1. Recognize as national policy that we are in a strategic space race with Russia.
     2. Expedite present space projects to provide a new and bold program with the following goals:

      - Manned space platform - 1965.
      - A U.S. citizen on the moon - 1967-68.
      - Nuclear power for space exploration - 1968-69.
      - A spacecraft which can take off from earth, travel to and in space, return and land under its own power - 1968-69.

       - Speed up to a maximum degree the construction of ICBM launching bases, Polaris submarines and the Mach 3 missile-carrying B-70.
       - Provide the Army with funds to begin the immediate procurement of already-developed modern missiles, other weapons, and airlift. .

     The space and defense proposals of Missiles and Rockets parallel, although in somewhat more detail, those of the Democratic Party platform. They are in line with my own thinking, our goals are identical. My comments on the nine-point proposal of September 27 follows. (M/R's points are in italics.)

     1. Recognize as national policy that we are in a strategic space race with Russia.

     We are in a strategic space race with the Russians, and we have been losing. The first manmade satellite to orbit the earth was named Sputnik. The first living creature in space was Laika. The first rocket to the moon carried a Red flag. The first photograph of the far side of the moon was made with a Soviet camera. If a man orbits earth this year his name will be Ivan. These are unpleasant facts that the Republican candidate would prefer us to forget.
     Control of space will be decided in the next decade. If the Soviets control space they can control earth, as in past centuries the nation that controlled the seas dominated the continents. This does not mean that the United States desires more rights in space than any other nation. But we cannot run second in this vital race. To insure peace and freedom, we must be first.

     2. Expedite present space projects to provide a new and bold program with the following goals: Manned space platform - 1965: A U.S. citizen on the moon - 1967-68; Nuclear power for space exploration - 1968-69; A spacecraft which, can take off from earth, travel to and in space, return and land under its own power - 1968-69.

     The target dates for a manned space platform, U.S. citizen on the moon, nuclear power for space exploration, and a true manned spaceship should be elastic. All these things and more we should accomplish as swiftly as possible. This is the new age of exploration; space is our great New Frontier.

     3. Recognize that "space for peaceful purposes" is possible only if "freedom of space" is insured; hence that the U.S. military must be given a predominant role in developing and carrying out the projects necessary to guarantee freedom of space.

     Freedom of space must be assured, preferably by mandate of the United Nations. The United States must have preeminence in security as an umbrella under which we can explore and develop space for the benefit of all mankind.

     4. Establish preeminent strategic, tactical, and defensive forces with representation, from all services.

     Reorganization of the cumbersome, antique, and creaking machinery of the Department of Defense is high on the agenda of the new Democratic administration. I have asked Senator Stuart Symington to head an advisory committee which by December 31 will give me recommendations for this reorganization. Members of the committee include Thomas K. Finletter, former Secretary of the Air Force; Clark Clifford, who assisted in drafting the National Security Act of 1947; Roswell L. Gilpatric, who was a member of the Rockefeller special studies project; Fowler Hamilton, former member of the Joint Intelligence Staff of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; and Marx Leva, a former special assistant to the Secretary of the Navy and chairman of a civilian-military review panel for a Senate committee. Dr. Edward C. Welsh, economist, military analyst, and a legislative assistant in the Senate for the past 8 years, is executive director.
     This committee will make practical recommendations as to what changes should be made in the organization and administration of our defense agencies to eliminate the present crippling effect of those problems upon our power.
     The Democratic platform calls for reorganization of the Department of Defense according to functions and missions. The committee will certainly study the feasibility and efficiency of: (a) A Strategic Command of such power and flexibility that it will deter surprise attack or major war - and indeed make it apparent to an enemy that surprise attack would be suicide; (b) a Tactical Command of strength and mobility capable of stamping out brush-fire wars with speed and certainty; (c) a Continental Defense Command; (d) a Material Command, and (e) a Development Command.
     Until 1945 major wars could be won by adhering to the principles of Napoleon, Nelson, Grant, Lee, Jackson, and Sheridan. The atom has changed war, as it will change the world. We must have a modernized defense establishment to cope with the atomic age.

     5. Recognize the necessity of greater defense funding to accomplish this, including a supplemental budget in January 1961, to make it possible to: Speed up to a maximum degree the construction of ICBM launching bases, Polaris submarines and the Mach. 3 missile - carrying B-70. Provide the Army with funds to begin the immediate procurement of already-developed modern, missiles, other weapons, and airlift.

     Defense spending must be based on the security needs of the Nation, not the predetermined confines of a budget. While more money will be spent for modernity and mobility in our Armed Forces, I believe that billions can be saved by streamlining the Department of Defense and minimizing competition between services. Our competitors lie on the other side of the Iron Curtain.
     In January, I will send to the Congress specific requests to -

 - Accelerate our Polaris, Minuteman, and other strategic missile programs.
 - Expand and modernize our conventional forces, giving them the versatility and mobility they require.
 - Protect our retaliatory capacity from a knockout blow through hardening and dispersal of bases, the use of an air alert, and improvements in our air defense system.
 - Streamline our Defense Establishment to give immediate reaction in this nuclear space age.

     6. Establish further-on defense spending by need and not by budget ceiling.

     My position on this is expressed in No. 5. I add this. Basic research must be encouraged and expanded, on a long-range budget plan. Research cannot be started and stopped according to the whims of the budgeteer. A "breakthrough" in a vital field may be achieved in. 5 years - or 10 - but no one can be sure until it happens.

     7. Streamline defense regulations and procedures to make industry's rote in the U.S. defense and space effort more effective.

     Certainly defense regulations and procedures must be simplified, and the proliferation of secretaries, assistant secretaries, under secretaries, special assistants and deputy assistants to secretaries, boards, commissions, councils, and committees must be rolled back. The Symington group is now hard at work on this tangled maze.

     8. Take what steps may be necessary to establish and promote national scientific objectives.

     Certainly national scientific goals will be our first objectives, continuously emphasized.

     9. Reestablish decision making in the U.S. defense and space organizations.

     The Democratic Party has strength in depth among dedicated men familiar with defense problems. They will have a mandate to speed the decision-making process, and authority to make affirmative decisions very quickly.

     1. Recognize as national policy that we are in a strategic space race with Russia.

     If the Eisenhower administration had not long ago recognized that we were in a strategic space race with Russia, our space record would not be as creditable as it is today.
     Twenty-six earth satellites and two space probes have been launched successfully by the United States.
     Six satellites and two space probes have been launched successfully by the Soviet Union.
     Today 13 U.S. satellites are in orbit; only 1 Russian satellite remains in orbit.
     Eight U.S. satellites in orbit are still transmitting; the sole Russian satellite in orbit is not transmitting.
     The United States has recovered two satellite payloads from orbit while the U.S.S.R. claims to have recovered one.
     Despite the greater weight of  U.S.S.R. space vehicles, the United States has gathered far more scientific information from space. In instrumentation, communications, electronics, reliability, and guidance, U.S. space vehicles have made gigantic strides.
     In short, the United States is not losing the space race or any other race with the Soviet Union. Today we are ahead of the U.S.S.R.  From a standing start in 1953, we have forged ahead to overcome an 8-year Russian lead. And we will continue to maintain a clear cut lead in the race for space.

     2. Expedite present space projects to provide a new and bold program with, the following goals: Manned space platform -1965; a U.S. citizen on the moon - 1967-68; nuclear power for space exploration - 1968-69; a spacecraft which, can take off from earth, travel to and in space, return and land under its own power - 1968-69.

     The ability to exploit space is a first priority national objective of the United States. Inspiring goals have always been the choice of the American people. In the exploration of space our goals will be moved forward as rapidly as possible, taking immediate advantage of every technological breakthrough. We have a 10-year program, officially approved by the space agency and the President, targeted on realistic goals that can be achieved. It is bold and imaginative and as compatible with proposal No. 2 as informed technological projections will permit. Briefly, it provides for actual testing of a nuclear-fueled space engine, Project Rover, by 1965. The program calls for launching and operation of a permanent manned space station to which our astronauts will go and come and stage flights deeper into space in the period 1966-67. It provides for the first manned circumlunar flights around the moon in the period 1967-68.
     Because of the need to perfect the nuclear deep space engines and insure adequate power for return and safe landing on earth, the moon landings are presently scheduled for the period 1970-71. It is entirely possible that this target date will be advanced.

     3. Recognize that "space for peaceful purposes" is possible only if "freedom of space" is insured; hence that the U.S. military must be given a predominant role in developing and carrying out the projects necessary to guarantee freedom of space.

     "Freedom of space," like "freedom of the seas," is essential to the progress of mankind. The United States will promote the concept of "space for peaceful purposes," and be its champion. Our efforts will be directed to insure that we are fully supported by international agreement and law. As with our other ideals and principles, our military forces must have the mission, and the necessary strength, to defend "freedom of space."

     4. Establish preeminent strategic, tactical, and defensive forces with representation from all services.

     President Eisenhower's 1958 reorganization of the Defense Department tightened civilian control over our Armed Forces, firmed the authority of the Secretary of Defense, strengthened the staff serving the Joint Chiefs of Staff, cleared the command channels to our fighting forces, and opened the way for expediting the decisionmaking process.
     The execution of this plan has completely justified and demonstrated the effectiveness of civilian control and our present concept of organization.
     I oppose the establishment of preeminent strategic, tactical, and defensive forces with representation from all services. My reasons in part, are as follows
     1. Precise advantages of functional organization have not been identified and presented to the Congress and to the American people.
     2. Today we have a proven defense system which we are asked to abandon in favor of one having obvious defects and no publicly known advantages.
     3. The principles of functional organization and of the unified command are not new in any respect. In fact, in our present defense organization, such principles are used whenever they can be employed effectively.
     4. The proposal could lead to as many separate forces as there are military functions to be performed. Instead of an Army, Navy, and Air Force a multiplication of services could result accompanied by duplication, confusion, and increased costs without increased military capability.
     I reject a "cannonball" approach and I reject the principle that just a little bit of reorganization will produce perfection in our defense organization. Improvements have been made over the years and will continue to be made after careful analysis, and with the approval of the Congress.
     I believe that our present defense organization established by President Eisenhower should be retained for the present. Today our Armed Forces, subject to civilian control, are fully capable of an immediate and flexible response operating under an umbrella of invulnerable and diversified deterrent forces.

     5. Recognize the necessity of greater defense funding to accomplish this, including a supplemental budget in January 1961, to make it possible to speed up to a maximum degree the construction of ICBM launching bases, Polaris submarines, and the Mach, 8 missile-carrying B-70. Provide the Army with funds to begin the immediate procurement of already developed modern, missiles, other weapons, and airlift.

     With respect to future defense budgets, the amount required must be determined on the basis of forces and programs and in context with the total national strategy. Military technology is moving at a very rapid pace and changes are occurring almost daily in the international situation. Clearly, under these circumstances, the defense program must be kept under virtually continuous review and changes made promptly wherever necessary. I have said many times I favor acceleration of the Polaris and Minuteman programs and I favor the seedy development of the B-70. Whether a supplemental appropriation will be necessary in January is a decision to be made at the time. If it usefully would serve our missile program, accelerated as recently as August and September by the President, I would favor it.
     There cannot be and will not be a price ceiling on our security. The United States must, and I for one am resolved, to pay what is necessary in money and effort to provide for our common defense.
     This is my position and I state it positively - we can afford and we will provide the defense America needs. There can never be a price ceiling on security, nor will we flinch from the demands our security requires.

     6. Establish, further-on defense spending by need and not by budget ceiling.

     In answer to this question I should like to quote from the Republican Party platform of 1960:
     The United States can and must provide whatever is necessary to insure its own security and that of the free world and to provide any necessary increased expenditures to meet new situations, to guarantee the opportunity to fulfill the hopes of men of good will everywhere. To provide more would be wasteful. To provide less would be catastrophic. Our defense posture must remain steadfast, confident, and superior to all potential foes.

     7. Streamline defense regulations and procedures to make industry's role in the U.S. defense and space effort more effective.

     Defense regulations and procedures have improved steadily throughout the years of the Eisenhower administration.
     Of America's annual 40-plus-billion-dollar defense budget, approximately $25 billion is spent each year in contracts for equipment, material, and services including research and development of weapons systems.
     Now, the 25 billion defense dollars spent in industry contracts is three times the combined purchasing volume of General Electric, General Motors, and United States Steel.
     Obviously, in a business as large as that conducted by the Defense Department, improvements can be made. And improvements have been made and will continue to be made. As an example, the single manager system installed in 1956 to eliminate duplication among the military services in the procurement of common-use supplies has produced almost $400 million in factual savings over the last 4 years.

     8. Take what steps may be necessary to establish and promote national scientific objectives.

     National scientific objectives have been established and are being pursued vigorously. Technological breakthroughs are exploited to the maximum advantage. From a standing start in 1953, the United States has had to telescope time in our scientific efforts. Our scientists and engineers have worked wonders, and are highly deserving of the deep gratitude of this Nation. I can assure my fellow Americans that we will all continue to press forward to attain and even surpass our national scientific objectives.

     9. Reestablish decisionmaking in the U.S. defense and space organizations.

     It may be that further improvement in the decisionmaking process will be found necessary in the future. I will not hesitate to recommend to the Congress any additional improvements required in the national interest. At the same time, I cannot condone any changes incompatible with our fundamental principles of government.