Produced by Lawrence E. Spivak.
     Guest: The Honorable Richard M. Nixon, the Vice President of the United States.
     Panel: Herbert Kaplow, NBC News; James Reston, the New York Times; Richard Wilson, Cowles Publications; Lawrence E. Spivak, regular panel member.
     Moderator: Ned Brooks.

     Mr. BROOKS. Our guest today is the Vice President, Mr. Richard Nixon. Tomorrow morning he takes off on his first cross-country campaign tour since receiving the Republican nomination for President. In the next 6 days he will travel about 9,000 miles, visiting 19 cities and 15 States.
     We will start the questions with Mr. Spivak.
     Mr. SPIVAK. Mr. Vice President, there is an uneasy feeling among leading observers here and abroad that there is something wrong in the way we are fighting this fight for survival against communism. Do you think there is anything wrong?
     Vice President NIXON. Of course, there are a number of different viewpoints expressed among the observers to whom you refer. I would say that in considering whether there is anything wrong in the fight against communism that we must not overlook the fact that we are going to have great difficulties in the years ahead. Those difficulties will be created in many instances, not because we are doing something wrong, but because the Communists are engaging in aggressive tactics, an attempt to take over the world. As far as I am concerned, I believe that, overall, the free world is conducting itself very responsibly - the Congo is a very good example - in the fight against communism today. I believe, as far as the United States is concerned, that as the leaders of the free world we have a responsibility to do everything that we can to mobilize the forces in the free world for peace and freedom so that we can be on the offensive and not on the defensive in this struggle.
     Mr. SPIVAK. Specifically, Mr. Vice President, you have said, "America is today the strongest country militarily, the strongest country economically, with the best educational system and finest scientists in the world overall," and those are your words. My question is, do you believe we have to date taken the steps necessary to make absolutely sure that we remain so - and by "us" I mean we the people and the Government?
     Vice President NIXON. Mr. Spivak, I believe that today the statement that I made is true. I don't believe that we can be complacent about the fact that we are first in the world in the fields that I have mentioned and that you have mentioned. I do believe that as we move into this critical period of the sixties, since we are in a race, that the United States must constantly reexamine what we are doing militarily, economically, educationally and in the fields of science and in all other areas to see that what we are doing is adequate. I would say finally that there can always be room for improvement, and the next President, whoever he is, must adopt and advocate policies which will assure not only holding the advantage, but increasing it if we can in these fields.
     Mr. SPIVAK. Mr. Vice President, do I understand, then, what you are saying is that we are the strongest, today, that we have taken all the necessary steps to remain the strongest and that comparatively we are the strongest? I mean by that, that vis-a-vis the Soviet Union we have kept our strength during the last 8 years?
     Vice President NIXON. We certainly have. Vis-a-vis the Soviet Union we are stronger militarily, economically, overall in science, overall in education. But the threat is real. They are moving, and we can't be complacent about our strength and must continue to increase it.
     Mr. RESTON. Mr. Vice President, on the question of Cuba, do you feel that we have done everything in Cuba that we might have done, or do you regard this as a serious setback to us?
     Vice President NIXON. The Cuban situation, Mr. Reston, troubles me, as I know it does members of both parties and observers in the foreign policy field, not only in the United States but abroad. When you examine that situation, it is difficult to see what the United States should have done that might have averted it, or what we could have done. In retrospect I might suggest that the policies that the President now is advocating and that the Congress has approved in this session for putting more emphasis on a program of economic development for Latin America, a program which will not go just to governments, to strengthen governments, but to serve the interests of people, that such a program, had we had it in effect perhaps 5 years ago, might have produced economic progress in Cuba which might have averted the Castro takeover. But this is looking back.
     Looking to the future, I can only say that I believe this program, which the President has now initiated, and which both parties support, gives us hope that we will not have another Cuba in another part of Latin America.
     Mr. RESTON. What happened, Mr. Vice President, when you came back from Latin America? You were very disturbed at that time by what you saw there. What happened to your recommendations when you did come back?
     Vice President NIXON. Some of those recommendations were put into effect. For example, I urged increased exchange with Latin America, and particularly increased emphasis in the exchange where labor leaders were involved and student leaders were involved, because I could see that the Communists were concentrating on these groups particularly.
     In addition to that, I urged that the United States participate in commodity studies with the Latin American governments and countries, for example, studies in coffee, other products which they produce and which we buy in which they desire to work out a method whereby they would not be at the mercy of the market as much as they were. We hadn't done that before my trip. We have done it since.
     Mr. KAPLOW. You have said a number of times, Mr. Vice President, that religion should not be a campaign issue and that the candidates, in order to prevent it from becoming one, might refrain from discussing it. There have been recent developments which indicate that religion is an issue in certain parts of our country, and I wonder if you have anything more to say about the subject?
     Vice President NIXON. Mr. Kaplow, as you have well said, I have discussed this issue. I discussed it at a meeting with the American Society of Newspaper Editors and also at a press conference I had immediately after receiving the nomination in Chicago. I do think it might be appropriate to make another statement on it at this point, to be sure that the record is absolutely clear and that my convictions as a candidate for the Presidency are known.
     I have no doubt whatever about Senator Kennedy's loyalty to his country and about the fact that if he were elected President that he would put the Constitution of the United States above any other consideration. I believe that he as a Member of Congress has followed this standard. I believe he would follow that standard as President. I don't believe, in other words, there is a religious issue as far as Senator Kennedy is concerned.
     In the second place, I believe that it would be tragic, and I repeat; tragic, for not only the United States at home, but it would be tragic as far as the picture the United States presents abroad, for this election to be determined primarily, or even substantially on religious, grounds.
     We do have a great problem in the world today, the one that has already been touched upon in the two previous questions, and that problem is fighting an ideology which opposes all religion - communism. In fighting that ideology - all regions are their enemy, and all religions must work together, and the United States must be united by this campaign insofar as that issue is concerned, and not divided.
     The question is, not whether Senator Kennedy or I believe that religion is an issue - we don't believe it is - not whether we believe it should be an issue - both of us believe it should not be an issue - the question is, how do you keep it out of a campaign? It has been my conviction that the best way that candidates can keep it out of the campaign is by not talking about it, because what do people consider to be issues? People consider those things to be issues that they hear other people talk about, the things they read about. And every time the candidate raises the issue or talks about it, even as I answer a question, it is news, and the people think about that. And so I can only say that I believe my first intuition about this is correct. As far as I am concerned, I have issued orders to all of the people in my campaign not to discuss religion, not to raise it, not to allow anybody to participate in the campaign who does so on that ground, and as far as I am concerned, I will decline to discuss religion and will discuss other issues in order to keep the minds of the people on the issues that should decide this election and to keep them off of an issue that should not enter into it.
     Mr. KAPLOW. Have you discussed this matter at all with Dr. Peale since his statement of Wednesday?
     Vice President NIXON. No, I have not.
     Mr. KAPLOW. Have you discussed it with any prominent clergymen?
     Vice President NIXON. Since that statement?
     Mr. KAPLOW. Recently?
     Vice President NIXON. Not recently; no. I haven't discussed it in the past 2 weeks. I have had letters from clergymen, some expressing the concern that I have expressed, others indicating positions similar to Dr. Peale. My response has been the response that I have made here.
     Mr. KAPLOW. Do you contemplate doing anything more or saying anything more to try and keep this out as an issue?
     Vice President NIXON. There I have the problem that I mentioned. Everything that I say or do publicly in itself raises the issue. As a matter of fact, I was criticized by Mr. Truman, by Governor Almond, by Mr. Bowles because they said that when I indicated, for example in a speech in Birmingham, that religion should not be an issue, that I was raising the issue, so this is my problem. All that I can say is that I have made my position clear, and I feel that we ought to have a cutoff date on its discussion. I would hope that Senator Kennedy would reach the same conclusion, because if the two candidates refrain from raising the issue, refrain from discussing it, that means that at least to that extent it won't be in the news.
     Mr. WILSON. Mr. Vice President, for the sake of enlightenment rather than argument, I would like to put to you the proposition that there may be several important contradictions in the position you take on some issues which affect your posture as the Republican nominee. For example, I believe you have stated that the domestic issue is whether activities of the Federal Government shall be expanded or whether the emphasis shall be on the expansion of the private sector of the economy and that you favor the latter. I notice that in the past few days you are reported to have endorsed one of the most rigid, strictest Government control programs ever devised, the program to control the growing of tobacco, one of the big industries of the country. How do you square your advocacy of that kind of a program with your advocacy of free enterprise and individual activity?
     Vice President NIXON. Mr. Wilson, the tobacco program is a very special case. Of course, there are exceptions to all the rules which we lay down in the field of government. In the case of tobacco we have a crop here which is a specialty crop. It is one which, as far as storage is concerned, when tobacco goes into storage for at least the first 2 years it increases in value rather than becoming a liability. In addition to that, as far as tobacco is concerned, there is no question of cross-compliance of, in effect, competition with other crops, like you have with the feed grains. The result is that this crop has been one of the few in the farming area where a program of controls which the tobacco farmers themselves overwhelmingly want and overwhelmingly have approved, has worked. It is a program that does not cost the Federal government a substantial amount of money. It is a program that has not resulted in higher prices or greater surpluses, and it is a program that the tobacco people almost overwhelmingly, I would say, agree should be continued. I think in other words that this crop is one where the general rules and the general objectives toward which we should work do not apply, for the reasons I have stated.
     Mr. WILSON. Let me mention another possible contradiction, and this is the contradiction of unlimited defense spending as outlined by you and the Governor of New York in the Republican platform. How do you square that and all the controls that may go with such an unlimited activity, how do you square that with your concepts of freedom, individual enterprise?
     Vice President NIXON. I think that as far as defense spending is concerned that we would all agree that we have to spend what is necessary. When you use the term "unlimited," I would like to qualify that to the extent that we should spend those funds in a wise way. This doesn't mean that we give the services a blank check. It doesn't mean that we don't cut down what the Defense Department may ask for in one area or another because we believe we can get more defense through spending in some instances less or spending it more wisely for other purposes. But in this field of defense, I don't think that we can have any compromise with the security of the United States, and I would say that here, we can never be in a position where we are second best. We have to spend what is necessary to maintain the position of being first that Mr. Spivak outlined in his first question.
     Mr. WILSON. Let me mention a third possible contradiction. This has to do with the question of social gains, social progress in this country, which I know that you favor. As I understand it you favor this progress by again using the maximum amount of individual enterprise, State and local enterprise, that is possible. Yet you have favored, and I think do favor now, the Social Security Act which in itself is one of the biggest Federal programs ever undertaken in the country. I wondered if you can say that these gains would ever have been made without the adoption by the Federal Government of such an all-inclusive act as the Social Security Act in the first place.
     Vice President NIXON. I don't think they would have been made; no. I believe that the Social Security Act was a major achievement. It is one that is to the credit of those who supported it, and I certainly agree with your conclusion.
     Mr. WILSON. Yet these are expansions of the Federal activity, are they not?
     Vice President NIXON. They are expansions of the Federal activity, but there comes a point beyond which those activities should not expand, and if we could get into more specific issues - health, education, and the like - I could give you the differences.
     Mr. SPIVAK. Mr. Vice President, I would like to get into one specific issue, and that is education. Back as far as 1955 you said, "Salaries paid to teachers are nothing short of a national disgrace, and if the situation is not corrected, it could lead to a national disaster." The situation hasn't been corrected. Don't you think, therefore, Federal action is essential?
     Vice President NIXON. I think Federal action is essential, but I do not think that Federal action of the type which would directly subsidize elementary and high school teachers' salaries, in our public schools, would be wise, for this reason. The moment you in effect have the Federal Government paying our teachers in whole or in part, in our public schools, you inevitably give to the Federal Government the power to set standards for teachers and to control what is taught - to tell them what is taught. Some would indicate maybe this is a good thing, and some Federal standards might be things that we might want to a opt. But on the other hand, once you go down that road, it seems to me that you run a great risk of impairing freedom in this country. If I may say just one thing: one of the greatest guarantees of freedom is local control of our educational system, and that is why I believe that our Federal aid program should be limited to school construction, which will allow funds then to be freed for paying teachers, if you have Federal aid for construction only.
     Mr. SPIVAK. Why should we get Federal controls if we give aid for teachers' salaries and not get it if we give aid for buildings? I mean, haven't we got the imagination to set up a system where we give the money to the localities and allow them to dispense it as they need it?
     Vice President NIXON. It is an altogether different thing. When we give money for buildings, even here we say we are not going to have standards. But let's say we did have standards; the classrooms have to be a certain size. That is one thing. When you set standards for teaching, what they can teach, what subjects can be taught, what they have to meet, this is an altogether different thing. We are talking in the one instance about control of the mind. We are talking in the other instances of control over matter, and there is a very great difference. One means control of the whole system itself.
     Mr. SPIVAK. Yes, but Mr. Vice President, why do we have to set standards? Why can't we give them the aid just as we give it to them for buildings, and let them set their own standards?
     Vice President NIXON. This would be an ideal, provided you could reach it. But the history of aid of any type, where aid is given in fields of this sort, has inevitably been that once you aid the next step is control, and I feel that the risk is so great that a position must be taken against it.
     Mr. SPIVAK. Mr. Vice President, I would like to switch to something else: If you are elected President, you will face the problem certainly of a Democratic Senate and probably of a Democratic House. Will you give us your comments on the seriousness of divided government during these very serious times?
     Vice President NIXON. I would say, first of all, that I thought President Eisenhower has done very well with divided government over the past 6 years. I think, second, that in the next administration, if I should be elected President, that I should be able to do reasonably well with a Republican House, if we can elect a Republican House and a Democratic Senate. I think what we have to remember is this: When a man is elected President, he then has in effect a mandate from all the people for the policies for which he stood and that means that he will be able to gain support in the Congress from the members of both parties for those policies.
     Mr. RESTON. Mr. Vice President, could I ask you a couple of specific questions on foreign policy: What is your policy about underground nuclear testing? Do you favor renewing these underground tests or not?
     Vice President NIXON. Mr. Reston, I favor renewing the tests, once it is clearly established that the test negotiations which are presently going on have no chance of success or no reasonable chance to succeed, I would say. The reason that I feel that we, however, must go down to the end of the road with regard to exploring the chance of those talks succeeding is that the whole world is watching to see whether or not we can make this one breakthrough of control of armaments with inspection. So I would say that we must press the Soviet Union to get a decision, and if the decision is that there will be no suspension of tests with inspection, then the United States must resume them immediately.
     Mr. RESTON. How do you propose to press this with the Soviet Union? Is it possible to discuss that with Khrushchev while he is in this country, for example, this month? Do you propose to see him in any way, or will he be open to negotiation on this subject?
     Vice President NIXON. He apparently did not want to discuss it with the President in Paris. He may not have wanted to discuss other things as well. I have no plans to see Mr. Khrushchev. I don't agree with those who suggest that it would be a good idea for Senator Kennedy and me to see him together. I think that only the President himself should make a decision to see him in view of the conduct of Mr. Khrushchev toward the President, and if the President sees him he might discuss it. I would say that I have very little hope that Mr. Khrushchev would discuss this problem with the President when he was here. I am sure that if he indicated a willingness to do so the President would be willing to discuss it with him. But it is Mr. Khrushchev's turn to open this subject up. It is he that has blocked the road for settlement in this area.
     Mr. BROOKS. We have less than 2 minutes, gentlemen.
     Mr. KAPLOW. Mr. Vice President, you have spoken on the desegregation question of the need for the President to develop public acceptance of desegregation. You pointed out as an example, I believe, recent talks in the Justice Department on the sit-ins with the chainstore owners. How else would you as President try to develop public acceptance of desegregation?
     Vice President NIXON. Through the appearances that I made in all parts of the country in which I could discuss this issue and through use of the executive branch of the Government in exactly the way that you have described, through bringing the people together where these conflicts exist and attempting to get them on a voluntary basis to do what the law would otherwise require.
     Mr. WILSON. Mr. Vice President, do you welcome the support of. Secretary of Agriculture Benson for your campaign?
     Vice President NIXON. I welcome the support, Mr. Wilson, of everybody we can get. It is going to be a very close election.
     Mr. WILSON. Do you think it implies that you are in agreement with the Benson policies?
     Vice President NIXON. No, Secretary Benson is well aware of the fact that I am in disagreement with him on several parts of his policy. I respect him for his view, for his dedicated service, but I believe that we need new leadership in the field of agriculture, which will enable us to break the pattern of the old programs which have resulted in the high surpluses without solving the problem.
     Mr. BROOKS. Gentlemen, I am sorry, but I am going to have to interrupt. I see that our time is up. Thank you very much, Mr. Vice President, for being with us.