't, and I don't think there's any way to compromise this, what you're doing.

And we haven't had any of that darn little content for a while.

Hardly has happened.

Hardly has.

Because, you know, we all sit up there on the U.N. ground.

But really, you've accomplished a lot.

And with all of us on the organization, a coordinated approach, we're one force.

I think all.

Why, John, on a social basis, basically, on a social basis, why would, say, maybe three times a year, if you would sit down with me, with Matt and Mara,

who are members of the Soviet Development Bank, or the Asian Development Bank, and say, well, some of them have to work, but what can we do best to help them work?

And people are following.

You know, there really isn't coordination there at the present time.

You know how Christ was going to have neighbors from the state.

I don't know.

They're on one side or the other side of the fence.

those things without knowing.

But if you folks could sort of be an informal board of directors to give us some sense of direction to our policies, that's what we really need.

Don't you think so?

Is that in the cards?

Sure.

There's no reason for you to do that.

No, no.

You, you see, you, Matt, there's all of the men.

You see, Jody, they're really all speaking to the same problem.

We should all be singing the same tune.

and the whole point of this is just to sort of exchange notes on various countries and so forth.

I think just for example, just sort of exchanging views, I would not be surprised to find, I wasn't here to show this, but there are occasions when these various institutions may be coming up with different views simply because they're saying, why?

I would think it would be great if you would help and you could help to sort of let's kind of pull it together and John and you could do the same thing from here.

You see, you can do it because you've got these organizations.

But I think if you could sort of have a meeting.

Now, as a matter of fact, the first one I think could well come.

I'm sorry it didn't come to January last afternoon, but it did in January sometime.

We can have all the movers and shakers in this field together.

We're going to be taking a hand from TID on our side.

And I'd like to go through a little bit of small debt.

We all just sit down and chat about it.

Would that be a sign?

Obviously.

And then we say that I'll just say, all right, now, we've got this just to come in church.

You should come, too, because you get up there and get a bachelor on the living side.

But I think if we could set this up, John, in January, we're not going to wait until January.

We could do it before January, but you're going into January.

And then let's say, John, in January, we'll

Right.

Oh, yes, my husband does a very good job.

And it's a thing because it's the way he runs.

Sure, I see.

It's the way he runs and that he carries the weight.

And I do think he's done a good job.

Oh, I think he's doing such a good job.

Yeah, you think so, too.

And I've talked to my ex-boyfriend.

I know he is.

Because he's not there to ask me.

He has to tell me.

Well, I don't even know.

See, I get all the time.

Right after the

That would be a good time.

You set up the meeting right after the IMF meeting.

You get the recommendations that Rudy scheduled with McNamara and said, whoever you think should be in, let's have a good, and I mean, not in the sense that they're going to have our final school, whatever they have, who's interested.

We'll have that, too.

But let's sit down, and then let's have a fairly well program.

Let's lay it right out on the line.

We've got to get you against policy.

The organization is really weird too.

Either that or the congressmen are the same.

They're the same.

They're actually up to the team.

But if I want an organization to pull out, we don't have to pay 24% of the rate.

That did more for us.

I wish we could pull out that much.

I hope so.

They have to now.

Because they have given us money.

We're out.

We're in trouble.

I give them.

when you're involved in UNDP, a good deal of objectives and goals.

But as Chairman Passman said, we're kind of looking to this decade to talk about results.

Now, when we come to that area, as far as I've gone, it seems to me we have three areas in this organization that require

One is a matter of the caliber of people in key areas.

I talked to Paul.

He had some question marks.

And with this reorganization and this regional concept of dividing the world in four parts, you have some pretty full men in those four.

Two of the key questions.

Their terms will, in most of them, expire in the next 12 to 18 months.

Now, I'm not re-judging.

have really functioned.

We're going to have to make some changes to it.

And I wanted, I'm going to need the support in doing that.

Now, the second one is that the governing council that charged the administration

UNDP contracts with these individual agencies.

And as you know, in many cases, 60 to 70% of what the agencies do is fed through UNDP.

And this is an area which George's main associates have pointed out in the State Department.

These agencies are still going off on their own, doing pretty much as they choose, and someone is going

and say, the administration is responsible for these results, not you, and have an understanding on that score, and that may well produce a low flag.

And the third area is, as part of the organization, this reorganization, and I have to concur with as far as I've seen, is that we should plan and program

This again in turn means that the agencies will have to understand that as we approve all of our country programs, that they are part of the program and that they will

as individual projects as such.

Well, considering the history as far as I can learn, this is what they go selling, and in some cases, it may take even a little talent, and you're eating birds for free.

But these are, I'm going to walk into these situations

Because it's got to be said enough.

It's a hell of a lot of people, George.

You know, I care about the U.N. A lot of them, of course, are here to stay.

Isn't that what you know?

It's kind of present time.

It's pretty.

It's about as low as the snake's belly in terms of public support.

That's correct.

Exactly right.

Right.

And the way they can be done, really, is to do some things like this.

Now, I said that when we had this meeting, John, I'd like you to get to all these various people and say that each of them could stay for 10 minutes to say, like you are, now, what are you doing to contribute?

How can we present what the Americans really care for this country as being effective in our game?

Which is going to be good.

And how do you think we can improve

I appreciate your confidence more than I can say.

I get to do a book in my opinion, and so I've been pretty, I think, very useful about Thomas and Lee.

Oh, really?

Great.

It's a wonderful thing to do.

That's what people would want to do.

I just see America as a good place.

And also they started out on a little bit of a different page.

But in this case, you've got a designer who's much smarter than I do, and we all understand it.

And you just went through the morning and I thought you really looked at me.

Thank you.

Nixon, Haldeman & Connally on US economy and Wage and price controls

AI Summary

Audio

NARA Description

Nixon Library Finding Aid

Transcript (AI-generated)

Also recorded on August 6, 1971

Cite this conversation

Nixon, Haldeman & Connally on US economy and Wage and price controls

AI Summary

Audio

NARA Description

Nixon Library Finding Aid

Transcript (AI-generated)

Also recorded on August 6, 1971

Related conversations

Cite this conversation