with. There is no question but that we cannot discuss our internal affairs in the United

States without recognizing that they have a tremendous bearing on our international

position. There is no question but that this nation cannot stand still; because we are

in a deadly competition, a competition not only with the men in the Kremlin, but the

men in Peking. We're ahead in this competition, as Senator Kennedy, I think, has implied.

But when you're in a race, the only way to stay ahead is to move ahead. And I subscribe

completely to the spirit that Senator Kennedy has expressed tonight, the spirit that the

United States should move ahead. Where, then, do we disagree? I think we disagree on the

implication of his remarks tonight and on the statements that he has made on many occasions

during his campaign to the effect that the United States has been standing still. We

heard tonight, for example, the statement made that our growth in national product last

year was the lowest of any industrial nation in the world. Now last year, of course, was

1958. That happened to be a recession year. But when we look at the growth of G.N.P. this

year, a year of recovery, we find that it's six and nine-tenths per cent and one of the

highest in the world today. More about that later. Looking then to this problem of how

the United States should move ahead and where the United States is moving, I think it is

well that we take the advice of a very famous campaigner: Let's look at the record. Is the

United States standing still? Is it true that this Administration, as Senator Kennedy has

charged, has been an Administration of retreat, of defeat, of stagnation? Is it true that,

as far as this country is concerned, in the field of electric power, in all of the fields

that he has mentioned, we have not been moving ahead. Well, we have a comparison that we

can make. We have the record of the Truman Administration of seven and a half years and

the seven and a half years of the Eisenhower Administration. When we compare these two

records in the areas that Senator Kennedy has - has discussed tonight, I think we find

that America has been moving ahead. Let's take schools. We have built more schools in

these last seven and a half years than we built in the previous seven and a half, for

that matter in the previous twenty years. Let's take hydroelectric power. We have developed

more hydroelectric power in these seven and a half years than was developed in any previous

administration in history. Let us take hospitals. We find that more have been built in this

Administration than in the previous Administration. The same is true of highways. Let's put it

in terms that all of us can understand. We often hear gross national product discussed

and in that respect may I say that when we compare the growth in this Administration

with that of the previous Administration that then there was a total growth of eleven percent

over seven years; in this Administration there has been a total growth of nineteen per cent

over seven years. That shows that there's been more growth in this Administration than

in its predecessor. But let's not put it there; let's put it in terms of the average family.

What has happened to you? We find that your wages have gone up five times as much in the

Eisenhower Administration as they did in the Truman Administration. What about the prices

you pay? We find that the prices you pay went up five times as much in the Truman Administration

as they did in the Eisenhower Administration. What's the net result of this? This means

that the average family income went up fifteen per cent in the Eisenhower years as against

two per cent in the Truman years. Now, this is not standing still. But, good as this record

is, may I emphasize it isn't enough. A record is never something to stand on. It's something

to build on. And in building on this record, I believe that we have the secret for progress,

we know the way to progress. And I think, first of all, our own record proves that we

know the way. Senator Kennedy has suggested that he believes he knows the way. I respect

the sincerity which he m- which he makes that suggestion. But on the other hand, when we

look at the various programs that he offers, they do not seem to be new. They seem to be

simply retreads of the programs of the Truman Administration which preceded it. And I would

suggest that during the course of the evening he might indicate those areas in which his

programs are new, where they will mean more progress than we had then. What kind of programs

are we for? We are for programs that will expand educational opportunities, that will

give to all Americans their equal chance for education, for all of the things which are

necessary and dear to the hearts of our people. We are for programs, in addition, which will

see that our medical care for the aged are - is - are much - is much better handled

than it is at the present time. Here again, may I indicate that Senator Kennedy and I

are not in disagreement as to the aims. We both want to help the old people. We want

to see that they do have adequate medical care. The question is the means. I think that

the means that I advocate will reach that goal better than the means that he advocates.

I could give better examples, but for - for whatever it is, whether it's in the field

of housing, or health, or medical care, or schools, or the eh- development of electric

power, we have programs which we believe will move America, move her forward and build on

the wonderful record that we have made over these past seven and a half years. Now, when

we look at these programs, might I suggest that in evaluating them we often have a tendency

to say that the test of a program is how much you're spending. I will concede that in all

the areas to which I have referred Senator Kennedy would have the spe- federal government

spend more than I would have it spend. I costed out the cost of the Democratic platform. It

runs a minimum of thirteen and two-tenths billions dollars a year more than we are presently

spending to a maximum of eighteen billion dollars a year more than we're presently spending.

Now the Republican platform will cost more too. It will cost a minimum of four billion

dollars a year more, a maximum of four and nine-tenths billion dollar a year more than

we're presently spending. Now, does this mean that his program is better than ours? Not

at all. Because it isn't a question of how much the federal government spends; it isn't

a question of which government does the most. It is a question of which administration does

the right thing. And in our case, I do believe that our programs will stimulate the creative

energies of a hundred and eighty million free Americans. I believe the programs that Senator

Kennedy advocates will have a tendency to stifle those creative energies, I believe

in other words, that his program would lead to the stagnation of the motive power that

we need in this country to get progress. The final point that I would like to make is this:

Senator Kennedy has suggested in his speeches that we lack compassion for the poor, for

the old, and for others that are unfortunate. Let us understand throughout this campaign

that his motives and mine are sincere. I know what it means to be poor. I know what it means

to see people who are unemployed. I know Senator Kennedy feels as deeply about these problems

as I do, but our disagreement is not about the goals for America but only about the means

to reach those goals.