Martin Agronsky: Evening Edition; 24

46. You from Washington

This is Evening Edition, now here is Martin Agransky. Good evening. The General Ford goes into the second year of his presidency with a national consensus that he deserves high marks for personal character and personal conduct. There are many reservations, though, about the qualities of his leadership and the effectiveness of his economic and foreign policies. Tonight on Evening Edition, a reporter's report card on the man in the White House with Kevin Phillips, political analyst and author of the Emerging Republican Majority,

Jack Germond, a political reporter for the Washington Star, and Lloyd Miller, political reporter for the night newspapers. I wonder if we could just take the first year. Lloyd, why don't you begin? What's your president's even? Good president for the first year, considering the circumstances under which he came in. But I think most of all, the fact that Gerald Ford really never asked to be president. Two years ago, I wrote a story of the other day, saying that two years ago, this guy was a rather obscure man in the Congress, very well known in the House, but not an American household word. All he ever wanted to be was speaker of the House of Representatives. And two years later, bam, here he is by the circumstances of Spiro Agnew and Richard Nixon. Considering that, I give him reasonably good marks for a year in which he has been thrown into about the worst position you could be thrown in, short of this country being totally in a depression or in a war.

And we've survived and we've calmed down. I think his testing time really is just upon us in a far different way as upon us now, as he says, all right, I want to run again. Yeah, no longer saying, I'm an accidental president, he says, I want to be president. That's right, he's no longer bailing water, you know, we're now rowing. But after you say, I mean, this is really pretty faint praise. After you say that he is not Richard Nixon, for a year he's not been Richard Nixon. And you say for a year he's been an ice guy. After you say that, what do you say? There's not an awful lot. What's happening in the economy, there isn't a great deal of evidence that the government has much to do about it one way or the other. Well, I think it's possible to take a more auspicious view of what he's done. I think the first year challenge was one of serving a psychological and therapeutic purpose for the country. And I think he's probably risen to that quite well.

Now I think the second year challenge will be to formulate the policies that are needed to get the country out of the box it's in, which I don't think he helped put it in. And I think there are a number of doubts as to whether he can do that. And I think that's the challenge that he faces and the uncertainty that we all have regarding his capability. Well, follow it along a bit, Kevin, from viewpoint of a Republican conservative as it were in terms of his leadership, how's he perceived in his own party? Well, first of all, I don't think the president has a terribly good understanding of the dynamics of American national electoral politics. And I think he's perhaps been stumbling into those bit by bit, but the problems with the right wing of the Republican party, with the way they handle the Rockefeller thing. I think all of that's going to come home to roost. I think he's perceived more and more positively by the bulk of the Republican party. That was not true in January to the best of my knowledge. The Republican establishment was very lukewarm at that time.

They hadn't made up their mind. I think most of them are favorable towards it now. What is it you're feeling as far as the Republicans are concerned? He's accepted now as the candidate. I mean, Reagan notwithstanding talking about that. I would say that. The Rockefeller notwithstanding. Yes, I think that's true. I think Ronald Reagan hasn't made the waves necessary. Now, if Ford does not do well in policy formulation over the next 10, 12, 15 weeks, I think Reagan might pick up. But he hasn't shown any desire to rock the boat. He's being the fellow in the white hand as opposed to the black hat. He's not throwing mudpies. And in that sense, I think yes. Ford is generally accepted within the Republican party as the nominee. I think Ford has to do more than just not stumble on policy formulation. I think, you know, short of some real serious gaff. It seems to me that Ford is in a tremendously strong position. And the reason for that, I think, is this. If you look at this whole year, the most interesting thing about it to me is that it's totally unsurprising. It's not, you know, I think it's sort of boring.

But that's a reporter who's looking who's interested in conflict. But it's unsurprising in another way. It's unsurprising in this sense that everything Ford has done is what you would, when you really look back at the whole year, is just precisely what you would have expected based on the 25 years in Congress. You read the messages that he puts out on vetoes of the jobs bill. And they sound just like the things he was saying during the Johnson administration at the time of the program of constructive Republican alternatives. You remember they used to vote against all the social programs that come up with these all kind of things. Well, he said it to me again this morning. Didn't interview with him at the White House. I pointed out that he'd beat to the jobs bill. He said, well, it was a bad bill. But what he was able to say was a good bill. You point out to him that there are 8 million unemployed. He talks about the economy being in great shape. You point out to him that there are 12% of the people in this country today at the poverty level. You know, 24 million Americans. And he says, well, we can live with that.

There is a curious, sure nice guy, but a curious lack of understanding, I think, in the sense. Martin, what we're forgetting here, I think, is the Jerry Ford is not measured against Franklin D. Roosevelt. Jerry Ford is measured against the other people on the national political scene. And most of all, he's measured against the Congress. And that Congress is an appalling group of people. They have got the lowest ratings that Congress has had in memory from Lou Harris, from George Gallup, from Albert Sillinger, from any pollster, I can't think of any exception to that. The only thing they've done of great consequence in the last couple of weeks is both themselves a sneaky pay raise before they bail out of town. But he's measured against these people. Ford looks good. He doesn't have to have very effective policies. If there is a rotten, then he can pose by knocking them down. Yeah, but Jack makes the point, too, that I think is equally significant. He looks awfully good against his predecessor, because if you start there, anything he does has to look good. You know, one thing you've really got to say about him all the way is he has had luck. He's had horseshoes just from the beginning.

Once against his predecessor, as you say, he looks great against Nixon. He's had problems, the economy, and everything else. But really, these things have all done more to solve themselves, certainly the economy, than his administration has been able to do. What they have done is seemingly really not had that much effect. Everything has sort of worked out for him rather well, and has Kevin put his finger on the Reagan thing. If Ronald Reagan had made a move, or even stood on tiptoes waiting to be kissed by the Republican Party three or four months ago, Gerald Ford would be in the deep mud right now, very likely with the Republicans. Reagan has played right into his hands. The Congress has played right into his hands. So that's part of it. Let's see, oh, Jack, don't just do something, sit there. You know, a great Republican President Lincoln once said that doing nothing is also a policy. Sometimes, but I think that Ford's gains in the Republicans' team can be measured partly against the comeback of the economy. If you look at the way that has taken place, at least to some extent, in a growing extent since March and April.

And he has come back up accordingly. Now, in the last couple of weeks, we see signs that inflation is recurring, that it will be necessary to really make hard economic decisions. Not just sit back. And I think that's going to be a hard time for him. Well, sure, just today, up 1.4% I believe on the wholesale price index, which pro-rated out over the year, gives you an annual increase of 14%. Now, that's really very, very tough and dangerous. Interest rates going up again. I just wonder if the horseshoes are going to work, you know, if you can just sit there and, you know, figuratively things will write itself. The competition marketplace is going to work, you know, we're going to have to do anything. One of the mistakes we make in Washington all the time, because we all sit around talking to each other, is in paying too much attention and blending too much weight to the victories of, you know, who wins between... We always do this in the daily press.

Ford wins another one when they fail to override a veto. And Congress, Ford wins because Congress fails to come up with an energy program. And against Congress as a whole, this is the point that you were making, Kevin. Against them, he looks awfully good. On the other hand, he goes into a campaign next year. And the unemployment situation is serious, the inflation is serious. And all of the economic proposals, if his record is essentially what he is able to sustain in the way of vetoes, as opposed to programs. I don't mean Johnson type programs, but programs period. I'm not sure that is very good politics, and I'm not sure at that time when people really start to pay attention. We're paying a lot more attention right now to Gerald Ford than the people who are watching this program, I suspect. Let me ask you this. Let's turn around a little bit. Do you think that perhaps he reflects a national mood and a national attitude a lot more accurately than we are able to see? Perhaps the country isn't a mood after Watergate and all the trauma of that business, and Vietnam, to mark time a bit. Perhaps he senses that. Perhaps he's a hell of a lot smarter than we are in terms of.

Or people are, I think that is true in a way that turned off by the government. We've been over that ground so many times. But it is also true that they are not very happy with the economic uncertainty. They're not very happy with the taxes they pay and a great many other things. It may be a plus because we're not having alarms and excursions every day in Washington. People don't have to pay focus on it the way they did a year ago. It doesn't necessarily mean that that is something he can get away with during the campaign. No, Kevin? I think a lot of it rides on the economy. It seems now that Western Europe's recovery is in the process of aborting somewhat. Certainly it's not going like they hoped. If that happens here, then I think people will look back and they'll have this vague notion that Congress was trying to do something. And the President really had no proposals. And unless he's gone activists by that term, I think he's got a lot of trouble shaping up. If on the other hand, recovery is steady from here on, they'll say this was the man with a strong hand at the helm, the cool head. And these crazies up on the hill that proposed all this nonsense were absolutely wrong.

So I think a really an awful lot depends on where the economy goes from here. Then what you're saying really is not that depends on how he manages the economy. What will happen is going to depend on how the economy itself goes without his management. I think a lot of the dye is already cast. My own feeling is that recovery is going to partially abort as a result of things that are in the mill now. And I think that will be very honest for him. Martin, so much is going to depend on how he's perceived to handle it. And there again, we're talking about luck and things that happen that maybe we're not within his control. But I think one thing that can happen to him on the economy and on a lot of other things is that he does not seem to be necessarily in touch with the mood of people. Most of our politicians, I think, may be aren't right now. But there are some amazing lapses that you still hear from this man. Like a speech in Chicago the other day when he assured us, well, he was making a modifying speech to big business. And he had a business audience and that was understandable.

But he had some lines in there, such as one that we all can trust the oil companies and sleep well at night because they're into business. And it's incredible to me that anybody in public office can say that knowing what people in this country think. You only have to look at about two issues, polls. You want to take a case to get to the Kevin's point. I think is right on the nose about the economy affecting his position a year from now. It's not one part of that, particularly, is the gasoline price thing. A few two or three weeks ago in the Midwest Governor's conference in Cincinnati, Rockefeller was giving the administration line on energy. Why price increases in your, increase in price in your gasoline were character building and good for you. And Exxon, Jim Exxon, the governor of Nebraska, a Democrat who was a very acute politician, posed what he called a question. And he said, all I know is that people in Nebraska are saying that a year ago, you had to line up to get gas at 35 cents. And now at 60 cents is all the gas you want.

And that's, as we all know, vast oversimplification and so forth. But that politically is very true. The gas is very suspicious. And carry it down the next step. There is every indication we're going to be spending 75 cents a gallon of gas. And not too long down the road. Suppose you're up to a bucket gallon for gas. Suppose OPEC gives us another kick in the pants, which is not at all impossible. Suppose bread goes to 45 cents or 50 cents. I think we're dealing with a lot of very touchy situations here. And I think the point that's made about the president and his business ties is very important. If I were advising Mr. Ford, I would say you should have a lot less visibility as being a man of big business and having all your big business friends around. Because it's all very well and good if businesses perceive as leading the country on a very session. But if things go sour again to look like you are a pawn, and sometimes he does, of a big business, I think is very bad policies. Well, it's a point Senator Brock made, you know. That as long as the people perceive the Republican Party as the party of Watergate and big business,

then you can begin to understand why 18% of the people in the country register Republican. You can understand why in effect, as far as registration is concerned, you become really a true minority party. I don't believe that Ford is capable, because I think this is the Gerald Ford who is president, is the same man he's always been. I'm not saying that's bad. A lot of good things about Gerald Ford, but he is the same man. And I don't think he's capable of changing his image and doing the kind of thing you're talking about. You know, I think he is a guy with Jerry Ford, what you see is what you get. I'm afraid you're right. I mean, I think of myself as what you might call a new majority Republican, and increasingly as I see Jerry Ford sort of with the old minority, I become less of a Republican because of my preference for quote, new majority politics. And I think one of the great difficulties he has is he appears to lean too much towards the business side of the equation, and not enough towards the middle American side of the equation, frankly.

And another great trouble that he's got is they are beginning to lean very hard, too hard on the decency quotient. They talk about this all the time. People around him in the White House is campaign manager, Bo Calloway. What are the issues of this campaign going to be? It's going to be a lack of deviousness. It's going to be the trustworthiness of this man. He talks about one of the things that he's brought up. He says it all over time. Trust in government. And again in the interview today, he lists as his chief attribute and the thing that he's most proud of, that he has restored confidence in the presidency and in government. I don't think we ought to put that down as a person. I don't. I don't. And he says put it down. We all think pretty well of it personally because of this. But it isn't enough. I think it's being overdone. My only point is they sound like they're about to run a campaign on it. Bo Calloway and I think it's a very weak read. It can achieve a plasticity level, which I think then becomes a detriment, the way that Nixon, with his football games and his earthsets, middle Americanism, the way that everything looking like it came out of Reader's Digest

and Little Fires and the Rooms and all of that. I think they're building up to the same thing on this decency kick. I think on another, as Lois says, in another six months or a year, this thing could look like this. I take it you feel that what he is doing is getting away from his midwestern roots. I mean, that's what your concern is. Well, people in a tumble Iowa don't head on down to the Methodist church, jump out of the station wagon and say, here I am, Mr. Decency. I mean, the thing just sort of trickles along and it's there and you sense it, it doesn't become a Madison Avenue campaign. And I think, unfortunately, White House has tend to produce Madison Avenue campaigns of any flavor, whatever party is in. They take something that goes over. Here it is, Franklin D. Rose Falls, warmed over, new deal with Hexaclorothene, brought to you by Hubert Humphrey, Scoop, Jackson and George Meaney. I mean, they will all make something into a super excess of whatever work for them. And at the same time, when you've got your campaign manager running around trying to cut the legs out from under Nelson Rockefeller, somebody is not decent, it's straightforward.

Well, the president put one leg back today. But the fact is, the fact is that part of the Jerry Ford for 25 years and the president Ford today is that he's a pretty tough politician. And that he's nice about it and he keeps cool. But he was also the guy who was capable of leading that assault on Justice Douglas a few years ago. We must think that he spends all his time sitting around with Charlie Hallock. And my point is that this is going to show so that you can't run a campaign on what a great big nice cream puff you are and then play that kind of game. Well, you know, and yet you get this funny feeling that they go out and they do the polls and come back and feeling getting worse and trouble is that, you know, we're not out in the country and we're relying on the polls. That there is a very good chance considering the disarray on the other side, the democratic side, that he can parlay that feeling of decency and confidence in the presidency, that he does emanate from the White House into election.

But the polls, his poll standings are incredibly volatile. I mean, they go, he goes up and down nine, ten points every time you turn around. They're dropping again right now because of the weak deal. I mean, he does go up and down. Is that what it's quite true? The weak deal prices inflationary expectations, the whole package. People are not sure now that the economy is what it's supposed to be. But I'd like to jump back to Nelson Rockefeller because I think Nelson Rockefeller is a great question mark hanging like a guillotine over Jerry Ford's future. And the sense that there are a lot of Republicans and a lot of conservatives don't want him. Are tired of this verbal charade that's going on? Simply say, look, forget about what you say in August of 1975 or February of 1976. If he's on the ticket, we are not going to support General Ford. But Kevin, he's in a beautiful position. He can go with Rockefeller right up to the last minute. Drop him overboard, move him into another area and go with somebody else because he feels he has to.

I think he's making the best of both possible worlds here. And I think it's smart politics, not bad politics. You can't go up to the last possible minute, Martin, if he's going to play the decency theme, he has to find a nice way for Nelson Rockefeller to leave quietly. Well, the other thing is, if he wants to drop Rockefeller, the only reason is to modify the conservatives and sort of quiet the Reagan thing down. And he can't wait till the last minute probably. Listen, I'll give you a rock scenario, which I thought was rather amusing, but might be valid too. Rock says that he may run the three men on the Ford ticket next time. Nelson Rockefeller, to be Secretary of State, to succeed Henry Kissinger. That would satisfy even Barry Goldwater, who has said so up front, right? And a new man on the vice presidential ticket. He's got a lot of options going here, and I think that he may successfully use in Kevin. Yes, but I think the problem will come if they don't orchestrate this early,

then coming down right at the last minute, trying to orchestrate it under fire would be awful because if you do dump Rockefeller, you have a liberal problem if you don't, you have a tremendous conservative problem. Well, what about the old argument, one always hears, well, the conservatives may not like it, but where else have they got to go? There will be a third party on the ballot. A third party? Definitely. Independent lines in most states, if not all states. Well, who's it going to be? Mother Hubbard and little Miss Muffet. If Nelson Rockefeller was on the ticket, there will be a protest. You're talking about the Howard Phillips. Yes. That is a very underestimated phenomenon of the thing he used. Tell me that, yes. Well, I mean, the effort that's being made by a number of people, which Kevin knows a lot more about than I do, Richard Vigory and Howard Phillips, I guess, is the man in the field on this, to qualify for another line, a conservative line on the ballot in a great many states. And the most states, I got it. And there are actually people involved in this, and Rockefeller is very much a factor here. Well, that's a party, but did they need a candidate?

No. Who did they go with? Not really. And give you an example. In California in 1972, John Schmitz, who was a birch-eyed ex-congressman, got 3% of the vote there. Now, California is normally the first. You're out of Schmitz, you're out of gear. California is normally a very close state. In any close election, California will be close. Now, if Rocky's the vice presidential nominee, I can conceive of the AIP out there, and that's the party. Even running a nobody, getting 4 or 5 or 6% of the vote, that would take it away from Gerald Ford. Where are you putting Wallace in all of this? Well, if his health holds that party, his party is going to be. But if you look at the thing, and if you look at a normal presidential election, which means one, where you don't have a candidate like Goldwater, or Montgomery, who scares the daylights out of people, you look at 1960 and 1968, and they were decided so closely. And what it tells you is that you cannot afford, and particularly a Republican, to give away that 2 or 3% of the votes. That's right. You really can't. But if you look at the whole Rockefeller thing,

regardless what you think about Rockefeller, the fact of the matter is that Rockefeller no longer has a constituency, and there are a lot of hard-headed friends of Gerald Ford, I think maybe he's a little hard-headed himself about this, but look at this thing, and they realize that. Now, that's where this drop Rockefeller thing's coming from, I think, is from people who have decided and who are trying to tail for it, and maybe they've convinced him. I'm not at all sure they haven't. Not only does he get in your way in getting the Republican nomination, the Reaganites and others can't stand him, but he doesn't bring anything to your ticket in the fall. Listen, Lloyd, today, when we asked him about that, he came very, very strongly to the support of Rockefeller. I mean, much more strongly than he has at any time before. He just said he's my vice president. He's operating very satisfactorily. He'll go after his delegates. I'll go after mine. That was the only kind of division that you saw. That's pretty serious division. Well, no, but you know the thrust of it was. I'm not dumping them. The minute you start talking about the vice president going after his own delegate, you're not saying what he was saying.

Last winter, he was saying that he was going to be nominated and he was going to recommend him to the convention again, in essence. He spoke of Rockefeller's going to run with me as if it were a fate of complete, and all of a sudden, within the past month, we've changed back to, well, the vice president will seek his delegates, and I'll seek mine. And it was very interesting that before Ford first said this, Rockefeller said, well, you don't run for a vice president. You know, that's crazy. You know, the vice president doesn't seek delegates. The president picks who he wants and that's that. Then Ford held a press conference in Chicago and said, the vice president will seek his colleagues. Let's walk away from the politics for a second, and perhaps you really already answered this by implication. But how would he be for another four years? Rockefeller? No, no, no, Ford for the country. How would you feel about that? How can you answer that until you know what the alternative is and also to the answer to Kevin's question about what kind of shape we're in? Well, trouble you as you come up with the right answer. You can't answer it. I know that. I'm just trying to protect him in terms of a year's performance. Can you see him as a man who can grow in the office,

function well in the office? I mean, does anybody have that feeling about him in terms of his quality? Whoever said we need to have Superman for president? I mean, why can't we have all men for president? Well, why not? Well, that's what I'm raised. We've got along for a year, and maybe the next year we'll say we should have had a Superman. But I think it's a very dangerous subversive notion that we look at our presidents as having to be someone really of a whole different dimension than the rest of us. And I think that's a mistake. I think we need a little more of this time. No vac in Evans, Evans in no vac wrote something about a year ago, is Ford the Eisenhower of the 70s. And my reaction at the time is, well, he might have been another Eisenhower if he had a replica of the 50s. But I don't believe the 70s replicate the 50s in any way. You have the United States in it. I mean, you can't mark time. Yes, we're in an international retreat pattern. We've tremendous economic and social difficulties that hadn't really come up in the 50s. And I don't think you can have an Eisenhower or a college in the mid-1970s. And I think Gerald Ford will have to shape up policy-wise.

I think people give him a lot of the benefit of the doubt because of what he is. But he's got to make hard decisions. He's got to make a lot of him. He's going to have to make enemies. Well, but you say he's got to, but can he? That's what we want to do. Well, I'm saying that he has to, if he wants to succeed. And if he doesn't succeed, I think people could sour on him awfully quickly. Yeah. I think he could. I think he might. And I think that, over the next year, he ought to give us a better feeling than that. Because I really do think he's in a new phase now. And he's asked us to make him president again. And he's kind of off on his own. He's had time to try to react to all this stuff and make a bunch of mistakes, such as running around wearing wind buttons. And to know that you can't change the economy that way. And maybe you better be able to try to do more about it. Well, you're not ready to mark his report card, really, then. Are you? I think we're talking about two report cards. We're talking about first grade, which he's just finished. And second grade's coming up. And it'll be junior high after the 76 election.

Did you make some closing words of wisdom? Maybe the Democrats will save it off, save him by nominating a notorious mafia figure for president. He got what it might. Well, nothing would surprise me, though. That's the key to it. If we're going to have a dynamic leader, who else is on the scene? It changes that. How's your wife compared to who? OK. Thank you very much, gentlemen. Good night for evening edition. Tomorrow night, a retrospective look at Watergate, with three members of the House of Representatives, impeachment inquiry. Democratic Congresswoman William Hungate of Missouri, former Democratic Congresswoman Jerry Walde of California, and former Republican Congresswoman Larry Hogan of Maryland. This program was produced by NPAC, a division of GWETA, which is solely responsible for its content. Funding provided by Public Television Stations,

the Ford Foundation, and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. This program was produced by NPAC, a division of GWETA, which is solely responsible for its content. Thank you.