On April 5, 1972, President Richard M. Nixon, John K. Andrews, Jr., and Stephen B. Bull met in the Oval Office of the White House from 4:36 pm to 4:55 pm. The Oval Office taping system captured this recording, which is known as Conversation 703-004 of the White House Tapes.
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 Do not cite this transcript as authoritative.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.
I see what you've done on the busing line in terms of what they have in there, but there's a real clincher in there.
I don't know whether you've discussed it or not.
I see the parts you marked about the U.S. Catholic conference.
Yeah, I'm very careful of that.
I don't want to have a speech of mine that says we're busing the case with the only tool that will accomplish our distribution objectives.
Is the way too much compared to what I said before?
Yes, sir.
Yes.
Well, I talked to him earlier about it and he said he felt it was not incompatible with the last resort, although he was dubious about it.
The attempt with busing was to
try to be a little more conciliatory for this audience, which we understand is well to the left of our position.
But I'm sure that dropping that particular phrase, we still say enough about equal educational opportunity and about ending racial isolation that I think that it will go down all night with them without weakening their position.
I recognize that among educators there is, among educators as well as among
People of good will across the nation.
There is a strong difference of opinion with regard to the use of busing for the purpose of achieving a racial balance in our schools.
I mean, in that sense, honestly, we're good.
You could simply go back to the way...
I was just saying, there's one who is, there's one, there's one who is, is, uh, opposed, and one who is, uh,
as one who is committed to this disease, completely committed to the desegregation.
School desegregation and quality education.
both the school desegregation and quality education.
Let me state my views on this issue directly and candidly.
And then to pick up heavy reliance on the thoughts
If you could pick that up in the end, right after you're finished, you'll see nothing less capable of running.
Then you can put it in the .
I think that's where it has to go because you can't, you can't, you see where I mean?
Yes, sir.
Right in there.
Don't you think that's where it has to go?
Yes. .
Then, on the next page, I would say, I would drop that person, and I'd say, even the strongest proponents of busing recognize this fact.
It would be physically impossible to transfer people to a scale large enough to solve the most pressing problem, where even the most best would still leave the vast majority.
See what I mean?
Yes.
That recognizes the fact that there are people in the audience who are for it, but I don't want to give an inch with regard to my being for it.
See my point?
Certainly.
Because I'm not for it.
I'm not for it at all.
Another alternative would be just to go back to the very clear
sharper statement in the previous draft, that the only thing is the previous draft made no concession for the fact that not the whole audience might agree with your... No, no, I wouldn't do that.
I don't think you need to do that.
I mean, this is fine.
Yes.
I realize this is not as sharp as the previous draft and so forth, but I see my introducing it this way.
Yes.
You say I realize that there's an honest, but I say something like that.
Recognize that it...
That there's strong differences of opinion.
That there are honest differences of opinion among educators as well as among the public at large.
As to the question on busing or whatever it is, let me state my
Incidentally, I'm not sure that this, I don't think you were going back to what Buchanan had in his draft about ten minutes to midnight.
Do you think that tracks on page 4?
Well, I wanted to point that out.
Public Education in America is at the 11th hour.
Not so that Education Day comes to midnight is probably correct.
I don't know what the preceding part is.
I don't know whether it's... Well, I put this back in, I guess Chuck Colson told you that Pat and I were sort of brokering back and forth as to... Yeah, he wanted this here.
And he wanted it, but my own feeling was it may raise a little bit too much of a crisis.
atmosphere which you don't really pay off with with your promises that you make at the end the old language was just about testing times which is a little gentler well we could say it was a testing time for public education and what else did we say
I just said it's a particularly severe testing time for non-public.
It is a major, but it is a massive crisis for, I don't say a massive crisis for, you take 10 minutes to pay back, it means like they're all going to go on to the next week or they're not.
You could say public education faces a...
in public education in America, or whatever you have.
You can end up gussying up the language just a little bit, but I think it goes too far to say that in terms of what we're going to do.
And I would say that the non-public education basis
a national crisis.
In other words, say one is a testing time and the other is a national crisis, non-public institution is a national crisis.
What can only be described as a national crisis?
Public education in America, or whatever age you have, how would you say it?
Would you say that public education
Public education in America is in a testing time.
Is in a time of great testing.
Is in a time of severe testing.
Non-public education.
Just go ahead.
Non-public education faces what can only be called a crisis.
Can only be described as an actual crisis.
See, wouldn't you want to say national crisis?
That makes it sound like a government problem.
What do you say?
It's a major crisis.
It's a major crisis.
I agree that the 10 minutes to midnight is a headline phrase.
I don't know that it's the headline that we want.
Well, it won't do because we don't do enough about what we do at midnight.
Now, I could sharpen this up and exaggerate it if necessary.
Non-public schools in America are not closing their doors forever at a rate of approaching two a day.
You see, that weaves fairly.
I'd simply say non-public schools in America are closing their days at a rate of two a day.
Frankly, we're approaching.
How close is it?
The data doesn't seem to be very good.
I know approaching is a weak word.
Well, they don't use it.
It's a bad sentence.
It's the only way to say something is to say it.
So it's maybe one a day.
Non-public schools in America.
At a rate of more than one a day?
When you appointed these...
I wanted to say approaches.
At that time, there was a Catholic school in Boston.
Uh...
One or two schools?
Every day, at least one, and sometimes two.
At least one, and sometimes two.
Should we call it Catholic schools?
Yeah, it is a Catholic school, of course.
I think that's the severe problem.
At least one and sometimes two Catholic schools in America are closing their doors forever.
It's not safe.
At least one and sometimes two.
The Catholic schools close their doors forever, whatever it is.
Okay, that's better.
I think it was about 20.
I put in the part you gave me this morning about promises and the commitment that had come out as you described it.
Oh, the partisanship.
Yeah.
No, that is not in there.
The American school system agrees.
What did I say?
Well, that's deep down.
I agree.
I think it's strong without it.
The closing paragraphs talk about the issue of division, and we could insert that line somewhere among those.
Yeah, you could say we should not be divided by party, or by religion, or by party, or by religion, or by race, or creed.
This is an issue that should not be...
But I think the idea that we are... Let us not be divided in this issue by party,
By religion.
By race.
By religion.
I think you said it when you said religion.
Yeah, by party, by party, religion, race.
Is that all there is to observe for?
I don't think so.
Yeah, party.
Unless you want to say regional or sectional.
Yeah, or less of a party.
Race or region.
The education of America's children is too much important.
It is too important.
The education of future generations of America's children.
or the education of our children.
Isn't that it?
Yes.
The education of our children is too important an issue for us to be divided by a party, race.
Party, religion, race, religion.
and then and then and that should come in uh that could come in before this record right before the line the time has come let us but then i would go around let all americans let all americans join together in a new recognition of the vital and positive rules which both
There.
I think that's trading things to bed.
Yes.
Now, you see what I'm trying to get back here, don't you, in terms of the...
In the bussing?
Bussing.
I don't want to give anything on that, because it'll pick that up.
You understand?
The way it got that section is, if you'd ever leave that in at one point, if you'd ever leave that in...
that while busting is occasionally the only tool that will accomplish a desegregation of judges, that would be lifted out of there, put out of, we haven't said that.
We have said it in the legislation where we've listed it as the last option or something, that while it is occasionally the only tool
Good God, I mean, all you do is to lose what we've tried to accomplish already.
And also something which the people are going to buy.
But I think what we have here is maybe you would have that part.
It makes compelling sense to use those to provide better education.
Yes, sir.
And so that's the one you gave me this morning.
And that's the one out there.
I think that education, transportation, contracts is a good one.
Provide better education for all.
That's right.
Also, it shows that busing only benefits a few.
Whereas our program benefits all.
Why don't you have typed off your new system?
Get out here.
So you can see how it works?
Yeah.
take it up right here, if you would, and then figure it out, too.
Yes, that's true.
Yes, and I, let me close that open.
Would you, uh, where's the girl, was it, she, was that right?
Yeah, one of the girls, section 36, yeah.
Oh, I need to hear it.
All right, and as soon as you have it, let's bring it in, I'll be speaking to the secretary of state.
I've got to finish this now, okay?
Yes, sir.