n006  0706  01 Mar 80
 
BC-SPEECH-BAKER (Undated) 2takes
c. 1980 N.Y. Times News Service
    Candidates for the presidential nomination in both major parties
make hundreds of speeches in their campaigns, speeches that vary in
content depending on where they are given and the audience being
addressed.
    But every candidate has a body of material, usually presented in
every speech, that varies little from audience to audience. This
material represents the heart of his message to the voters as he
moves around the country.
    Sen. Howard Baker's basic speech is the second in a series of texts
of such ''stock speeches,'' heard by millions of Americans but rarely
published at length, that have been collected by The New York Times.
 
    I'm convinced that the decisions that we make in the campaign for
the presidency in 1980 will decide, in large measure, whether this
decade, which has just begun, will be the best decade this century,
or indeed the worst decade of this century. Because the potential for
either, the best time that this country has seen in the 20th century,
or the most difficult, or the most deadly, time that we've endured in
the 20th century will be decided in large measure on the basis of the
judgments and decisions that we express in the political arena in
1980, because now this country is indeed at a watershed time. We're
going to decide great issues that will affect the foreign policy of
this nation, the nature of our national defenses, and in my view and
judgment we will decide issues which in turn will determine whether
or not we have before us a century of peace or a time of acute peril.
    I believe that the worst failure of the Carter administration today
has been their mismanagement of the foreign policy of this nation. I
believe that the vacillation of the uncertainty of the policies of
this administration - the decisions that they've made almost from the
first day of the Carter administration in terms of the cancellation
of new weapons systems has sent a signal to all the world that the
United States is uncertain, or even unwilling to protect the vital
security interests of this nation, and that we're engaged in some
sort of flirtation with the idea of unilateral disarmament.
    I listened to the president of the United States in his State of the
Union message the other night and I heard him say that America must
defend our vital security interests in the Middle East. As I sat
there I thought, ''You know, he's right, he's saying the right thing
and it's about time,'' but then it dawned on me - you know he's
saying it three years late.
    He's saying it after the Soviet Union is tempted to believe that you
can push on Uncle Sam and he never pushes back. Three years into a
presidential administration what chance does he have to convince the
world or the Soviet Union? For that matter what chance does he have
to convince a Democratic Congress that he's changed his mind? My
friends, the only way we can realize the potential for a century of
peace, the only way we can change the foreign policy of this nation
is to change the president of the United States?
    If this country does not gain control of the ravages of inflation
being inflicted on us and every citizen within this nation - if we do
not once again contain the forces of inflation which are robbing our
savings, our income, our aspirations and hopes for the future - if we
don't put that animal back in the cage, 13.3 percent inflation will
change in a fundamental way the lifestyle of this nation, and only
the failure of the foreign policy in the Carter administration can
compare with their failure in domestic policy.
    Too many Americans now think that double-digit inflation is a
permanent way of life on the American landscape. Many Americans
surely must have forgotten that in the last quarter of the
administration of President Gerald R. Ford that inflation had been
reduced from double-digit levels down to 8.4 percent by a president
who had the courage to exercise a series of more than 50 vetoes on
spending measures passed by a Democratic Congress - a president who
not only was conserving our resources, but was sending a signal in
this country and abroad that America does care about the soundness of
our dollar, the solvency of our system. He put the animal of
inflation back in the cage and we owe President Ford a debt of
gratitude for that, but Jimmy Carter let it out and we've got to
change the president of the United States in order to do that.
    The other day I saw the president on television at another time. If
I understood him correctly he said, Well you know it's too bad about
inflation but a great part of that, maybe, he said, even most of
that, but at least a great part of that 13 percent inflation,
according to President Carter, was due to the increase in oil prices
by the OPEC countries. Well of course he's right. OPEC is gouging
there. But my friends, look at the statistics. I asked my staff to do
that the other day after the president's speech.
    (MORE)
    
ny-0301 1004est
***************

n007  0715  01 Mar 80
 
BC-SPEECH-BAKER (Undated) 1stadd
NYT UNDATED: president's speech.
    And you know what they discovered? They discovered that all of the
oil increases since Jimmy Carter has taken office - all of the
increases in oil prices, including the pass-through increases in oil
prices, all working together - accounts for 3 percent of today's
inflation. Three percent of it belongs to OPEC and 10 percent of it
belongs to Jimmy Carter, and I'm not going to let him forget it in
this campaign!
    My friends, we have great issues that are before this country and
indeed I believe that the judgments and decisions that you make in
the campaign in 1980 will decide whether the decade of the 80s is the
best decade in this century or the worst.
    I believe I can help. I believe I can lead America. I believe I can
carry the banner of the Republican Party to victory in November of
1980. I believe we can implement together those policies that we
believe in, that we could restate our determination to stay strong
and free and to protect the vital interests of this nation. I believe
we could reiterate our belief in the free enterprise system and
self-reliance and a sound and solvent currency. I believe we could
restate our belief in ourselves. But my friends you cannot do it -
you cannot do it by choosing between two Democratic contenders, both
of whom are a product of the tired old theories of the 1930s and
suffer from a Depression-era mentality. It'll take a Republican
president to do that in 1980.
    Why should Howard Baker carry our banner? Why should you chose him
instead of Ronald Reagan, instead of George Bush, instead of John
Connally, Bob Dole, John Anderson, Bill Crane? - everybody I know is
running for president. Now my friends it's time for me to lay aside
the last remnant of modesty that's laid - that's left in my body, and
there isn't very much, to tell you why Howard Baker instead of one of
my good friends.
    The name of this game is not to get nominated, the name of this game
is not to win a straw poll or a caucus, the name of this game is not
even to win a single primary - the name of this game is to win the
election in November. And my friends I can do that - I can do better
than the others. I ask you to judge me. I ask you to compare my
record with theirs.
    I ask you to compare the fact that I sought public office in my
native state and I have succeeded. And that anybody who knows
anything about Tennessee knows that if you're going to get elected as
a Republican you'd better get a lot of independents and Democrats to
vote with you because there aren't that many Republicans in Tennessee.
    But you know, friends, that same thing's so in the United States.
You can get every Republican vote in this country and you'll get 25
percent, and it'll be a Democratic landslide. In order to win, either
a Democratic nominee or a Republican nominee must seek not only the
support of his own party, but appropriately, I think, he must seek
the support of independents and members of the other party as well. I
believe I have a track record to do it. I believe I can do that in
November. I believe I can translate your desires and your demands and
indeed your dissent into useful public policy - the formulation of
the future of this nation. I believe I can be elected and I ask for
support in that respect.
    In the course of my campaign I've tried to speak with particularity,
with exactness and specificity on the issues that confront this
country. I've talked about taxes, I've talked about energy, I've
talked about the environment. I've talked about regulation, the
anonymous bureaucracy, I've talked about education, I've talked about
war and peace, the national defense and foreign policy. I've talked
about the formulation of a new foreign policy for this country. I've
talked about what I believe the presidency should bring.
    In the television advertising and the radio advertising I will try
once again to spell out in detail where I stand on particular issues.
And I hope my worthy opponents - Republican and Democratic - will do
the same. Because this campaign for president must not be decided on
generalities. It must be decided on evaluation of the candidate and
his position on the issues.
    
ny-0301 1013est
***************