Ronald Reagan Speech Wiki - User contributions [en]

78-02-A6

2026-11-10T15:55:22Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[78-02-A5|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-02-A7|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Independents vs IRS =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
Reginald Dwyer is one of a rare breed, an independent [[wikipedia:Vermont|Vermont]] [[wikipedia:Logging|logger]].
Even in subzero weather you can find Reg Dwyer out in the woods, bringing out
pulpwood to feed the nation's huge appetite for paper products. And, after a
hard day in the woods, you may find him at the school board meeting in his
little town of Sheffield. Reg is one of those dependable, community-minded
small businessmen who have done so much, over two centuries, to create the
image of Vermont in the national mind.

But Reg Dwyer is in trouble - $18,500 worth of trouble - with the
[[wikipedia:Internal_Revenue_Service|Internal Revenue Service]]. It's not about paying his taxes - he's always done
that. It's about paying other people's taxes. To understand why the IRS is
hounding him and dozens of other small logging contractors in New England
and the deep South, it's necessary to know how an independent logging operation
works.

Most of the pulpwood produced by independent loggers in the northeast is
produced on what is called the contract system. The prime contractor - a man
like Reg Dwyer - secures stumpage or cutting rights. Then four operations
follow in sequence: felling and limbing the trees, skidding the logs to a
collection yard, cutting the logs to pulpwood size, and loading and trucking
the wood to the paper mill. Sometimes, in large operations, one company will
hire employees to perform these various operations. But, in independent
logging, each operation may be performed by a specialist who works on contract
with the prime contractor. Fellers and cutters provide their own chain saws,
fuel, safety equipment, and transportation to the job. The skidder may own his
own bulldozer or skidder to haul the logs out of the woods. The trucker will
own his own truck with an expensive clamshell loader.

Now, all these subcontractors are in business for themselves. They may
work for many different logging contractors over the year. But the IRS has
traditionally been hostile to this independent business system because it
makes it more difficult for it to track down and tax every dollar of income.
Self-employed persons pay less than employees to social security. And they
may deduct up to five times as much in self-employed retirement plans as
employees.

So the IRS informed the Dwyers - by announcing it to them before their
neighbors in the lobby of the Sheffield post office - that they owe Uncle Sam
$18,500 in social security, withholding, unemployment insurance taxes, penalties
and interest for all the independent subcontractors they have contracted with
over the past five years--whether or not those subcontractors have already
paid the required taxes! And if the Dwyers have to pay, it will darn near put
them out of business.

New England's independent loggers are not the only victims of this IRS
attack. Independent contractors of all kinds -- artisans, truckers, taxicab
operators, repairmen, and fishermen are under the same gun (although Congress
exempted certain lobstermen by statute in 1976). It's time that Congress told
the IRS, loud and clear, that the independent small contractor is a vital part
of America . They cannot survive if, in addition to the risks of the economy,
they are harassed into insolvency by an IRS determined to make them pay the
taxes of others with whom they contract, as well as their own.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/27/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[rrpl:public/2024-07/40-656-7386263-014-007-2024.pdf#PAGE=24|Online PDF]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===
* [https://www.libertarianism.org/essays/terrorizing-america-how-the-irs-threatens-our-liberties Article indicating the IRS eventually dropped the case]
</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-02-A6

2026-11-10T15:51:04Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[78-02-A5|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-02-A7|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Independents vs IRS =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
Reginald Dwyer is one of a rare breed, an independent [[wikipedia:Vermont|Vermont]] [[wikipedia:Logging|logger]].
Even in subzero weather you can find Reg Dwyer out in the woods, bringing out
pulpwood to feed the nation's huge appetite for paper products. And, after a
hard day in the woods, you may find him at the school board meeting in his
little town of Sheffield. Reg is one of those dependable, community-minded
small businessmen who have done so much, over two centuries, to create the
image of Vermont in the national mind.

But Reg Dwyer is in trouble - $18,500 worth of trouble - with the
[[wikipedia:Internal_Revenue_Service|Internal Revenue Service]]. It's not about paying his taxes - he's always done
that. It's about paying other people's taxes. To understand why the IRS is
hounding him and dozens of other small logging contractors in New England
and the deep South, it's necessary to know how an independent logging operation
works.

Most of the pulpwood produced by independent loggers in the northeast is
produced on what is called the contract system. The prime contractor - a man
like Reg Dwyer - secures stumpage or cutting rights. Then four operations
follow in sequence: felling and limbing the trees, skidding the logs to a
collection yard, cutting the logs to pulpwood size, and loading and trucking
the wood to the paper mill. Sometimes, in large operations, one company will
hire employees to perform these various operations. But, in independent
logging, each operation may be performed by a specialist who works on contract
with the prime contractor. Fellers and cutters provide their own chain saws,
fuel, safety equipment, and transportation to the job. The skidder may own his
own bulldozer or skidder to haul the logs out of the woods. The trucker will
own his own truck with an expensive clamshell loader.

Now, all these subcontractors are in business for themselves. They may
work for many different logging contractors over the year. But the IRS has
traditionally been hostile to this independent business system because it
makes it more difficult for it to track down and tax every dollar of income.
Self-employed persons pay less than employees to social security. And they
may deduct up to five times as much in self-employed retirement plans as
employees.

So the IRS informed the Dwyers - by announcing it to them before their
neighbors in the lobby of the Sheffield post office - that they owe Uncle Sam
$18,500 in social security, withholding, unemployment insurance taxes, penalties
and interest for all the independent subcontractors they have contracted with
over the past five years--whether or not those subcontractors have already
paid the required taxes! And if the Dwyers have to pay, it will darn near put
them out of business.

New England's independent loggers are not the only victims of this IRS
attack. Independent contractors of all kinds -- artisans, truckers, taxicab
operators, repairmen, and fishermen are under the same gun (although Congress
exempted certain lobstermen by statute in 1976). It's time that Congress told
the IRS, loud and clear, that the independent small contractor is a vital part
of America . They cannot survive if, in addition to the risks of the economy,
they are harassed into insolvency by an IRS determined to make them pay the
taxes of others with whom they contract, as well as their own.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/27/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/public/2024-07/40-656-7386263-014-007-2024.pdf#PAGE=24 Online PDF]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===
* [https://www.libertarianism.org/essays/terrorizing-america-how-the-irs-threatens-our-liberties Article indicating the IRS eventually dropped the case]
</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-02-A5

2026-11-10T15:45:12Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[78-02-A4|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-02-A6|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Oil =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
Not too long ago [[77-24-B3|I told of the editor]] of an oil industry trade paper who
had figured out that at 45¢ a cup (which he had paid) coffee was $600 a barrel
compared to $14 for Arab oil. Then he wondered why there were no Congressmen
clamoring about the high price of coffee, with the usual charges of monopoly,
withheld reserves and obscene profits.

I'm afraid most of us look at the familiar signs and billboards of the
major oil companies and find it easy to believe at least some of the tirade
against the oil merchants. With that in mind I decided to do some boning up.
I was surprised at what I found, and maybe you'll be too.

Try this one for starters. Since 1958 the [[wikipedia:History_of_United_States_postage_rates|cost of mailing a letter]] has
gone up 333%. The price of gasoline has only gone up 88%. Makes you wonder
about that new $10½ billion [[wikipedia:United_States_Department_of_Energy|Energy department]] in Washington, doesn't it?

Senator [[wikipedia:Henry_M._Jackson|Henry Jackson]] of Washington has found a few things in the oil
industry to criticize. But, if the price of gasoline had gone up as much in
his home state as those tasty apples they raise there, Washingtonians would
be paying $1.46 a gallon. Senator [[wikipedia:Edmund_Muskie|Muskie]] of Maine has had some unkind things
to say about the petroleum peddlers, but if gasoline had gone up in price to
match Maine lobsters it would sell for $2.85 a gallon. While we're at it let's
take the dollar itself (we won't be taking much). Over the last 40 years the
dollar has shrunk a little. It's worth a fraction under 26¢. But you can still
buy a gallon of gas for less than one of those 26¢ dollars.

High on the list of things the oil industry is accused of is that it enjoys
being a monopoly. Congress debates divestiture a bill to break up the major
oil companies. Now monopoly means domination of the industry by a few companies,
reduced competition and limited entry into the business by others.

Well that was my next surprise. There are more than 10,000 companies
competing with each other in oil and gas exploration and production; 133 companies
operate 264 refineries and more than 100 pipeline companies transport crude oil,
liquefied natural gas and refined products.

In the wholesale side of the industry there are 15,000 companies selling
petroleum products to over 300,000 retailers (90 percent of whom are independents).
Would it surprise you as it did me to learn there are more than 1500 different
brands of gasoline for us to buy? That's not much of a monopoly.

There is a direct ratio between increased production in America and energy.
Four million jobs are created for every billion barrels of oil found in this
country. I hope the new Department of Energy knows that because we'll need 19
million new jobs by 1985. That's five billion barrels of oil.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/27/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan.27s_Path_to_Victory|RPtV-257]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===
* [https://afdc.energy.gov/data/10641 Gas Prices 1950 to present (actual and inflation adjusted) from US Department of Energy]
</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-02-A5

2026-11-10T15:38:59Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[78-02-A4|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-02-A6|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Oil =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
Not too long ago [[77-24-B3|I told of the editor]] of an oil industry trade paper who
had figured out that at 45¢ a cup (which he had paid) coffee was $600 a barrel
compared to $14 for Arab oil. Then he wondered why there were no Congressmen
clamoring about the high price of coffee, with the usual charges of monopoly,
withheld reserves and obscene profits.

I'm afraid most of us look at the familiar signs and billboards of the
major oil companies and find it easy to believe at least some of the tirade
against the oil merchants. With that in mind I decided to do some boning up.
I was surprised at what I found, and maybe you'll be too.

Try this one for starters. Since 1958 the cost of mailing a letter has
gone up 333%. The price of gasoline has only gone up 88%. Makes you wonder
about that new $10½ billion [[wikipedia:United_States_Department_of_Energy|Energy department]] in Washington, doesn't it?

Senator [[wikipedia:Henry_M._Jackson|Henry Jackson]] of Washington has found a few things in the oil
industry to criticize. But, if the price of gasoline had gone up as much in
his home state as those tasty apples they raise there, Washingtonians would
be paying $1.46 a gallon. Senator [[wikipedia:Edmund_Muskie|Muskie]] of Maine has had some unkind things
to say about the petroleum peddlers, but if gasoline had gone up in price to
match Maine lobsters it would sell for $2.85 a gallon. While we're at it let's
take the dollar itself (we won't be taking much). Over the last 40 years the
dollar has shrunk a little. It's worth a fraction under 26¢. But you can still
buy a gallon of gas for less than one of those 26¢ dollars.

High on the list of things the oil industry is accused of is that it enjoys
being a monopoly. Congress debates divestiture a bill to break up the major
oil companies. Now monopoly means domination of the industry by a few companies,
reduced competition and limited entry into the business by others.

Well that was my next surprise. There are more than 10,000 companies
competing with each other in oil and gas exploration and production; 133 companies
operate 264 refineries and more than 100 pipeline companies transport crude oil,
liquefied natural gas and refined products.

In the wholesale side of the industry there are 15,000 companies selling
petroleum products to over 300,000 retailers (90 percent of whom are independents).
Would it surprise you as it did me to learn there are more than 1500 different
brands of gasoline for us to buy? That's not much of a monopoly.

There is a direct ratio between increased production in America and energy.
Four million jobs are created for every billion barrels of oil found in this
country. I hope the new Department of Energy knows that because we'll need 19
million new jobs by 1985. That's five billion barrels of oil.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/27/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan.27s_Path_to_Victory|RPtV-257]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

77-20-B1

2026-11-09T19:12:38Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1977|1977]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[77-20-A7|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[77-20-B2|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Olympics =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
As 1980 edges closer I’m sure many of us will find our thoughts turning to
Moscow and the Olympic games. I'll be right back.

Some time ago on one of these broadcasts I told how the Soviet Union through
some several of it’s spiritual unofficial allies—you might in the absence of
formal ties call them ideological soul mates—was working to shut Israel out of
the 1980 Olympics. At the time I indicated a little unhappiness with the
International Olympic Committees tendency to waffle a bit when a stand on
principle is called for.

The committee was established from the beginning to be above politics,
absolutely independent of any and all governments, supreme authority and sole owner of
the Olympic games. Membership on the committee is pretty exclusive,
new members can be appointed only by recommendation of established members
of the committee.

Each new committee member takes a solemn oath to keep himself free
"from all political, sectarian or commercial influence." Now that pledge didn't
cause any problems in an earlier day but in the world as it is now obviously no
citizen of a totalitarian country could take such an oath. And yet the roster
shows the [[wikipedia:Soviet_Union|Soviet Union]], [[wikipedia:Bulgaria|Bulgaria]], [[wikipedia:Romania|Romania]], [[wikipedia:Poland|Poland]], [[wikipedia:Czechoslovakia|Czechoslovakia]], [[wikipedia:Cuba|Cuba]] and [[wikip[edia:East_Germany|East
Germany]] represented on the committee by full fledged members in good
standing. Can it be we're wrong and totalitarians will permit a certain freedom
in the name of sport?

No, it seems the International Olympic Committee solves this problem as it has so
many others. The oath was waived for these members. The late Avery
Brundage President of the Olympics for 20 years<SUP>1</SUP> said that “unfortunately there are
large sections of the world today where the form of government precludes full
independence of it’s citizens.” Alexander Solzhenitsyn puts it a little more bluntly.

But in 1969 it was also ruled that such non-independent members could
never total more than 10% of the membership. And last June in observance of
that quota the committee, turned down recommendations from Eastern block Iron
Curtain countries—the “People's Democratic Republic of Korea (that's North Korea)
included. Now that sounds better—or it did until the committee decided to
boost it's membership by accepting citizens from such bastions of freedom as
Mali, Mongolia and Libya.

It is not known whether they were asked to take the oath of independence.
Possibly they weren't since the individuals chosen are members Presidents of
their national Olympic committees & are therefore fully accountable to their
govts. And those govts, are not exactly our idea of a Republic or a Democracy.

In Mali the power all of it, is vested in the Revolutionary Military
Council. In Mongolia it is the Communist party and in Libya it is Colonel
Qaddafi<SUP>2</SUP> the absolute Dictator.

One thing is certain, they are all solid allies of the Kremlin and will
be helpful in seeing that the 1980 Olympics in Moscow are successful, as
success is defined by the Kremlin.

I’ve always suspected the Russian Athletes do as well as they do because
they think there are real bullets in the starters gun. If there were I won-
der if the International Committee would protest.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>09/27/[[Radio1977|1977]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan.27s_Path_to_Victory|RPtV-201]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===
''from the book'':
<OL STYLE="font-size: 80%">
<LI>Avery Brundage was president of the International Olympic Committee from 1952 to 1972.
<LI>Muammar Qaddafi.
</OL>
</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-02-A5

2026-11-09T18:25:52Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[78-02-A4|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-02-A6|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Oil =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
Not too long ago [[77-24-B3|I told of the editor]] of an oil industry trade paper who
had figured out that at 45¢ a cup (which he had paid) coffee was $600 a barrel
compared to $14 for Arab oil. Then he wondered why there were no Congressmen
clamoring about the high price of coffee, with the usual charges of monopoly,
withheld reserves and obscene profits.

I'm afraid most of us look at the familiar signs and billboards of the
major oil companies and find it easy to believe at least some of the tirade
against the oil merchants. With that in mind I decided to do some boning up.
I was surprised at what I found, and maybe you'll be too.

Try this one for starters. Since 1958 the cost of mailing a letter has
gone up 333%. The price of gasoline has only gone up 88%. Makes you wonder
about that new $10½ billion Energy department in Washington, doesn't it?

Senator Henry Jackson of Washington has found a few things in the oil
industry to criticize. But, if the price of gasoline had gone up as much in
his home state as those tasty apples they raise there, Washingtonians would
be paying $1.46 a gallon. Senator Muskie of Maine has had some unkind things
to say about the petroleum peddlers, but if gasoline had gone up in price to
match Maine lobsters it would sell for $2.85 a gallon. While we're at it let's
take the dollar itself (we won't be taking much). Over the last 40 years the
dollar has shrunk a little. It's worth a fraction under 26¢. But you can still
buy a gallon of gas for less than one of those 26¢ dollars.

High on the list of things the oil industry is accused of is that it enjoys
being a monopoly. Congress debates divestiture a bill to break up the major
oil companies. Now monopoly means domination of the industry by a few companies,
reduced competition and limited entry into the business by others.

Well that was my next surprise . There are more than 10,000 companies
competing with each other in oil and gas exploration and production; 133 companies
operate 264 refineries and more than 100 pipeline companies transport crude oil,
liquefied natural gas and refined products.

In the wholesale side of the industry there are 15,000 companies selling
petroleum products to over 300,000 retailers (90 percent of whom are independents).
Would it surprise you as it did me to learn there are more than 1500 different
brands of gasoline for us to buy? That's not much of a monopoly.

There is a direct ratio between increased production in America and energy.
Four million jobs are created for every billion barrels of oil found in this
country. I hope the new Department of Energy knows that because we'll need 19
million new jobs by 1985. That's five billion barrels of oil.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/27/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan.27s_Path_to_Victory|RPtV-257]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-02-A4

2026-11-06T20:19:52Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[78-02-A3|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-02-A5|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Korea =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
Last spring Major General [[wikipedia:John_K._Singlaub|John Singlaub]], a most capable soldier with a
distinguished military record was abruptly and publicly removed from his job
in South Korea by the Commander-in-Chief himself. The General had expressed
his views in what he thought was a private conversation, that the President's
plan to withdraw our 2nd infantry division from Korea could tempt the Communists
in the North to have another go at conquering the Republic of Korea.

Arriving in this country, the General was summoned to appear before the
House Armed Services Committee. He told the Congressmen that our intelligence
reports reveal that the North Koreans have done what the Soviet Union has done --
engaged in a massive buildup of military power. And being the honest man he
is, he said that removing troops from Korea would seriously weaken South
Korea's ability to defend itself.

Now, many months later, our State department (which from the first has
supported the President's decision to withdraw the 2nd division) comes forth
with a 12-page report to Congress on Korea. And, guess what? The report
stresses the fact that North Korea has rejected all efforts to peacefully
settle the political issues which divide the two Koreas.

The report points out the "sizable military advantage" the North has over
the South and the fact that North Korea's military force is obviously offensive
and not defensive in nature. In tanks, armored personnel carriers, rocket
launchers, artillery, and so forth, the South is outnumbered more than two-to-one.
North Korea's advantage includes jet fighter planes, naval vessels and Russian
missiles for use against ships. South Korea has no submarines, but Korea
builds its own.

Most significantly, the report--after stressing the proximity of Seoul to
the North Korean border--makes it plain that South Korea could survive an attack
with our help. They will have to have air, naval and logistic support. The
report goes farther and says steps must be taken to "replace the combat
capability of the U.S. ground forces we are going to withdraw." We must build
up South Korea's stores of ammunition and equipment, send more and better tanks
and anti-tank weapons; there must be an increase in South Korea's capability
to utilize sophisticated weaponry and still -- with all that -- they would need
our active participation if war should come.

The report doesn't come right out and say it, but it strongly implies we'd
be better off if the U.S. 2nd infantry division stayed right where it is.
In other words, General Singlaub knew what he was saying! The presence of our
troops in South Korea could very well mean the difference between peace and war.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/27/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan:_In_His_Own_Hand|RihoH-68]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-02-A3

2026-11-06T19:31:58Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[78-02-A2|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-02-A4|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= St. Stephen's Crown =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
I've [[wikipedia:78-01-A7|spoken before]] about the [[wikipedia:Holy_Crown_of_Hungary|Crown of St. Stephan]] which has been a symbol of
freedom to the Hungarian people for a thousand years, but I can't resist having
one more go at it.

The Washington paper [[wikipedia:Human_Events|Human Events]] has published a conversation between [[wikipedia:Reed_Irvine|Reed
Irvine]] of [[wikipedia:Accuracy_in_Media|Accuracy-in-Media]] and a spokesman for the State department regarding
the President's statement that we were returning the crown -- QUOTE-- "To the
people of Hungary." --UNQUOTE-- Here's the way it went. I'll play both parts.

Q: Could you tell us whether this statement that they are returning the crown
to the people of Hungary indicated that the State department and the United
States government believe that the government of [[wikipedia:János_Kádár|Janos Kadar]], which has been
supported by Soviet occupation forces in Hungary, and installed with their support,
represents the people of Hungary?<BR />
A: We are not returning it so much to the government, Reed ... we are returning it
to the Hungarian people.

Q: You obviously are not turning it over to the man in the street, you are turning
it over to government officials.<BR />
A: There has to be somebody --

Q: Do you think that the government officials represent the people of Hungary?<BR />
A: I don't think the question arises in this particular case, Reed.

Q: It obviously does, from your statement. You say your are returning it to
the people--and you are returning it to the Hungarian government.<BR />
A: We have a disagreement which we can discuss if you want. I am saying that--

Q: Do you think that the government of Hungary is representative of the people?<BR />
A: I won't answer the question. It's not what we are saying here.

Q: Well, could you tell us when the last free election was held in Hungary?<BR />
A: I would have to go back and look at the history books. I don't really know.

Q: Has Janos Kadar ever submitted himself to a free election?<BR />
A: I think what you ought to do is ask the Hungarians.

Q: Well you know that. You know he hasn't.<BR />
A: Well, then, why do you ask the question?

Q: Well, I wanted to get the State department's view of why they feel that this
government is representative of the people.<BR />
A: My answer, Reed, as I have said, is that from this podium we are not in the
habit of making judgments on other people's governments.

Q: You don't have opinions about representative governments?<BR />
A: I did not say that.

Q: In Rhodesia, South Africa?<BR />
A: No, I am not saying that at all.

Q: I'm at a complete loss to understand the State department's position.<BR />
A: Maybe I am at a complete loss to know why you don't inform yourself of what
this forum is about, and what these briefings are really intended for.

Q: I take it, it's to try to find out what the United States government policy
is, isn't it? What is our policy?<BR />
A: I don't think you are asking me what our policy is.

Q: I am asking you. What is our policy?<BR />
A: Our policy to what?

Q: Toward governments that don't represent people. You say you are returning the
crown to the Hungarian people. You are returning it to Janos Kadar, who obviously
doesn't represent the people, because he has never submitted himself to an election.<BR />
A: And?

Q: Therefore, you are saying, it seems to me, incorrectly, that the government of
Hungary represents the people and by this action you are indicating to everyone in
the world that this government represents the people.<BR />
A: No, I would contest that strongly, Reed. I don't think I am making that kind
of statement at all.

But he never explained what kind of statement he was making.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/27/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[rrpl:public/2024-07/40-656-7386263-014-007-2024.pdf#PAGE=21|Online PDF]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-02-A3

2026-11-06T16:52:13Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[78-02-A2|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-02-A4|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= St. Stephen's Crown =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
I've [[wikipedia:78-01-A7|spoken before]] about the [[wikipedia:Holy_Crown_of_Hungary|Crown of St. Stephan]] which has been a symbol of
freedom to the Hungarian people for a thousand years, but I can't resist having
one more go at it.

The Washington paper [[wikipedia:Human_Events|Human Events]] has published a conversation between [[wikipedia:Reed_Irvine|Reed
Irvine]] of [[wikipedia:Accuracy_in_Media|Accuracy-in-Media]] and a spokesman for the State department regarding
the President's statement that we were returning the crown -- QUOTE-- "To the
people of Hungary." --UNQUOTE-- Here's the way it went. I'll play both parts.

Q: Could you tell us whether this statement that they are returning the crown
to the people of Hungary indicated that the State department and the United
States government believe that the government of Janos Kadar, which has been
supported by Soviet occupation forces in Hungary, and installed with their support,
represents the people of Hungary?<BR />
A: We are not returning it so much to the government, Reed ... we are returning it
to the Hungarian people.

Q: You obviously are not turning it over to the man in the street, you are turning
it over to government officials.<BR />
A: There has to be somebody --

Q: Do you think that the government officials represent the people of Hungary?<BR />
A: I don't think the question arises in this particular case, Reed.

Q: It obviously does, from your statement . You say your are returning it to
the people--and you are returning it to the Hungarian government.
A: We have a disagreement which we can discuss if you want. I am saying that--

Q: Do you think that the government of Hungary is representative of the people?
A: I won't answer the question. It's not what we are saying here.

Q: Well, could you tell us when the last free election was held in Hungary?
A: I would have to go back and look at the history books. I don't really know.

Q: Has Janos Kadar ever submitted himself to a free election?
A: I think what you ought to do is ask the Hungarians.

Q: Well you know that. You know he hasn't.
A: Well, then, why do you ask the question?

Q: Well, I wanted to get the State department's view of why they feel that this
government is representative of the people.
A: My answer, Reed, as I have said, is that from this podium we are not in the
habit of making judgments on other people's governments.

Q: You don't have opinions about representative governments?
A: I did not say that.

Q: In Rhodesia, South Africa?
A: No, I am not saying that at all.

Q: I'm at a complete loss to understand the State department's position.
A: Maybe I am at a complete loss to know why you don't inform yourself of what
this forum is about, and what these briefings are really intended for.

Q: I take it, it's to try to find out what the United States government policy
is, isn't it? What is our policy?
A: I don't think you are asking me what our policy is.

Q: I am asking you. What is our policy?
A: Our policy to what?

Q: Toward governments that don't represent people. You say you are returning the
crown to the Hungarian people. You are returning it to Janos Kadar, who obviously
doesn't represent the people, because he has never submitted himself to an election.
A: And?

Q: Therefore, you are saying, it seems to me, incorrectly, that the government of
Hungary represents the people and by this action you are indicating to everyone in
the world that this government represents the people.
A: No, I would contest that strongly, Reed. I don't think I am making that kind
of statement at all.

But he never explained what kind of statement he was making.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/27/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[rrpl:public/2024-07/40-656-7386263-014-007-2024.pdf#PAGE=21|Online PDF]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-02-A2

2026-11-06T16:44:04Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[78-02-A1|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-02-A3|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Panama =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
I'd like you to hear what one of our [[wikipedia:Panama_Canal|Panama Canal]] employees, a Panamanian himself, has to say about the doings of government, ours and Panamas.
I'll be right back.

On a recent visit to [[wikipedia:Panama|Panama]] two U.S. Senators, [[wikipedia:Paul_Laxalt|Paul Laxalt]] and [[wikipedia:Bob_Dole|Bob Dole]],
met with the Panama Canal Zone Civic council. The council is made up of
representatives of the towns in the zone.

One of the council members who spoke to the senators was a fireman. He was
born in the zone to parents from the West Indies, he is by law, a Panamanian.
Yet, in his heart he is American and in his heart he is against the treaties
which would give the canal to Panama.

He spoke with a heavy West Indian accent. He's a man in his 40's, black and
concerned (as are most of the canal employees) that he will face retribution
if the treaties are ratified because of his loyalty to the United States.
He was quite emotional as he spoke:

--QUOTE-- "The employees that you see here working, the ones that come from
the United States and the ones that are employed locally, we are a breed of
people--a breed of second, some third generation, whose fathers come here and
built this place.

"They're probably turnin' over in their graves wanting to find out what's
wrong with the United States government. What's this business about givin' away
the Panama Canal? To Who? Are we working for what? We sacrifice all the time.
We give of ourselves. ... . freely. Yes, we came here and worked for 10 cents an hour.
We are going to defend it. Regardless of what anybody wants to say, we stood here
in 1964 and we defended it." --UNQUOTE-- (He was speaking of the riots)
Quote--And we dare anybody to come over and take it away from us. That's the
kind of feelin's that I have. I am tell you that.

"You are never making me an American citizen which I know that I'm entitled
to be because I was born and grow up in the Canal Zone under the American Flag.
And trained western style . I don't know anything about Communism or whatever.
I read, write english. That's the language I know. The money in my pocket
--"In God we trust"-- thats what it writes on there. It's American money. And
it's the only kind of money I care to spend.

"So what you think I'm going to do? Sit here and let some tinhorn terrorist
come over here and tell us what we should do. Uh? This is our country. We built
it. This Panama Canal was built by this people and it was paid in blood, sweat
and tears. Are you going to tell me the United States government just--just
give it away like that?--UNQUOTE. At this point he was interrupted by another
member of the Council who said, QUOTE--"This man is very dramatic but he is 100
percent right."

The fireman continued QUOTE--"I know that I'm right. That's the reason why
my kids at home--three girls and a boy--they're going to be in the United States
Navy and Army. They're not to go through this what I'm going through. Never
happen. I'm going to see to it . And any day that this treaty comes into effect
I'm going to tell you this: you'll have an exodus to the United States.
Employees- -black and white--will be going out of here." UNQUOTE--

I hope he knows how many Americans feel the same way.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/27/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan.27s_Path_to_Victory|RPtV-256]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD>Yes</TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>[[yt:n7etzDJZDbg|Listen]]</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===
* ''Note from Script'': These programs are provided for airing from February 13th through March 3rd inclusive. Maintaining this schedule will enable your station to air all newly recorded programs as received.
</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

75-11-A4

2026-11-06T16:37:05Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1975|1975]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[75-11-A3|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[75-11-A5|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Big Mo =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
Something happened a few weeks ago that gave me a better feeling about the movies than I got from the Oscar night. I'll be right back.

I suppose you could say that what I'm doing for the next few minutes is a commercial and maybe so because I'm going to try to sell you tickets to a movie. On April 22nd the Southern California Motion Picture Council presented an award to producer [[wikipedia:Frank_Ross_(producer)|Frank Ross]], co-producer and author [[wikipedia:Douglas_Morrow|Doug Morrow]] and director Daniel Mann for a picture called "Big Mo." All three have considerable stature in the movie world. Among their credits, Frank produced "[[wikipedia:The_Robe_(film)|The Robe]]," Doug wrote "[[wikipedia:The_Stratton_Story|The Stratton Story]]," and the [[wikipedia:Jim_Thorpe_–_All-American|film biography of Jim Thorpe]] and [[wikipedia:Daniel_Mann|Danny Mann]] has directed dozens of Hollywood's top films. "Big Mo" was the nickname of a great pro basketball player, the late [[wikipedia:Maurice_Stokes|Maurie Stokes]].

The movie was released sometime back under the title "[[wikipedia:Maurie_(film)|Maurie]]." It didn't sell. Whether it was the title, the distributing company (now out of business) or what, it was not a box office success, but those who did see it raved about it. Now the producers could have just written it off as another picture that didn't make it and gone on to other things, but they didn't. For one thing, making it had been a labor of love. They believed in it and so did virtually everyone who saw it. Cards were left in the lobbies of theaters and 99 percent of the people, old and young, who filled them out said more pictures like this should be made. So those of you who missed it will have another chance. It's being reissued under the new title, "Big Mo."

It's a true story of two pro basketball players, Maurie Stokes and [[wikipedia:Jack_Twyman|Jack Twyman]]. At the height of his career, Maurie was suddenly stricken with a rare disability that left him totally paralyzed. Jack his teammate, couldn't stand the idea that Maurie would have to live out his life a physical vegetable, his mind active and alert but unable to even speak. Under Jack's insistent probing and questioning a doctor finally said that with years of therapy, at a cost of at least $100,000 a year, possibly, just possibly, Maurie might regain some ability to move and maybe speak. Jack said, okay begin. That was quite an undertaking for a basketball player who had a wife and child and another on the way and who only made $15,000 a year, but he took it on. For 11 years he went on playing basketball with Cincinnati, supporting his family and raising one way or another a $100,000 a year for therapy that gradually brought Big Mo to where he could speak and sit in a wheelchair.

Now that's all I'm going to tell you about the story because I want you to go see it. This is a picture that had to be made. We need it now more than at any other time. The acting is, in my opinion, outstanding. There is suspense, humor and deeply moving scenes that will make you realize once more that man has an indomitable spirit, that we do have a spark of the divine and we're capable of noble deeds and great love. Take the family, nothing in that picture would embarrass you but your children will be better off for having seen it, and so will you. In fact, you will come out of the theater feeling as tall as Jack and Maury and they're six feet seven.

Watch for it. Big Mo a true story.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.

</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>06/01/[[Radio1975|1975]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>N/A</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD>Yes</TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===
* Used on The Citizen Reagan Podcast
* [[yt:2UeQEnzNzZo|Movie on Youtube]]
</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-02-A1

2026-11-06T16:31:24Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[78-01-B8|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-02-A2|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Big Mo =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
Quite a [[75-11-A4|long time back on one of these broadcasts]] I talked about a great
pro-basketball star named [[wikipedia:Maurice_Stokes|Maurie Stokes]]. To all the N.B.A. fans he was known
as Big Mo.

At the very height of his career he was struck down by a rare--almost
unheard of--disease. One of his teammates, [[wikipedia:Jack_Twyman|Jack Twyman]], accompanied him to
the hospital because, as he later said to his wife, "It didn't seem right to
let him go by himself." That was the start of one of the truly great stories
of friendship between two strong men.

That story caught the attention of a fine Hollywood screenwriter, [[wikipedia:Douglas_Morrow|Doug
Morrow]], who had also written [[wikipedia:The_Stratton_Story|the story]] of [[wikipedia:Monty_Stratton|Monte Stratton]], the baseball pitcher
who lost his leg in a hunting accident and fought his way back to be a starting
pitcher in the big leagues. [[wikipedia:James_Stewart|Jimmy Stewart]], you may remember, played Stratton
in what was one of Hollywood's finer movies.

It was only natural that Doug Morrow would see the epic quality and the
drama in the real life stories of Big Mo and Jack Twyman. With Big Mo gone
Jack Twyman set the rule that the story would have to be the truth, the whole
truth and, so help me, no artificial "tinsel town" gimmicks added. Those
conditions didn't bother Morrow--that's the way he wanted to do it. He wrote
the story and co-produced the picture with [[wikipedia:Frank_Ross_(producer)|Frank Ross]], producer of the epic,
"[[wikipedia:The_Robe_(film)|The Robe]]".

They made this motion picture the way pictures used to be made. More
important it was a picture that everyone should see; a picture about the
indomitable human spirit that has raised us above the primeval swamp. Against
the competitive background of big time pro basketball "Big Mo" is a story with
heart, humor, excitement and suspense. And you can have a family night with a
picture the kids should see and you won't have to pretend you didn't hear
certain words.

In today's world here is a story about man's humanity to man. One of our
biggest army training centers has made this picture a part of recruit indoctrination
and credits it with unifying our young men and binding them together in
a common cause. The first time I saw it I called it a picture all America
should see. You'll see courage and compassion, brotherly love without mawkishness
and a story that will hold your attention. And every minute of it is a true
life story that really happened.

I know I sound like a commercial, but I mean every word of it. If you liked
the [[wikipedia:Brian's_Song|story]] of [[wikipedia:Brian_Piccolo|Brian Piccolo]], you'll love "Big Mo" on C.B.S. Friday Night.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/27/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[rrpl:public/2024-07/40-656-7386263-014-007-2024.pdf#PAGE=19|Online PDF]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===
* ''Note from script'': (MUST air before 2/17/78)
* ''Note from script'': These programs are provided for airing from February 13th through March 3rd inclusive. Maintaining this schedule will enable your station to air all newly recorded programs as received.
</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-02-A1

2026-11-06T16:30:54Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[78-01-B8|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-02-A2|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Big Mo =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
Quite a [[75-11-A4|long time back on one of these broadcasts]] I talked about a great
pro-basketball star named [[wikipedia:Maurice_Stokes|Maurie Stokes]]. To all the N.B.A. fans he was known
as Big Mo.

At the very height of his career he was struck down by a rare--almost
unheard of--disease. One of his teammates, [[wikipedia:Jack_Twyman|Jack Twyman]], accompanied him to
the hospital because, as he later said to his wife, "It didn't seem right to
let him go by himself." That was the start of one of the truly great stories
of friendship between two strong men.

That story caught the attention of a fine Hollywood screenwriter, [[wikipedia:Douglas_Morrow|Doug
Morrow]], who had also written [[wikipedia:The_Stratton_Story|the story]] of [[wikipedia:Monty_Stratton|Monte Stratton]], the baseball pitcher
who lost his leg in a hunting accident and fought his way back to be a starting
pitcher in the big leagues. [[wikipedia:James_Stewart|Jimmy Stewart]], you may remember, played Stratton
in what was one of Hollywood's finer movies.

It was only natural that Doug Morrow would see the epic quality and the
drama in the real life stories of Big Mo and Jack Twyman. With Big Mo gone
Jack Twyman set the rule that the story would have to be the truth, the whole
truth and, so help me, no artificial "tinsel town" gimmicks added. Those
conditions didn't bother Morrow--that's the way he wanted to do it. He wrote
the story and co-produced the picture with [[wikipedia:Frank_Ross_(producer)|Frank Ross]], producer of the epic,
"[[wikipedia:The_Robe_(film)|The Robe]]".

They made this motion picture the way pictures used to be made. More
important it was a picture that everyone should see; a picture about the
indomitable human spirit that has raised us above the primeval swamp. Against
the competitive background of big time pro basketball "Big Mo" is a story with
heart, humor, excitement and suspense. And you can have a family night with a
picture the kids should see and you won't have to pretend you didn't hear
certain words.

In today's world here is a story about man's humanity to man. One of our
biggest army training centers has made this picture a part of recruit indoctrination
and credits it with unifying our young men and binding them together in
a common cause. The first time I saw it I called it a picture all America
should see. You'll see courage and compassion, brotherly love without mawkishness
and a story that will hold your attention. And every minute of it is a true
life story that really happened.

I know I sound like a commercial, but I mean every word of it. If you liked
the [[wikipedia:Brian's_Song|story]] of [[wikipedia:Brian_Piccolo|Brian Piccolo]], you'll love "Big Mo" on C.B.S. Friday Night.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/27/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/public/2024-07/40-656-7386263-014-007-2024.pdf#PAGE=19 Online PDF]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===
* ''Note from script'': (MUST air before 2/17/78)
* ''Note from script'': These programs are provided for airing from February 13th through March 3rd inclusive. Maintaining this schedule will enable your station to air all newly recorded programs as received.
</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

75-11-A4

2026-11-06T16:13:02Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1975|1975]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[75-11-A3|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[75-11-A5|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Big Mo =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
Something happened a few weeks ago that gave me a better feeling about the movies than I got from the Oscar night. I'll be right back.

I suppose you could say that what I'm doing for the next few minutes is a commercial and maybe so because I'm going to try to sell you tickets to a movie. On April 22nd the Southern California Motion Picture Council presented an award to producer Frank Ross, co-producer and author Douglas Morrow and director Daniel Mann for a picture called "Big Mo." All three have considerable stature in the movie world. Among their credits, Frank produced "The Robe," Doug wrote "The Stratton Story," and the film biography of Jim Thorpe and Danny Mann has directed dozens of Hollywood's top films. "Big Mo" was the nickname of a great pro basketball player, the late Maurie Stokes.

The movie was released sometime back under the title "Maurie." It didn't sell. Whether it was the title, the distributing company (now out of business) or what, it was not a box office success, but those who did see it raved about it. Now the producers could have just written it off as another picture that didn't make it and gone on to other things, but they didn't. For one thing, making it had been a labor of love. They believed in it and so did virtually everyone who saw it. Cards were left in the lobbies of theaters and 99 percent of the people, old and young, who filled them out said more pictures like this should be made. So those of you who missed it will have another chance. It's being reissued under the new title, "Big Mo."

It's a true story of two pro basketball players, Maurie Stokes and Jack Twyman. At the height of his career, Maurie was suddenly stricken with a rare disability that left him totally paralyzed. Jack his teammate, couldn't stand the idea that Maurie would have to live out his life a physical vegetable, his mind active and alert but unable to even speak. Under Jack's insistent probing and questioning a doctor finally said that with years of therapy, at a cost of at least $100,000 a year, possibly, just possibly, Maurie might regain some ability to move and maybe speak. Jack said, okay begin. That was quite an undertaking for a basketball player who had a wife and child and another on the way and who only made $15,000 a year, but he took it on. For 11 years he went on playing basketball with Cincinnati, supporting his family and raising one way or another a $100,000 a year for therapy that gradually brought Big Mo to where he could speak and sit in a wheelchair.

Now that's all I'm going to tell you about the story because I want you to go see it. This is a picture that had to be made. We need it now more than at any other time. The acting is, in my opinion, outstanding. There is suspense, humor and deeply moving scenes that will make you realize once more that man has an indomitable spirit, that we do have a spark of the divine and we're capable of noble deeds and great love. Take the family, nothing in that picture would embarrass you but your children will be better off for having seen it, and so will you. In fact, you will come out of the theater feeling as tall as Jack and Maury and they're six feet seven.

Watch for it. Big Mo a true story.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.

</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>06/01/[[Radio1975|1975]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>N/A</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD>Yes</TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===
* Used on The Citizen Reagan Podcast
* [[wikipedia:Maurie_(film)|Maurie]]
* [[wikipedia:Maurice_Stokes|Maurice Stokes]]
* [[yt:2UeQEnzNzZo|Movie on Youtube]]
</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-01-B8

2026-11-06T16:11:43Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[78-01-B7|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-02-A1|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Social Security =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
A couple of months after this year's elections the social security tax will
start climbing again, till, by 1987, it will be three times what it is now for
employer and employee. A rate of more than seven percent will be applied on all
earnings up to $42,600.

One nice touch I must admit was putting off the actual increase until after
the election. After all, you know they must have done that for our benefit. With
our interest centered on the candidates we wouldn't want to be bothered by
trivialities such as tax increase. This could even explain why the cut in benefits
from 44 percent of earnings down to 41 percent won't take place until 1984.

The bill-signing ceremony in Washington was well covered by television so we
saw all the congratulations, the back-slapping and hand-shaking. Sure they were
happy--they don't pay any social security tax.

This $250 billion, 10-year tax increase will do nothing but stave off for a
few years the collapse of the social security system. By its own admission, the
program is 17 trillion (yes, trillion) dollars out of balance. What happens when
those few years are up? Another tax increase? At what point do we face up to
reforming the system and making it actuarially sound?

I have a copy of the [https://www.ssa.gov/history/ssn/ssb36.html official announcement of the beginning of social security]
November 24, 1936. It is addressed to us the citizens and explains how the program
will function, "if you work in some factory, shop, mine, mill, store, office
or almost any other kind of business or industry you will be earning benefits
that will come to you later on."

The tax started at one percent of earnings up to $3,000. And, it was explained
how the rate of tax would increase by half a cent every three years until it reached
its ultimate ceiling of three percent, but only on $3,000 of earnings.

Then came this promise. "That is the most you will ever pay". We were also
promised that our dollars would go into a fund where we were guaranteed at least
three percent interest, therefore we would always get back more than we paid in
and more than we could get by putting our money into any kind of private investment.

I'm sure they meant those promises, but they never kept them. Right now more
than half the people paying into social security will get less than they pay in --
possibly as little as half. For more than half the work force the social security
tax is bigger than the income tax and, remember, it is not deductible for income
tax purposes--you pay a tax on a tax.

Truth is if we could invest you and your employer's share of the social security
tax in savings or insurance we could make a much better return than that promised
by social security.

It was never going to cost more than three percent on $3,000. Now it's going to
cost more than seven percent on $42,600 and it is, in effect, bankrupt.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/09/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan:_In_His_Own_Hand|RihoH-372]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-01-B6

2026-11-06T16:06:23Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[78-01-B5|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-01-B7|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Healthy Competition =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
In my years of public life I have been privileged to know many fine men and
women. But there have been a few who lived in memory because of their great
dedication to important principles. Ed Wimmer was such a man.

From the first year of the New Deal until his death last fall at 76, Ed Wimmer
had an unrelenting, high-minded devotion to the great cause of his life--the
preservation of the spirit of independent enterprise in a free republic.

Ed knew that the liberty and prosperity of the American people depended
critically upon the preservation of economic freedom. Ed's hero was the bold,
daring, independent man or woman who cleared and planted, dug and drilled, built
and invented, invested and produced. Without that enterprising spirit, America
could scarcely have become the most productive--and spiritually strong--nation on
earth.

Over the four decades of his public life, Ed Wimmer was a one man army for
independent business. In the Thirties he fought successfully for legislation to
break up the overgrown utility holding company empires. He fought to curb
predatory marketing practices, where monopolies underpriced its products purely to
drive competitors out of business. Wherever monopoly raised its ugly head to
threaten independent business, Ed Wimmer sprang into the breach like Horatio at the
bridge.

Now that gallant man is gone, to whatever special corner of heaven is reserved
for those who devote their lives to preserving the liberty of a free people. But
Mike and Hope Wimmer, his son and daughter, are pumping new vitality into their
father's organization, Forward America. It's working today, from its national
headquarters in [[wikipedia:Covington,_Kentucky|Covington, Kentucky]], to develop and promote responsible and
economically sound public policies to preserve and give full scope to the vital
spirit of enterprise. It is exploring the ground rules for the economy--notably
the federal tax code and regulatory policies--to identify the points where the
balance is tilted toward "giantism". And, at those crucial points, Forward America
is proposing to reverse that tilt to favor increased opportunity for the dynamic
small and medium-sized company and the enterprising individual.

Forward American is not waging war on bigness as such. In our modern economy
a large scale is often necessary for efficiency in production. Forward America's
target is bigness unjustified by any claim to efficiency--bigness for sake of
exercising monopoly power--bigness to extract special privilege from government--
bigness working to destroy genuine competitive free enterprise.

Concentrated power has always been the enemy of liberty. Power widely diffused
among the people means freedom. Thus Forward America's program aims at encouraging
a widespread distribution of capital and property ownership, and discouraging the
concentration of economic and political power in the hands of Big Business, Big
Labor and Big government alike.

Ed Wimmer, like his hero [[wikipedia:Thomas_Jefferson|Thomas Jefferson]] before him, devoted his life to
defending this principle. In Forward America's new program, Ed's soul goes marching
on.

</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/09/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[rrpl:public/2024-07/40-656-7386263-014-007-2024.pdf#PAGE=16|Online PDF]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-01-B6

2026-11-06T16:04:45Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[78-01-B5|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-01-B7|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Healthy Competition =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
In my years of public life I have been privileged to know many fine men and
women. But there have been a few who lived in memory because of their great
dedication to important principles. Ed Wimmer was such a man.

From the first year of the New Deal until his death last fall at 76, Ed Wimmer
had an unrelenting, high-minded devotion to the great cause of his life--the
preservation of the spirit of independent enterprise in a free republic.

Ed knew that the liberty and prosperity of the American people depended
critically upon the preservation of economic freedom. Ed's hero was the bold,
daring, independent man or woman who cleared and planted, dug and drilled, built
and invented, invested and produced. Without that enterprising spirit, America
could scarcely have become the most productive--and spiritually strong--nation on
earth.

Over the four decades of his public life, Ed Wimmer was a one man army for
independent business. In the Thirties he fought successfully for legislation to
break up the overgrown utility holding company empires. He fought to curb
predatory marketing practices, where monopolies underpriced its products purely to
drive competitors out of business. Wherever monopoly raised its ugly head to
threaten independent business, Ed Wimmer sprang into the breach like Horatio at the
bridge.

Now that gallant man is gone, to whatever special corner of heaven is reserved
for those who devote their lives to preserving the liberty of a free people. But
Mike and Hope Wimmer, his son and daughter, are pumping new vitality into their
father's organization, Forward America. It's working today, from its national
headquarters in [[wikipedia:Covington,_Kentucky|Covington, Kentucky]], to develop and promote responsible and
economically sound public policies to preserve and give full scope to the vital
spirit of enterprise. It is exploring the ground rules for the economy--notably
the federal tax code and regulatory policies--to identify the points where the
balance is tilted toward "giantism". And, at those crucial points, Forward America
is proposing to reverse that tilt to favor increased opportunity for the dynamic
small and medium-sized company and the enterprising individual.

Forward American is not waging war on bigness as such. In our modern economy
a large scale is often necessary for efficiency in production. Forward America's
target is bigness unjustified by any claim to efficiency--bigness for sake of
exercising monopoly power--bigness to extract special privilege from government--
bigness working to destroy genuine competitive free enterprise.

Concentrated power has always been the enemy of liberty. Power widely diffused
among the people means freedom. Thus Forward America's program aims at encouraging
a widespread distribution of capital and property ownership, and discouraging the
concentration of economic and political power in the hands of Big Business, Big
Labor and Big government alike.

Ed Wimmer, like his hero [[wikipedia:Thomas_Jefferson|Thomas Jefferson]] before him, devoted his life to
defending this principle. In Forward America's new program, Ed's soul goes marching
on.

</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/09/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/public/2024-07/40-656-7386263-014-007-2024.pdf#PAGE=16 Online PDF]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-01-B4

2026-11-06T15:25:18Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[78-01-B3|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-01-B5|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Miscellaneous =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
I'm going to touch on several subjects today, no one of which would cover a
full broadcast. For example, a couple of tributes to bureaucracy's ability to
find new ways to spend our money.

The [[wikipedia:United_States_Senate_Committee_on_Energy_and_Natural_Resources|Senate Energy and Natural Resources committee]] has unanimously approved
legislation which first confesses that in 1893 the [[wikipedia:John_L._Stevens|U.S. minister]] to the Kingdom of
Hawaii did "unlawfully conspire" to [[wikipedia:Overthrow_of_the_Hawaiian_Kingdom|overthrow the government]] of Queen [[wikipedia:Liliʻuokalani|Liliuokulani]].
It then goes on to set up an Aboriginal Hawaiian Claims Settlement Study commission.
This commission will seek out descendants of the aboriginal Hawaiians and bestow
on them a billion dollars.

On the subject of money it is interesting but not surprising to find that the
State department has a streak of generosity. The [[wikipedia:Michael_Manley|Prime Minister of Jamaica]] who
is taking that lovely island nation into totalitarian socialism, is discovering
the price of such foolishness. The once solid tourist trade and flourishing
economy of Jamaica are virtually non-existent now. But over the hill to the rescue
comes the cavalry. The State Department is bailing him out with a little over
$63 million of our money. It is reported the announcement of this was held up till
after [[wikipedia:Fidel_Castro|Fidel Castro]]'s visit with the Prime Minister.

Now this next one is a verbatim quote from a farm bill passed by the House.
Perhaps it will help you understand the ways of government a little better. "Upon
a finding by the Secretary", (of agriculture I presume) "that the peanuts marketed
from any crop for domestic edible use by a handler are larger in quantity or higher
in grade or quality than the peanuts that could reasonably be produced from the
quantity of peanuts having the grade, kernel content and quality of the quota peanuts
acquired by such handler from such crop for such marketing; such handler shall be
subject to a penalty equal to 120 per centum of the loan level for quota peanuts on
the peanuts which the Secretary determines are in excess of the quantity, grade or
quality of the peanuts that could reasonably have been produced from the peanuts so
acquired." You wouldn't like to have me run over that again, would you?

Turning to the world of sports; the [[wikipedia:Soviet_Union|Soviet Union]] has given a hint of what to
expect at the [[wikipedia:1980_Summer_Olympics|1980 Olympics]]. African diplomats visiting Moscow have been informed
that [[wikipedia:Rhodesia|Rhodesia]] and [[wikipedia:South_Africa|South Africa]] will be banned from the games. Why oh why won't some
nation (preferably our own) say if they don't go we won't go?

Well let's close on a cheerful note. You can, as I've said before, "fight city
hall". More businesses have taken to fighting the [[wiki[edia:Occupational_Safety_and_Health_Administration|Occupational Safety and Health
Agency]]'s habit of inspecting work places without a warrant. OSHA has a no-win
streak in 18 consecutive contests, they've lost six times in Federal courts and 12
times in state courts.

Now, we're waiting for the final round -- a ruling by the Supreme Court as to
whether paragraph 8A of the OSHA act is unconstitutional.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/09/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[rrpl:public/2024-07/40-656-7386263-014-007-2024.pdf#PAGE=13|Online PDF]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===
* It appears that Rhodesia, under the new name of Zimbabwe, did compete in the 1980 Summer Olympics. South Africa did not.
* The United States would end up [[wikipedia:1980_Summer_Olympics_boycott|boycotting these Olympic games]], but for a different reason, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.
</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-01-B5

2026-11-06T15:24:53Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[78-01-B4|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-01-B6|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Welfare =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
For some time now we've been told the [[wikipedia:Presidency_of_Jimmy_Carter|Carter administration]] will present a plan
for welfare reform this year. While there have been trial balloons sent up as to the
direction such reform would take, we've had little in the way of a comprehensive
summary.

Now thanks to Rep. [[wikipedia:Charles_Thone|Charles Thone]] of Nebraska we have some factual information.
I doubt that it will rouse your enthusiasm for the proposed reforms.

To begin with I'm convinced, in view of our own experience with welfare reform
in California, that a primary goal of reform should be to reduce the welfare rolls.
Our caseload was increasing by 40,000 people a month. We reversed that and achieved
an 8000 a month reduction in the rolls for more than three years. This doesn't mean
we callously threw needy people into the streets nor is this what I'm suggesting
at the national level. We found that there were some of what I call "paper people"--
names on the welfare lists of nonexistent people which meant some people were
collecting more than one welfare check.

Our reforms tightened eligibility procedures but mainly we directed our effort
to salvaging human beings and making them self-supporting. The proposals for
welfare reform in Washington will do just the opposite -- they will put additional
people on the dole, says Congressman Thone.

The California reforms save overall welfare cost in this one state alone of
some $2 billion. The Washington proposals will increase the annual cost by almost
$15 billion -- about $12 billion more than the Carter Administration said it would
cost. That estimate is based on the present value of the dollar, but the reform
wouldn't go into operation until 1981. With inflation that $15 billion estimate
will have to be increased considerably.

Even that doesn't tell the whole story. The program is designed to provide
government jobs for all who can't find private employment. The ratio now for public
employees is one for ever four-and-a-half in private enterprise. Or try this one on
for size--there are approximately 73 million people in the country working and
earning in private enterprise. They are the only source government has for tax
revenue. Their taxes are supporting 81 million other Americans who are totally
dependent on tax dollars for their year 'round income. That should be a convincing
argument against making government the employer of last resort.

The administration has projected that this program will put 1.4 million people
to work by 1981. Private business and industry created more jobs than that in just
two months and it didn't take a single tax dollar to do it.

Welfare can be reformed by using common sense. The objective should be to
care for those who can't help themselves, give temporary aid to those who can
while you get them back into the private industry job market. But it looks as if
the White House has given up on this objective before it begins.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/09/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan:_In_His_Own_Hand|RihoH-394]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-01-B4

2026-11-06T15:10:31Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[78-01-B3|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-01-B5|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Miscellaneous =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
I'm going to touch on several subjects today, no one of which would cover a
full broadcast. For example, a couple of tributes to bureaucracy's ability to
find new ways to spend our money.

The [[wikipedia:United_States_Senate_Committee_on_Energy_and_Natural_Resources|Senate Energy and Natural Resources committee]] has unanimously approved
legislation which first confesses that in 1893 the [[wikipedia:John_L._Stevens|U.S. minister]] to the Kingdom of
Hawaii did "unlawfully conspire" to [[wikipedia:Overthrow_of_the_Hawaiian_Kingdom|overthrow the government]] of Queen [[wikipedia:Liliʻuokalani|Liliuokulani]].
It then goes on to set up an Aboriginal Hawaiian Claims Settlement Study commission.
This commission will seek out descendants of the aboriginal Hawaiians and bestow
on them a billion dollars.

On the subject of money it is interesting but not surprising to find that the
State department has a streak of generosity. The [[wikipedia:Michael_Manley|Prime Minister of Jamaica]] who
is taking that lovely island nation into totalitarian socialism, is discovering
the price of such foolishness. The once solid tourist trade and flourishing
economy of Jamaica are virtually non-existent now. But over the hill to the rescue
comes the cavalry. The State Department is bailing him out with a little over
$63 million of our money. It is reported the announcement of this was held up till
after [[wikipedia:Fidel_Castro|Fidel Castro]]'s visit with the Prime Minister.

Now this next one is a verbatim quote from a farm bill passed by the House.
Perhaps it will help you understand the ways of government a little better. "Upon
a finding by the Secretary", (of agriculture I presume) "that the peanuts marketed
from any crop for domestic edible use by a handler are larger in quantity or higher
in grade or quality than the peanuts that could reasonably be produced from the
quantity of peanuts having the grade, kernel content and quality of the quota peanuts
acquired by such handler from such crop for such marketing; such handler shall be
subject to a penalty equal to 120 per centum of the loan level for quota peanuts on
the peanuts which the Secretary determines are in excess of the quantity, grade or
quality of the peanuts that could reasonably have been produced from the peanuts so
acquired." You wouldn't like to have me run over that again, would you?

Turning to the world of sports; the [[wikipedia:Soviet_Union|Soviet Union]] has given a hint of what to
expect at the [[wikipedia:1980_Summer_Olympics|1980 Olympics]]. African diplomats visiting Moscow have been informed
that [[wikipedia:Rhodesia|Rhodesia]] and [[wikipedia:South_Africa|South Africa]] will be banned from the games. Why oh why won't some
nation (preferably our own) say if they don't go we won't go?

Well let's close on a cheerful note. You can, as I've said before, "fight city
hall". More businesses have taken to fighting the [[wiki[edia:Occupational_Safety_and_Health_Administration|Occupational Safety and Health
Agency]]'s habit of inspecting work places without a warrant. OSHA has a no-win
streak in 18 consecutive contests, they've lost six times in Federal courts and 12
times in state courts.

Now, we're waiting for the final round -- a ruling by the Supreme Court as to
whether paragraph 8A of the OSHA act is unconstitutional.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/09/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/public/2024-07/40-656-7386263-014-007-2024.pdf#PAGE=13 Online PDF]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===
* It appears that Rhodesia, under the new name of Zimbabwe, did compete in the 1980 Summer Olympics. South Africa did not.
* The United States would end up [[wikipedia:1980_Summer_Olympics_boycott|boycotting these Olympic games]], but for a different reason, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.
</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-01-B4

2026-11-06T15:01:17Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[78-01-B3|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-01-B5|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Miscellaneous =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
I'm going to touch on several subjects today, no one of which would cover a
full broadcast. For example, a couple of tributes to bureaucracy's ability to
find new ways to spend our money.

The [[wikipedia:United_States_Senate_Committee_on_Energy_and_Natural_Resources|Senate Energy and Natural Resources committee]] has unanimously approved
legislation which first confesses that in 1893 the [[wikipedia:John_L._Stevens|U.S. minister]] to the Kingdom of
Hawaii did "unlawfully conspire" to [[wikipedia:Overthrow_of_the_Hawaiian_Kingdom|overthrow the government]] of Queen [[wikipedia:Liliʻuokalani|Liliuokulani]].
It then goes on to set up an Aboriginal Hawaiian Claims Settlement Study commission.
This commission will seek out descendants of the aboriginal Hawaiians and bestow
on them a billion dollars.

On the subject of money it is interesting but not surprising to find that the
State department has a streak of generosity. The [[wikipedia:Michael_Manley|Prime Minister of Jamaica]] who
is taking that lovely island nation into totalitarian socialism, is discovering
the price of such foolishness. The once solid tourist trade and flourishing
economy of Jamaica are virtually non-existent now. But over the hill to the rescue
comes the cavalry. The State Department is bailing him out with a little over
$63 million of our money. It is reported the announcement of this was held up till
after [[wikipedia:Fidel_Castro|Fidel Castro]]'s visit with the Prime Minister.

Now this next one is a verbatim quote from a farm bill passed by the House.
Perhaps it will help you understand the ways of government a little better. "Upon
a finding by the Secretary", (of agriculture I presume) "that the peanuts marketed
from any crop for domestic edible use by a handler are larger in quantity or higher
in grade or quality than the peanuts that could reasonably be produced from the
quantity of peanuts having the grade, kernel content and quality of the quota peanuts
acquired by such handler from such crop for such marketing; such handler shall be
subject to a penalty equal to 120 per centum of the loan level for quota peanuts on
the peanuts which the Secretary determines are in excess of the quantity, grade or
quality of the peanuts that could reasonably have been produced from the peanuts so
acquired." You wouldn't like to have me run over that again, would you?

Turning to the world of sports; the [[wikipedia:Soviet_Union|Soviet Union]] has given a hint of what to
expect at the [[wikipedia:1980_Summer_Olympics|1980 Olympics]]. African diplomats visiting Moscow have been informed
that Rhodesia and South Africa will be banned from the games. Why oh why won't some
nation (preferably our own) say if they don't go we won't go?

Well let's close on a cheerful note. You can, as I've said before, "fight city
hall". More businesses have taken to fighting the Occupational Safety and Health
Agency's habit of inspecting work places without a warrant. OSHA has a no-win
streak in 18 consecutive contests, they've lost six times in Federal courts and 12
times in state courts.

Now, we're waiting for the final round -- a ruling by the Supreme Court as to
whether paragraph 8A of the OSHA act is unconstitutional.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/09/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/public/2024-07/40-656-7386263-014-007-2024.pdf#PAGE=13 Online PDF]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-01-B3

2026-11-06T14:48:42Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[78-01-B2|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-01-B4|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Crime =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
We talk of human rights and civil rights but is there any greater right --
human or civil -- than the right of an honest man to his life, the right of a child
to walk on the street without fear or a housewife to feel secure in her own kitchen?

I have just received a letter from the father of a young man who was brutally
murdered on New Year's Eve five years ago. His letter was a cry of protest because
one of his son's two murderers has been free on parole after only two years in
prison and now has been discharged from parole and is totally free.

The judge who sentenced the man to second degree murder and the prosecuting
attorney are both outraged . They had spent 16 days in court, one presenting and
the other listening to the shocking evidence of the brutal crime. The judge says
of the parole, "It is a miscarriage of justice. Two years for a brutal murder like
that?" The prosecutor expressed disgust with what he called "another failure of
the system". And he asks, "What is a human life really worth when compared to the
degree of punishment?"

The victim of the crime was a young man 24 years of age with a wife and a young
child. The murderers -- one 21 and the other a year younger -- were both on parole
for previous offenses. Having beaten the victim and abused him in other ways, they
decided he'd have to die so their paroles wouldn't be revoked.

The testimony at the trial showed that in the hours before his death the victim
had been beaten, sexually abused and then bound hand and foot and stuffed in the
trunk of a car. He was taken to a remote country road where he was shot in the
back of the head and twice in the back.

At the trial, the two killers tried to blame each other. On May 9, 1974
they were found guilty; one or murder in the first degree for which he was sentenced
to life imprisonment. Under California law he'll be eligible for parole three-and-
a-half years from now. The other was given a five-year to life sentence for murder
in the second degree. He is the one who was paroled after two years in prison and
now a year-and-a-half later has been released from further parole.

A spokesman from the parole board, which in our state is now called the
"Community Release Board", said there was nothing wrong in the decision to release
him because the board didn't have the full details of his involvement in the crime.
Is it asking too much to suggest that a board having the power to send a convicted
murderer back into society should take the time to get the details?

As [[wikipedia:Cicero|Cicero]] said, "The safety of the people shall be the highest law".

But, in California, a father writes, "After two years the murderer of my son
goes free, but my son is dead."

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/09/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan.27s_Path_to_Victory|RPtV-254]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-01-B2

2026-11-06T14:39:27Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[78-01-B1|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-01-B3|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Our Country =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
I have disagreed with those in government on many of these broadcasts. I'm sure I will
continue to do so. But just to keep the record straight, let me make plain my criticism
is not directed against this system of ours which is unique in all the world. I
criticize those I believe are turning away from and repudiating the very principles which
brought us greatness. They are instead, eroding individual freedom, robbing us of
independence and the right to control our own destiny.

I thought of this the other day when I read an account of a meeting to launch an
Australian visitor here on a three-month tour of campus appearances. The visitor, [[wikipedia:Wilfred_Burchett|Wilfred
Burchett]], is hardly a typical representative of the land down under. He has been
identified as a collaborator with our enemies in two wars -- Korean and North Vietnam.
A [[wikipedia:Yuri_Krotkov|Russian K.G.B. defector]] testified he has been a Soviet K.G.B. agent. He is telling
our college students what is wrong with America and his message is not just a complaint
about bureaucratic ineptness. According to him, our system is the enemy of mankind,
and those who believe in it are the dragons who must be slain before we devour all that
is good and noble in the world.

Well, I offer in rebuttal the words spoken a few years ago (when we were still involved in
the Vietnam war) by a widely known and respected Canadian commentator who became angry
at the rest of the world for, as he put it, kicking us when we were down.

God bless him, [[wikipedia:Gordon_Sinclair|Gordon Sinclair]] went on the radio and said, "It is time to speak up for
the Americans as the most generous and possibly the least appreciated people in all the
earth". He said, "As long as 60 years ago, when I first started to read newspapers, I
read of floods on the yellow river and the Yangtze. Who rushed in with men and money to
help? The Americans did. Germany, Japan and even to a lesser extent Britain and Italy
were literally lifted out of the debris of war by the Americans who poured in billions
of dollars in aid and forgave other billions in debts. When the franc looked to be
in danger of collapsing in 1956, it was the Americans again who propped it up.

"When distant cities are hit by earthquakes it is the United States that hurries in to
help. Managua, Nicaragua is one of the most recent examples.

"The Marshall plan, the Truman policy, all pumped billions upon billions of dollars into
discouraged countries. Now newspapers in those countries are writing about the decadent
war-mongering Americans.

"I can name you 5,000 times when the Americans raced to the help of other people in
trouble. Can you name me even one time when someone else raced to help when the Americans
were in trouble." - UNQUOTE. Mr. Sinclair said he wouldn't blame us if we thumbed our
nose at the rest of the world. I'm grateful to him, but I hope there'll be no nose
thumbing. I hope we'll keep right on being the first to arrive when help is needed.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.

</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/09/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan.27s_Path_to_Victory|RPtV-252]], [[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan:_Stories_in_his_Own_Hand|SihoH-47]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-01-B1

2026-11-06T14:30:47Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[78-01-A7|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-01-B2|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Taxes =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
In [[wikipedia:California|California]] a [[wikipedia:Serrano_v._Priest|court decision]] has outlawed the traditional financing of public schools
by local property tax on the grounds that some school districts are poorer than others
in real estate values. Naturally this has caused an automatic turn to the state as the
only source of funding some 1100 districts on an equal base.

California doesn't face this problem alone. More than 20 states -- perhaps your own --
have switched from local property tax funding since 1971. That was the year a high-powered
movement began to centralize school funding at the state level. Those pushing
the move were very well aware that control of funding would also mean control of
education and that was really their goal.

Up in [[wikipedia:Maine|Maine]], a statewide property tax was adopted in 1973 with the enthusiastic support
of the Maine Teachers association -- an affiliate of the [[wikipedia:National_Education_Association|National Education association]].
Prior to 1973 the citizens of each Maine community met at annual town meetings and voted
on the budget for specific local programs including education. Since their decisions
had a direct effect on local property tax rates, economy dictated those decisions.

Under the new system, the state set the uniform property tax rate and then returned to
each community an amount based on the number of children enrolled in school. This meant
of course, that some towns found themselves supporting their own schools as well as
schools in other towns. At first those "other towns" -- the ones benefiting from the new
system -- were happy as clams.

Of course, the towns that had to share their revenues had a legitimate beef and they
weren't long in starting to complain. But they weren't alone in their misery for long.
School budgets began to move skyward as the public school establishment lobbied for and
got from the state legislature all the things it had always wanted. And, of course, the
statewide property tax climbed right along with those skyrocketing school budgets.

The people of Maine did more than just complain. On December 5th they went to the polls
in a statewide referendum and voted three to two for repeal of the statewide tax. Their
campaign went up against the school establishment and the [[wikipedia:National_Conference_of_State_Legislatures|National Conference of State
Legislatures]], which has been plumping for a statewide system all over the country. The
move to repeal was, for the most part, a grass roots affair and the issue was local budget
control.

If this action by the people of Maine is the forerunner of a national move toward more
authority and autonomy at the local level and a return of such by the federal government
to the states, government will cost less and we might look around some day and find
inflation "went that-a-way".

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/09/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan.27s_Path_to_Victory|RPtV-251]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-01-A7

2026-11-06T14:15:44Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[78-01-A6|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-01-B1|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Human Rights III =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
In signing the [[wikipedia:Helsinki_Accords|Helsinki pact]] we gave the Russians something they've wanted
for 35 years. In effect, we recognized the [[wikipedia:Soviet_Union|Soviet Union]]'s right to hold captive
the Eastern and Central European nations they have ruled since World War II. We
signed the pact apparently because of one clause which had to do with human rights.
Those making the decision to sign claimed the Soviet Union by its signature had
agreed to let people have some (if not all) of the rights the rest of us take for
granted. They are (for example) supposed to be able to leave the Soviet Union
and the captive nations if they choose. But the Russians make promises; they don't
keep them.

For more than three decades now we've referred to the [[wikipedia:Iron_Curtain|Iron Curtain]] countries
as the captive nations. Each year we have proclaimed a [[wikipedia:Captive_Nations_Week|Captive Nations week]] to
remind the world and ourselves that the Soviet Union holds millions of people in
bondage.

This year as Captive Nations week drew near, there was no proclamation from
the White House--only silence.

Then Americans of Central and Eastern origin brought pressure to bear and a
weak, meaningless Presidential message was released. It pleased no one but the
Russians.

The [[wikipedia:United_Nations_Commission_on_Human_Rights|U.N. Human Rights commission]] in Geneva faced an American motion calling
on the U.N. to question the Soviet Union about implementation of the human rights
clause of the U.N. Charter. But then our chief delegate withdrew the motion
before it could be brought to a vote.

Now comes an act of symbolism which has shocked every American of Captive
Nation descent and those of Hungarian descent particularly. I'm talking about the
[[wikipedia:Holy_Crown_of_Hungary|Crown of St. Stephen]]. It was first used in the coronation of Hungary's King
Stephen (now Saint Stephen) by the Pope nearly a thousand years ago. It has come
to have an aura of mysticism about it with both religious and nationalistic
significance to the people of Hungary. Most significant, it is symbolic of the
legitimacy of Hungarian government.

At the end of World War II we liberated Hungary from the Nazi's but under the
deal made at [[wikipedia:Tehran|Tehran]] turned it over to the Russians.

Our departing forces were asked to take the Crown of St. Stephen to keep the
Russians from getting it and hold it in trust until Hungary was once again free.
For more than 34 years it has been kept in the vaults at [[wikipedia:Fort_Knox|Ft. Knox]].

Now the White House has declared this crown which confers legitimacy and the
blessings of Heaven upon Hungarian government to be the rightful property of the
Godless, Communist rulers of that captive land.

At Tehran we sold a freedom not ours to sell. Now we give legitimacy not
ours to give to an illegitimate government. Are we really serious about human rights?

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/09/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan:_In_His_Own_Hand|RihoH-152]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-01-A6

2026-11-06T14:06:08Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[78-01-A5|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-01-A7|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Human Rights II =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
An American ex-G.I. and his German-born wife have made the perilous journey
through the [[wikipedia:Berlin_Wall|Berlin Wall]] almost a dozen times in the last few years to help people
who have no human rights. This couple will have to remain anonymous for obvious
reasons. You see, they'll be making more trips to [[wikipedia:East_Germany|East Germany]].

The wife in our story was a little girl when American bombers were flattening
the city in which she lived. Her father was a prisoner in an American prison camp.
The war ended, he returned to his family and they watched the Russian tanks roll
in. Six years later they escaped to [[wikipedia:West_Germany|West Germany]] where the girl grew up and married
an American soldier.

Our Mrs. X knew great anguish as she learned of what her country under [[wikipedia:Adolf_Hitler|Hitler]]
had done. She even turned away from God for letting her be born there, but that was
only for a little while. She says, "Then I realized He knew what He was doing when
He gave me the life He did." And she explains that her experience fitted her for
the missions of mercy she has undertaken since coming to America.

She and her husband began by making contact with those Germans who had
courageously defied Hitler. They learned all the tricks one must know to visit
relatives or strangers in East Germany without bringing the wrath of the Communists
down on their heads. She says that outside the [[wikipedia:Soviet_Union|Soviet Union]] there is no tighter
and more repressive Communist government than that in [[wikipedia:East_Berlin|East Berlin]]. And she adds,
"If I remain quiet about what I know I become implicated in the crime in East Germany
just like those who knew what went on under Hitler but preferred to shed the
responsibility".

Right now she is trying to help a man named [https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/03064227808532739 Rolf Mainz] and his family. Mr. Mainz
held an executive position with a publishing company. Then one day he dropped his
membership in the Communist party. Several days later he was fired but no one would
say why. He can list his credentials in seeking employment, but when his name
is learned it seems the vacancy has just been filled.

So, after six months he wrote a letter to the editor of a [[wikipedia:Die_Zeit|West German paper]] --
a sarcastic letter under the heading "Comrades why don't you come live with us?"
His letter telling of his effort to get a job was printed on page one. One week
later the paper reported he had been arrested four days after his letter appeared.
He is now serving a 54-month sentence in the worst, most brutal East German prison.
His wife has lost her job and his children are abused at school. Both he and his
wife suffer from ill health. Friends and neighbors are afraid to even speak to the
family, let alone offer neighborly help.

Mr. and Mrs. X have helped with money and necessities and have contacted the
West German government and [[wikipedia:Amnesty_International|Amnesty International]] about Rolf Mainz. They say the
greatest need now is for our representatives in Washington to know about this
blatant violation of the [[wikipedia:Helsinki_Accords|Helsinki pact]] so that pressure might be put on the East
German government to free Mainz and let him and his family leave East Germany . I
hope this helps a little.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/09/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan:_In_His_Own_Hand|RihoH-150]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-01-A5

2026-11-05T21:18:05Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[78-01-A4|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-01-A6|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Human Rights I =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
If human rights are denied to a people over a long enough period of time do
they become ineligible for such rights? The answer to that as we listen to the
voices raised in Washington would seem to be, "yes they do lose those rights."

U.S. government representatives have been meeting in [[wikipedia:Paris|Paris]] with representatives
of North Vietnam. The announced reason for the [[nyt:1977/12/04/archives/vietnam-asks-us-to-delay-talks-planned-next-wednesday-in-paris.html|meeting is to open the door to
friendship]] and to enter into an era of normal relations. The only two sticking
points seem to be our demand for an answer as to the whereabouts or the fate of
some 2,500 of our men listed as missing in action. And, on the North Vietnamese
side, their demand for about $3 billion they say we promised in the Paris Peace
accords to repair all the battle damage to both North and South Vietnam.

Now those [[wikipedia:Paris_Peace_Accords|Paris Peace accords]] were signed by us, the South Vietnamese government
and the Communist regime of North Vietnam. And it's true we agreed to put up
the money. But the accords also called for North Vietnam to quit trying to conquer
South Vietnam and to immediately give us an accounting of our men.

Haven't our negotiators overlooked what should be the first issue to be settled
before there is any talk about friendship or rebuilding any part of Vietnam? There
were two Vietnams, north and south. They had been separate nations for 1000 years.
Both became colonial possessions of France in what was known as French Indo-China
and both were freed a few years after World War II as one after another of the
European colonial empires were liquidated. Vietnam returned to its pre-colonial
status as separate nations. The great powers in Geneva set down a plan, first, to
allow the people of both countries to move to which ever of the two they chose
without interference and, second, for an internationally supervised election by the
people as to whether they wanted to unite or continue as separate nations.

The Communist dictator of North Vietnam, [[wikipedia:Ho_Chi_Minh|Ho Chi Minh]], refused to hold the
election and when a million of his people started moving south away from
Communism (under the terms of the agreement) his troops barricaded the frontier and
halted the migration.

The Vietnamese war was a plain and simple effort by North Vietnam to conquer
South Vietnam. We tried to prevent this in a long, bloody war which our government
refused to win. But now how do we negotiate with North Vietnam unless we begin
with Step One--the release of half-a-million South Vietnamese now in concentration
camps and the North Vietnamese withdrawal from South Vietnam, leaving it once again
a free and independent nation.

For that matter how did we agree to North Vietnam's entry into the United
Nations which specifically demands that its member nations do not take up arms
against their neighbor? Until South Vietnam is freed, North Vietnam is still an
outlaw among nations.

Time's up, but next air time I'll continue with some other nonexistent human
rights we've forgotten lately.

</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/09/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan:_In_His_Own_Hand|RihoH-53]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-01-A5

2026-11-05T20:35:21Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[78-01-A4|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-01-A6|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Human Rights I =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
If human rights are denied to a people over a long enough period of time do
they become ineligible for such rights? The answer to that as we listen to the
voices raised in Washington would seem to be, "yes they do lose those rights."

U.S. government representatives have been meeting in [[wikipedia:Paris|Paris]] with representatives
of North Vietnam. The announced reason for the [[nyt:1977/12/04/archives/vietnam-asks-us-to-delay-talks-planned-next-wednesday-in-paris.html|meeting is to open the door to
friendship]] and to enter into an era of normal relations. The only two sticking
points seem to be our demand for an answer as to the whereabouts or the fate of
some 2,500 of our men listed as missing in action. And, on the North Vietnamese
side, their demand for about $3 billion they say we promised in the Paris Peace
accords to repair all the battle damage to both North and South Vietnam.

Now those [[wikipedia:Paris_Peace_Accords|Paris Peace accords]] were signed by us, the South Vietnamese government
and the Communist regime of North Vietnam. And it's true we agreed to put up
the money. But the accords also called for North Vietnam to quit trying to conquer
South Vietnam and to immediately give us an accounting of our men.

Haven't our negotiators overlooked what should be the first issue to be settled
before there is any talk about friendship or rebuilding any part of Vietnam? There
were two Vietnams, north and south. They had been separate nations for 1000 years.
Both became colonial possessions of France in what was known as French Indo-China
and both were freed a few years after World War II as one after another of the
European colonial empires were liquidated. Vietnam returned to its pre-colonial
status as separate nations. The great powers in Geneva set down a plan, first, to
allow the people of both countries to move to which ever of the two they chose
without interference and, second, for an internationally supervised election by the
people as to whether they wanted to unite or continue as separate nations.

The Communist dictator of North Vietnam, Ho Chi Minh, refused to hold the
election and when a million of his people started moving south away from
Communism (under the terms of the agreement) his troops barricaded the frontier and
halted the migration.

The Vietnamese war was a plain and simple effort by North Vietnam to conquer
South Vietnam. We tried to prevent this in a long, bloody war which our government
refused to win. But now how do we negotiate with North Vietnam unless we begin
with Step One--the release of half-a-million South Vietnamese now in concentration
camps and the North Vietnamese withdrawal from South Vietnam, leaving it once again
a free and independent nation.

For that matter how did we agree to North Vietnam's entry into the United
Nations which specifically demands that its member nations do not take up arms
against their neighbor? Until South Vietnam is freed, North Vietnam is still an
outlaw among nations.

Time's up, but next air time I'll continue with some other nonexistent human
rights we've forgotten lately.

</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/09/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan:_In_His_Own_Hand|RihoH-53]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-01-A5

2026-11-05T19:55:47Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[78-01-A4|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-01-A6|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Human Rights I =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
If human rights are denied to a people over a long enough period of time do
they become ineligible for such rights? The answer to that as we listen to the
voices raised in Washington would seem to be, "yes they do lose those rights."

U.S. government representatives have been meeting in [[wikipedia:Paris|Paris]] with representatives
of North Vietnam. The announced reason for the meeting is to open the door to
friendship and to enter into an era of normal relations. The only two sticking
points seem to be our demand for an answer as to the whereabouts or the fate of
some 2,500 of our men listed as missing in action. And, on the North Vietnamese
side, their demand for about $3 billion they say we promised in the Paris Peace
accords to repair all the battle damage to both North and South Vietnam.

Now those [[wikipedia:Paris_Peace_Accords|Paris Peace accords]] were signed by us, the South Vietnamese government
and the Communist regime of North Vietnam. And it's true we agreed to put up
the money. But the accords also called for North Vietnam to quit trying to conquer
South Vietnam and to immediately give us an accounting of our men.

Haven't our negotiators overlooked what should be the first issue to be settled
before there is any talk about friendship or rebuilding any part of Vietnam? There
were two Vietnams, north and south. They had been separate nations for 1000 years.
Both became colonial possessions of France in what was known as French Indo-China
and both were freed a few years after World War II as one after another of the
European colonial empires were liquidated. Vietnam returned to its pre-colonial
status as separate nations. The great powers in Geneva set down a plan, first, to
allow the people of both countries to move to which ever of the two they chose
without interference and, second, for an internationally supervised election by the
people as to whether they wanted to unite or continue as separate nations.

The Communist dictator of North Vietnam, Ho Chi Minh, refused to hold the
election and when a million of his people started moving south away from
Communism (under the terms of the agreement) his troops barricaded the frontier and
halted the migration.

The Vietnamese war was a plain and simple effort by North Vietnam to conquer
South Vietnam. We tried to prevent this in a long, bloody war which our government
refused to win. But now how do we negotiate with North Vietnam unless we begin
with Step One--the release of half-a-million South Vietnamese now in concentration
camps and the North Vietnamese withdrawal from South Vietnam, leaving it once again
a free and independent nation.

For that matter how did we agree to North Vietnam's entry into the United
Nations which specifically demands that its member nations do not take up arms
against their neighbor? Until South Vietnam is freed, North Vietnam is still an
outlaw among nations.

Time's up, but next air time I'll continue with some other nonexistent human
rights we've forgotten lately.

</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/09/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan:_In_His_Own_Hand|RihoH-53]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-01-A4

2026-11-05T19:47:52Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[78-01-A3|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-01-A5|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= American Farm School II =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
The Rev. [[wikipedia:John_Henry_House|John Henry House]] and his wife Susan started scratching at 53 barren
acres in northern [[wikipedia:Greece|Greece]] in 1902. Their harvest? A beautifully landscaped campus
and 400 acres of productive farm land with several hundred Greek boys and girls
learning and working.

They dry-farmed, dug wells, prayed to God and built a tiny school room. Their
first students were a handful of orphans, refugees from the [[wikipedia:Ilinden–Preobrazhenie_Uprising|massacre of Macedonian
peasants by the Turks]].

From that beginning the Thessaloniki Institute became the [[wikipedia:American_Farm_School|American Farm School]]
and is one of the oldest educational landmarks in Macedonia. It has survived wars,
pestilence, drought and [[wikipedia:malaria|malaria]]. Today it is a middle level technical school open
to those who've had nine years of schooling.

Rev. House never lived to see one part of his dream come true--the creation of
a girls' school on the campus. It was his belief that, "when you educate a man you
educate an individual. When you educate a woman, you educate a whole family."

In 1917 his son Charles, a [[wikipedia:Princeton|Princeton]] engineering graduate, returned to Greece
where he had been brought up. His father was aging and Charles pitched in to help
what had now become the American Farm School. When John House died in 1929 Charles
took over. He understood and loved the Greek farmer. The school is not an American
outpost on Greek soil. Of its graduates 6 out of 10 today farm in their native
villages, others have gone on to get additional training and some have returned to
teach and carry on the tradition of John and Susan House.

In 1945 when a rural electrification program began in Greece, the Farm school
graduates were the first to harness electricity for farm use.

Charles died in 1961 but the school carries on, led by Bruce Lansdale, who is
as dedicated to the founders' dream as was the founder himself. With the exception
of years in college in America he has lived in Greece since 1925 and has known the
American Farm School since childhood.

The students get a total education -- an academic program plus homemaking
skills and crafts for the girls and modern farming for the boys. They pay $350 a
year which is one-half of the cost-per-student. All the work is done by the students,
the housekeeping chores and the farming. They have a shop where the girls' handiwork
is sold. This, and the produce raised by the boys, provides almost one-half of the
school budget. A small percentage of help now comes from the Greek government which
pays to send adult farmers to the school for special courses. Our own foreign aid
program, [[wikipedia:United_States_Agency_for_International_Development|A.I.D.]], helps with some construction needs which leaves 37 percent to be
raised by private donations, both in Greece and the U.S.

Talk about dropping a pebble in the water and watching the rings spread across
the surface--the school now has a student exchange program with other countries
and there are special summer courses in the ancient arts and crafts of Greece
which makes for an interesting summer vacation for even a touring American.

Time won't permit a listing of all the programs offered by the school, but you
can get complete information or if you just want to keep a truly successful bit of
American neighborliness going, write the American Farm School, 380 Madison Avenue,
New York. Up around Thessaloniki no one says "Yankee go home."

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/09/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan.27s_Path_to_Victory|RPtV-250]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-01-A4

2026-11-05T16:57:09Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[78-01-A3|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-01-A5|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= American Farm School II =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
The Rev. [[wikipedia:John_Henry_House|John Henry House]] and his wife Susan started scratching at 53 barren
acres in northern [[wikipedia:Greece|Greece]] in 1902. Their harvest? A beautifully landscaped campus
and 400 acres of productive farm land with several hundred Greek boys and girls
learning and working.

They dry-farmed, dug wells, prayed to God and built a tiny school room. Their
first students were a handful of orphans, refugees from the massacre of Macedonian
peasants by the Turks.

From that beginning the Thessaloniki Institute became the [[wikipedia:American_Farm_School|American Farm School]]
and is one of the oldest educational landmarks in Macedonia. It has survived wars,
pestilence, drought and malaria. Today it is a middle level technical school open
to those who've had nine years of schooling.

Rev. House never lived to see one part of his dream come true--the creation of
a girls' school on the campus. It was his belief that, "when you educate a man you
educate an individual. When you educate a woman, you educate a whole family."

In 1917 his son Charles, a Princeton engineering graduate, returned to Greece
where he had been brought up. His father was aging and Charles pitched in to help
what had now become the American Farm School. When John House died in 1929 Charles
took over. He understood and loved the Greek farmer. The school is not an American
outpost on Greek soil. Of its graduates six out of 10 today farm in their native
villages, others have gone on to get additional training and some have returned to
teach and carry on the tradition of John and Susan House.

In 1945 when a rural electrification program began in Greece, the Farm school
graduates were the first to harness electricity for farm use.

Charles died in 1961 but the school carries on, led by Bruce Lansdale, who is
as dedicated to the founders' dream as was the founder himself. With the exception
of years in college in America he has lived in Greece since 1925 and has known the
American Farm School since childhood.

The students get a total education -- an academic program plus homemaking
skills and crafts for the girls and modern farming for the boys. They pay $350 a
year which is one-half of the cost-per-student. All the work is done by the students,
the housekeeping chores and the farming. They have a shop where the girls' handiwork
is sold. This, and the produce raised by the boys, provides almost one-half of the
school budget. A small percentage of help now comes from the Greek government which
pays to send adult farmers to the school for special courses. Our own foreign aid
program, A.I.D., helps with some construction needs which leaves 37 percent to be
raised by private donations, both in Greece and the U.S.

Talk about dropping a pebble in the water and watching the rings spread across
the surface--the school now has a student exchange program with other countries
and there are special summer courses in the ancient arts and crafts of Greece
which makes for an interesting summer vacation for even a touring American.

Time won't permit a listing of all the programs offered by the school, but you
can get complete information or if you just want to keep a truly successful bit of
American neighborliness going, write the American Farm School, 380 Madison Avenue,
New York. Up around Thessaloniki no one says "Yankee go home."

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/09/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan.27s_Path_to_Victory|RPtV-250]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===
* The massacre mentioned might be connected to the [[wikipedia:Ilinden–Preobrazhenie_Uprising|Ilinden–Preobrazhenie Uprising]]
</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-01-A3

2026-11-05T16:49:32Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[78-01-A2|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-01-A4|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= American Farm School I =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
"Give a hungry man a fish and he'll be hungry tomorrow. Teach him how to fish
and he'll never be hungry again." Unfortunately that ancient maxim has not always
guided us in our efforts to help others through foreign aid. But today I'd like to
tell you about a program that does meet that test.

A few months ago friends of mine in San Francisco told me of their interest in
helping something called the [[wikipedia:American_Farm_School|American Farm School]]. Thanks to them, Nancy and I
were visited by a young lady who works out of an office at 380 Madison Avenue, New
York City. The sign on that big city office door must seem a little strange to
native New Yorker is--"American Farm School."

If they'd drop in and ask a few questions they'd learn as we did from our
charming visitor that the American Farm School is about 20 minutes from downtown
[[wikipedia:Thessaloniki|Thessaloniki]] in northern [[wikipedia:Greece|Greece]]. It is an agricultural and technical training
center on 400 acres, with a girls' school featuring home economics and crafts
and a boys' school with specialties in Farm Machinery, Animal Husbandry, and
Horticulture. It was founded in 1904 and owes its existence to one man who had
a dream he made come true.

[[wikipedia:John_Henry_House|John Henry House]], a Congregational minister, was a missionary in the Balkans
for 30 years. During that time he became increasingly aware of a sociological
trend. Village boys had learned to despise village life and made their way to the
cities. Reverend House believed a change in education could result in a new or
perhaps a revived belief that it was not degrading for educated people to work with
their hands.

Rev. House had that rare combination of the practical and the visionary. He
dreamed of founding an educational institution that would develop "the whole man,
the head, the heart and the hand." He believed that a school patterned after
[[wikipedia:Hampton_University|Hampton Institute]] in Virginia, [[wikipedia:Tuskegee_University|Tuskeegee]] in Alabama and the [[wikiedpia:Penn_Center_(Saint_Helena_Island,_South_Carolina)|Penn School]] for girls
in South Carolina could train young people to be leaders, modern farmers and make
them content to stay down on the farm--down on the farm in Macedonia.

Rev. House was 60 years old in 1902 when he and two missionary friends bought
53 acres of parched, waterless land in a bandit-infested part of northern Greece.
If they were to convince their students to-be, they had to start with land as poor
as that of the poorest farmer. House had raised the money for the project himself.
The [[wikipedia:American_Board_of_Commissioners_for_Foreign_Missions|American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions]] did not share his vision
and considered it outside the scope of the missionary endeavor for which he'd been
sent to the Balkans.

Rev. House was not a man to give up on a dream. He took his wife to see the
land he had chosen for his venture. Standing on the 53 windswept barren acres she
asked, "Whoever will you get to live in this place?" He answered, "You, my dear."
And live there she did. Thus was started the Thessloniki Agricultural and
Industrial Institute which was to become the American Farm School. I'll continue
this in my next broadcast and I'm sure you'll be a little more proud of America
the Beautiful.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/09/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan.27s_Path_to_Victory|RPtV-248]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-01-A2

2026-11-05T16:33:23Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[78-01-A1|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-01-A3|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Christmas =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
All the traditions associated with Christmas were observed as usual in the
past holiday season, including the chorus of complaints that "commercialization" is
robbing the day of its true meaning. I'll have to confess I can't join that chorus.
Somehow the ads offering helpful gift suggestions when we are all filled with the
spirit of giving; the decorations on the streets, in the stores; the familiar
carols--all add to the Christmas spirit for me and don't really strike me as crass.
I am disturbed, however, about something I read over the holidays which could
really rob Christmas of its meaning for millions of us who see it as more than just
the birthday of a great and good teacher. I realize there are those who, by
religious belief, consider Jesus a very human prophet whose teachings about love
for one another, treating others as we would like to be treated ourselves are
sound patterns for living; that he is to be respected by not worshipped.

But for many of us he is much more. He is the promised Messiah, the Son of
God come to earth to offer salvation for all mankind. It was disturbing therefore
to read that in many Christian seminaries there is an increasing tendency to
minimize his divinity, to reject the miracle of his birth and regard him as merely
human.

Meaning no disrespect to the religious convictions of others, I still can't
help wondering how we can explain away what to me is the greatest miracle of all
and which is recorded in history. No one denies there was such a man, that he
lived and that he was put to death by crucifixion.

Where then, you may ask, is the miracle I spoke of? Well consider this and
let your imagination translate the story into our own time--possibly to your own
home town. A young man whose father is a carpenter grows up working his his
father's shop. One day he puts down his tools and walks out of his father's shop.
He starts preaching on street corners and in the nearby country side, walking from
place to place preaching all the while, even though he is not an ordained minister.
He never gets farther than an area perhaps 100 miles wide at the most.

He does this for three years. Then he is arrested, tried and convicted.
There is no court of appeal so he is executed at age 33 along with two common thieves.
Those in charge of his execution roll dice to see who gets his clothing--the only
possessions he has. His family cannot afford a burial place so he is interred in a
borrowed tomb.

End of story? No, this uneducated, property less young man who preached on
street corners for only three years and who left no written word has, for 2000 years,
had a greater effect on the world than all the rulers, Kings and emperors; all the
conquerors, generals and admirals; all the scholars, scientists and philosophers
who ever lived--all of them put together.

How do we explain that--unless he really was what he said he was.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/09/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan.27s_Path_to_Victory|RPtV-247]], [[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan:_Stories_in_his_Own_Hand|SihoH-16]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-01-A1

2026-11-05T16:32:11Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[77-24-B8|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-01-A2|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Salt II =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
When it comes to the current Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (they're called
[[wikipedia:Strategic_Arms_Limitation_Talks#SALT_II_Treaty|SALT II]] for short), the [[wikipedia:Soviet_Union|Soviet Union]] seems to be resorting to a technique they've
used with us before: bluster. Right now, they seem so pleased with some tentative
concessions they got from our government last fall that they've launched a major
propaganda campaign to lock them in place.

American critics of the current negotiations are worried that our [[wikipedia:Cruise_missile|cruise
missile]] will be bargained away. It's a new weapon system that could provide
security for Western Europe. In fact, its deployment in Western Europe was one
of the Russians' greatest worries till their [[wikipedia:Andrei_Gromyko|Foreign Minister]] met with President
[[wikipedia:Jimmy_Carter|Carter]] in September. Now they aren't talking about it anymore.

To review, Secretary of State [[wikipedia:Cyrus_Vance|Vance]] went to Moscow last spring, made some
proposals and was turned down cold by the Soviets. After that, Moscow turned its
propaganda machine to "high" in denouncing the U.S. This, too, stopped after the
[[wikipedia:1977/09/28/archives/gromyko-meets-with-carter-after-addressing-un-gromyko-meets-with.html|Gromyko-Carter meeting]] and after the SALT talks themselves seemed to turn more to
the Soviets' liking.

Bear in mind the Soviet objectives. They want maximum flexibility for their
mobile-launched missiles; they want to downplay the importance of their intercontinental
[[wikipedia:Tupolev_Tu-22M|Backfire bomber]] and, of course, they are firmly against on-site inspections.

Now, since fall, there has been a barrage of [[wikipedia:Pravda|Pravda]] stories and [[wikipedia:Radio_Moscow|Radio Moscow]]
panel programs to stress the urgency of signing a formal agreement quickly -- "on
the basis of agreements reached in principle as result of recent talks."

Meanwhile, attacks on U. S. skeptics of the SALT talks sharpened, especially
against Senator [[wikipedia:Henry_M._Jackson|Henry Jackson]] of Washington, former Defense Secretary [[wikipedia:Melvin_Laird|Melvin
Laird]], Senator [[wikipedia:Barry_Goldwater|Barry Goldwater]] and former Deputy Secretary of Defense [[wikipedia:Paul_Nitze|Paul Nitze]].
Pravda and [[wikipedia:Izvestia|Isvestia]] have unleased some of their highest voltage criticism on these
men because they have expressed sharp doubts about the turn the negotiations have
taken.

Moscow has also asked the help of its friends on the left in the United States
to try to build pressure for a favorable SALT II agreement signed. Prompted by
the Soviet-controlled [[wikipedia:World_Peace_Council|World Peace council]], an ad hoc group met twice in October
to work out a link-up between advocates of U.S. disarmament and the more hysterical
elements of the anti-nuclear movement. Among groups supporting the [https://findingaids.library.nyu.edu/tamwag/tam_127/ Mobilization
for Survival], the new ad hoc operation, are some old familiars on the left: the
[[wikipedia:War_Resisters_League|War Resisters League]], [[wikipedia:Women_Strike_for_Peace|Women Strike for Peace]] and the [[wikipedia:American_Friends_Service_Committee|American Friends Service
committee]].

The plan of this coalition is to fight every new American weapons development
tooth-and-nail (along with nuclear power), on the grounds that if we take the first
disarmament steps unilaterally, the Russians are sure to follow. Heard that one
before? It's been around at least two decades. One of the things that caused so
much controversy over [[wikipedia:Paul_Warnke|Paul Warnke]]'s appointment by President Carter as disarmament
chief last year was Warnke's apparent belief in this theory.

You needn't ask whether there are any Moscow chapters of this anti-nuclear, pro
disarmament lobby. There aren't. And the Kremlin is going ahead with nuclear power
and weapons development full-tilt, without so much as a peep of protest from the
American left.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/09/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[rrpl:public/2024-07/40-656-7386263-014-007-2024.pdf#PAGE=3|Online PDF]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-01-A1

2026-11-05T16:31:42Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[77-24-B8|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-01-A2|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Salt II =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
When it comes to the current Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (they're called
[[wikipedia:Strategic_Arms_Limitation_Talks#SALT_II_Treaty|SALT II]] for short), the [[wikipedia:Soviet_Union|Soviet Union]] seems to be resorting to a technique they've
used with us before: bluster. Right now, they seem so pleased with some tentative
concessions they got from our government last fall that they've launched a major
propaganda campaign to lock them in place.

American critics of the current negotiations are worried that our [[wikipedia:Cruise_missile|cruise
missile]] will be bargained away. It's a new weapon system that could provide
security for Western Europe. In fact, its deployment in Western Europe was one
of the Russians' greatest worries till their [[wikipedia:Andrei_Gromyko|Foreign Minister]] met with President
[[wikipedia:Jimmy_Carter|Carter]] in September. Now they aren't talking about it anymore.

To review, Secretary of State [[wikipedia:Cyrus_Vance|Vance]] went to Moscow last spring, made some
proposals and was turned down cold by the Soviets. After that, Moscow turned its
propaganda machine to "high" in denouncing the U.S. This, too, stopped after the
[[wikipedia:1977/09/28/archives/gromyko-meets-with-carter-after-addressing-un-gromyko-meets-with.html|Gromyko-Carter meeting]] and after the SALT talks themselves seemed to turn more to
the Soviets' liking.

Bear in mind the Soviet objectives. They want maximum flexibility for their
mobile-launched missiles; they want to downplay the importance of their intercontinental
[[wikipedia:Tupolev_Tu-22M|Backfire bomber]] and, of course, they are firmly against on-site inspections.

Now, since fall, there has been a barrage of [[wikipedia:Pravda|Pravda]] stories and [[wikipedia:Radio_Moscow|Radio Moscow]]
panel programs to stress the urgency of signing a formal agreement quickly -- "on
the basis of agreements reached in principle as result of recent talks."

Meanwhile, attacks on U. S. skeptics of the SALT talks sharpened, especially
against Senator [[wikipedia:Henry_M._Jackson|Henry Jackson]] of Washington, former Defense Secretary [[wikipedia:Melvin_Laird|Melvin
Laird]], Senator [[wikipedia:Barry_Goldwater|Barry Goldwater]] and former Deputy Secretary of Defense [[wikipedia:Paul_Nitze|Paul Nitze]].
Pravda and [[wikipedia:Izvestia|Isvestia]] have unleased some of their highest voltage criticism on these
men because they have expressed sharp doubts about the turn the negotiations have
taken.

Moscow has also asked the help of its friends on the left in the United States
to try to build pressure for a favorable SALT II agreement signed. Prompted by
the Soviet-controlled [[wikipedia:World_Peace_Council|World Peace council]], an ad hoc group met twice in October
to work out a link-up between advocates of U.S. disarmament and the more hysterical
elements of the anti-nuclear movement. Among groups supporting the [https://findingaids.library.nyu.edu/tamwag/tam_127/ Mobilization
for Survival], the new ad hoc operation, are some old familiars on the left: the
[[wikipedia:War_Resisters_League|War Resisters League]], [[wikipedia:Women_Strike_for_Peace|Women Strike for Peace]] and the [[wikipedia:American_Friends_Service_Committee|American Friends Service
committee]].

The plan of this coalition is to fight every new American weapons development
tooth-and-nail (along with nuclear power), on the grounds that if we take the first
disarmament steps unilaterally, the Russians are sure to follow. Heard that one
before? It's been around at least two decades. One of the things that caused so
much controversy over [[wikipedia:Paul_Warnke|Paul Warnke]]'s appointment by President Carter as disarmament
chief last year was Warnke's apparent belief in this theory.

You needn't ask whether there are any Moscow chapters of this anti-nuclear, pro
disarmament lobby. There aren't. And the Kremlin is going ahead with nuclear power
and weapons development full-tilt, without so much as a peep of protest from the
American left.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/09/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/public/2024-07/40-656-7386263-014-007-2024.pdf#PAGE=3 Online PDF]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-01-A1

2026-11-05T15:48:47Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[77-24-B8|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-01-A2|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Salt II =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
When it comes to the current Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (they're called
[[wikipedia:Strategic_Arms_Limitation_Talks#SALT_II_Treaty|SALT II]] for short), the [[wikipedia:Soviet_Union|Soviet Union]] seems to be resorting to a technique they've
used with us before: bluster. Right now, they seem so pleased with some tentative
concessions they got from our government last fall that they've launched a major
propaganda campaign to lock them in place.

American critics of the current negotiations are worried that our [[wikipedia:Cruise_missile|cruise
missile]] will be bargained away. It's a new weapon system that could provide
security for Western Europe. In fact, its deployment in Western Europe was one
of the Russians' greatest worries till their [[wikipedia:Andrei_Gromyko|Foreign Minister]] met with President
[[wikipedia:Jimmy_Carter|Carter]] in September. Now they aren't talking about it anymore.

To review, Secretary of State [[wikipedia:Cyrus_Vance|Vance]] went to Moscow last spring, made some
proposals and was turned down cold by the Soviets. After that, Moscow turned its
propaganda machine to "high" in denouncing the U.S. This, too, stopped after the
[[wikipedia:1977/09/28/archives/gromyko-meets-with-carter-after-addressing-un-gromyko-meets-with.html|Gromyko-Carter meeting]] and after the SALT talks themselves seemed to turn more to
the Soviets' liking.

Bear in mind the Soviet objectives. They want maximum flexibility for their
mobile-launched missiles; they want to downplay the importance of their intercontinental
Backfire bomber and, of course, they are firmly against on-site inspections.

Now, since fall, there has been a barrage of Pravda stories and Radio Moscow
panel programs to stress the urgency of signing a formal agreement quickly -- "on
the basis of agreements reached in principle as result of recent talks."

Meanwhile, attacks on U. S. skeptics of the SALT talks sharpened, especially
against Senator Henry Jackson of Washington, former Defense Secretary Melvin
Laird, Senator Barry Goldwater and former Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Nitze.
Pravda and Isvestia have unleased some of their highest voltage criticism on these
men because they have expressed sharp doubts about the turn the negotiations have
taken.

Moscow has also asked the help of its friends on the left in the United States
to try to build pressure for a favorable SALT II agreement signed. Prompted by
the Soviet-controlled World Peace council, an ad hoc group met twice in October
to work out a link-up between advocates of U.S. disarmament and the more hysterical
elements of the anti-nuclear movement. Among groups supporting the Mobilization
for Survival, the new ad hoc operation, are some old familiars on the left: the
War Resisters League, Women Strike for Peace and the American Friends Service
committee.

The plan of this coalition is to fight every new American weapons development
tooth-and-nail (along with nuclear power), on the grounds that if we take the first
disarmament steps unilaterally, the Russians are sure to follow. Heard that one
before? It's been around at least two decades. One of the things that caused so
much controversy over Paul Warnke's appointment by President Carter as disarmament
chief last year was Warnke's apparent belief in this theory.

You needn't ask whether there are any Moscow chapters of this anti-nuclear, pro
disarmament lobby. There aren't. And the Kremlin is going ahead with nuclear power
and weapons development full-tilt, without so much as a peep of protest from the
American left.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/09/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/public/2024-07/40-656-7386263-014-007-2024.pdf#PAGE=3 Online PDF]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

78-01-A1

2026-11-05T15:48:05Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1978|1978]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[77-24-B8|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[78-01-A2|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Salt II =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
When it comes to the current Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (they're called
[[wikipedia:Strategic_Arms_Limitation_Talks#SALT_II_Treaty|SALT II]] for short), the [[wikipedia:Soviet_Union|Soviet Union]] seems to be resorting to a technique they've
used with us before: bluster. Right now, they seem so pleased with some tentative
concessions they got from our government last fall that they've launched a major
propaganda campaign to lock them in place.

American critics of the current negotiations are worried that our [[wikipedia:Cruise_missile|cruise
missile]] will be bargained away. It's a new weapon system that could provide
security for Western Europe. In fact, its deployment in Western Europe was one
of the Russians' greatest worries till their Foreign Minister met with President
[[wikipedia:Jimmy_Carter|Carter]] in September. Now they aren't talking about it anymore.

To review, Secretary of State [[wikipedia:Cyrus_Vance|Vance]] went to Moscow last spring, made some
proposals and was turned down cold by the Soviets. After that, Moscow turned its
propaganda machine to "high" in denouncing the U.S. This, too, stopped after the
[[wikipedia:1977/09/28/archives/gromyko-meets-with-carter-after-addressing-un-gromyko-meets-with.html|Gromyko-Carter meeting]] and after the SALT talks themselves seemed to turn more to
the Soviets' liking.

Bear in mind the Soviet objectives. They want maximum flexibility for their
mobile-launched missiles; they want to downplay the importance of their intercontinental
Backfire bomber and, of course, they are firmly against on-site inspections.

Now, since fall, there has been a barrage of Pravda stories and Radio Moscow
panel programs to stress the urgency of signing a formal agreement quickly -- "on
the basis of agreements reached in principle as result of recent talks."

Meanwhile, attacks on U. S. skeptics of the SALT talks sharpened, especially
against Senator Henry Jackson of Washington, former Defense Secretary Melvin
Laird, Senator Barry Goldwater and former Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Nitze.
Pravda and Isvestia have unleased some of their highest voltage criticism on these
men because they have expressed sharp doubts about the turn the negotiations have
taken.

Moscow has also asked the help of its friends on the left in the United States
to try to build pressure for a favorable SALT II agreement signed. Prompted by
the Soviet-controlled World Peace council, an ad hoc group met twice in October
to work out a link-up between advocates of U.S. disarmament and the more hysterical
elements of the anti-nuclear movement. Among groups supporting the Mobilization
for Survival, the new ad hoc operation, are some old familiars on the left: the
War Resisters League, Women Strike for Peace and the American Friends Service
committee.

The plan of this coalition is to fight every new American weapons development
tooth-and-nail (along with nuclear power), on the grounds that if we take the first
disarmament steps unilaterally, the Russians are sure to follow. Heard that one
before? It's been around at least two decades. One of the things that caused so
much controversy over Paul Warnke's appointment by President Carter as disarmament
chief last year was Warnke's apparent belief in this theory.

You needn't ask whether there are any Moscow chapters of this anti-nuclear, pro
disarmament lobby. There aren't. And the Kremlin is going ahead with nuclear power
and weapons development full-tilt, without so much as a peep of protest from the
American left.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>01/09/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/public/2024-07/40-656-7386263-014-007-2024.pdf#PAGE=3 Online PDF]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

77-20-A1

2026-11-05T15:39:06Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1977|1977]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[76-19-B8|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[77-20-A2|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Pot =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
Washington has given voice to the idea that criminal sanctions for possession of
small amounts of marijuana should be lifted. I’ll be right back.

A recent editorial in a metropolitan paper approved the a statement emanating
from Washington about removing Federal criminal sanctions for possession of
small amounts, of marijuana. The editorial writer said, “Experience so far shows
no significant increase in marijuana use or abuse.”

This was too much for [[wikipedia:Daryl_Gates|Daryl F. Gates]], Assistant Chief, Director of Operations, Los
Angeles Police Department, one of the finest finest police forces in all the cities
of the world. Chief Gates took pen in
hand and wrote a letter to the editor.<SUP>1</SUP> He asked, “What experience?”

Not too long ago California, had a pretty sound law that gave a judge flexibility
to reduce a felony conviction to a misdemeanor in cases such as the youthful
experimenter. There were also provisions to allow users to choose
attending a treatment center with no filing of an arrest record. The people of
California overwhelmingly voted down a repudiated a ballot measure to
decriminalize marijuana. But on Jan. 1, 1976 a new law went into effect
reducing penalties for marijuana possession to about the level of a traffic ticket.

Chief Gates in his letter to the editor said that prior to the new law
in 1975 seizure of marijuana was totaled 4900 lbs. which gives some measurement of probable use.
When the relaxed law went into effect confiscation of the drug jumped to almost
18,000 lbs. In addition he said the marijuana was also of the more exotic
type containing a much higher percentage of THC the intoxicating agent.
Alarmingly the departments juvenile division, narcotic section experienced an
almost 50% increase in juvenile arrests for possession or use of marijuana in
1976 and so far in ’77 an additional 20% increase.

The Chief Gates wrote, “This apparent trend of increased usage by children
was also evident in a recent study in San Mateo County” and he
added that “the age of the user became progressively lower as the law became
weaker.”

Summing it up his letter read; “This evidence indicates that when the Legislature
reduced the penalties for marijuana use and possession there was a
marked increase in marijuana importation and in its use among our young
people.

Marijuana trafficking is a lucrative business, and one can only conclude
that it’s possession and use are encouraged when the legislature continues to
deemphasize the criminal consequences. The end result,” he says, “of such
legislative leniency is that the traffickers of this intoxicating drug are virtually
free to drain the vitality from our youth and our society with the approval of
our legislative representatives.”

I hope the editorial writer also reads letters to the editor.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.

</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>09/27/[[Radio1977|1977]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan.27s_Path_to_Victory|RPtV-199]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===
''from the book'':
<OL STYLE="font-size: 80%">
<LI>Editorial, “Of Pot and Punishment,” ''Los Angeles Times'' Sec. 2, p. 4, August 4, 1977.<BR />
Gates’s letter was published on August 22, 1977 (Sec. 2, p. 6).
</OL>
</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

76-19-B8

2026-11-05T15:29:37Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1977|1977]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[76-19-B7|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[77-20-A1|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Furbish Lousewart [Lousewort] =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
Some time ago on [[76-16-A7|one of these broadcasts]], I told about a giant electric power
project; a multi-billion dollar construction job that had been stopped before it
could start. It was the [https://www.nrcm.org/success-stories/dickey-lincoln-dam/ Dickey-Lincoln power program] in northern [[wikipedia:Maine|Maine]], intended
to supply energy to a large section of the northeast.

The project was halted when it was discovered the huge hydroelectric dam
essential to the program could not be built. Federal law prohibits use of federal
funds in any construction that could harm plant or animal species included on
the rare and endangered list of the [[wikipedia:United_States_Fish_and_Wildlife_Service|United States Fish and Wildlife service]].

And there on the banks of the St. John River in the area to be flooded by
the building of the dam, someone found about 200 weeds. They were a particular
kind of weed - a sort of wild snapdragon known as the [[wikipedia:Pedicularis_furbishiae|Furbish Lousewart]]. The
Furbish Lousewart is on the endangered species list. Furthermore, some supposedly
knowledgeable people said those were the only 200 furbish lousewarts left in the
world. So scratch one power project.

I found it a little hard to believe that all the rocks and rills and templed
hills in Maine and elsewhere had been scoured for Furbish Lousewart and so stated
on this program. If no one knew the 200 were there until they were getting ready
to build a dam and accidentally stumbled on them, wasn't it possible they might
stumble on some more?

I also remember suggesting that weeds aren't all that hard to grow; that
possibly they could gather seeds from the 200 or even transplant some of them.
After all, a few more winters like the last one without an adequate power supply
and some New Englanders might get on that endangered species list.

Well, I'm happy to tell you I've learned, thanks to the [[nyt:1977/08/26/archives/around-the-nation-police-in-transit-system-strike-in-san-francisco.html|New York TIMES]], that
the [[wikipedia:United_States_Army_Corps_of_Engineers|Army Corps of Engineers]] were having some of the same thoughts. They like to
build dams and didn't take kindly to being shut out by a weed called the Furbish
Lousewart. They enlisted the aid of George Stirett, a naturalist from New
Brunswick and Dr. Charles Richard, a botanist from the University of Maine.

These gentlemen, along with some other scientists who were interested in the
situation, discovered that, apparently, by doing a little hiking, the Furbish
Lousewart reproduces by seed and can be transplanted outside its original habitat.
I wonder if they'll grow in California? It would be quite a conversation piece
to have a weed that stopped a $700 million dam. I wonder, too, if one of these
days I might be doing a broadcast about the emergency situation in Maine where a
weed called the Furbish Lousewart had become so prolific that it threatened the
state's agriculture?

What we really should wonder is -- will environmentalists find another reason
why the dam shouldn't be built?

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>09/06/[[Radio1977|1977]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan.27s_Path_to_Victory|RPtV-197]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

76-19-B7

2026-11-05T15:14:10Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1977|1977]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[76-19-B6|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[76-19-B8|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Blackout =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
I've been waiting for information on one facet of the [[wikipedia:New_York_City_blackout_of_1977|big blackout story in New York]] and finally have it.
I'll be right back.

Utility companies, more than some other industries, are vulnerable to charges of villainy and so it was no surprise that [[wikipedia:Consolidated_Edison|Consolidated Edison]] in New York would be pilloried for the recent blackout in Fun City. To hear some tell it, you'd think the company planned the whole thing. The attacks were made more bitter than usual by the looting that broke out in several neighborhoods. Of course, those with no charity whatsoever for Con Ed, as it is dubbed, played the sorrowing parent where the looters were concerned. Our [[wikipedia:Robert_Young|ambassador to the United Nations]] even seemed to have the attitude that "Stealing is something everyone does when the lights go out." The Brooklyn district attorney has released some figures which contradict those bleeding hearts who saw the looters as just hungry people who had a chance to eat for a change.

It seemed that 48% were regularly employed, many by the city itself. 41% were in anti-poverty or educational programs funded by government. Fewer than 10% were on welfare. The hunger excuse doesn't hold up either when you see a breakdown of the looter's targets. There was that automobile dealer that lost 50 cars, 39 furniture stores, 20 drug stories, 17 jewelry stores, 10 clothing stores and only 6 grocery stores. The looters had an appetite, but not for food.

But to get back to Con Ed, I kept wondering when if ever someone would look back down the last few years to see whether consumer minded politicians might have put thumbs down on requests by the company to expand or upgrade its facilities. After all, a utility isn't exactly a free agent. Yes it is a privately-owned, profit-making business, but it is also a government regulated monopoly, controlled by politically appointed commissioners. [[wikipedia:Victor_Riesel|Victor Reizel]], the noted columnist and expert on labor affairs did look back over the years and found that a 'Yes' several years ago instead of a 'No' could have made the blackout impossible.

Con Ed made application to build a hydroelectric generating plant on the banks of the [[wikipedia:Hudson_Rover|Hudson]] near [[wikipedia:United_States_Military_Academy|West Point]]. The company explained the need and the possibility of power shortages unless the plant was built, but environmentalists would have none of it. First, it would mar the scenery. Con Ed replied to that with plans to put it completely underground. Opponents said the concrete tube bringing the water from the river to the turbines would still be visible. Then fishermen got into the act and said the warm water returning to the river would interfere with and reduce the [[wikipedia:Striped_bass|striped bass]] in the Hudson. Con Ed volunteered to build and maintain a fish hatchery to keep the river stocked. This too was turned down, which adds to the suspicion that we have an element in this country that just doesn't want any additional power plants, period.

And all their environmental complaints are excuses to hide their real purpose. Had that generating plant been built there would probably have been no blackout, no looting, no small merchants wiped out in the Big Apple. Con Ed still has the plans for the underground plant and the fish hatchery even though scientists now say the maximum loss of striped bass would be less than five percent.

Who really was the villain on that July night?

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.

</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>09/06/[[Radio1977|1977]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan.27s_Path_to_Victory|RPtV-196]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD>Yes</TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>[[yt:ykMCs6bTPPY|Listen]]</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===
* The Brooklyn District Attorney was Eugene Gold.
* The [https://hudsonrising.nyhistory.org/hudson-highlands-part-1 Storm King Project] was a pump-storage hydro-electric power plant proposed in 1962.
* Mentioned in the [http://www.accesstoenergy.com/view/atearchive/s76a4054.htm September 1977] issue of the Access to Energy newsletter
* [[wikipedia:Scenic_Hudson_Preservation_Conference_v._Federal_Power_Commission|Court case involving the Storm King Project]]
</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

76-19-B7

2026-11-05T14:47:27Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1977|1977]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[76-19-B6|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[76-19-B8|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Blackout =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
I've been waiting for information on one facet of the big blackout story in New York and finally have it.
I'll be right back.

Utility companies, more than some other industries, are vulnerable to charges of villainy and so it was no surprise that Consolidated Edison in New York would be pilloried for the recent blackout in Fun City. To hear some tell it, you'd think the company planned the whole thing. The attacks were made more bitter than usual by the looting that broke out in several neighborhoods. Of course, those with no charity whatsoever for Con Ed, as it is dubbed, played the sorrowing parent where the looters were concerned. Our ambassador to the United Nations even seemed to have the attitude that "Stealing is something everyone does when the lights go out." The Brooklyn district attorney has released some figures which contradict those bleeding hearts who saw the looters as just hungry people who had a chance to eat for a change.

It seemed that 48% were regularly employed, many by the city itself. 41% were in anti-poverty or educational programs funded by government. Fewer than 10% were on welfare. The hunger excuse doesn't hold up either when you see a breakdown of the looter's targets. There was that automobile dealer that lost 50 cars, 39 furniture stores, 20 drug stories, 17 jewelry stores, 10 clothing stores and only 6 grocery stores. The looters had an appetite, but not for food.

But to get back to Con Ed, I kept wondering when if ever someone would look back down the last few years to see whether consumer minded politicians might have put thumbs down on requests by the company to expand or upgrade its facilities. After all, a utility isn't exactly a free agent. Yes it is a privately-owned, profit-making business, but it is also a government regulated monopoly, controlled by politically appointed commissioners. Victor Reizel, the noted columnist and expert on labor affairs did look back over the years and found that a 'Yes' several years ago instead of a 'No' could have made the blackout impossible.

Con Ed made application to build a hydroelectric generating plant on the banks of the Hudson near West Point. The company explained the need and the possibility of power shortages unless the plant was built, but environmentalists would have none of it. First, it would mar the scenery. Con Ed replied to that with plans to put it completely underground. Opponents said the concrete tube bringing the water from the river to the turbines would still be visible. Then fishermen got into the act and said the warm water returning to the river would interfere with and reduce the striped bass in the Hudson. Con Ed volunteered to build and maintain a fish hatchery to keep the river stocked. This too was turned down, which adds to the suspicion that we have an element in this country that just doesn't want any additional power plants, period.

And all their environmental complaints are excuses to hide their real purpose. Had that generating plant been built there would probably have been no blackout, no looting, no small merchants wiped out in the Big Apple. Con Ed still has the plans for the underground plant and the fish hatchery even though scientists now say the maximum loss of striped bass would be less than five percent.

Who really was the villain on that July night?

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.

</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>09/06/[[Radio1977|1977]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan.27s_Path_to_Victory|RPtV-196]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD>Yes</TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>[[yt:ykMCs6bTPPY|Listen]]</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===
* The [https://hudsonrising.nyhistory.org/hudson-highlands-part-1 Storm King Project] was a pump-storage hydro-electric power plant proposed in 1962.
* Mentioned in the [http://www.accesstoenergy.com/view/atearchive/s76a4054.htm September 1977] issue of the Access to Energy newsletter
</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

76-19-B7

2026-11-05T14:47:07Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1977|1977]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[76-19-B6|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[76-19-B8|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Blackout =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
I've been waiting for information on one facet of the big blackout story in New York and finally have it.
I'll be right back.

Utility companies, more than some other industries, are vulnerable to charges of villainy and so it was no surprise that Consolidated Edison in New York would be pilloried for the recent blackout in Fun City. To hear some tell it, you'd think the company planned the whole thing. The attacks were made more bitter than usual by the looting that broke out in several neighborhoods. Of course, those with no charity whatsoever for Con Ed, as it is dubbed, played the sorrowing parent where the looters were concerned. Our ambassador to the United Nations even seemed to have the attitude that "Stealing is something everyone does when the lights go out." The Brooklyn district attorney has released some figures which contradict those bleeding hearts who saw the looters as just hungry people who had a chance to eat for a change.

It seemed that 48% were regularly employed, many by the city itself. 41% were in anti-poverty or educational programs funded by government. Fewer than 10% were on welfare. The hunger excuse doesn't hold up either when you see a breakdown of the looter's targets. There was that automobile dealer that lost 50 cars, 39 furniture stores, 20 drug stories, 17 jewelry stores, 10 clothing stores and only 6 grocery stores. The looters had an appetite, but not for food.

But to get back to Con Ed, I kept wondering when if ever someone would look back down the last few years to see whether consumer minded politicians might have put thumbs down on requests by the company to expand or upgrade its facilities. After all, a utility isn't exactly a free agent. Yes it is a privately-owned, profit-making business, but it is also a government regulated monopoly, controlled by politically appointed commissioners. Victor Reizel, the noted columnist and expert on labor affairs did look back over the years and found that a 'Yes' several years ago instead of a 'No' could have made the blackout impossible.

Con Ed made application to build a hydroelectric generating plant on the banks of the Hudson near West Point. The company explained the need and the possibility of power shortages unless the plant was built, but environmentalists would have none of it. First, it would mar the scenery. Con Ed replied to that with plans to put it completely underground. Opponents said the concrete tube bringing the water from the river to the turbines would still be visible. Then fishermen got into the act and said the warm water returning to the river would interfere with and reduce the striped bass in the Hudson. Con Ed volunteered to build and maintain a fish hatchery to keep the river stocked. This too was turned down, which adds to the suspicion that we have an element in this country that just doesn't want any additional power plants, period.

And all their environmental complaints are excuses to hide their real purpose. Had that generating plant been built there would probably have been no blackout, no looting, no small merchants wiped out in the Big Apple. Con Ed still has the plans for the underground plant and the fish hatchery even though scientists now say the maximum loss of striped bass would be less than five percent.

Who really was the villain on that July night?

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.

</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>09/06/[[Radio1977|1977]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan.27s_Path_to_Victory|RPtV-196]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD>Yes</TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>[[yt:ykMCs6bTPPY Uploaded by me]]</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===
* The [https://hudsonrising.nyhistory.org/hudson-highlands-part-1 Storm King Project] was a pump-storage hydro-electric power plant proposed in 1962.
* Mentioned in the [http://www.accesstoenergy.com/view/atearchive/s76a4054.htm September 1977] issue of the Access to Energy newsletter
</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

76-19-B6

2026-11-05T14:45:49Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1977|1977]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[76-19-B5|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[76-19-B7|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Pensions =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
All of us should be more aware than we are of the [[wikipedia:Employee_Retirement_Income_Security_Act_of_1974|Employee Retirement Income
Security Act of 1974]]. This is particularly true if we're participants in a
nongovernmental pension fund. One man has tagged that set of initials -- E.R.I.S.A.
as standing for "everyman's ridiculous idea since Adam".

The purpose underlying passage of the act was worthwhile and in the concept
of government's responsibility to protect us from each other. Many workers have
seen pension plans they were counting on in anticipation of their non-earning
years wiped out in bankruptcies, company failures or just by faulty planning
or management. When that happens, it is a tragedy of major proportions. Hence,
the passage by Congress of the 1974 act to protect employees' pension rights.

But, as in so many things government attempts to do with good intent, the
solution to the problem has become the problem. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
[[wikipedia:Jerome_Kurtz|Jerome Kurtz]] recently told a House Subcommittee that as many as 30% -- almost
one-third of the nation's half-million private pension plans -- may have gone
out of business since ERISA was born in 1974. A subcommittee aide said the total
is about five times the number previously believed to have closed up shop. Let
me hasten to say that this does not mean that 30% of the nation's workers have
lost their pensions. Most of the plans that failed were in small companies and
about 5 percent of the workers have lost their retirement security.

The reason for dropping the plans is the 1974 act. Small pension plans have
been driven out of existence by the complex and cumbersome financial and reporting
requirements. Small businesses are less able to handle the paperwork and meet
the financial requirements and regulations than are large corporations with
computerized. operations, large legal staffs and auditing departments.

After hearing the testimony one congressman told Kurtz, "This is an alarming
development. By passing the act, we may well have driven out 100,000 or 150,000
plans." An idea of the size problem they were trying to solve and the subsequent
overkill is indicated by the Assistant Secretary of Labor for labor-management
problems who said the Labor department disposed of 1370 pension fund investigations
last year (remember, there were some 500,000 pension plans). They found only 642
violations -- all but four were settled out of court.

It's ironic that Washington should be in the business of trying to regulate
private pension plans in view of its mishandling of social security. Significantly,
federal employees managed to exempt themselves from social security and set up
for themselves instead a generous pension program which hangs over future taxpayers
as an unfunded liability of billions of dollars.

Recently, a columnist for the [[wikipedia:Boston_Herald|Boston Herald American]], a specialist in economic
affairs, revealed some startling facts about the Social Security Disability Program
and the disability pensions for federal employees. This year, the government
(meaning us) will shell out $32 billion for disability pensions, and that does
not include our disabled military veterans.

The federal government pays its disabled employees 75% of their full-time
salary and it's tax free. In social security, disability pensioners have increased
45 times as fast as the increase in population and the cost has gone up almost
2000%.

Congress should give ERISA a quiet burial and social security immediate
first aid.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>09/06/[[Radio1977|1977]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan:_In_His_Own_Hand|RihoH-373]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===
* I find plenty of references to Kurtz's testimony, but not the testimony itself. Senator [[wikipedia:Richard_Lugar|Lugar]] of Indiana followed up on the testimony by reaching out to businesses in his state, which is detailed in [https://www.finance.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/media/doc/Hrg95-70.pdf this PDF].
</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

76-19-B5

2026-11-05T14:19:21Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1977|1977]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[76-19-B4|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[76-19-B6|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Government Can Cost Less II =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
On the last broadcast, I told of how [[wikipedia:Scottsdale,_Arizona|Scottsdale, Arizona]] and a dozen other
cities in our land were hiring a private, profit-making company to provide fire
protection with no loss of quality and great savings to the taxpayers. Since
fire departments are so universally thought of as one of those things only
government can do, I got curious about other governmental functions and whether
some of them might lend themselves to the Scottsdale pattern.

The answer is (and I'll admit I was surprised), "yes". [[wikipedia:Rochester,_New_York|Rochester, New York]]
began increasing its contracting out of government chores in 1974 and has
reduced the number of city employees by 12%. Private firms take care of some
of the street and all the building maintenance and operate all but one of the
city parking garages. Vehicle repair and gravedigging are contracted out. The
city manager considers all of this as still experimental but is going ahead
with a plan to have private garbage collection in one part of the city. He's
interested in the competitive feature and what it might do to perk up the city
run departments.

Other cities have been even more extensive in their contracting and at it
longer. Twice as many cities use private firms for garbage collection rather
than city refuse departments and a survey has found that, on the average, the
cost for government garbage collection is 68% higher than when it's done by
a private, profit-making concern. Among the better known cities who are moving
to private contracting are [[wikipedia:New_Orleans|New Orleans]]; [[wikipedia:Charleston,_South_Carolina|Charleston, South Carolina]]; [[wikipedia:Dallas|Dallas]];
[[wikipedia:Portland,_Oregon|Portland, Oregon]] and [[wikipedia:Omaha,_Nebraska|Omaha, Nebraska]].

Just about every public service is being provided somewhere by private
contractors at considerable savings to the taxpayers.

In [[wikipedia:Houston|Houston, Texas]], instead of using highly trained policemen for routine
protective duties, private security guards are employed to guard municipal
court buildings and even the City Hall, freeing the police for crime fighting
duties. [[wikipedia:San_Francisco|San Francisco]] has contracted a number of parks and recreational
facilities out to private operators and is now making a profit on these facilities
instead of showing a loss to the taxpayers. Another California city is saving
20% through private management of a municipal golf course. More and more school
cafeterias are being operated by private contractors -- even one by a hamburger
chain and they have turned money losers into profitable operations.

At another level of government, [[wikipedia:Orange_County,_California|Orange County]] in California is contracting
out its data processing for seven years at a price of $26 million. The county
is getting better service and expects to save $11 million.

One of the best incidents has to do with Minnesota's [[wikipedia:Hennepin_County,_Minnesota|Hennepin County]].
County staff had proposed construction of a major food service plant as part of
its new medical center. Then someone asked a simple question; "What does a
county government know about preparing 3½ million meals a year?" I doubt anyone
even tried to answer that question. There must have been an instant realization
that food purchasing, storage, preparation and serving on such an institutional
scale is a pretty complicated business for beginners. At the same time, there
was recognition that a number of private firms have been in that line of business
for quite a while. Hennepin County contracted with a private concern, set
standards of performance, quality and cost and estimates it saves about $1 million
a year.

It's something worth looking at in everyone's hometown. And think what
might happen if the idea reached Washington.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>09/06/[[Radio1977|1977]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan.27s_Path_to_Victory|RPtV-195]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

76-19-B5

2026-11-04T21:39:48Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1977|1977]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[76-19-B4|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[76-19-B6|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Government Can Cost Less II =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
On the last broadcast, I told of how Scottsdale, Arizona and a dozen other
cities in our land were hiring a private, profit-making company to provide fire
protection with no loss of quality and great savings to the taxpayers. Since
fire departments are so universally thought of as one of those things only
government can do, I got curious about other governmental functions and whether
some of them might lend themselves to the Scottsdale pattern.

The answer is (and I'll admit I was surprised), "yes". [[wikipedia:Rochester,_New_York|Rochester, New York]]
began increasing its contracting out of government chores in 1974 and has
reduced the number of city employees by 12%. Private firms take care of some
of the street and all the building maintenance and operate all but one of the
city parking garages. Vehicle repair and gravedigging are contracted out. The
city manager considers all of this as still experimental but is going ahead
with a plan to have private garbage collection in one part of the city. He's
interested in the competitive feature and what it might do to perk up the city
run departments.

Other cities have been even more extensive in their contracting and at it
longer. Twice as many cities use private firms for garbage collection rather
than city refuse departments and a survey has found that, on the average, the
cost for government garbage collection is 68% higher than when it's done by
a private, profit-making concern. Among the better known cities who are moving
to private contracting are New Orleans; Charleston, South Carolina; Dallas;
Portland, Oregon and Omaha, Nebraska.

Just about every public service is being provided somewhere by private
contractors at considerable savings to the taxpayers.

In Houston, Texas, instead of using highly trained policemen for routine
protective duties, private security guards are employed to guard municipal
court buildings and even the City Hall, freeing the police for crime fighting
duties. San Francisco has contracted a number of parks and recreational
facilities out to private operators and is now making a profit on these facilities
instead of showing a loss to the taxpayers. Another California city is saving
20% through private management of a municipal golf course. More and more school
cafeterias are being operated by private contractors -- even one by a hamburger
chain and they have turned money losers into profitable operations.

At another level of government, Orange County in California is contracting
out its data processing for seven years at a price of $26 million. The county
is getting better service and expects to save $11 million.

One of the best incidents has to do with Minnesota's Hennepin County.
County staff had proposed construction of a major food service plant as part of
its new medical center. Then someone asked a simple question; "What does a
county government know about preparing 3½ million meals a year?" I doubt anyone
even tried to answer that question. There must have been an instant realization
that food purchasing, storage, preparation and serving on such an institutional
scale is a pretty complicated business for beginners. At the same time, there
was recognition that a number of private firms have been in that line of business
for quite a while. Hennepin County contracted with a private concern, set
standards of performance, quality and cost and estimates it saves about $1 million
a year.

It's something worth looking at in everyone's hometown. And think what
might happen if the idea reached Washington.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>09/06/[[Radio1977|1977]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan.27s_Path_to_Victory|RPtV-195]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

76-19-B4

2026-11-04T20:11:49Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1977|1977]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[76-19-B3|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[76-19-B5|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Government Can Cost Less I =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
I've often said that when government tries to do things that are not proper
functions of government, it cannot do them as well or as economically as private
enterprise. Now, I'm beginning to wonder if we've gone as far as we could in
determining just what are the proper functions of government.

I'll yield to no man in my respect for and appreciation of the men who fight
our fires. So I intend no criticism of them when I bring up the question of
whether they should or should not be employees of government.

The other day I discovered, by way of Robert Poole, Jr., President of the
"[[wikipedia:Reason_Foundation|Local Government Center]]" -- a non-profit research organization -- that more
than a dozen towns and cities in our land have no fire departments and no more
fire problems than cities that do.

One of the dozen is [[wikipedia:Scottsdale,_Arizona|Scottsdale, Arizona]]. It contracts with [https://www.ruralmetrofire.com/ Rural/Metro Fire
Department, Inc.], a private concern that has an employees' profit sharing plan,
employs both men and women and pays time and a half for overtime. One, additional
difference also -- its trucks are painted yellow, not the traditional fire engine
red. This is not some experiment. Scottsdale has used Rural/Metro, Inc. for 25
years and just recently signed on for another five.

How does Scottsdale compare to more traditional communities? Well, the latest
figures available for comparison show that the per cost for fire protection in
Scottsdale is less than one quarter the national average of cities in its
population range. And, before you ask the next logical question, fire insurance
rates in Scottsdale are in the Class Five rating, which is good and compares with
all other well run cities its size (96,000 population).

There is another statistic used to determine fire protection quality -- what
are per capita fire losses over a period of years? The national average is about
$12. In Scottsdale, it's only about $4.50. Bolstering these figures is the fact
that Scottsdale has been recognized by the National Commission on Productivity
for eight significant innovations in fire fighting. It has also received
commendations from the Institute for Local Self-government and the New York City
Rand Institute.

One of the eight innovations is something called the snail; a remote control
robot invented by the company and built at a cost of only $3000. Operated by one
man, it does the work of four and goes into action on treads with a two-and-a-half
inch hose in areas too hot or dangerous for fire fighters (700 degrees). Other
improvements include "attack" trucks with an on-board water tank, pump and hose.
These are pick-up trucks with two-man crews for the 75% of cases which are minor,
rubbish and grass fires, and so forth.

There is much more that can be told about Rural/Metro, but very simply, it
comes down to this; because the company operates to make a profit, it has the
strongest incentive to be efficient and cost effective. And, since 90% of fire
fighting cost is personnel and much of that is for people who are paid to wait
for something to happen, Rural/Metro has modernized the volunteer concept.

Scottsdale city employees form an auxiliary force of paid reservists. Those
who serve must pass stringent selection procedures and undergo a rigorous training
program, for which they receive a $50 monthly retainer and $6.38 an hour for
training and duty. They are on call for one week out of four. During his "on"
week, each reservist carries a portable paging unit. Adding in these reservists
and the regular company employees, Scottsdale uses only two-thirds the manpower
of the average city its size.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>09/06/[[Radio1977|1977]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan.27s_Path_to_Victory|RPtV-193]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===
* Scottsdale ended its contract with Rural/Metro in 2005.
* Based on the contents of both Reagan's broadcast and this [https://reason.com/1976/05/01/fighting-fires-for-profit/ May 1976 article from Reason Magazine] I wouldn't be surprised if this is what Reagan had read.
</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

76-19-B3

2026-11-04T19:51:14Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1977|1977]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[76-19-B2|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[76-19-B4|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= The Olympics =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
Most Americans were angry, frustrated and a little ashamed last year when
young athletes from the [[wikipedia:Taiwan|Republic of China on Taiwan]] were told they couldn't
compete in the [[wikipedia:1976_Summer_Olympics|Montreal Olympics]].

If I remember correctly, they had made the journey and were on hand when the
door was slammed in their faces. The Chinese Communists -- claiming there is only
one China -- had demanded the Taiwan ouster on the grounds that the Peking team
was the official representative of that one China.

It wasn't the first time an Olympic committee has taken the easy way out
under political pressure, and I'm afraid it won't be the last. The committee
should have told the Chinese Communists their protest was denied. If they then
chose not to compete, that would have been their decision. The Olympics are
dedicated to sport and, by rule and tradition, are supposed to ignore politics.

Frankly, I would have been proud if our young athletes and those from other
free world nations had told the weak-kneed committee that Taiwan would compete or
the Chinese Communists would be running around the track by themselves. But that
didn't happen and the Olympic flame seems a little less bright these days.

Now, it appears the athletes of another country are threatened with being
ousted even though the games are three years away. The [[wikipedia:Soviet_Union|Soviet Union]], as host
of the [[wikipedia:1980_Summer_Olympics|1980 games]], is being a little more subtle but the goal is the same --
ouster of a nation because of politics.

In this case the target is [[wikipedia:Israel|Israel]] and someone had better start speaking up
or Israel will be on the non-competitors list long before 1980 rolls around.

From all that can be learned, the Soviet Union is working through the [[wikipedia:Third
World]] nations using an Olympic rule governing eligibility. It seems that a
competing nation must belong to at least five of the 26 international sports
federations to be eligible for the Olympics. If you'll remember, the Third World
nations some time ago took advantage of their numbers to pass a [[wikipedia:United_Nations_General_Assembly_Resolution_3379|resolution in the
U.N. General Assembly]] equating Zionism with racism.

Now, as the various international sports federations meet, Third World
nations invoke this resolution to oust Israel on the charge of racial discrimination.
So far the maneuver has been successful in getting Israel thrown out of three
federations. If, come 1980, Israel does not have membership in the required five,
they just won't be invited to compete. Ineligible, don't you know -- sorry.

There seems to be a media blackout on this shenanigan and the Olympic
committee makes pollyanna noises about Soviet "guarantees". You can't help but
wonder what would happen if the U.S. Olympic committee just once would say to the
international committee, "We want to see the guest list now or we aren't coming
to the party."

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>09/06/[[Radio1977|1977]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan:_In_His_Own_Hand|RihoH-214]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20180209182414/http://www.cbc.ca/archives/entry/taiwan-controversy-at-the-1976-montreal-olympics CBC article about the banning] indicates it was ''not'' the Olympic Committee that banned the Taiwanese players, it was Canadian Prime Minister [[wikipedia:Pierre_Trudeau|Pierre Trudeau]].
</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

76-19-B2

2026-11-04T19:23:50Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1977|1977]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[76-19-B1|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[76-19-B3|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Youth Employment =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
Some have said the [[wikipedia:New_York_City_blackout_of_1977|looting last July in New York]] was aggravated by not enough
welfare. Others said it was the direct result of four decades of too much welfare.
I myself have deplored a tendency in education to ignore teaching moral precepts.
Columnist [[wikipedia:John_Chamberlain_(journalist)|John Chamberlain]] recognized all these differing views in a recent
column, but then came up with what might very well be the best explanation.

Idle hands can get into mischief. Juveniles who can't find summer jobs to
keep them busy and to provide pocket money not only become bored, they can become
resentful toward a society that seemingly doesn't need them.

John Chamberlain called attention to the fact that [[wikipedia:George_Meany|George Meany]] and President
[[wikipedia:Jimmy_Carter|Carter]] met recently to discuss the minimum wage. Meany said it should be three
dollars an hour; the President wanted to go to $2.50. They finally settled on
$2.65. How many jobs that teenagers with no experience in the labor market can
do have disappeared because possible employers don't think the jobs they can do
are worth $2.65 an hour.

I remember a meeting I had with a group of youngsters from one of our minority
neighborhoods while I was Governor. These young people earnestly wanted an
opportunity to work and earn. I expressed the view (backed by some available
statistics) that jobs had been eliminated by the minimum wage and that we needed
a waiver for young people such as themselves. I had thought they might possibly
resent the suggestion that they should work below the prescribed pay level. I was
wrong. They asked if I would help in trying to get the law changed. I've been
trying ever since.

John Chamberlain's column reported the findings of University of Chicago
economist Yale Brozen in two masterful studies that prove beyond a shadow of a
doubt that every time the minimum wage goes up, teenage unemployment goes right
up with it.

Four Congressmen, Senators [[wikipedia:Jim_McClure_(politician)|McClure]] and [[wikipedia:Orin_Hatch|Hatch]] and Representatives [[wikipedia:Bud_Brown_(politician)|Clarence
Brown]] and [[wikipedia:John_H._Rousselot|John Rousselot]], were impressed enough by Brozen's figures to sponsor
an independent study by Professor [[wikipedia:Walter_E._Williams|Williams]] of Temple University that is now before
the Joint Economic committee of Congress.

Teenage unemployment averages five times that of the civilian labor force
over age 25. And youths between 20 and 24 average 2½ times as much. Young people
16 to 24 are only one quarter of the work force, but they are one-half of all the
unemployed. And young blacks have an unemployment rate almost double that of their
white contemporaries.

Everyone must feel needed. I've never forgotten an episode a few years ago
when one of our winter storms had churned up a high tide and rough surf which
threatened to undermine and destroy dozens of beautiful beach homes. All day
and into the night, volunteers filled sand bags and built barricades.

It was some time after midnight when a TV reporter stopped a young man in
swimming trunks. It was so cold you could see his breath. Yes, he'd been at it
all day. Yes, he was cold and tired. Did he live in one of those houses? No.
Then why? He stopped for a second, then he said something so poignant -- this
average teenager -- that it should be printed on a billboard. "I guess it's the
first time we've ever felt needed."

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>09/06/[[Radio1977|1977]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan:_In_His_Own_Hand|RihoH-303]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

76-19-B1

2026-11-04T19:13:09Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1977|1977]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[76-19-A7|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[76-19-B2|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Cuba II =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
The tourist traffic to [[wikipedia:Cuba|Cuba]] is increasing. Most recent visitor to the island,
traveling in an air force jet was U.S. Senator [[wikipedia:Frank_Church|Frank Church]]. He spent four days
with [[wikipedia:Fidel_Castro|Fidel Castro]] and departed for home saying, "I leave with the impression I
have found a friend."

Lest we lose our perspective with so many carefully staged Cuban tours recently,
let me read a letter written to President [[wikipedia:Jimmy_Carter|Carter]] by the exiled sister of the Cuban
dictator.

"My name is [[wikipedia:Juanita_Castro|Juanita Castro]]. I am the sister of the communist dictator of
Cuba, Fidel Castro. However, I am also a Cuban woman in exile who loves her
country and has put its liberation above personal gain and family ties. I have
chosen liberty, Christianity and patriotism over slavery, atheism and treason.
You, Mr. President, must now choose how your name will go down in history. I
speak to your conscience and through it to the American people."

"I come to remind you of those killed by Communist Cuba's firing squads for
trying to be free. I come to remind you of Communist Cuba's concentration camps and
jails where torture and murder are everyday occurrences. I come to remind you of
the enslaved people of Cuba, muted by terror and waiting, hoping, struggling for
liberation."

"I come to tell you that those who state that the lifting of economic sanctions
against Cuba and the establishment of relations with its communist government do
not constitute condoning or accepting its actions, are wrong. This argument would
not have stood up to the realities of an [[wikipedia:Auschwitz|Auschwitz]] or a [[wikipedia:Dachau|Dachau]] under [[wikipedia:Adolf_Hitler|Hitler]]'s
Germany and ring hollow and bankrupt before the realities of their counterpart in
communist Cuba."

"I come to ask you why, after your pronouncements concerning human rights,
you do not vigorously advocate that these be respected in Cuba before even trying
to renew relations of any kind with the Communist government of Havana."

"I come to remind you of the [https://www.congress.gov/bill/87th-congress/senate-joint-resolution/230 Congressional resolution] of October 3, 1962 and
of the innumerable conventions, doctrines and treaties that oppose such action.
I come to remind you, Mr. President, of that day in Florida when you shouted,
'Democracy, yes; Castro, no.'

"Last but not least, I come to warn you, Mr. President, that my brother,
Fidel Castro, and the international communism he represents are not interested in
this country's friendship, but only in the economic gain that would accrue to his
regime from this move and in the increase of his political prestige that such action
would bring."

"At the beginning of your War of Independence in 1775, [[wikipedia:Benjamin_Franklin|Benjamin Franklin]] wrote
to his old friend in England, [[wikipedia:William_Strahan_(publisher)|William Strahan]]: 'Look upon your hands! They are
stained with the blood of your relations!' Mr. President, I submit that your
decision in this matter might well determine if you will ever again be able to
look at yours."

Juanita Castro's letter was addressed to the President, but, in truth, it
was written to all of us, and all of us must be a part of the answer. Has Senator
Church or any of us, for that matter, "found a friend"?

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>09/06/[[Radio1977|1977]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan.27s_Path_to_Victory|RPtV-192]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>

76-19-A7

2026-11-04T18:55:06Z

Reagan admin:

[[Category:Radio Episodes]]
- [[Main Page]] \ [[Reagan Radio Commentaries]] \ [[Radio1977|1977]]

<TABLE WIDTH="80%"><TR><TD>[[76-19-A6|<< Previous Broadcast]]</TD><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">[[76-19-B1|Next Broadcast >>]]</TD></TR></TABLE>

= Cuba I =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
Since the administration announced (in the interest of human rights, no doubt)
that we were going to normalize relations with [[wikipedia:Fidel_Castro|Castro]]'s [[wikipedia:Cuba|Cuba]], wondrous things
have happened. They've [https://openprairie.sdstate.edu/dc_bb-cuba/ beaten us in a basketball game], American businessmen tour
Havana, dreaming of branch offices and new sales territories, and the wife of one
of them tweaks Fidel's beard and finds him "cute".

Senator [[wikipedia:George_McGovern|George McGovern]] and the Cuban dictator munch ice cream cones together
and the Senator discovers Fidel is a personable, well-informed fellow. Apparently,
he's better informed than the Senator, who shows no sign of knowing that the
15,000 [[wikipedia:Cuban_intervention_in_Angola|Cuban mercenaries in Africa]] are only the tip of an iceberg. "West Watch",
quarterly journal of the Council for Inter-American Security says Cuban agents
have been active on the continent for more than 10 years and it lists 14 African
states where they are operating. British journalist [[wikipedia:Robert_Moss|Robert Moss]] estimates there
are more than 20,000 (not 15) in Angola and gives specifics on their Russian arms
which include everything from heavy tanks to multiple rocket launches and MIG
fighter planes.

If all of the testimony available on Cuba's long time support of so-called
liberation movements is added up, there are 25 to 30,000 Cubans in Africa, and
many hundreds more have operated in the past or still are operating in [[wikipedia:Jamaica|Jamaica]],
[[wikipedia:Panama|Panama]], [[wikipedia:Portugal|Portugal]], [[wikipedia:Vietnam|Vietnam]] and [[wikipedia:North_Korea|North Korea]]. They have trained exiles who attempted
to launch guerilla warfare in the [[wikipedia:Dominican_Republic|Dominican Republic]] as well as the terrorists
who plague [[wikipedia:Argentina|Argentina]]. [[wikipedia:Bayard_Rustin|Bayard Rustin]], writing in "New America", a socialist journal,
describes Cuba as doing the Soviet's dirty work in Africa, the Caribbean and Latin
America.

But what should be the most difficult thing for Americans to swallow is the
testimony of our own former war prisoners in Vietnam. It is bad enough that we
rewarded their years of suffering and their heroism by ducking out on our allies;
surely they are entitled to be heard on the subject of Cuba. So far the national
press has said nothing about their shocked disbelief that we could be negotiating
with Castro.

Colonel [[wikipedia:Bud_Day|George E. Day]], former P.O.W. and holder of the Congressional Medal
of Honor has written that Cuban embassy officials in [[wikipedia:Hanoi|Hanoi]] inflicted some of the
worst tortures on our men. They sold the North Vietnamese the idea they were
experts on brainwashing and could re-educate a dozen American servicement so they
would come home preaching the Communist line. When brainwashing failed, they
turned to plain brutality.

Colonel Day tells of one of our Airmen who was raped, bullied and tortured
for 24 hours until his mind was gone. Then he was subjected to electric shock
treatments with an antiquated machine that not only left massive burns on his
arms and head but also finished off what was left of his brain.

He was last seen by his fellow prisoners in October, 1970. Whether murdered
or just left to die, he never returned. Colonel Day writes with regard to
recognizing Cuba that he is, "appalled, amazed and frightened", that men such as
Senator McGovern, [[wikipedia:Andrew_Young|Andrew Young]] and President [[wikipedia:Jimmy_Carter|Carter]] "would have the uncommon, bad
judgement and poor sense of responsibility to Americans to aid the cause of these
international outlaws."

To forgive is divine but not while Castro is arrogantly declaring (as he did a
few weeks ago) that he has no intention of halting his efforts to bring terror
and revolution to the World.

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2"> </TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>09/06/[[Radio1977|1977]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan.27s_Path_to_Victory|RPtV-191]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>