MR. McGEE. Mr. Levy with a question for Vice President Nixon.
MR. LEVY. Mr. Vice President, the Labor Department today added five more major industrial centers to the list of areas with substantial unemployment.
You said in New York this week that as President, you would use the full powers of the Government, if necessary, to combat unemployment.
Specifically, what measures would you advocate and at what point?
MR. NIXON. To combat unemployment, we first must concentrate on the very areas to which you refer, the so-called depressed areas.
Now, in the last Congress, the special session of the Congress, there was a bill, one by the President, one by Senator Kennedy and members of his party. Now, the bill that the President had submitted would have provided more aid for those areas that really need it, areas like Scranton and Wilkes-Barre, and the areas of West Virginia, than the ones that Senator Kennedy was supporting.
On the other hand, we found that the bill got into the legislative difficulties, and consequently, no action was taken. So point one: At the highest priority, we must get a bill for depressed areas through the next Congress.
I have made recommendations on that and I have discussed them previously and I will spell them out further in the campaign.
Second, as we consider this problem of unemployment, we have to realize where it is. In analyzing the figures, we will find that our unemployment exists among the older citizens. It exists also among those who are inadequately trained. That is, those who do not have an adequate opportunity for education. It also exists among minority groups. If we're going to combat unemployment then, we have to do a better job in these areas.That's why I have a program for education, a program in the case of equal job opportunities, and one that would also deal with our older citizens.
Now, finally, with regard to the whole problem of combating recession, as you call it, we must use the full resources of the Government in these respects: One, we must see to it that credit is expanded as we go into any recessionary period--and understand, I do not believe we're going into a recession.
I believe this economy is sound and that we're going to move up.
But second, in addition to that, if we do get into a recessionary period, we should move on that part of the economy which is represented by the private sector, and I mean stimulate that part of the economy that can create jobs--the private sector of the economy.
This means through tax reform, and if necessary tax cuts that will stimulate more jobs.
I favor that rather than massive Federal spending programs which will come into effect usually long after you've passed through the recessionary period.
So we must use all of these weapons for the purpose of combating recession if it should come. But I do not expect it to come.
MR. McGEE. Senator Kennedy.
MR. KENNEDY. Well Mr. Nixon has stated the record inaccurately in regard to the depressed area bill. I'm very familiar with it; It came out of the committee of which I was the chairman, the Labor Subcommittee, in '55. I was the floor manager.
We passed an area redevelopment bill far more effective than the bill the administration suggested on two occasions, and the President vetoed it both times. We passed a bill again this year in the Cong-- in the Senate and it died in the Rules Committee of the House of Representatives.
Let me make it very clear that the bill that Mr. Nixon talked about did not mention Wilkes-Barre or Scranton; it did not mention West Virginia. Our bill was far more effective. The bill introduced and sponsored by Senator Douglas was far more effective in trying to stimulate the economy of those areas.
Secondly, he has mentioned the problem of our older citizens. I cannot still understand why this dministration and Mr. Nixon oppose putting medical care for the aged under social security to give them some security.
Third, I believe we should step up the use of our surplus foods in these areas until we're able to get the people back to work. Five cents a day is what the food package averages per person.
Fourthly, I believe we should stimulate the economy. I believe we should not carry out a hard money, high interest rate policy which helped intensify certainly the recession of 1958 and I think help brings the slowdown of 1960. If we move into a recession in 1961, then I would agree that we have to put more money into the economy and it can be done by either one of the two methods discussed, one is by a program such as aid to education. The other would be to make a judgment on what's the most effective tax program to stimulate our economy.
MR. McGEE. Mr. Niven with a question for Senator Kennedy.
MR. NIVEN. Senator, while the main theme of your campaign has been this decline of American power and prestige in the last 8 years, you've hardly criticized President Eisenhower at all. In a speech last weekend you said you had no quarrel with the President.
Now isn't Mr. Eisenhower and not Mr. Nixon responsible for any such decline?
MR. KENNEDY. Well, I understood that this was the Eisenhower-Nixon administration according to all the Republican propaganda that I have read. The question is what we're going to do in the future. I've been critical of this administration and I've been critical of the President. In fact, Mr. Nixon discussed that a week ago in a speech. I believe that our power and prestige in the last 8 years has declined.
Now, what is--the issue is what we're going to do in the future. Now, that's an issue between Mr. Nixon and myself. He feels that we're moving ahead in a-- we're not going into a recession in this country, economically; he feels that our power and prestige is stronger than it ever was relative to that of the Communists, that we're moving ahead. I disagree, and I believe the American people have to make the choice on November 8th between the view of whether we have to move ahead faster; whether what we're doing now is not satisfactory; whether we have to build greater strength at home and abroad, and Mr. Nixon's view. That's the great issue.
President Eisenhower moves from the scene on January 20 and the next 4 years are the critical years. And that's the debate, that's the argument between Mr. Nixon and myself and on that issue the American people have to make their judgment, and I think it's a important judgment. I think in many ways this election is more important than any since 1932, or certainly almost any in this century, because we disagree very fundamentally on the position of the United States and if his view prevails, then I think that's going to bring an important result to this country in the '60's.
If our view prevails that we have to do more, that we have to make a greater national and international effort, that we have lost prestige in Latin America.
The President of Brazil, the new incumbent running for office, called on Castro during his campaign because he thought it was important to get the vote of those who were supporting Castro in Latin America.
In Africa--the United States has ignored Latin A--Africa. We gave more scholarships to the Congo this summer, we offered them, than we've given to all of Africa the year before--less than 200 for all the countries of Africa--and they need trained leadership more than anything.
We've been having a very clear decision in the last 8 years. Mr. Nixon has been part of that administration. He has had experience in it, and I believe this administration has not met its responsibilities in the last 8 years; that our power relative to that of the Communists is declining; that we're facing a very hazardous time in the '60's, and unless the United States begin to move here, unless we start to go ahead, I don't believe that we're going to meet our responsibility to our own people or to the cause of freedom. I think the choice is clear and it involves the future.
MR. McGEE. Mr. Vice President.
MR. NIXON. Well, first of all I think Senator Kennedy should make up his mind with regard to my responsibility. In our first debate he indicated that I had not had experience or at least had not participated significantly in the making of the decisions. I am glad to hear tonight that he does suggest that I have had some experience.
Let me make my position cl ear. I have participated in the discussions leading to the decisions in this administration. I am proud of the record of this administration. I don't stand on it because it isn't something to stand on but something to build on.
Now, looking at Senator Kennedy's credentials, he is suggesting that he will move America faster and further than I will, but what does he offer? He offers retreads of programs that failed.
I submit to you that as you look at his programs--his program, for example, with regard to the Federal Reserve and free money, or loose money; high--low interest rates; his program in the economic field generally--are the programs that were adopted and tried during the Truman administration. And when we compare the economic progress of this country in the Truman administration with that of the Eisenhower administration, we find that in every index there has been a great deal more performance and more progress in this administration than in that one.
I say the programs and the leadership that failed then is not the program and the leadership that America needs now. I say that the American people don't want to go back to those policies. And incidentally, if Senator Kennedy disagrees, he should indicate where he believes those policies are different from those he's advocating today.