LETTER TO ADMIRAL STANSFIELD TURNER FROM BIRCH BAYH

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP81M00980R002800020065-9
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 5
• Document Creation Date: December 19, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 4, 2006
• Sequence Number: 65
• Publication Date: August 22, 1978
• Content Type: LETTER

Approved For Release 2006/12/04: CIA-RDP81 M00980R002800020065-9
Approved For Release 2006/12/04: CIA-RDP81 M00980R002800020065-9
 H G QN- Pr dd?t t . Car= being weak, a serios. ad.dser quoted
ter 's veto of se author izat n Carter as saying when he reached the
bill was designedto head o what he veto decision at a luncheon meeting
sacv as cane, r. ; con?: esston cuts in the Cabinet room Wednesday.
to
oin
follow lily U%-11 1;1-
"` g
g
i< a o -secret sate to y stincts now because its the ri
ht
g
pa ect cons ered tiital for monitor V . thing to do," the President-said, teil-
lli? SSCVIa ~i{its-V ~rtiG~t aC
ing g aides he should have-done so
- The veto decision, made Wednes- sooner and vetoed several-other mea-
day and -carried out Thursday, was sores he was signed during his tenure
described by one top adviser as a in office.
` watershed" in the Administration's. : The bill cover the next fiscal year
relations with Congress- It was also beginning in Octob_
-influenced by Carter's belief that the : The soy satellite ur~i~^>
time had come to follow his own po- as an ex',.re neiy l noorta
rit Intel-
_
, litic.al instincts and ignore aides who fence ~Q ~i t to r~, ~ S z
had urged him to avoid any such con- --N ,-,,ILe
.
'
ntation
f
,: ?
_._
ro
: :?--. b7rUP t imo~ tbae nn? ~f a h~tr Ii ;t
"I listened to my advisers during of items Congress has sought to dr-
the past year telling me what to do lute fro mthis veers ease seen^i- - .
about some of these
hir:gs and what
an; in ord
t
p
er
o r a e way or a 32
t
did it get me? Now I am perceived as :? please Tara to Pare 8, Col. I
-.... - i?r+...~...- .. ..a .w r .. -~r-.v-~n.v I. err-.r-u?. i
Approved For Release 2Q06i121Q4. O A-RDP81 M00980R002.800020065-9
 Carter : Aimed at Averthig, Cits 'in, Vital, Defense:. e ,~
.
` ' Althouggh -Administration officials have predicted a drop the carrier?and instead allocate the $2 billion it would
Coaiiaucd from first FA
e ''c -'' '"
?:; ;
i
:
.
s
'' tough fi tit to sustain it, indications are that Carter has the , r cost to other defense needs, including the satellite system
billion nuclear-powered aircratt cr> fir' g
Emp7ia"siz Chaff fie wants-Congress to reorganize its ;;~?necessary strength, The House, the only body which voted' and such mundane but important things as maintenance
funding priorities, not cut overall spending, Carter offered on the issue of deleting the carrier, voted 218 to-, 156; operations costs, and research and development.
the broad outlines of his reasoning at a news conference against deleting it. But Carter needs only a one-third vote"By diverting funds away from more important defense'-
Thursday, when he formally announced his veto of the $30 of the total 435 members, 14G, to sustain a veto. needs in order to build a very expensive nuclear aircraft
billion defense authorization bill--the spending policy "I don't think we have.a prayer to override the veto;''*: -,carrier," Carter ? said it his news conference, - "this--bill
measure that must precede passage of the detailed defense said Rep. Bob Wilson (R-Calif.), ranking Republican 0n=?; would waste -resources available for defense, reduceour
na-
appropriations bill now working its way through Congress. the House Armed Services Committee, and a lea-derr,of the commitment to NATO in the future,, and weaken our'
But the underlying elements of Carter's concern about pro-carrier forces. r, tion's military capabilities."
the impact of the authorization bill on national security, as '.? . Carter also was assured the support of a prominent Re- The override issue will go to the House first,'after meat,
well as his political assessment, wcrc shelled out a ore_ex: publican, Arizona's Sen. Barry Goldwater, who said he did ,.,?'? bcrs return from a summer recess on Sept, 5.?In the inter-
im there is likely to be heavy lobbying with elements of
piicitly_t? the co idcuti mo and b to it I o sp not believe the carrier was needed,
aides in a series of interviews ~viith'1` c ime ,I' "Also, if it stays in the bill, we wili?deprive all the ser-.'the defense industry on different sides of the issue;
-'fie memo, sent to Presidential Press Secretor Jod vices of badly needed equipmcrit,' said Goldwater, The Newport News, (Va.) Ship 'and Drydock Co., the
: ;,? y shipyard that could build the nuclear carrier, for ex-
po~'v`elI` id~v~itt ~y_anofficiaCin.`th IicE_o_f_1. in4ge? staunch supporter of themilitary.,-: oni
menu and.adget, said "The President, _in_.reyl?Wing_pall' ample, undoubtedly will lobby -tooverride the President.
that might benefit from other types of militaryex-
-laced this item as an absotulotgR Goldwater's comment touched on a complex but pivotal Firms
ram
t-clli
n
i
,
,
ce prog
ge
n
pnority6~'sfio ress Co gef.`tlus mesa a across to factor in the controversy: The defense spending cuts that' p'cit`rrL coon the o.lticrliand,~inc u Ong'-Z esa ellifepy !i
tfie CongYes Carter objects to are contained not in the authorization bill pro ect, can Ue expccSect,t9_L2hhy 9~u$tatA ~el?.
,1m. _ - tbi- he is vetoing but in the defense annronriations bill which Alit oug ll^Contress probably will fail to override the is
a
g
thro gh
e and now is workin
th
H
--- -_-.
_--
. ?. -_ ._..._......
g .w ,...,
ous
e
publicly, but you and others snoniaDo pre area to g4-40 ? 1140 passed
pnvalej n your falls witl con ressme~,;the memo said, the Senate in similar form. rier will remain in the Senate appropriations bill.
"Lsscnt,ally; iTie ~rooaa is a nay lntClhgcia~e~g ctiilg The appropriations. cuts arc designed, however, to per-'. Carter, informing a group of key congressmen of his
system which `v~It be cit~~cal o o_u~1ltt r >ylily!Rananl-; ; mit construction of the nuclear carrier provided for in the . ? veto decision Thursday morning, said he also would veto
for a ~vle authorization bill- without pushing the overall level of de- the appropriations bill if it'contained the carrier provision.
Towell and other Carter aides already are trying to con- fense spending above the $120 billion sought by the Ad- Rep. Robert M. Carr (D-Mich.), a House Armed Services
vince members of Congress they should not vote to over ministration. Committee member who opposes the carrier, quoted Carter
I'd
ersuade Congress to assaying: "If you don't take it out of the appropriations
es to do is
w ho
t
Wh
C
,
1 :
p
p
ar
er no
at
ride the veto.
have to veto that as well."
Carter's handling of the issue brought mixed rcaction?on
Capitol Hill.
An aide to Sen, Henry Jackson (D?Wash.) said, "the
??veto will cause divisiveness in the'Congress and compli-
cate the schedule. It throws the timing off." He said it
could indirectly endanger the energy bill but added. "the
Sen. Alan Cranston (D-Calif,), the majority whip, said
the veto would "casue some aggravation over the fact that
this adds to the agenda just as we're leaving town on.re? ,
Please Turn to Page 9; Col.1
 Approved For Release 2006/12/04: CIA-RDP81M00980R002800020065-9
Cantio~~td from onln Pr;ge
:cuss," Cranston said he theught any political problems table munching club sandwiches and drinking coffee and-"regretted having signed the bill increasing the minimum now risen up and sailed one back for them to deal with-'
proeably would be confined to Washington. iced tea as they debated the issue Wednesday, ? wage and several appropriations measures, and a big one at that, not like a'voto of a rabbit meat bill,'.{
Sen. John Stennis (D iiiss,), chairman of the Senate ICirba said that although he knew little about the merits Vhilc Carter talked Thursday of "close ponsuliations" ;";' ICarter's previous vetoes were one that killed a bill dea!~
;Armed Services Committee and an ardent supporter of the ;' of the, bill, "I shared this with the President, that all this,; with Congress, some top aides talked in a tougher vein of :' ng with inspection cf rabbit moat and another which
"
bill, said the carrier was
the cement that held the bill: worry about getting beat or losing face is a bunch of batl
toge ther," loney, Besides I thought it was no more politically damag?
If the Senate now has to reconsider all the items in the ? ing to be overriden on a veto than It was to be defeated in
authorization bill, Stennis said, "We won't finish in this the first place and he and the nation were being defeated it
calendar year." he signed the bill the way it was."
Senators and representatives who attended two White . hfondale, Brzezin'ski and Brown spoke In' favor of the
House meetings Carter called Thursday to discuss his veto veto, but domestic affairs adviser Stu Eizenstat opposed it,
decision doscribod the President as pleasant but firm in his Political adviser Hamilton Jordan expressed concern about
remarks. the political repercussions, although he ultimately agreed a
I, Rep. Hobert N. Giaimo' (D-Conn.) urged the President veto was in order.
rot to veto the bill, but instead to ask Congress for rescis-
s,"n e:' the carrier item Giaimo said, "The President said '?,"In essence," said one official who attended the'meeting
rescission was much more. difficult, and thus would allow 'but declined to be identified, "the President said'I've gone
things to go unchallenged. ljc believed it's time, for a along with other things political advisers toi4?me to go
shos do ern on the issue, right now. with and ndw it's being said I won't stand up to Congress
and do what ought to be done,'.
"'If it's right,,it's time to do what's right, The politics of
Carter's decision represented a victory for 0MB Director..,
James J. McIntyre and his staff, who long have urged'a'''what's right is better than the,politics of what pleases most'
veto, and a,cub ack for some of the President's other aavi? everybody.'"
sees, , : Although Carter emphasized coopcration;wiih Congress
t'. Charles Kirbo, an Atlanta attorney and Carter confi- ? . and played down any confrontations with Capital Hill dur?'
dance ,rho at in on the decisive meeting, told The Times, , ing nrs press conference, he did indicate he would not hesi.
;'Some of the advisers on the political side thought it was tale to veto other bill she considers unreasonable. He spa-
loo lag a political risk for him to c' excise the veto, that it cifically mentioned the tax reduction bill and the tuition
. V;ould be awfully embarrassing if he was overridden." tax credit deduction bill, as presently, constituted, as legis?'
Carter, Kirbo, Vicc President Mondale, Defense Secreta. ' lation he would not hesitate to veto,
,.ry Harold Brown, Naticml Adviser Zhigniew Brzezinski In some past instances, Carlcr told the roup,he_,hod
L
lenient" In dc~iln th Con
1ee"too a si ed g.~ngeleu c imerJ ? Flt, Aso Is, t4r84
islation he Se(I IN V(, w4 r
P 11 r n ~nnrnnn,_
and top White House aides sat around the Cabinet room aner aide said the 'P HIM' afsohas saidPri"ately he'~:;ter faking so much foolishness from Congress we 'iave
how the President was sending Capital Flill a massage it r would have provided for development of the controversial
could not ignore, "In a way this was a tough bill to tackle;!, Clinch River nuclear reactor plant. Both were sustained.. i
because sustaining a veto won't be all that easy," said one
..aide, "But we couldn't have asked for a better opportunity
to send a clear signal the President is ready to use the veto t
power on a wider basis,
"Everyone here, feels good about it, not only because of'
grolvin confidence we can sustain it, but also because a!?
Approved For Release 2006112104: CIA-RDP81M00980R'002800020065-9
}t
 Approved For Release 2006/12/04: CIA-RDP81 M00980R002800020065-9
Approved For Release 2006/12/04: CIA-RDP81 M00980R002800020065-9