YTread Logo
YTread Logo

KENNEDY AFTER TWO YEARS

May 29, 2021
After two

years

, last night I had a conversation with the President of the United States in his office, Mr. Kennedy recalled the first two

years

of his presidency and looked to the future speaking with him for about 90 minutes with three House correspondents Blanca, Bill Lawrence of ABC News, George Herman of CBS News and sander van ocher of NBC News, now on the CBS television network and time of that edited and videotaped conversation as he recalled his first two years in office, sir, Since his experience in office matched his expectations, he had studied a lot the power of the presidency, the methods of its operation, how it has worked.
kennedy after two years
As you saw beforehand, when interconnecting the problems is more difficult than you had imagined, secondly, there is a limitation on the ability of the United States to solve these problems, we are involved now in the Congo in a very difficult situation that we had. we have not been able to guarantee the implementation of the policy that we have supported, we are involved in many other areas and we are trying to see if a solution can be found to the fight between Pakistan and India, with whom we want a friend from Maine with whom we want to maintain friendly relations but cannot reach an agreement, in other words, there is a limitation on the power of the United States to achieve solutions.
kennedy after two years

More Interesting Facts About,

kennedy after two years...

I think our people get terribly impatient and maybe insanely fatigued and tired. I have been carrying this burden for 17 years, we can leave it, we cannot leave it and I don't see how we are going to leave it in this century, so I would say the problems are more difficult than The responsibilities I imagined in the United States are greater than what I imagined and there are greater limitations on our ability to achieve a favorable outcome than I had imagined and I think that's probably true for anyone. who becomes president because there is so much difference between those who advise or speak or legislate and are and between the man who must select among the various proposed alternatives and say that this will be the policy of the United States.
kennedy after two years
It was much easier to make the choice. speeches that ultimately make judgments because unfortunately your advisors are often divided if you take the wrong path and sometimes I have the president bears the burden of responsibilities rightly the advisors can move on to new councils well, mr. President, I raise a point that has always interested me: how does a president make a decision like the one in Cuba, for example, the most recent one was really elaborated, our policy and decision over a period of five or six days, during that period, the 15 or so people who were consulted directly had frequently changed their minds because any action we took had many downsides and every action we took raised the possibility that it could escalate with the Soviet Union to a nuclear war, however, I think a general consensus was finally achieved. developed and it certainly seemed after all the alternatives were examined, the course of action we ultimately adopted was the correct one now, when I spoke with members of Congress, several of them suggested a different alternative when we confronted them that Monday with the evidence of my feeling.
kennedy after two years
It's that if they had gone through the five-day period that we had gone through analyzing the various alternatives, the pros and cons of the stock, they probably would have come out the same way we did. I think we made the right one if we had acted on Wednesday in the first 24 hours, I don't think we would have chosen as wisely as we finally did a quarantine against the use of offensive weapons, plus that had a lot more power than we initially thought because I think The Soviet Union was very reluctant for us to detain ships that were carrying with them a large amount of their highly secret and sensitive material.
Another reason I think the Soviet Union retired eye 28 was because we were conducting very intensive operations. -Level photography now, no one would probably have guessed that that would have been such harassment, Mr. Castro could not allow us to continue indefinitely with widespread flights over his island at 200 feet every day and yet he knew that if he shot down one of our planes , that would bring much more serious retaliation against him, which is why it is always very difficult to make judgments here about what the effect of our decisions would be. another country in this case it seemed to me that we chose the right one in Cuba in 1961 we chose the wrong one I would like to go back To the question of consensus and its relationship to consensus, you have said and the Constitution says that the decision can only be made by the president.
What was its relationship with the consensus? Did you not form any opinion until a consensus appeared or was it part of the formation of the consensus and you didn't agree with it, but well, I think you know that old story about Abraham Lincoln in the cabinet, he says that everyone In favor they say yes and the entire cabinet voted yes and everyone opposed no and Lincoln voted no and he said that the vote is No, that is to say that, naturally, the Constitution attributes the responsibility to the president; There was some disagreement with the course we finally adopted, but the course finally adopted had the advantage of allowing other measures if this one was not successful;
In other words, we were in a sense starting from a small place so, if that had not been successful, we could have gradually escalated until we had initiated a much more massive action that might have been necessary if the first step had not been successful. I think the majority eventually came to accept that, although in the end In the beginning there was a lot of workshopping and division and after all this was very valuable because the people involved had particular responsibilities of their own. Therefore, Secretary of Defense McNamara had to advise me on the military capacity of the United States in that area and the Secretary of State had to advise me on the attitude of the OAS and NATO so that, in my opinion, the majority would accept the direction we finally took. took it, made it much easier in the 1961 cube, the advice of those who were brought into the executive branch was also unanimous and the advice was wrong, so finally and I was responsible, ultimately it comes down to it, but how many advisors have?
They are often divided the president must finally choose the other point is something that President Eisenhower told me on January 19 he said that they are not easy issues that will come to you as president if they are easy they will be resolved at a lower level then the issues that that ultimately come to you as president are always difficult issues that carry big implications, so this contributes to some of the burdens of the presidency that other presidents have long shouldered during the Cuban crisis. some problem that you are apparently already familiar with and bored with about the possibility of a president speaking in very private and secret conversations with his advisors and it somehow being leaked, do you think this will inhibit the free flow of advice from Frank ? that every president has to have no, I think it's unfortunate when there are these types of conversations, but there is a report of 1300 credited only to the White House, I guess there are a hundred and 150 people who are familiar with what happens because in the In the Security Council, in one way or another, there are people who are actually there and there are others who are given instructions as a result of the decisions there and I guess people talk and then, as I said at the time of the Cuban disaster of the April 61 that successes are a hundred fathers and defeats and many times I suppose that when something goes well there is more tendency to talk at all levels and many times the reports are inaccurate I would say that security is quite good in the National Security Council, It is unfortunate when it is violated.
Is it true that during your first year, sir, you were personally on the phone with the State Department and trying to get a response to some investigation that had been done? Yes, I still do it when I can because it's a I think there's a big tendency in government for documents to sit on the desk too long and I find that to be a really important function, after all the president can't manage a department, but at least it can be a stimulant, do you remember any? response you received from someone unsuspecting a phone call and the State Department any specific response something bad for you know they always say yes but it takes a little time to let them know after i met mr.
Khrushchev Vienna and they gave us a memorandum to commit several weeks to get our response through the State Department coordinator. The British, the French and the Germans took too long. It seems to me that we have been able to accelerate it, but this. it is a constant problem in several departments there are so many interests involved in any decision no matter the delay decisions about Africa or Asia involves the Europe task involves the site desk involves the Department of Defense could involve the CIA frequently involves the Treasury, could involve the World Bank and it involves the United Nations delegation, so it seems to me that one of the president's functions is to try to make it move faster, otherwise you can wait for the world to collapse. you were reading more and enjoying it less you continue like a bat a reader of newspapers magazine I remember those of us who traveled with you on the campaign a magazine was not safe near you would you do it oh and there is no I don't think it is the invaluable thing even though it may cause you or some, it's never pleasant to read and things that are not pleasant frequently, but I would say it is an invaluable arm of the presidency as a real check on what is happening in an administration and more things are coming. to my attention that they cause me concern or give me information so I would think that Mr.
Khrushchev is operating a totalitarian system that has many advantages in terms of being able to move in secret and everything else has one tremendous disadvantage: not having the abrasive quality of the press applied daily to an administration when it has done so, even though we never liked it. and even though we don't, even though we wish they wouldn't write it, and even though we disapprove of it, there is no doubt that we couldn't do the job at all in a free society without very, very active people. The press now, on the other hand, the press has a responsibility not to distort things for political purposes, not to just take some news to make a political point.
It seems to me that your obligation is to be as tough as possible on the administration, but to do it in a way that is aimed at getting as close as possible to the truth and not simply because of some political motivation, sir. president in light of the election results, which at least at the Congressional level were undoubtedly a defeat for Republican hopes, how do you measure his chances of significant success at the national level in the Congress ahead? Well, I think it will be in roughly the same position as the Over the last two years, I think, as I say, what we have that is controversial will be highly contested.
If the appearance of a house changed a little with these changes, I would say that it is a little more against us than it was, but not in as good shape as it is. it was for the last two years, but we're pretty much where we were the last two years, which means each vote is going to be three or four votes either way when you're losing, do you have a very crucial vote early on in this fight of the Rules Committee? Again, do you think and I hope that the Rules Committee stays at its current number because we can't function if it's not so well that we end up losing if they try to change the rules, something controversial in that case? would come to the floor of Congress, in other words, Oh, Graham, in my opinion, you would be emasculated as a young congressman, sir, you voted to impose a two-term limit on presidents now that you've been in office for a while and you've also Noting its effect on President Eisenhower's second term, would you repeat that vote even if the amendment did not apply to you?
Yes, I would, I would know that the conditions were special in 47, but I think that eight years is enough and I am not sure that a president from Ephesus, my In the event that he was re-elected, you would be at a kind of disadvantage, no there are a lot of jobs, that is not at all the power of the presidential patronage, they are filled the first month, most of those jobs are for members of Congress. In any case, I think that sponsorship is not for many other powers, the presidency that runs in the second term, as well as in the first, for mr. president at that point the fact that now the specialists have a great influence today in the Republican Party and therefore in the country and has a great influence and foreign policy does not even occupy the position in some way is a greater influence and somewhat to a certain extent so that then the The same is actually true for also President Truman, President Hoover.
I don't think it depends on the influence of a president that is still substantial or any second term, so I'm not a secondmandate. I think that's what you're talking about a lot on that point. of his program must still be approved by Congress. There are some people who say that either he will do it in the next two years or it will not be done if he is elected for a second term. Do you share that point of view? I know in the first one, I think we have a lot when looking at what we set out to do the other day in January of '61 and in the taxes and in the social welfare changes in Social Security and the airy redevelopment, the minimum wage, the Corps of Peace, the alliance for progress. that is, in strengthening defenses, strengthening our space program, we did all of those things, the trade bill, perhaps to the extent in all cases of our original proposal, but with substantial progress, I think we can do something more.the next two years and I think there are going to be new problems in 65 re-elected and 65 and I don't think I don't see the second term as necessarily a decline and I don't believe that in fact I think you know a lot more about the position is a tremendous change going from senator to president in the first months is very difficult but I have no reason to believe that a president with the powers of this position and the responsibilities assigned to him does believe that it is necessary to do something and can do it just as well , the second time is the first, depending on the composition of Congress, the fact is that I think Congress seems more Sitting here is more powerful than when I was there in Congress, but that is because when you are in Congress you are one in a hundred in the Senate or one in 435 in the House, so the power is very divided, but from here I look at a Congress and I look at the collective power that Congress has, particularly to block actions that, if you want, and It is a substantial power, sir.
The power of the president, like charities, you know it starts at home and you seem to have one vision of what we should do at home and Congress seems to have another vision: a lot of money will be appropriated for defense and national security, but there is some reluctance to money to another form of education limit on investments and other things like that at home is it a pure question of money or this religious question is really going to make it impossible for an Education Law to be passed, while the Education is certainly the question of how funds will be distributed and how they will be shared is one of the factors.
The question of integration is another issue that comes into play. I think you know that Thomas Jefferson once said that people should be expected to be ignorant and he expressed: respect what never was, never will be. being here we are going to have twice as many people trying to go to college in 1970 is 1960, that means we have to build as many buildings in ten years as we built in the other sixty years of our country's history, so we have these millions of boys and girls who are dropping out of school and who are not qualified at a time when they are not qualified, when skilled and not unskilled labor is needed, so we need money for vocational training, train them in skills, return to train workers, provide assistance funds for universities. and then to provide assistance to those who are going to get more advanced doctorates in engineering sciences and mathematics, we have a serious shortage and yet we are asking for space defense and everything else, the Soviet Union is concentrating on this, so all this. requires funds but everything is in controversy some people feel that the federal government should not play any role and yet the federal government since the land grant in place after the Northwest Ordinance has played an important role.
I believe that the federal government has a great responsibility in the field of education. We cannot maintain our industrial, military, scientific and social strength without a very well-educated citizenry and I believe that the federal government has a role to play, so we are going to send a program unfortunately because of the factors you mentioned and other reasons why We have been close to getting educational assistance in the past, but we have not been successful as president. His problem of passing an education bill this year has been made more difficult by events in Oxford, Mississippi, and the use of federal troops there.
Yes I think so. Well thank you, how will you combat this? Well, as I say, we have one time. This is a case in which we have been very close to prison. Eisenhower came close. We came close once we got a bill in the House and almost in the Senate. through the House we didn't get it another time for higher education through the Senate, the House and then the conference failed now Oxford Mississippi failed, which has made this whole issue of the federal government and education more sensitive in some parts of the country, I suppose that was going to be a factor against us I don't really know what other role they would expect the president to play the United States the court made up of judges from the south determined that it was in accordance with the Constitution Code of Mr.
Mareth University of Mississippi the governor of Mississippi opposed it and there were riots against mr. In the case of Mehra which endangered his life, we sent marshals and after all, one hundred and fifty or sixty marshals were injured in one way or another out of four hundred or five hundred and at least three of the launderers were from the South and then we sent troops when it seemed that the swamps were going to be invaded. I don't think anyone who sees the situation would think that we could do anything more. He may be doing yes, but on the other hand I recognize that it has caused a lot of resentment against me and against the national government in Mississippi and elsewhere and although they expect me to abide by my old Constitution and that is what we are going to do, it makes it more difficult pass an education bill, but I think we should not penalize this great resource of our youth for all these reasons, instead we should do the work of getting them and building these schools, these compensated teachers, and higher education available for all these boys and girls, and every time I drive across the country, that's all you see.
There are six, seven, eight and nine year old children who are going to be bored in our schools and colleges and every governor would tell them that this is their main problem in providing educational facilities and fulfilling the Responsibility of National Governors. Return to the topic for a moment. of the president's responsibilities in foreign affairs now when some congressmen did not agree with his course of action on Cuba that Monday, the responsibility that you had for the Constitution was very clear but in internal affairs the responsibility is divided. How is the presidency used? in Theodore Roosevelt's phrase? the bully pulpit to move these men who really are sort of barons and sovereigns in their own right up there on the hill, do you have any way of moving them toward a course of action that you believe is imperative to the Constitution and the development congressional? all give an advantage to delay it is very easy to defeat a bill in Congress it is much more difficult to pass one get it through a committee say the House Ways and Means Committee subcommittee and get a majority of votes full committee get a majority of votes go to the Rules Committee and get a rule go to the full house and get a majority start over in the Senate subcommittee and in the full committee and in the Senate there is unlimited debate so an issue can never be brought up to vote if there is enough determination on the part of the opponents, even if they are a minority, to pass the bill in the Senate and then unanimously obtain a conference between the House and the Senate to adjust the bill or a member of Jack to be approved by the Rules again.
Committee back through Congress and getting this done on controversial legislation that powerful groups oppose, is an extremely difficult task, so fighting for a president who has an agenda to get it through Congress, particularly when the seniority system can place particular individuals in key positions who may not be at all sympathetic to your program, perhaps even though members of your own party in political opposition to the president of this magnitude is a struggle with which Frank Note was elected by the largest majority in history in 1936 and suffered his worst defeat a few months later on the Supreme Court bill for which are two separate officials and two separate powers: Congress and the presidency that will surely be in conflict and weakened. but they must cooperate as much as possible, but that is why no president puts programs at any time presents programmers quickly and easily when the program is insignificant, but if it is significant and affects important interests and is controversial, for So, then there is a fight and then the president is never completely successful, mr.
President, what is the most wisdom in accepting a bill that is completely emasculated that you had a strong interest in and accepting or accepting the defeat of it in the hope of generating public support for it at a later time? Oh, I would say given the conditions you described. I think it would be better to accept defeat, but generally what has happened and what has happened to us in the last two years with many of our bills passed in a reasonable position not in the way we sent them, but after all , Congress has done it. their own will and their own feelings and their own judgment and they are close to the people, the whole House of Representatives has just been elected, so it is quite natural that they have a different perspective than I may have, so I would say that what we have What we should do is do the best we can, but if it is completely emasculated then there is no point in having the shadow of success and not the substance of mr.
President, this exercise of presidential power I think perhaps the best known and most talked about case was your reduction in steel prices after they were announced by the steel company. Some people have suggested that, in retrospect, perhaps you would not have acted so forcefully. Is there any truth to the suggestion? No, I must say that I think it would have been a very serious situation if, although I don't like to rate fires in general, I think it would have been a serious situation if I had not tried with all my influence. to try to achieve a reversal because there was a question of good faith involved, the Steel Union had accepted the limited movement agreement that they had had since the end of the second war, they had accepted it three or four months earlier, they did it in the part I.
I think because I said we couldn't afford another inflationary spiral that would affect our competitive position abroad, so they signed and then when they lost, the contract was signed, which was the Friday of, unfortunately, before that, Steele went up their prices immediately. Well, it seemed. For me, that was a question of good faith and then, if I had not tried, after asking the union, to accept a non-inflationary agreement, if I had not tried to use my influence to get the companies to keep their prices stable, I think the The unions could rightly have felt they had been misled and my opinion would have been in jeopardy.
All the bargaining between labor and management would have made it impossible for us to exert any influence from a public point of view in the future on these large unions. disputes that affect the public interest, so I have no regrets, the fact is that we succeeded, assuming that we had tried and made a speech about it and then failed, I would have thought that it would have been a terrible setback for the office of the presidency now. I just think looking back I wouldn't change it at all there's no point in making a fuss and then not being successful there's no point in risking the odds of the presidency on an issue and then getting defeated now miserable

If you have any copyright issue, please Contact