TIME: Almanac 1993/TIME Almanac 1993.iso/time/election/64elect/64elect.011

Text File | 1992-10-19 | 16.3 KB | 307 lines

                ╝,                                                            ╚January 21, 1966

THE PRESIDENCY

The Union & the War



     Lyndon Johnson's third State of the Union address was, in
effect, a holding action. He wanted to discuss the war in
Vietnam but, because of the still continuing peace offensive,
not in too much detail. He had plans for many new projects at
home, but he wanted to leave himself an out in the event the
war escalates. So, in a sober, straightforward speech, he
strongly expressed his belief that the U.S. has the strength to
fight the war and simultaneously improve its society at home.

     "We will not permit those who fire upon us in Vietnam," he
said, "to win a victory over the desires and the intentions of
all the American people. This nation is mighty enough, its
society is healthy enough, its people are strong enough, to
pursue our goals in the rest of the world while still building a
Great Society here at home." To that end, he laid out an
astonishingly demanding list of domestic legislative proposals
for the 89th Congress, which had already set a record for bill
passing during its hard-working first session and had looked
for a light load this time around.

     As for Vietnam, Johnson spoke while several of his envoys
were still circling the globe as part of the American peace
offensive. He made it clear that the peace offensive will
continue, while leaving no doubt that the U.S. will stay in
Vietnam. "The enemy is no longer close to victory," he said.
"Time is no longer on his side. There is no cause to doubt the
American commitment. The days may become months and the months
may become years, but we will stay as long as aggression
commands us to battle."

     Felt-Tipped Pen. The President looked tanned after weeks
of L.B.J. Ranch recuperation, but the strong TV lights
accentuated new lines in his face and highlighted a thin,
somewhat scrawny neck. It was a long speech -- 53 minutes -- and
the President read it rapidly, sometimes almost perfunctorily.
It was devoid of any high rhetoric or drama -- intentionally so.
The President wanted to make it plain that he was saying as much
as he could about the war and, at the same time, had far more
domestic plans than anyone had imagined.

     The speech was initially compiled from memoranda ordered
weeks ago from Government agencies and advisers. White House
aides digested the memos, and the speech's first draft was
written by Richard Goodwin, a former Kennedy and Johnson
speechwriter who was called back from his post at Wesleyan
University. When Goodwin was through, the President
re-constructed the speech with the help of No. 1 White House
Aide Jack Valenti and Press Secretary Bill Moyers, finally
wound up penciling in many of the words and phrases himself. He
was still making changes with his felt-tipped pen as his
chauffeured limousine sped him from the White House to Capitol
Hill.

     Low Deficit. The President first dug into the domestic
portion of his program, rattling off more than a dozen general
proposals for the 89th's second session. Then, almost casually,
he dropped the word that next year's administrative budget will
be a record-breaking $112.8 billion, while the estimate for
federal revenues for the same period totals $111 billion. That
left a deficit of $1.8 billion, which, Johnson carefully
emphasized, would be "one of the lowest in many years." In fact,
he said, the cash budget for fiscal 1967 (as opposed to the
smaller administrative budget, which does not include such
ready-cash sources as social security payments and highway
funds) would actually show a surplus of $500 million.

     The President's desire for a cash budget surplus next year
was clearly Keynesian in approach, an anti-inflationary
manipulation aimed at curbing a surging economy. It appeared to
many to be a bit of sleight of hand as well, and it did, to be
sure, depend rather heavily on some imponderables. For one
thing, the President was relying on congressional passage of
his various tax programs, which may face some opposition.
Beyond that, Government forecasts have averaged an almost 9%
error on revenues, more than 6% on spending. This year's budget
totals, said a White House aide, are "highly uncertain." As it
now stands, the administrative budget, not counting a projected
$5.8 billion increase caused by Vietnam, will rise by $600
million over fiscal 1966. The extra requests for the Great
Society will be partially offset by a $1.5 billion cut in
Pentagon spending not related to Vietnam, and by another $1.5
billion reduction by all other federal agencies.

     A Proviso. The President threw down his spending plans like
a gauntlet before those who have attacked his Great Society
programs. "I have not come here tonight to ask for pleasant
luxuries and for idle pleasures," said Johnson. "I have come
here to recommend that you bring the most urgent decencies of
life to all your fellow Americans." Then he put forth his faith
and his warning for the coming session: "I believe that we can
continue the Great Society while we fight in Vietnam. But if
there are some who do not believe this, then, in the name of
justice, let them call for the contribution of those who live
in the fullness of our blessing rather than try to strip it from
the hands of those that are most in need."

     Despite his optimism in predicting a healthy financial
condition for the Federal Government, Johnson added a proviso:
"I will not hesitate to return to the Congress for additional
appropriations or additional revenues if they are needed." They
may be needed if the peace offensive fails and the war worsens
in Vietnam -- and the President pulled no punches in detailing
the hard realities of the "brutal and bitter conflict."

     Swelling Stream. A substantial part of the President's
speech was given over to the war, a remarkable change of
emphasis from his 1965 State of the Union address, which
contained only 126 words on the Vietnam conflict. This time,
Johnson carefully and lucidly redefined the principles behind
the U.S. commitment in Southeast Asia. In keeping with the
almost bland tone that he brought to the rest of the speech, he
managed to discuss a white-hot situation without so much as a
hint of belligerence. Yet there was an unmistakable undertone
of strength and determination.

     "The insistent urge toward national independence is the
strongest force of today's world in which we live," he said.
"History does not favor a single system or belief unless force
is used to make it so. Six years ago, North Vietnam decided on
conquest; and from that day to this, soldiers and supplies have
moved from North to South in a swelling stream -- swallowing the
remnants of revolution in aggression." The U.S. commitment in
Vietnam, he said, is based on the fact that "around the world
are countries whose independence rests in large measure on
confidence in America's word and in America's protection. To
yield to force in Vietnam would weaken that confidence. We
would have to fight in one land, and then we'd have to fight in
another -- or abandon much of Asia to the domination of
Communists. And we do no intend to abandon Asia to conquest!"

     Combat or Conference. Johnson added that "our decision to
stand firm has been matched by our desire for peace" -- at which
point, many listeners thought that they would hear some news
about the peace mission. The President kept mum, but in pursuit
of that mission, Vice President Hubert Humphrey last week talked
with Soviet Premier Aleksei Kosygin in New Delhi, and Secretary
of State Dean Rusk and Ambassador at Large Averell Harriman
conferred with South Vietnamese officials in Saigon. As the U.S.
stretched to its fourth week the halt on bombings of North
Vietnam, the White House also revealed that a U.S. diplomat
recently handed a direct communication, dealing with
Washington's peace proposals, to Ho Chi Minh's government.

     The President reviewed U.S. efforts at peace: "In 1965
alone we had 300 private talks for peace in Vietnam. We have
made it clear, from Hanoi to New York, that there are no
arbitrary limits to our search for peace. We will meet at any
conference table, we will discuss any proposals -- four points
or 14 or 40 -- and we will consider the views of any group."
Still, said Johnson, "so far we have received no response to
prove either success or failure." Then, uttering a phrase that
he had penciled into the speech himself only hours before he
appeared on Capitol Hill, Johnson said: "I wish tonight that I
could give you a blueprint for the course of this conflict over
the coming months, but we just cannot know what the future may
require. We may have to face long, hard combat or a long, hard
conference -- or even both at once."

     Since the President's message was more a report than an
exhortation, it drew a generally mild, undivisive reaction.
There were questions about whether there would be enough money
to pay for all the programs he proposed, but that problem would
have to be worked out in Congress in the months to come. As for
the issue of war or peace in Vietnam -- who could say when or
where the signal would come?


_______________________________________________________________
SAID THE PRESIDENT TO CONGRESS


     Because the first session of the 89th Congress gave Lyndon
Johnson so much, most congressional observers expected him to
request a minimum amount of domestic legislation in his State of
the Union message. They got quite a surprise. Herewith seven
areas in which the President asked for legislation.

     -- TAXATION. "Because of increased military expenditure,"
the President asked Congress to "temporarily restore"
excise-tax cuts on cars (which had dropped from 7% to 6%) and
telephone service (down from 10% to 3%). Since the reductions
had come into effect only twelve days before his speech, quick
congressional approval of the request would make the excise
reductions the briefest tax cut in memory. Restoring those taxes
would add about $1.2 billion for Johnson's record $112.8 billion
budget next year. Beyond that, the President recommended a
razzle-dazzle redesign of revenue-collection mechanics that
would put an extra $3.7 billion at the Government's disposal
next year. The new pay-as-you- go plan would not actually raise
taxes, instead would increase the monthly amounts withheld form
high-salary paychecks and speed up tax payments from large
corporations.

     -- LABOR. The President astonished labor by opting for new
federal laws "to deal with strikes which threaten irreparable
damage to the national interest," a move clearly encouraged by
the New York transit strike. Almost certainly that proposal
will mean revisions in the Taft-Hartley Act, which has no teeth
when it comes to dealing with walk-outs by public employees, and
gives the Government no legal leverage to stop a national strike
once a mandatory 80-day cooling-off period has expired. On the
other hand, Johnson promised to try again for repeal of
Taft-Hartley's Section 14b, the celebrated "right-to-work"
clause that allows states to outlaw union shops. He also asked
Congress to "improve unemployment insurance" and to increase the
minimum hourly wage, probably from $1.25 to around $1.50 --
still well below the $1.75 wage approved last year by the House
Education and Labor Committee.

     -- CIVIL RIGHTS. After the 1965 voting-rights bill, even
Negro leaders did not expect the President to offer another
sweeping civil rights package -- but he did. Most controversial
of his measures (and certain to run into heavy congressional
opposition) was his demand for laws "resting on the fullest
constitutional authority of the Federal Government" to prohibit
discrimination in housing sales or rentals. Although Johnson
spelled out no details, his proposal is much broader than the
presidential executive order signed by John Kennedy in 1962,
which outlawed discrimination in housing financed by the
Federal Housing Authority or the Veterans Administration. It
would likely be based on the U.S. Constitution's interstate
commerce clause and could easily cover the vast majority of the
nation's banks and private lending agencies, nearly all of which
operate interstate. The President will also press for tough
federal laws against those who "murder, attack or intimidate"
rights workers. He repeated his promise, made in November, to
"establish unavoidable requirements for non- discriminatory
jury selection" in the South.

     -- POLITICS. The President's most surprising, if scarcely
most meaningful, proposal was his foursquare declaration in
favor of a four-year term for Representatives. The present
two-year term, said Johnson, caused Congressmen to "divert
enormous energies to an almost constant process of campaigning."
Although House members met his recommendations with a rousing
cheer, there will be much debate about it in weeks to come. For
one thing, Johnson's plan would bring all 435 House members up
for election in the same year as the President -- thus
effectively canceling off-year judgments by the voters, who have
frequently displayed discontentment with presidential policies
by electing an opposition-party Congress. Anyway, final
acceptance of the plan would take a long time: the longer terms
would not start until after 1972, and would require a
constitutional amendment needing two-thirds passage in both
houses of Congress and ratification by three-fourths of the
states. While talking politics, Johnson also asked for federal
laws to install "strong teeth and severe penalties" in the
uncertain regulations applied by most states to get honest
disclosures about campaign contributions. To encourage small
contributions to candidates, he will move to make donations to
political parties tax-exempt.

     -- GOVERNMENT. Johnson asked for a twelfth Cabinet-level
agency: a Department of Transportation. The new department, he
said, could bring "efficiency and frugality" to the 35
different U.S. agencies that spend $5 billion a year working on
various facets of travel and transportation. A possible choice
to head it: Alan S. Boyd, now Commerce Under Secretary for
Transportation. Johnson reiterated his plea for home rule in
the District of Columbia, a measure that was beaten in the House
last year, promised to "streamline" the Executive branch and
"restructure" civil service in the top grades. And he proposed
a "commission of the most distinguished scholars and men of
public affairs" to look into the relations between "city, state,
nation, and the citizens themselves" with an eye toward
building "creative federalism" -- a rather confusing label that
sounds to many people as if it means more power for the Federal
Government when it actually means the opposite.

     -- NATIONAL WELFARE. This was a grab bag within a brag
bag. Among other things, the President called for 1) a Highway
Safety Act to cut down on traffic deaths, 2) a plan to "rebuild
entire sections and neighborhoods" in some U.S. cities as well
as "stimulate and reward planning for the growth of entire
metropolitan areas," 3) an end to pollution of rivers, 4) an
attack on "crime and lawlessness" through a federal program to
"modernize and strengthen local police forces," 5) a bill
requiring honest labels on packages, 6) a program demanding
that all interest and credit charges be fully revealed by
lenders to unsuspecting borrowers, 7) a revival of an
Administration bill, beaten last session, in which a traveling
Teachers Corps would be sent to impoverished U.S. districts, and
8) congressional reconsideration of a bill offering federal
money for the ailing and the aged to help pay their home
rentals.

     -- FOREIGN POLICY. Although he gave few details, the
President spoke glowingly of a "new and daring direction" for
U.S. foreign aid that would include "a worldwide attack on the
problems of hunger and disease and ignorance," specifically
through the programs carrying unmistakable Johnson-brand names
-- the International Education Act and the International Health
Act. The President estimated that it would cost $1 billion next
year to internationalize the Great Society. Beyond that, he
spoke strongly in favor of cutting tariff barriers and of
expanding U.S. trade with Communist countries in Europe -- even
though such a stand will certainly meet powerful opposition in
a war-conscious Congress.