Senator KENNEDY. President McDonald, Secretary
Treasurer Abel, Vice President Hague, delegates to the 10th Constitutional
Convention of the United Steel workers of America and their friends, this
is the third time in 4 years that I have been the guest of the United Steelworkers,
and I am proud to be here today. [Applause.]
We have met together in Los Angeles, in Atlantic
City, and we are going to meet together in a discussion of the problems
that face this country in the coming years. [Applause.] Let
me say first that I am proud to have the endorsement of the United Steel
Workers for the office of the President of the United States. I accept
that endorsement. [Applause.]
Last week at the machinists' convention, Mr.
Nixon criticized me and misquoted me for identifying myself too closely
with the aims of organized labor. He took out of context a speech that
I made at Detroit on Labor Day, in which I said that I know that organized
labor wants the things that I want for the United States, they want
better schools and better hospitals, and they want this country to move
forward, and I said on that occasion that organized labor opposes lethargy
and economic standstill and weakness at home and weakness abroad. I think
the working men and women of this country want what everyone else wants.
They want this country to be second to none. They want this country to
move. [Applause.]
I would remind Mr. Nixon of what another American
said on an earlier occasion: "All that serves labor serves the Nation.
All that harms labor is treason to America. No line can be drawn between
the two." That was not Harry Truman and it was not Franklin Roosevelt.
It was Abraham Lincoln. [Applause.]
We come and meet at this convention in a difficult
and trying time in the life of our country, and as the standard bearer
for the oldest political party on earth, I bear, and I think my party bears,
a great responsibility. The United States moves in a period of danger.
We are anxious that from this campaign the United
States shall gather renewed strength. It is our obligation during the coming
6 or 7 weeks to present to the American people an alternative course of
action so that they shall have the opportunity, the American people, to
make a choice as to which way they want to go. I think the choice is very
clear, and I think the choice has been placed before us not only by the
Democrats and by myself, but it has been placed before us by Mr. Nixon
and the members of the Republican Party who speak for him. Mr. Nixon has
gone through the country saying that we cry "doom and gloom." He has gone
through the country saying we have never had it so good. I go through the
country saying that this is a great and rich country, but I think it can
be a greater country and a richer country and a more powerful country.
[Applause.]
I do not believe that the period of the 1960's
is a period in which we can conserve, in which we stand still, in which
we gather ourselves for renewed effort. We have done that in the 1950's.
I think the 1960's are the time for new effort. This election is not 1900.
This election is 1912 and 1932 and 1948. This is a time for new go-ahead
for this country and the American people. [Applause.] And I shall continue
during the coming 6 weeks to present the alternative to the present course
of action to the American people.
And what is that alternative? I think the
alternative is written in the record of the two parties in this history.
I did not suddenly spring up after the Democratic Convention. The Democratic
Party was not invented in the last 6 weeks, nor was the Republican Party.
Mr. Nixon's record and my record are not both statements we have made in
the last few days of the campaign. The record which I have written, the
record which I have written for 14 years in the Congress and the record
which the Democratic Party has written through 160 years of service to
the Nation, are well known to the American people. [Applause.]
And I put the challenge to them in a few words;
can you tell me, not in the last 8 years, but in the last century, since
the administration of Theodore Roosevelt, can you tell me a single piece
of domestic social legislation that served the people that has been initially
proposed by the Republican Party? [Response from the floor.]
Senator KENNEDY. Social security, minimum
wage, civil rights legislation in the Congress - the Republicans dominated
the country and the Congress for years, for nearly a century after the
Civil War. Can you tell me when the Congress ever passed a single piece
of legislation giving equal rights to our citizens in all that period of
time? Did they in 1953 and 1954 when the Congress was dominated by the
Republican Party pass a single piece of legislation protecting the rights
of our citizens?
[Response from the floor.]
Senator KENNEDY. Was a single piece of legislation
passed in those years that increased the minimum wage of our people, that
increased their social security, that increased public housing, that increased
private housing? Can you tell me what the position was of the Republican
Party in the August session of the Congress on minimum wage? It was opposition
to the $1.25 an hour, and it was opposition, wholehearted opposition, to
providing medical care for our elder citizens. One Republican voted for
it and 44 Democrats voted for it. That is the record which is before the
American people. I think the choice is very clear. To those Americans who
want to stand still, who look back, I say they should vote for the Republican
Party. To those Americans who are not satisfied, who may feel that we are
ahead, as Mr. Nixon said to Mr. Khrushchev, in color television, I am not
satisfied, while he was ahead in rockets. I am not satisfied. I can look
at color television and have rockets. [Applause.]
Mr. Nixon, speaking in Portland, Oreg., said:
"There are those who are going around the country crying 'doom and gloom,'
but we just built the largest shopping center in the world."
I am not satisfied to have the largest shopping
center as long as the Soviet Union is moving in Latin America, Asia, and
Cuba. I think we can do better; that is the question before us in 1960.
[Applause.]
Now, if there is any group in the United States
who recognizes the need to do better it is the men and women who are here
at this convention. The production of steel is the hallmark of an industrial
society. If the Soviet Union overnight should knock out 50 percent of our
steel capacity we would feel we were ruined. And yet the economic policies
of this administration have contributed to one-half of our steel capacity
being unused, 100,000 of our steelworkers out of work, other thousands
working part time. Who can say that they have never had it so good? They
have had it better and they are going to have it better. [Applause.]
Are we going to slip and slide through the
1960's? Are we going to have a recession in 1954 and 1958 and a slowdown
in 1960, and the future bringing we don't know what in 1961? Are we going
to have economic policies and leadership which provides a stifling of the
American economy when we need schools and hospitals and roads and private
investment? Are we going to stand still and become as we were last year,
the lowest country or economic growth of any major industrialized society
in the world? Or are we going to go ahead? Are we going to move again?
[Response from the floor.]
Senator KENNEDY. I think this is a serious
election, and I think we offer a clear alternative to the American people.
This union has seen good times and bad times. This union went through a
strike of over 6 months, during the last year. That strike came in part
because the steel companies in 1957 had their last great year when their
productive capacity was used to the full. Steel settlements come from two
factors, first from both the union and the company, recognizing their public
obligation, and secondly, when the economy is moving along so that there
is an incentive on both the company and the union to get together, to make
a contract, to go back to work. But if the steel companies find that one-half
of their capacity produces as much
steel as the market is consuming, or if they feel that they can produce
in 6 months what the market consumes in a year, then they would just as
soon face up and say, "Let's settle this matter right now, let us rewrite
our working standards, let's stand still, let them strike. We will use
up our inventory, use up our backlog, and 6 months from now we can go back
to work and our profits will still be up."
You get an agreement when there is a need
for steel, you get an agreement when the economy is moving ahead, you get
an agreement when there is incentive on both sides to sign a contract and
get back to work. So the difficulties of last year were not only tied up
with the inequities of the Taft-Hartley Act emergency section, but they
were also tied up with the fact that 1959 was not a boom year. As long
as you have a slowdown in our economy, so long will you find it difficult
to work out satisfactory collective bargaining procedures.
Dave McDonald, who has been a friend of mine
and supporter for many months and years, has put forward a suggestion that
the only way to meet the problem of overabundance is to have a 32-hour
week. [Applause.] My own feeling is I would prefer a different solution.
I would prefer the solution of this economy going ahead at such full blast
that in 40 hours a week we barely produce what we can consume, that at
the time when we have a productive race with the Soviet Union, at a time
when we need all the steel we can get to take care of a population which
is increasing and which will double in 40 years, I would like to see economic
and fiscal policies by this Government will be directed toward stimulating
the economy so that the steel industry works full time and so your people
go back to work.
I respect his suggestion, and we are friends
enough so that we can disagree. Our objective is the same; full time work
for our people, enough leisure to enjoy themselves. [Applause.] But I feel
before we move to 32 hours that we should try an administration which is
dedicated to full economic growth, which wants our people and our country
working, which wants our steel pouring out, which wants us to grow comparable
to that of Western Germany and France and England, which doubled the economic
growth of the United States last year.
I come here today as a man who has served
on that Committee on Labor for 14 years, and I come here today as the candidate
for the Democratic Party, and more important than that, I come here as
the standard bearer for a party in direct line of succession with three
great Presidents of this country in this century, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin
Roosevelt and Harry Truman. [Applause.] I think the theme for our party
and country was said by Franklin Roosevelt when he came before 100,000
people in Franklin Field, Philadelphia, in 1936, to accept the second Presidential
nomination. In that speech he said:
Governments can err, Presidents do make mistakes, but the immortal Dante tells us that Divine Justice weighs the sins of the coldblooded and the sins of the warmhearted in a different scale. Better the occasional faults of a government living in the spirit of charity than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference.I think for the last 8 years we have had a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. As long as there are 15 million Americans living in substandard housing, as long as the average unemployment compensation check for workers thrown out of work in this country is $32 a week, as long as there are millions of Americans who do not even receive the inadequate $1 an hour minimum wage, as long as the average check for laundry women in five large cities of this country is 65 cents an hour for a 48-hour week, as long as there are 4 million families receiving a food surplus package from our Government every month, so long is there need for the Democratic Party. [Applause.]