Eisenhower Library, White House Office, Office of Staff Secretary records, “1952–61
Notes on the Legislative Leadership Meeting, Held at the White House, December 14, 19541
- The following were present:
- President Eisenhower
- Vice President Nixon
- Sen. Knowland
- Sen. Bridges
- Sen. Millikin
- Sen. Saltonstall
- Sen. Ferguson
- Sen. Wiley
- Speaker Martin
- Rep. Halleck
- Rep. Arends
- Rep. Leo. Allen
- Rep. Chiperfield
- Rep. Taber
- Rep. Dewey Short
- Sec. Dulles
- Asst. Sec. Thruston Morton, State
- Sec. Humphrey
- Sec. Wilson, and Asst. Secs. Seaton, Burgess, McNeil, Struve Hensel
- Gov. Stassen, FOA
- Director Hughes and Mr. Brundage
- Sen. Lyndon Johnson
- Sen. Clements
- Sen. Hayden
- Sen. Russell
- Sen. George
- Rep. Sam Rayburn
- Rep. McCormack
- Rep. Cannon
- Rep. James P. Richards
- Rep. Carl Vinson
- Gov. Adams
- Gen. Persons
- Mr. Shanley
- Mr. Hagerty
- Mr. Snyder
- Mr. Harlow
- Mr. Morgan
- Mr. Jack Martin
- Mr. Gruenther
- Gen. Goodpaster
- Mr. Milton Eisenhower
- Dr. Hauge
- Mr. Randall
- Mr. Minnich
The President opened the meeting with a brief outline of the topics scheduled for discussion but made it clear that the Leaders could appropriately raise other items if they wished. He was hopeful of developing a meeting of the minds.
[Here follows discussion of the budget, Foreign Relations, the foreign trade program, and national defense. For text of the section on foreign trade, see page 112]
Mutual Security—Mr. Stassen characterized this program as one devoted to facilitating our air base program and denying bases to the Communists, as helping fulfill our long term strategic needs and strengthening our economy generally.
He noted that Europe had just had its best year economically since World War II, that European countries needed to maintain a mobilization base there, and that it would be desirable for them soon to reach a position where they could contribute to the development of less advanced areas of the world. This was particularly true since the Soviets were now using trade as an instrument of policy and also were offering technical assistance as we had been doing for some time. Sen. Johnson ascertained that, to our knowledge, Russia had thus far offered about $111 million of technical assistance. Sen. Knowland was interested in how much of this was already in effect. Mr. Taber inquired and was informed that our trade agreements under this program were mostly barter, as in the case of taking Icelandic fish because of Iceland’s economic requirements. Mr. Stassen then referred to our plans for expanding the Point Four program, especially by contracting the services of US universities. This had a double advantage of helping us to reach the intellectuals of the countries we work with.
Korea, said Mr. Stassen, would remain a large part of the program, though less than the current year, because of the remaining need for rebuilding the country and particularly for underpinning the twenty Korean divisions—which are just too much for an economy like Korea’s. Some of the 1955 Indo-China money is to be used in other parts of Southeast Asia and the Pacific.
Answering Sen. Wiley, Mr. Stassen pointed out that 75% of FOA money is spent directly to purchase materials in the United States. The other 25% is for purchases abroad or for direct cash payments. Sen. Wiley asked if it were true that sooner or later all of this money comes back to the United States. Mr. Stassen agreed that much of it does, and the remainder strengthens their economies for other trade helpful to the United States.
Mr. Stassen corrected Sen. Russell’s belief that the Indo-China money had merely been turned over to the French after the Geneva settlement. He made clear that the program was subject to [Page 813] GAO scrutiny, then went on to discuss the economic needs of that country and of Japan.
With charts, Mr. Stassen showed how our aid to other countries had paid off during our own recent economic difficulties, for exports of both industrial and agricultural products had stood up well while domestic sales were reduced.
Sen. Wiley asked further about unobligated balances for Southeast Asia. Mr. Stassen stressed that most of what was available in unexpended balances was for military items which take a long lead time. The carryover this year will be less than in the past and would be still further reduced in the coming year. Mr. Cannon thought it highly important to keep on with reducing the carryover.
Mr. Richards asked about economic aid or direct support to Europe, and Mr. Stassen told him there was none except for Berlin, Spain and Yugoslavia. Mr. Richards wondered if the request for funds for military items for Europe would be directed to the Military Committees of the Congress, but Mr. Stassen felt that was a matter for the Congress to decide. Richards then asked if the program involved a great deal of offshore procurement and Mr. Stassen replied that it was on a declining trend.
Mr. Hensel presented the military side of the program, stressing that it is virtually impossible to follow any rigid plan because of the almost continuous changes in the world picture which require almost constant programming. He stated that some $380 million had already been transferred this year for things that could not be predicted firmly enough to warrant advance programming. About $225 million had been transferred from the military to the economic part of the program, not under Defense Department responsibility.
Mr. Hensel devoted considerable attention to carryovers, new requests, and planned expenditures. The entire program was being kept under review to see that programs accord with realistic force goals rather than unrealistic targets. He indicated that consideration was being given to the use of “new weapons” in Europe, a radical factor that might be introduced into the program.
Summarizing, Mr. Hensel thought approximately $1.4 billion new funds would be needed this year, also the establishment of an emergency fund to avoid transfers, and generally less rigid programming.
Conclusion—The President discussed and agreed with the Leaders that January 6th would be the date for the State of the Union address—incidentally Mr. Rayburn’s birthday.
The President again stated his great hope that all of these programs would always be considered in an honest bipartisan way. He [Page 814] recognized that initiative in these areas was not a monopoly of the Executive Branch and he would give full attention to things begun in the Congress. He assured the leaders that he and other Administration officials would always be available for discussion of these programs to the end that they be executed in a nonpartisan way. And he was open to suggestions on procedures for any necessary discussions, whether through the Republican leaders or directly to the President.
After inquiring as to any further questions or comments, the President said that the State of the Union message was taking firm shape and that he would assume from this morning’s discussion that there exists basic agreement on all of these programs, but not in such detail as to freeze any one in a fixed position.
Mr. Hagerty then read and obtained approval of a draft statement to be made following the meeting.
- Drafted by Assistant Staff Secretary to the President, L. Arthur Minnich, Jr. The source text indicates the meeting was held from 8:30 a.m. to 11:45 a.m.↩