QUESTION. (Says the Vice President plans to
use Governor Rockefeller in several States and that he regards New York
State as perhaps the most important of all. Asks for clarification.)
Vice President NIXON. Well, I wouldn't agree
that New York State was the most important of all, because I wouldn't downgrade
any State. I have said on several occasions that I think this will probably
be the closest election in this century in this country. Now, of course,
when you look at the election of 1916, that means it will be pretty close.
I think it could depend, for example, on what happens in California, or
any one of the States of the Union. And New York obviously has the most
electoral votes, and for that reason it is a major prize in the election.
But California is certainly among those that will be one of the closest
States and the hardest fought States.
And in that connection, I would like to say
that in my discussions with Ambassador Lodge yesterday, while we are not
yet ready to announce his schedule since he, of course, cannot make any
political appearances until he finishes his work at the U.N., that one
of his first major speeches will be in California.
In addition to that, when I talked with Governor
Rockefeller on the phone on Sunday, I indicated that we had a number of
invitations for him for California, and he indicated that he would be delighted
to appear in California and we expect him to appear in California in the
course of the campaign. Mr. Finch is working out the details.
QUESTION. Mr. Kennedy and Mr. Truman made
peace with each other today. Do you consider that bad news?
Vice President NIXON. No; I would expect that,
and news that you expect is usually not bad; it's the unexpected that usually
knocks you off balance.
QUESTION. [Repeated by the Vice President.]
As a means of reducing world tension, what do you think of the idea of
the leaders of the major religions of the world getting together to see
if they could agree on some basic principles? Do you think such a meeting
would be doomed to failure?
Vice President NIXON. Well, first, I would
say that if such a meeting could be arranged, it could of course contribute
tremendously if agreement on such principles were possible. I believe that
the stakes are so high, the stakes insofar as having a world at peace,
or one in which we have war, that we must explore every possible avenue
- government and nongovernment - to create the conditions which could lead
to peace and a lessening of world tensions. I have no ideas of course as
to whether such a meeting would help, but I do know that one thing that
characterizes all the great religions of the world - including, of course,
the Christian religion - is an adherence to the principles of peace and
nonviolence. And certainly that means you start with one basic principles
- if the leaders could get together, they might be able to do a great deal
in this cause.
QUESTION. Mr. Kennedy says he will not make
any members of his proposed Cabinet known prior to November. Will you?
Vice President NIXON. [A buzzing sound is
heard.] Actually, I got up earlier than that this morning, gentlemen, that
was my wrist alarm going off. [Laughter.] The answer is, "No." I
think that is a good rule that the Senator is following; it's one that
I announced some time ago. I think it's a good rule also.
QUESTION. Mr. Vice President, will you stick
to the high road in this campaign ahead?
Vice President NIXON. Well, I think the question
in the campaign ahead is whether we talk issues or personalities. I believe
the issues are vitally important; I have tried to talk about them. I will
continue to talk about them, and I'm going to avoid discussion of personalities.
Now, in my opinion, when you're talking issues, that is what I would call
the "high road"; when you're talking personalities, in other words, something
which is not related really to the decision the voters make, I think that's
something other than the high road.
QUESTION. Jack Kennedy says you were one of
the architects of the Benson plan and now you are turning your back on
it, selling it and regretting it. What about this?
Vice President NIXON. I would say in answer
to that question, that as a member of the administration, I of course have
had an opportunity to comment upon the various administration proposals
as they have come before the Cabinet for consideration. In the area of
farm policy, a very difficult area and a very controversial one, I have
felt for some time that a stalemate which had been developed between the
administration's position and the position in the Congress, had to be broken.
My disagreement with Mr. Benson was on his unwillingness to develop new
approaches which would break that stalemate. And, for that reason, I felt
that it is time for both parties, and the leaders of both parties, not
to dig in in the prepared positions of the past - either legislative or
administrative neither of which can prevail, neither of which can solve
the problem - but to offer new approaches which can get support. And no
matter how good a position may be, you are unable to get a Congress to
enact it, it means you are stuck with what you've got, and what we've got
in farm policy is wrong. It's wrong from the standpoint of the people because
it continues to cost more as the surpluses mount up, and it's certainly
wrong from the standpoint of the farmer because the farmer continues to
get less for his basic products - crops. So we must move from that position
and find a new approach, and whatever Senator Kennedy or anyone else wants
to characterize that, it's perfectly all right with me. I intend to offer
to the people throughout this campaign the programs will solve the problems
we presently have, the programs that are not wedded to past positions where
those past positions no longer are tenable.
QUESTION. [The Vice President repeats the
question.] The reports that our allies are worried about the election
gap - is there anything that we can do about that?
Vice President NIXON. I think that the President's
action in briefing Senator Kennedy on foreign policy, the intelligence
matters particularly, of course, as was the case when the President ran
in 1952 and in l956, I think that to an extent that answers that problem.
In addition to that, in the foreign policy
area, I think that our allies need not have too great a concern with regard
to the positions, at least the stated positions, of the candidates in the
parties, because we both stand for strengthening the relations with our
major allies in the world; we do not have a basic disagreement on that
point. If I were an ally of the United States, I would not be concerned
on that point.
QUESTION. When did you first express your
disagreement with Secretary Benson, or your call for a new approach on
the farm problem - privately or in official circles.
Vice President NIXON. I think the record is
pretty clear on that. I have for several years, when it seemed that we
were unable to get action in the Congress on the proposals that he had
made. And I would say that the stories to the effect that I have been trying
to get a breakthrough in this area are correct.
QUESTION. David McDonald came out for Senator
Kennedy and the Democratic Party yesterday and that indicated that labor
would go along with the Democratic Party. What are your plans - or the
Republican Party plans - to woo some of the labor votes away?
Vice President NIXON. Well, I would answer
that question in two parts:
First, the fact that Senator Kennedy has the
support of a number of major leaders, labor leaders, is not a surprise,
because he, in effect, paid the price that he had to get for that support
in his platform in Los Angeles. I will not pay that price. I will not pay
it because we need a President in this next administration who will not
owe his election either to the captains of industry or to the leaders of
labor, who, when there develops an impasse between the two - as it did
in the steel strike settlement - he can use the great power and prestige
of his office in the interest of the public at large without being weighted
one way or the other on the side of the labor leaders or the leaders of
management.
Now, as far as the labor vote itself is concerned,
in 1952 and in 1956 Mr. McDonald - along with most of the other major labor
leaders - supported the opposition candidate. We still got a considerable
portion of the vote of labor union members, and of course this is typical
of American voters and it's particularly typical of California voters,
who (1) do not vote the party rigidly and (2) do not like any indication
of being told how to vote by a leader of an organization to which they
belong.
I believe that we will get a good share of
the vote of labor union members who will respect us for our standing for
the interests of the country and who will recognize that labor has never
"had it so good" as they have had it in the past 8 years, infinitely better
than they had it in the 8 years of the Truman administration, and who will
want to continue in office principles that will continue to provide increased
take-home pay in real dollars rather than increased pay in dollars which
were inflated (as was the case in the Truman administration). I think we
can make a good case with the labor rank-and-file and we intend to go after
it.
QUESTION. [The Vice President repeats the
question.] Do you consider that Senator Kennedy is making personal
attacks on you? Where do you draw the line between political attacks and
personal attacks?
Vice President NIXON. The line is between
issues and personalities. When you're discussing issues, for example like
the labor issue that I've just discussed, you should have a hard-hitting
discussion on both sides. He will express his views with regard to mine,
I'm sure - he should; and I will do likewise. I think where you draw the
line is where you question the motives of an individual, his honesty, his
personal honesty, as did Senator Kennedy in his acceptance speech. As you
will note, I did not reply in kind and I shall not reply in kind throughout
this campaign. I believe that the public deserves more than simply a contest
of that type in which we are really trying to avoid a discussion of the
issues by letting it develop into a discussion of personalities. I have
always believed in discussing issues in as effective, hard-hitting way
as I can. I expect Senator Kennedy to do likewise, I hope he does, and
if we can do that, the country will benefit.
QUESTION. Are you in favor of a joint effort
with Russia and other nations for an international space program?
Vice President NIXON. The answer is that the
United States in the United Nations has been exploring the possibility
of the peaceful exploration of outer space, the peaceful development of
atomic energy and other areas. I believe that if we could get agreement,
that this would be helpful. I believe that certainly we should explore
it; I do not see at this time any hope that it will come about.
QUESTION. Mr. Vice President, do you welcome
the debate between you and Senator Kennedy?
Vice President NIXON. I assume you mean a
joint debate on television or radio. The answer is that I think the debate
- under the proper circumstances - would be helpful in interpreting the
issues to the people. I say the "proper circumstances" - I'd like to outline
them just briefly:
I think it would not serve a useful purpose
if it was the kind of debate that Senator Kennedy and Senator Humphrey
had in West Virginia, where I think what you need is a discussion of the
issues without texts, without notes, where the candidates in depth go into
specific issues so that the people can learn how they think and how they
react to the questions that are raised by each other in the course of the
debate - We're now trying to see whether we can work out such a format.
QUESTION. Mr. Vice President, you said earlier
that you thought our allies need not worry whichever one of you was elected
- I didn't understand what you meant. Do you mean there's essentially no
difference so far as our allies are concerned?
Vice President NIXON. When I said there was
essentially no difference between my opponent and myself as far as our
allies was concerned, the answer is that as I look at the platforms and
as I look at Senator Kennedy's voting record and my voting record before
I became Vice President, I find a great similarity on, for example, support
of NATO, support of the regional alliances that we have in other parts
of the world. Now, there will be differences over and beyond that, differences,
for example, in how much emphasis each believes should be put on the nonmilitary
aspects of the world struggle; whether or not the NATO alliance should
be strengthened to undertake economic activities on a broad basis, such
as it does not at the present time. I do not think we can get into the
specifics on that. What I do mean to say is that you don't have a situation
here where one candidate says we want to weaken the alliance, and the other
candidate says we want to keep the alliance; both candidates, I think,
are for - recognize the fact that the United States must have friends in
the world, that we must develop alliances, and that programs should be
adopted which will strengthen those alliances. The only question will be
one of means and on that, of course, we will differ.