f. Brow David E. Clarenbach, State Representative November 30, 1979 422 North State Capitol Madison, Wisconsin 53702 608-266-8570 Chairperson: Committee on Tax Exemptions Member: Committee on Administrative Rules Committee on Energy Committee on Judiciary Edmund G. Brown, Jr. Governor of the State of California State Capitol Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Governor Brown: I have enclosed a copy of an article that appeared in today's Madison Press Connection. I want to commend you on your stand on gay rights. I know this was a difficult position for you to take and your doing so reaffirms my belief that you are a person of integrity and insight. Also, be assured that you have received much favorable comment from both political leaders and the media in our state for your position regarding Wisconsin's open primary law. This, too, was a difficult position for you to take and despite the harassment you are receiving from the Democratic National Committee, I thank you for making the right decision. Please accept my commitment of support to your candidacy for the office of President of the United States. I offer my help in any way I can be of assistance. I look forward to your coming to Madison. With every best wish, I am Sincerely, David Clarenbach State Representative cc: Wally McGuire Tom Epstein This is 100% Recyled Paper --- THE STATE MPSHI BRILLERS State of New Hampshire HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES CONCORD STER thanks. info AAUG 176 REECE August 12, 1979 The Honorable David Clarenbach House of Representatives Room 422 North State Capitol Maddison, WI 53702 Dear Dave: It was good to meet you during my visit to San Francisco last month. I am very glad to hear that there is some interest in a Jerry Brown can- didacy in Wisconsin. As you may know, things will be getting under way here in New Hampshire, the site of the first-in-the-nation primary, but, every single primary campaign which Jerry enters is important to win. Please drop me a line from time to time to let me know how things are going with you. Again, it was nice meeting you, and I am looking for- ward to seeing you again soon. Warm regards, JK:KC James Kaklamanos Representative Jerry Brown (A-2) --- THE STAT State of New Hampshire HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES f: Gerry Brown CONCORD October 29, 1979 NOV 1 REC'D The Honorable David Clarenbach House of Representatives 422 North State Capitol Madison, Wisconsin 53702 Dear David: This is just a short note to update you on what is occurring here in New Hampshire. As you may know, Tom Hayden and Jane Fonda visited the state on September 29, and were well received at the events which were scheduled for them. I had an opportunity to meet with them both and came away very impressed. Governor Brown has made a few visits to New Hampshire in recent weeks, all of which have been most successful in raising some much needed campaign funds, but more importantly, enlisting many volunteers. He has received good press coverage of his travels around the state, both on television and in print. When your schedule permits, let me know how things are shaping up in Wisconsin. Warm regards, M James Kaklamanos Representative JK/dpm 09 --- For 1980's signal a newera marked by establishment of a new consciousness of national & state leaders. Those who governed Amer past 40 years were fundamentally shaped by Depres & WWII In 1980) a new generation will come to power that was shaped by the strugge in the form of I'm glad to have the chance to introduce Governor Jerry Brown for civil rights, place in Vietnam & against gut tyranny today -- en because I believe it's essential that a statement be made about FRICIA & Watergate Brinn the importance of his campaign for the presidency. Too many people - --- understand national in the Democratic Party and in the media --- have failed to grasp the significance of the Brown candidacy. I predict that that will change. Jerry Brown is an insurgent voice in the politics of this country. His candidacy will force a fundamental debate, the likes of which we seldom see in presidential elections, on critical issues that will affect our lives/not only in the next decade but on/into the next century. decad de/but ives/not Those of us who are concerned and frightened about the unbridled power of giant corporations, the enslavement of our society to nuclear power, increased militarism and Pentagon spending, and the continued erosion of our civil libiertjes ----- should listen to Jerry Brown. Those of us who care about alternative energy, a nuclear-free society, a clean environment, affirmative action, civil liberties, and economic democracy ----- should listen carefully to what Jerry Brown is saying. And His positions on these issues are bold and visionary. He may well provide this country with the greatest opportunity it has had for fundamental country/with had/for social and political reform. It's a privilege to present to you ----- Governor Jerry Brown. th --- Democrats for Reagan & Bush 901 South Highland Street, Arlington, Virginia 22204 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Thursday, October 23, 1980 703/685-3515 CONTACT: Keith Adkinson or Janine Perrignon 703/685-3515 Brown, Canpage STATEMENT BY HONORABLE EUGENE MCCARTHY In speeches to student groups and to others I have until recently urged support for any one of three candidates: John Anderson, running as an Independent, Barry Commoner, the candidate of the People's Party, and Ed Clark, the Libertarian candidate. It was orginally my hope that Anderson, especially after the addition of Pat Lucy as a vice-presidential running mate, might move on from his declared purpose of making his campaign a one-shot event, without any plan to attempt to build a possible third party beyond this year's campaign. Anderson, however, has failed to develop any clear or compelling theme or consistent direction in his campaign, and is not likely to have any signifi- cant impact on this year's campaign issues, or beyond it, by his own continued declaration of returning to the Republican Party after the campaign. Barry Commoner, despite his efforts to broaden his base, remains essentially a one-issue candidate. And Ed Clark continues courageously to challenge the integrity of the Civil Liberties Democrats and of the Free- Enterprise Republicans. It is good work, and I hope that his efforts will be recognized by a strong vote by those persons of Libertarian disposition. Paid for by Democrats for Reagan, Janine Perrignon. Treasurer. Authorized by Reagan Bush Committee --- -2- Now, however, past mid-October, the electorate of the United States faces a decision as to who, of the two major parties, will be the next President of the United States. In 1976 I asked for votes on the grounds that it was important to challenge the domination of American politics by the Republican and by the Democratic Parties, especially since that domination, for the first time, was being sustained by the federal election laws. I said in that campaign that the differences between the two party candidates, Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter, were so minimal that no one should bear any burden of conscience for voting Independent. In this year's election, however, there are few politicians or political experts, who say that there are no differences between the candidates of the major parties. Rather, they say that there are differences, that the differences make a choice difficult, and that in assessing the differences the emphasis is on the negative. I agree that there are differences and that some of them are negative. There are, however, some major positive differences; certainly some that provide the basis for a positive choice. President Carter has denounced Mr. Reagan's opposition to the SALT II and has said that Reagan as President might get us into an arms race, principally a nuclear one with the Russians. Mr. Reagan has responded, as have some liberal Senators, by saying that SALT II was not a disarmament treaty but an agreement for continued arms build up. I agree. He says that if elected he will immediately enter into negotiations, or seek to enter negotiations, with the Russians, seeking parity in nuclear weapons, --- -3- possibly at a lower level of total power than that projected for the future by SALT II. The Reagan proposal is worth considering, especially since President Carter has been unable to persuade the Senate to ratify the treaty negotiated by his administration. Reagan quite possibly could get Senate ratification for a treaty differing from SALT II and, if he were to change his mind, perhaps even of SALT II. To my mind, the ratification of a treaty on nuclear arms control appears more likely under a Reagan administration than under a second Carter administration. Carter's second charge that Reagan's policies will lead to an arms race is difficult to understand. Under President Carter, the United States continues to produce approximately three major bombs a day. The neutron bomb has been perfected. Even though it is a "clean" bomb, as new technology, it contributes to the arms race. The MX missile project continues, with side strategies of having multiple silos, or putting the missiles on a track, thus forcing the Russians to build bigger and better bombs and missiles if they wish to be prepared to knock out our land-based missiles. The cruise missile is being tested and negotiations are underway to place medium range missiles, capable of reaching Russian cities, in Europe. A new strategy, or a new emphasis on an old one, that of knocking out Russian missiles through the application of new technology, thus displacing the old standard of security in Mutual Assured Destruction, has been announced by the Carter administration. In the nuclear competition there is not much that Governor Reagan could add to the contest, except possibly the Bl bomber, which is only minimally less obsolete --- -4- than the B 52. As if all the above weren't enough, the Carter administration has announced plans for a new plant to produce fissionable mater- ials for new bombs, and also has proposed a standby facility for producing materials for chemical warfare. To suggest that Governor Reagan is likely to propel the United States into war is ridiculous. Reagan doesn't wish to involve the United States in a war any more than does President Carter, nor more than you or I. The economic issue of the campaign has centered largely in alternative tax plans. The Carter plan is certainly more inflationary than is the Reagan plan. It would increase personal purchasing power, through transfer payments, some of them in the form of rebates, a favorite device with Carter, but on which Congress has not approved. The Carter program would also stimulate pro- duction by business organizations in geographical areas and industries that have already proved to be uneconomic. There is peripheral good in the Carter tax program but it deals largely with symptoms, rather than with substance and structure. Alhtough it involves what I think is an over-simplified application of Adam Smith economic ideas, the Reagan program is structurally, and economically, sounder than the Carter program. The suggestion by President Carter that Reagan would do away with or considerably weaken basic welfare programs is all but irrelevant. The programs are a part of the social, political and economic structure of the country. --- -5- Reagan has said that he will not do away with social security, unemployment insurance, medicare or other social programs. Some credit is due Republicans for the development and improvement of social programs. It was in the Nixon administration that something approaching minimum national standards for unemployment payments were established and, with the urging of cabinet member Daniel Patrick Moynihan, that a national welfare program was at least presented. Insurance against catastrophic medical costs was proposed by Senator Robert Taft, the elder, in the 1950s. Governor Reagan in the 1980s might decide to urge passage in his memory. Reagan is certainly more likely than is Carter to reduce the number of bureaucracies, if not the number of bureaucrats. He has listed at least four for extinction, including the Department of Education and the Department of Energy, both established by President Carter. The final consideration in judging between presidential candidates, and one I believe is especially important, must be their conception of the office and their conduct, or likely conduct, in the office. Ronald Reagan, I believe, has a clear concept of the meaning of the office and will be able to distinguish the Presidency from the President, something that has not been clearly distinguished by any President of the United States since Harry Truman. --- -6- Governor Reagan sees himself as an extension of his party, and as its agent, in contrast with President Carter who, as a Democrat, has stood aside during the two major tests of his party, on the issues of civil rights and the Viet Nam war. Governor Reagan has run a more dignified and becoming campaign than has the Democratic candidate. I believe he will bring these same attributes and attitudes to the presidency. There are, as I have just outlined, some positive differences which provide the basis for a positive choice in this presidential On the basis of these positive differences, I intend to vote for Ronald Reagan. election. ---