This blog serves my Nixon course (Claremont McKenna College Government 124A) for the fall of 2022
About This Blog
I shall post videos, graphs, news stories, and other material. We shall use some of this material in class, and you may review the rest at your convenience. You will all receive invitations to post to the blog. I encourage you to use the blog in these ways:
·To post questions or comments;
·To follow up on class discussions;
·To post relevant news items or videos.
There are only two major limitations: no coarse language, and no derogatory comments about people at the Claremont Colleges.
In this assignment, you will write a research paper on any Nixon-related topic of your choice. Here are some options, but you are free to choose another, as long as it is Nixon-centric. During the first two full weeks of April, you will each make a 5-minute Power-Point-free class presentation on your topic. (You may post graphs or video clips on the class blog.)
Explain a major Nixon decision in foreign policy or national security. What military, diplomatic and political considerations went into his choice? And what do we know now that was not public knowledge at the time?
Choose any major figure in Nixon's life (not counting anyone you may have written about in the second assignment). How did this person influence Nixon's life and career? Did this person serve as friend, foe, mentor, foil, punching bag -- or some combination thereof? What did Nixon gain or lose as a result of the relationship? In your answer, consider the historical circumstances that allowed this person to have this influence.
Instructions:
Essays should be typed (12-point), double-spaced, and no more than six pages long. I will not read past the sixth page. As always, please submit papers to the Sakai dropbox as Word documents, not pdfs.
Document your claims. Do not write from the top of your head. Wherever possible, rely on primary sources and scholarly works.
Cite your sources with endnotes in Chicago/Turabian style. Endnote pages do not count against the page limit.
Whittaker Chambers on abandoning his life as a Soviet spy: "I wanted my wife to realize clearly one long-term penalty, for herself and for the children, of the step I was taking. I said: `You know, we are leaving the winning world for the losing world.' ... Almost nothing that I have observed, or that has happened to me since, has made me think that I was wrong about that forecast."
They [the Soviets] deployed more than a hundred intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) while we deployed none; they added several nuclear missile-firing submarines to their Navy while we added none; and they deployed forty new ABMs around Moscow. We knew that even as the debate in Congress over an American ABM was raging, the Soviets had initiated work on more ICBMs and ABMs, as well as major new radar systems in conjunction with their deployment; they were also building additional submarine missiles. I felt that tactically we needed the ABM as a bargaining chip for negotiations with the Soviets: they already had an ABM system, so if we went into negotiations without one we might have to give up something else, perhaps something more vital. In that sense, we had to have it in order to be able to agree to forgo it. I tried to persuade Congress that what the ABM vote represented was really a philosophical turning point in America’s strategic credibility.
The administration ultimately won the ABM battle. Congress did not actually pass the bill authorizing spending on defense projects, including the ABM, until November 9. But the Senate effectively approved Safeguard on August 6 [1969], when, by votes of 51–49 and 50–50, it defeated amendments that, if adopted, would have prohibited all funding for the system’s deployment. Vice President Agnew cast the tie-breaking ballot in the latter vote. The next day Nixon wrote a memorandum in which he directed Kissinger, Ehrlichman, and H.R. Haldeman to get “out the true story,” which was that the ABM victory was a result and reflection of the “Nixon Style.” The President urged them to “point out that RN made the decision to tackle ABM head on against the advice of most of his major advisers, including particularly the State Department.”
...
In his memoirs, Nixon concluded, “I am absolutely convinced that had we lost the ABM battle in the Senate, we would not have been able to negotiate the first nuclear arms control agreement in Moscow in 1972.” (Nixon, RN, page 418)
Soviet Jews: take your pick on which is the real Nixon
RN: The Memoirs of Richard Nixon, page 876:
I have never had any illusions about the brutally repressive nature of Soviet society. But I knew that the more public pressure we placed on Soviet leaders, the more intransigent they would become…. I felt that we could accomplish a great deal more on the Jewish emigration issue when we were talking with the Soviets than when we were not. Although we did not publicly challenge the Soviet contention that these questions involved Soviet internal affairs, both Kissinger and I raised them privately with Brezhnev, Gromyko, and Dobrynin. This approach brought results…. [T]he statistics are proof of undeniable success: from 1968 to 1971 only 15,000 Jews were allowed to emigrate. In 1972 alone, however, the number jumped to 31,400. In 1973, the last full year of my presidency, nearly 35,000 were permitted to leave.
In fact, the CIA exaggerated the strength of the Soviet economy and military, underestimated the burden of Soviet defense spending, and ignored Mr. Gorbachev's efforts to conduct a strategic retreat and to engage the United States in a series of disarmament agreements.
The memoirs of Secretary of State George Shultz and Gen. Colin Powell demonstrate the CIA's lack of credibility on the Soviet problem. Mr. Shultz concluded that the CIA was ''usually wrong'' about Moscow and warned the White House that the agency was ''unable to perceive that change was coming in the Soviet Union.'' His memoirs record his distrust of CIA analysis and accuse CIA Director William Casey with providing ''bum dope'' to the president. Mr. Powell added that CIA specialists ''could no longer anticipate events much better than a layman watching television.''
THINK OF RESEARCH PAPER TOPICS: BRIEF PRESENTATIONS IN NOVEMBER. DUE NOV 20 (2 extra days). BE READY TO MAKE A 5-MIN PRESENTATION STARTING THE WEEK AFTER NEXT.
Taking the long view, we simply cannot afford to leave China forever outside the family of nations, there to nurture its fantasies, cherish its hates and threaten its neighbors. There is no place on this small planet for a billion of its potentially most able people to live in angry isolation. But we could go disastrously wrong if, in pursuing this long- range goal, we failed in the short range to read the lessons of history.
VIETNAM (more next week)
"Nixon had promised as a presidential candidate in 1968 that he had a secret plan to end the war" (Schoen, p. 59).
But, but, but.... "You will be better advised to watch what we do instead of what we say" -- John N. Mitchell (Schoen p. 26) Nixon desegregates schools
In addition we have: ... Required all firms doing business with the Government to have affirmative action plans for the hiring and promotion of women;
Requested Congress to expand the jurisdiction of the Commission on Civil Rights to cover sex discrimination;
Recommended and supported passage of Title IX of the Higher Education Act opposing discrimination against women in educational institutions;
Supported the Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972 giving the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission enforcement power in sex discrimination cases;
Continued our support of the Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution, our Party being the first national party to back this Amendment.
Other factors beyond outright employer discrimination—the lack of child care facilities, for example—can limit job opportunities for women. For lower and middle income families, the President supported and signed into law a new tax provision which makes many child care expenses deductible for working parents. Part of the President's recent welfare reform proposal would provide comprehensive day care services so that women on welfare can work. ... To continue progress for women's rights, we will work toward:
Ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment; Appointment of women to highest level positions in the Federal Government, including the Cabinet and Supreme Court;
Equal pay for equal work;
Elimination of discrimination against women at all levels in Federal Government;
Elimination of discrimination against women in the criminal justice system, in sentencing, rehabilitation and prison facilities;
Increased opportunities for the part time employment of women, and expanded training programs for women who want to reenter the labor force;
Elimination of economic discrimination against women in credit, mortgage, insurance, property, rental and finance contracts.
We pledge vigorous enforcement of all Federal statutes and executive orders barring job discrimination on the basis of sex.
(1) Require employers to provide basic health insurance coverage for their employees, with the minimum requirement being to pay for hospital services, inpatient and outpatient physician services, full maternity care, well-infant care, immunizations, laboratory services, certain other medical expenses, and minimum of $50 000 in catastrophic coverage
(1) Employers with at least 50 full-time employees musoffer health coverage that is affordable and provides a minimum level of benefits to at least 95% of their employees and dependents. None of their employees can receive a premium tax credit to help pay for coverage on a marketplace; if so, the employer must make a shared responsibility payment
(2) The costs for this would be shared by employers and employees, with a 35% ceiling on employee contribution for the first 2.5 years, and 25% after that
(2) Affordable coverage is defined as ≤9.5% of an employee’s annual household income
(3) Keep the range within which benefits can vary narrower than it has been, so competition between insurance companies will be more likely to compete on overall price of contracts
(3) A plan provides the minimum level of coverage if it covers at least 60% of the total allowed cost of benefits
(4) Small employers are exempt from the coverage requirement and allow them to purchase insurance through the small business health options program
(4) Require the establishment of special insurance pools in each state that would offer insurance at reasonable group rates to people who did not qualify for other programs: the self-employed or poor-risk individuals
(5) Small employers with up to 25 employees and average annual wages less than $50 000 are eligible to receive a tax credit
Medicaid
Medicaid Expansion
(1) Implement the Family Health Insurance Plan to meet the needs of poor families by eliminating the part of Medicaid that covers most welfare families. In its place, develop a new insurance plan that is fully financed and administered by the federal government. This federal health insurance plan would provide insurance to all poor families with children headed by self-employed or unemployed persons whose income is below a certain level. As family income increases, the cost-sharing would increase through a graduated schedule of premium charges, deductibles, and coinsurance payments
(1) Provide funding to states to expand their Medicaid programs to cover non–Medicare-eligible individuals younger than 65 with incomes up to 133% of the federal poverty line
(2) Guarantee all newly eligible individuals a benchmark insurance package that includes the minimum benefits for plans in the marketplace
(3) Finance the coverage for the newly eligible with federal dollars until 2016, and then gradually decrease the federal contribution to 90% by 2020
(4) Increase Medicaid payments in fee for service and managed care for primary care services to 100% of Medicare payment rates
(1) Require all employers to offer all full-time employees health insurance, with employee contribution at 35% for 3 years, and then 25% subsequently
(2) Use federal subsidies to ease initial burden on employers
(3) Specific deductible, coinsurance, and out-of-pocket limits under this insurance plan
Assisted Health Insurance
(1) Replace state-run Medicaid by implementing a federally administered insurance plan to cover anyone not offered coverage under the Employee Health Insurance or Medicare
(2) Individuals could also get this if they cannot get coverage at reasonable rates from other options
What did America reap from its brief fling with economic controls? The August 15, 1971 decision to impose them was politically necessary and immensely popular in the short run. But in the long run I believe that it was wrong. The piper must always be paid, and there was an unquestionably high price for tampering with the orthodox economic mechanisms.
What we must do, I emphasize above everything else, is to plan to get out these things primarily through back grounder stories, television programs, etc,, but above all, the subtle, personal quality must come through in a way that people "discover" them , rather than in a way where we force them down their throats.
Nixon's self-awareness
Haldeman diaries on Nixon's dog, King Timahoe ("Tim")
1/28/69: "Formally presented the new dog, King Timahoe, in Rose Garden after leaders meetings - they all watched. Rose and I brought Tim up to President, press all there. Lots of gags regarding picking him up by the ears - house-broken, etc. President explained Irish origin of name. "
1/31/69: " Had Tim in the office - can't get him to come over by President's desk - he's trying dog biscuits, no use."
2/3/69: "Still trying to get Tim by his desk - dog biscuits are starting to work. "
Haunting
"Kennedy's record in foreign policy, as Kissinger points out over and over again, was an utter disaster"
At about 1 a.m. on Saturday, July 19, 1969, Senator Edward Kennedy was involved in an automobile accident at Chappaquiddick, Mass. Later that morning, as news reports of the accident reached the public, Caulfield was directed by Ehrlichman to send Ulasewicz to the scene of the accident as soon as possible. Ulasewicz flew to Boston on the Eastern Airlines shuttle on July 19 and rented a car for the trip to Martha’s Vineyard and Chappaquiddick. Ulasewicz spent 4 days in the area on this first visit and reported back continually to Jack Caulfield in the White House, who passed the information on to Ehrlichman and others as it developed. Ulasewicz spent a good portion of the remaining summer and much of the fall of 1969 at Chappaquiddick trying to dig up politically valuable information from Senator Kennedy’s accident.
Start around 36:00 (audio from 1972)
"FAKE NEWS!" -- 1969 EDITION
"I realize that we have an insurmountable wall of opposition and indifference in the media"
November 1950, when Rep. Richard Nixon, not yet 40 years old, was elected to the U.S. Senate from California, he received an invitation to a Georgetown dinner party. Every Sunday night, columnist Joe Alsop assembled some of his friends, usually high ranking officials at the CIA and State Department, with a few journalists and politicians thrown in, to dine and drink (copiously) at his house at 2720 Dumbarton Ave. Alsop and his pals wanted to take the measure of young Nixon, who was seen as a rising star in the Republican Party. Alsop’s weekly dinner, known in his circle as “the Sunday Night Supper,” was intimidating to Nixon. Alsop’s friends had gone to Harvard or Yale and carried themselves with assurance. Nixon and his wife, Pat, who had little experience in high society, were visibly uncomfortable as they arrived, recalled Tish Alsop, the wife of Joe’s brother and fellow columnist, Stewart Alsop. It did not help that Nixon’s host forgot his name and introduced him as “Russell Nixon.” At dinner, Ambassador Averell Harriman, a crusty old school diplomat who was slightly deaf, loudly announced, “I will not break bread with that man!”
And now, I turn to an event related to all this, that occurred in San Jose yesterday. You saw it on your television screens, an incident in which you saw 3,000 people inside listening to the speakers and 1,000 demonstrators outside, demonstrators who shouted epithets, but, in addition to that, who hurled bottles and rocks and bricks, broke windows, damaged the President's car, damaged the buses, injured some of the people in those buses.
It was a violent demonstration. And as that demonstration was concluded, there were those that were trying to indicate what it meant.
I want to give you tonight my judgement as to what that demonstration meant.
I say to you tonight, it is time to draw the line. I do not mean a party line. Because, when I speak of a line, I am referring not just to Republicans or Democrats, I am referring to a line between those who understand this problem and deal with it effectively and those who do not.
You recall what happened at the University of Wisconsin, where someone was killed in a lighted building. Listen to what the Wisconsin State Journal said in an editorial. "It isn't just the radicals that set the bomb in the lighted, occupied building who were guilty. The blood is on the hands of anyone who encouraged them, anyone who talked recklessly of revolution, anyone who has chided with mild disparagement the violence of extremism, while hinting that the cause was right all the time."
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA, 1970). Proposed by Nixon “...for better protection of life and property from natural hazards…for a better understanding of the total environment…[and] for exploration and development leading to the intelligent use of our marine resources…”
No one subject more profoundly involves the issue of popular sovereignty than the method of electing the President. For almost two centuries the system of the Electoral College has somehow worked, albeit just barely at times, and at other times even doubtfully. Every four years the American democracy places a large, unacceptable, and unnecessary wager that it will work one more time, that somehow an institution that never in any event functioned the way the framers of the Constitution anticipated, will somehow confer the Presidency on that candidate who obtains the largest number of votes. The Electoral College need not do so. Indeed on occasion it has not done so. But far more importantly--whatever the popular vote--it need not confer the Presidency on any candidate, if none has a majority of the electoral vote.
Our ability to change this system in time for the 1972 elections is a touchstone of the impulse to reform in America today. It will be the measure of our ability to avert calamity by anticipating it.
As I stated in my October 1969 message, I originally favored other methods of reforming the electoral college system, but the passage by the House of a direct popular election plan indicated that this thoroughly acceptable reform could be achieved, and I accordingly supported it. Unfortunately, the Senate has not completed action. Time is running out. But it is still possible to pass the measure and to amend the Constitution in time for the 1972 elections.
:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/10345345/chart2.png)
