TRANSLATION - jw

6 April 1988

(postmarked 22 June)

Dear Professor Kissinger:

Our apologies for turning to you with a request which normally
is not our practice. However, from a telex of 3 April 1988
which reported on Mr. M. S. Forbes and in which you were
cited as a close friend, only you can help us by forwarding
the enclosed letter to Mr. Forbes. So that you can be aware
of the contents of the letter, we are enclosing a copy and
hope that with your assistance, the letter will reach its
destination.

Thanking you for your efforts,

[4]

6 April 1988

Dear Mr. Forbes:

In a telex of 3 April 1988, we learned of your success as
a businessman and promoter of the arts.

This is the reason for us getting in touch with you to kindly
consider two offers.

1) We are able to offer a painting by Titian--"The Burial"--
from a family estate, dimensions 1mx1.25m. The necessary
expert's reports are available. Sale is to occur under a family
settlement.

2) Rheingauer wine. The name "Pfarrgut Rauenthal" probably doesn't mean much to you. "Pfarrgut" was not only the purveyor to the English royal household, also Emperor Haile Selassie and President Eisenhower bought this excellent Rheingauer wine. In addition, "Pfarrgut" received a gold medal at the world exhibition in Brussels in 1935 and in Paris in 1937. We have several excellent wines which we have catalogued in the price list.

Since these wines will increase in price in the future, we
would appreciate your letting us know whether we may reserve
some for you.

In anticipation of your valued, confidential reply, we remain,

P.S. The original prices apply to the Federal Republic of Germany.

[L.C]

JUN 28 1988

B. Baaske

WEINVERTRETUNG

6540 Simmern/Hunsrück

Migennesstraße 14
Telefon (06761) 2108

Bankverbindungen:
Hunsrück Bank Simmern Kto.-Nr. 110 326 482
(BLZ 560 617 44)

Datum: 06.04.1988

[postmarked June 22nd]

Sehr geehrter Herr Professor Kissinger !

Bitte verzeihen Sie, daß wir heute mit einer Bitte an Sie herantreten, was sonst nicht unsere Art ist.

Aber veranlaßt durch eine FS - Sendung am 03.04.1988, die über Herrn M.S. Forbes berichtete und in der Sie als enger Vertrauter genannt wurden, können nur Sie uns weiterhelfen, indem Sie den als Anlage beigefugten Brief an Mister Forbes weiterleiten.

Damit Sie von dem Inhalt des Briefes Kenntnis nehmen können, fügen wir eine Kopie bei und hoffen, daß durch Ihre Unterstützung, der Brief sein Ziel erreicht.

Für Ihre Mühe bedanken wir uns heute schon ganz herzlich und verbleiben mit

den besten Grüßen
aus Deutschland

KOPfE

[L.C]

B. Baaske

WEINVERTRETUNG

6540 Simmern/Hunsrück

Datum: 06.04.1988

Sehr geehrter Mister M.S. Forbes !

In einer BRD FS - Sendung am 03.04.1988 lernten wir
Sie als erfolgreichen Geschäftsmann und Förderer der
Kunst kennen.

Dies soll Anlaß sein, uns mit Ihnen in Verbindung zu
setzen und zwei Angebote wohlwollend zu prüfen.

1.) Wir können aus Familienbesitz ein Bild von Tizian - Die Grablegung -, Größe 1,00 x 1,25 m anbieten. Die notwendigen Expertisen liegen vor. Der Verkauf soll aufgrund einer Erbauseinander-setzung erfolgen.

2.) Rheingauer Weine.
Sicherlich sagt Ihnen der Name Pfarrgut Rauenthal nicht viel.
Das Pfarrgut war nicht nur Hoflieferant von dem engl. Königshaus, sondern unter anderem bezog auch Kaiser Haile Selasie und auch Präsident Eisenhower diese herrlichen Rheingauer Weine. Weiterhin erhielt das Pfarrgut auf der Weltausstellung 1935 in Brüssel und 1937 auf der Weltausstellung in Paris jeweils eine Goldmedaille. Auch hier sind wir im Besitz einiger exelenter Weine, die wir Ihnen in der Preisliste aufzeichnen dürfen.
Da diese Weine in Zukunft versteigert werden sollen, bitten wir um Nachricht, ob wir einige Weine für Sie reservieren dürfen.

In Erwartung Ihrer geschätzten, vertraulichen Rück-
antwort, verbleiben wir

mit freundlichen Grüßen

P.S.

Die original Preise verstehen sich ab BRD.

GERD-WALTER BACHERT

FREIER JOURNALIST
INTERNATIONALER PARLAMENTS-FOTO-REPORTER

SEP 24 1987

To
Prof.Dr. Henry A. Kissinger
- Former Minister of State -

Suite 520
1800 K Street, N.W.
WASHINGTON D.C. 20006

U.S.A.

Eilige Pressesache

NOCKHERSTRASSE 56
D-8000 MUNCHEN 90

POSTFACH 90 02 27

BUNDESREPUBLIK DEUTSCHLAND

18. 9. 1987

Dear Minister Professor Dr. Kissinger,

some years ago I have had the pleasure to take
some nice photographs of you here in the Olympic Center of München for
my international German Press-Archiv. I was very happy to met you this
time here in München.

Meanwhile, I got very ill, so that I could not
continue my works like photoreporter since long time. That's the matter
for what I'm just staying in very hard problems till to this moment.

As I, however, think that you also would
like these nice photographs I will send them to you here enclosed, and
will ask you to be kind enough, please, to take them over, and to
transmit me in refund for them the expenses, I have had for them. The expen
ses had been more or less nearly 10,-- or 15,-- US-Dollars for one of
them here in Germany.

If you would like it to overtake the nice
pictures you could help me well in my very hard problems a little bit
surely.

You could transmit me the money in change for
the photographs by US-Dollars into a registered letter to my address
here in München.

Hoping that you are happy to have these nice
photographs, I'm sure that you will help me in take them over, and so I
thank you so very much in advance.

I should be very glad to hear from you as soon
as possible and so I remain with all my best wishes for yourself and
the United States

your' s very sincerely and truly German journalist

G.W. Bachert

Publikationen:

Deutsches Fernsehen WDR/ARD

DIE WELT

NEUE OSNABRÜCKER ZEITUNG

NÖRNBERGER NACHRICHTEN

NEUE BILDPOST

Div. Tages-, Wochen- und

Monatszeitungen und Illustrierte

Div. Medizinische Zeitschriften

Div Fachzeitschriften

Div. Fach- u. Unterhaltungs-Literatur

TRANSLATION - jw

Bonn, 3 March 1988

Dear Henry:

I wanted to try once undertaking an analysis of the East/West
situation and from that develop some recommendations. The
enclosed book resulted from this which I assume will interest
you, especially since it gave rise to some discussion here.

Seit Michail Gorbatschows Erscheinen auf
der weltpolitischen Bühne hat sich die in-
ternationale Szene schlagartig verändert.
Plötzlich ist Moskau das Bewegungs-
zentrum der Politik geworden, und die
amerikanische Führungsmacht sieht sich
immer neuen Vorschlägen des Kreml
gegenüber, auf die sie oft genug verblüfft
und ohne eigenen weltpolitischen Entwurf
reagiert.

Egon Bahr, so oft schon im letzten Viertel-
jahrhundert Vordenker deutscher Ostpoli-
tik, skizziert hier das Konzept einer Politik
zum europäischen Frieden, mit der der
Westen auf die geistige Herausforderung
der östlichen Abrüstungspolitik antworten
sollte.

Egon Bahr Zum europäischen Frieden.

CORSO

ISBN 3-88680-306-6

Egon Bahr **Zum**
**europeanischen**
**Frieden**
Eine Antwort
auf Gorbatschow

CORSO bei Siedler

[lc]

JAN 19 1988

Bailey, Deardourff & Associates, Inc.
6720 Old McLean Village Drive
McLean, Virginia 22101 (703) 442-0880

January 15, 1988

Dr. Henry A. Kissenger
Suite 400
1800 K Street NW
Washington, DC 20006

Dear Henry:

I'd like you to see what I have spent 15 hours a
day for the last three months of 1987 to develop.

The HOTLINE is a detailed daily briefing on the
presidential race and the key Senate races. It is
delivered by computer every work-day AM to subscribers
(which include all the campaigns, all the TV networks,
about 75 daily newspapers and a hundred other key
political and corporate offices).

The HOTLINE has revolutionized both the coverage of
the race and the nature of current information available
for those who have a need to know the status of what may
be the most unpredictable presidential race of our
lifetime.

I really want you to see it the way it is intended.
Call me (1-703-442-0819) or use the attached coupon and
I'll put your office on a one week free trial for
computer delivery. I would consider it a personal favor
if you'd agree to look at it this way.

If, after the free trial, you choose to be a
subscriber it will cost $250.00/month ($200.00/month if
paid a full year in advance) -- and subscribers can send
a representative in person to our M Street Forum
breakfast briefings every Wednesday morning (after the
Tuesday primaries). (Tax exempt institutions qualify for
a $150.00/month rate).

Please call me to say you'll try it or send the
coupon back, marked to my attention -- and I'll establish
the staff-to-staff relationship to make it easy.

[LC]

# Explore the *Inner Circle* Free!...

There's good reason why America's political "inner circle"—the media, top consultants, PACs, lobbyists, candidates, committees and business leaders—subscribe to *The Presidential Campaign HOTLINE*.

The top newspaper, newsmagazine and broadcast journalists know what other political insiders know — *The Presidential Campaign HOTLINE* gives them something available nowhere else.

The HOTLINE is the most unique, complete and inside picture of what is happening in all the presidential campaigns and key senate races.

The list of subscribers to the HOTLINE reads like a WHO'S WHO of American Media and Politics. All the TV networks, major national and regional newspapers ... all the weekly newsmagazines ... the presidential campaigns ... the party committees ... and scores of leading media consultants, pollsters, major PACs and corporations.

## Isn't it about time you took a look "inside"?

Each day—at 10:00 a.m. EST—you'll receive the most up-to-the-minute inside information. Your daily briefing is arrayed in easy-to-find sections:

* The three page summary provides the HIGHLIGHTS of the full edition, and an index to the full contents.

* The daily CAMPAIGN REPORTS from each campaign are unedited.

* The Contributing Analysts provide INSIDER COMMENTARY of current campaign events every day.

* The POLL UPDATE includes every poll on the candidates or the issues published that day.

* The daily NATIONAL BRIEFING reports the same morning's stories from leading papers across the country and the previous night's TV network news. It also features that day's stories from target state papers (like Iowa and New Hampshire).

* The SENATE RACE BRIEFING focuses on daily local coverage of the hottest races—as in Ohio, Nebraska, Nevada, California and Florida.

## *Daily Insider Commentary—
only in the HOTLINE...*

Contributing Analysts to the HOTLINE include:

* Charles Black

* Jill Buckley

* Patrick Caddell

* John Deardourff

* Linda DiVall

* Nancy Dwight

* Wilma Goldstein

* Frank Greer

* Bill Hamilton

* Peter Hart

* Nikki Heidepriem

* David Keene

* Celinda Lake

* John Marttila

* Paul Maslin

* Tom Mathews

* William Schneider

* Greg Schneiders

* John Sears

* Don Sipple

* Robert Squier

* Lance Tarrance

* Robert Teeter

* Richard Wirthlin

## Act Now...

To enter the "inner circle" just complete the coupon below and rush it back today. Or, to come "inside" even faster, just call the Presidential Campaign HOTLINE at (703) 442-0819.

This subscription coupon is worth

### One Free Week of the
Presidential Campaign HOTLINE

☐ Here is my coupon for one free week of the HOTLINE.

☐ Please phone me or _______________ in my office with computer access/delivery instructions.

☐ Please sign me up for paper copy delivery (on Capitol Hill and downtown Washington only).

☐ I'd like more information. Please call me.

Name (please print) ____________________

Address ____________________

City ____________________

State _______________ Zip _______________

Telephone (________) ____________________

Mail to: HOTLINE, Post Office Box 6623, McLean, Virginia 22106-6623 or call (703) 442-0819.

APR 11 1988

Apr. 3, 1988

Dear Mr. Kissinger,

Thank you very much for your letter of November 24, 1987 I am most delighted with your acknowledgement of my letter.

Your valuable advice in respect of education of
my daughter, Naila Baig, in United States has provided her
correct direction to persue her studies further. She has
now moved to William and Mary in Virginia and feels more
satisfied with yer learning and environment

Once again I must thank you for your warm response.

With warmest regards and very best wishes

Captain M.T. Baig
25, Amir Khusro Road
C.P. Berar Society
Block 7 & 8
Karachi-8, Pakistan

JUN. 15 '88 16:06 KISSINGER ASSOCIATES N.Y.

P.002

Suggested Remarks for President Reagan

Dr. Havelange and members of the FIFA Executive Committee ... it is a great honor for me to address you on this important day.

Every four years the entire world takes pause to follow sport's greatest spectacle, the World Cup.

Today, football -- or soccer, as we Americans call it -- has a large and dedicated following around the world. Perhaps, more than any other sport, soccer transcends all cultural, social and political boundaries.

In recent years Americans have come to appreciate and enjoy soccer. Millions of Americans of all ages now play the game and follow their favorite teams and players, both here and overseas. Americans appreciate the game's spirit of teamwork and sportsmanship.

I believe this appreciation was evident in 1984, when over 100,000 fans filled the Rose Bowl stadium in Pasadena for the final match -- Brazil versus France -- of the Olympic soccer tournament.

Today, as you determine which nation will have the honor of hosting the 1994 World Cup, I want to express my gratitude, on behalf of all Americans, for your thorough and fair consideration of our bid.

As you make your choice, Americans are both proud and confident. Proud to have had this opportunity to present our unique qualifications for hosting the 1994 World Cup. And confident that, if selected, we will conduct a highly successful competition which advances the sport not only in America, but around the world.

To that end, I want to assure you once again that I pledge my full support. As I noted in my correspondence and at a meeting we had last Fall, the United States stands ready to provide unsurpassed support to make the 1994 World Cup tournament a success.

On behalf of all Americans, thank you for considering our bid to host the 1994 World Cup. We are most grateful and anxious to hear your decision.

(Note: Havelange is pronounced "haav-uh-lanj" while FIFA is pronounced "fecfa")

[LC]

THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY
WASHINGTON

29 September 1988

Dr. and Mrs. Henry A. Kissinger
Center for Strategic and
International Studies
1800 K Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20006

OCT 04 1988

Dear Dr. and Mrs. Kissinger:

Patty and I would like to invite you to join us for the Army-Navy Football Game to be played in Philadelphia at Veterans' Stadium on Saturday, 3 December.

A special train will depart Washington's Union Station in the morning to take us to Philadelphia, and will return to Washington after the game. We will have food and refreshments on the train and in our hospitality suite at the stadium. The cost will be $78.00 per person. This amount does not include the cost of game tickets, as I understand you have received a complimentary set.

We are looking forward to an exciting game, and
Patty and I hope that you will be able to join us.
Additional details will be provided if you are able
to accept. Please reply by 13 October to Lieutenant
Carlyn Lowery at (202) 695-0154/2258.

BEAT ARMY!

3/30/88

HAK:

Note the attached from the Editor in Chief
of Bantam Books, Stephen Rubin.

It concerns a soon to be published book by
Llovio-Menendez, Insider: My Hidden Life
as a Revolutionary in Cuba. Menendez is
a Fellow at the CFR at present.

Rubin seeks "your comments" on the text
(which I have not seen - galleys are in your
NY office). He does not ask for a jacket
blurb but that may be the ultimate intent.
The book is expected to "cause something of
a stir" when it is published.

Can I assume that you do _not_ wish (or even
have the time) to be involved in commenting
on this book on the Cuban revolution? If
so, we could just ignore without a reply and
if they ask, say you don't have time to do
justice to the text.

Agree; turn aside per above

____ Other:

Rosemary

HK: You'd written on your mail copy to write a letter to Rangel w/ ref. to the attached letter from Andrew Bardagjy, former Ed.-in-Chief of TOPIC, seeking your support in better preservation of Richard Saunders' photo collection.

JUL 18 1988

5613 North 32nd Street
Arlington, Virginia 22207

July 15, 1988

Dr. Henry Kissinger
Center for Strategic International Studies
1800 K Street NW - Suite 400
Washington, D.C. 20006

Dear Dr. Kissinger:

The name at the end of this letter is no doubt totally
unfamiliar to you, so please allow me to introduce myself:
I retired from the U.S. Information Agency in 1978, and
during my last 11 years there served on the staff of TOPIC,
the Agency's magazine for Africa; I was the magazine's
editor-in-chief from 1974 to 1978. You will recall that
while you were Secretary of State, TOPIC prepared a special
supplement devoted to your trip to Africa, photographed by
its international editor, Richard Saunders.

Having established this background, I am writing to you now
to enlist your help. Dick Saunders retired from USIA in
1986; he died last August, the victim of diabetes
complications. Dick left behind a legion of friends--in
the U.S. and in Africa--and also a splendid legacy of
photographs accumulated over two decades of traveling in
Africa and the Middle East for TOPIC and other Agency
magazines.

Following Dick's death, a group of his colleagues in
Washington, New York, Atlanta, and Chicago concluded that
this body of work, and many of his photos made prior to
joining USIA, should preserved in a manner that would make
them available to scholars and researchers and also allow
them to be utilized for educational purposes and in
exhibitions. Without any further action, his USIA
photographs most likely will end up in the National
Archives where, for all practical purposes, they will cease
to exist. The Library of Congress will not accept the
photographs unless they are on microfiche, and even then,
would store the originals in a warehouse some eight miles
from Washington. The Smithsonian's Museum of African Art
cannot accept the collection, except for the few photos of
African art and artists.

There is, however, one potential repository that would
enthusiastically receive and preserve Saunders' photos--the
Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture, a branch of

the New York Public Library. Internationally known, it has
the facilities for handling, protecting, and storing the
transparencies and negatives, and indexing them so that
they may be easily accessed.

As you are no doubt aware, USIA materials cannot be
released domestically without Congressional approval. With
this in mind, Congressman Charles R. Rangel has consented
to sponsor the legislation necessary to waive the
restriction. There are precedents for this, such as the
domestic release of Agency films following the
assassination of President Kennedy.

Knowing of your past interest in TOPIC and the work of the
Agency in Africa, would you consider communicating to
Congressman Rangel your support for his legislation?
Release of this 20-year photographic documentation to a
center of the Schomburg's stature would constitute a
significant contribution to the research base covering the
emergence and development of post-Colonial Africa and of
American involvement in that process.

Should you agree with the merits of this project and offer
your support to Congressman Rangel, I would appreciate a
copy of your note or letter, if possible, for our "backup"
file. On behalf of all of those involved in this project,
thank you for your interest and for your efforts to help
insure that this historic collection of photographs is made
available to present and future generations of students,
scholars, and researchers.

LUCIUS D. BATTLE

4856 ROCKWOOD PARKWAY, N. W.
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20016

March 9, 1988

MAR 16 1988

The Honorable
Henry Kissinger
Center for Strategic and International
Studies
1800 K Street NW, Suite 400
Washington, D.C. 20006

Dear Dr. Kissinger:

I have seen the recent statement attributed to you with
regard to the situation in the West Bank and the Gaza strip.

To be perfectly frank, I find it an appalling statement!
Any aura of statesmanship that has surrounded you these years
is now removed.

HENRY A. KISSINGER

March 23, 1988

Dear Mr. Battle:

This is to acknowledge your insolent letter. That a
high-ranking foreign service officer would presume to
write such a letter to a former Secretary of State
is a disgrace to our profession.

You have too much experience in Middle Eastern affairs
not to know the tendency of passionate believers to
put their own views into the mouths of interlocutors.
In this case, your insolence is all the more inex-
cusable since six other participants have written to
The New York Times disavowing the memorandum that
caused the furor (enclosed).

I owe you no kind of explanation. But lest you add
deliberate untruth to malice you should know that the
theme of my remarks was the need for a new political
initiative by Israel (this was before the Secretary
of State became involved). My point was that Israel
had little choice in the face of insurrection except
to try to quell it. But it could do so only if it
offered immediately to put Gaza and key areas of the
West Bank under Arab authority-- not as part of an
autonomy plan, but as a territorial cession. I also
stated that this should be done not in return for
peace--which raises too many procedural and substan-
tive problems--but for a satisfactory security
arrangement. In other words, territory for a politi-
cal agreement.

My office has been instructed to return any communi-
cation from you unopened.

Mr. Lucius D. Battle
4856 Rockwood Parkway, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20016

TWENTY-SIXTH FLOOR · 350 PARK AVENUE · NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10022 · (212) 759-7919

HENRY A. KISSINGER

March 23, 1988

Dear Mr. Battle:

You have too much experience in Middle Eastern affairs not to know the tendency of passionate believers to put their own views into the mouths of interlocutors. In this case, your insolence is all the more inex- cusable since six other participants have written to *The New York Times* disavowing the memorandum that caused the furor (enclosed).

What Kissinger Said!

To the Editor:

We, the chairman and former
chairmen of the Conference of Pres-
dents of Major American Jewish Or-
ganizations, were present at the Jan.
31 breakfast meeting of Jewish lead-
ers with Henry Kissinger, in which he
was invited to present his views and
answer questions on matters of con-
cern to our community. Our recollec-
tion of that discussion is that Dr. Kiss-
inger expressed the following views,
among others:

* Although Israel's handling of the Arab demonstrations left much to be desired, the foreign press and media opinion unfortunately exaggerated Israel's alleged excesses.

* It would be unfair and unwise for the American Jewish community to waiver in its fundamental support of Israel.

* Israel would be at a disadvantage in an international conference as proposed because process would overcome substance, and in the absence of adequate time to prepare, Israel would be overwhelmed by other participants and world opinion to its unfair detriment.

* Therefore, during 1988, Israel and the United States should come to an agreement on an approach, and Israel should unilaterally propose to initiate bilateral negotiations for autonomy and withdrawal from part of the occupied territories.

Dr. Kissinger did not advise that Israel should bar the press from the occupied territories. He suggested that while that might have been desirable at the outset, it would be inadvisable now. We have no recollection that he advocated the use of brutality in putting down the riots; indeed, he was critical of excessive force, while strongly advocating that the uprisings should be put down as promptly as possible.
MORRIS B. ABRAM

KENNETH J. BIALKIN, JACOB STEIN
(Rabbi) ALEXANDER M. SCHINDLER
(Rabbi) ISRAEL MILLER
New York, March 7, 1988

OFFICES OF
VINCENT N. BAXTER, LL.B., C. L. U.

1101 SOUTH WINCHESTER BOULEVARD
BUILDING M - WINCHESTER PLAZA
SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95128

AREA CODE 408
TELEPHONE 249-5678

DEC 15 1988

December 9, 1988

TO: Friends, clients and associates who as good and responsible citizens continue to express interest in presidential election campaigns and the electoral process.

RE: The electoral college system of presidential elections as set forth in the body of the U. S. Constitution, plus amendments, Article XII and Article XX thereof.

Enclosed is a draft version of an article now being circulated by various publications and used by commentators concerning the electoral college voting system which, although it remains the constitutional method of electing the president and vice-president of the United States, is little known to the general public.

For over forty years I have persistently advocated the amendment, or modification, of the presidential election system. In this endeavor, I've made dozens of speeches, including debating the subject many times, written innumerable articles, and assisted in the preparation of source material for political figures, writers and commentators to support this persuasion.

It is my intention to further argue this change and instigate a movement to that end and purpose during the next three years in the hope that by 1992 the people of this country will be granted the freedom to vote directly for presidential candidates for the first time in American history.

It is incredible that any Senator or Congressman could object to the elimination of this middleman procedure which takes away our right to vote for president.

Kindest regards,

VINCENT N. BAXTER

P.S. You have permission for use of this article for any non-profit publication, college or high school classroom use, etc. Please give proper accreditation and notify our staff of such publication for our records. Thank you.

Other voices

Electoral College a travesty

By Vincent Baxter

A few weeks ago one of Utah's five Republican presidential electors, David Fowers, 19, a University of Utah freshman, threatened to vote for Lyndon La Rouche, an independent Democrat, as a protest against the obsolete and little understood Electoral College presidential election system. After his comments concerning his intentions were published, he had second thoughts and was persuaded to vote for Ronald Reagan instead.

In Illinois a Republican elector voted for Representative Geraldine A. Ferraro, a Democrat and the first woman vice-presidential major party candidate. After some discussion and delay the Ferraro vote was changed to the regular Republican slate.

These two minor incidences make the 1984 Electoral College voting one of the least eventful in presidential election history.

To refresh your recollection, we vote for presidential electors on election day. The electors then meet in December at 50 different locations to actually vote for the office of president and vice-president. The votes are sealed and sent to Washington, D.C. They are then counted in January; hopefully, before the alleged or suspected President rents a tuxedo for the Inaugural Ball.

Every four years, between the election and the inauguration of the new president, the media and politicians play up the imminent demise of the Electoral College system because of its flaws and pitfalls.

In 1977 President Carter urged elimination of the Electoral College system. The president would be elected by a majority of the national popular vote. He was joined by other political celebrities playing the same old chorus. As usual, nothing happened. On July 10, 1979, the Senate defeated a proposed constitutional amendment to end the Electoral College and have direct popular election of presidents in some form. The defeat by the Senate was reasoned as a desire not to tamper with a basic constitutional concept.

In the past the Electoral College system has allowed a person without the popular mandate to be elected. The man with the most citizens' votes in each case was turned away. This has occurred three times: 1824, 1876 and 1888. Democrat Samuel J. Tilten would have been immortalized on our postage stamps instead of Republican President Rutherford Hayes if the citizens had their way in 1876. That Electoral College mess has been characterized as the "stolen election" in many American history books.

Incidentally, the constitution does not require an elector to vote for the person or party to whom he is pledged. And many have voted their own choice. W.F. Turner, a Democratic Adlai Stevenson elector in Alabama in 1956, voted for his neighbor and friend, Judge Walter E. Jones. In 1976 a Republican elector in the state of Washington cast his ballot for Ronald Reagan, although pledged to President Ford.

In 1972 a Republican Nixon elector defected in Virginia and cast his ballot for one John Hospers, the Libertarian Party candidate. In 1968 another Nixon

elector, one Dr. Lloyd Bailey of North Carolina, diagnosed the case and decided to cure the nation's ills by casting a ballot for third party candidate George Wallace, contrary to his pledge. In 1980 a pledged Oklahoma Republican elector voted for Senator Harry Byrd, a Democrat of Virginia.

We should all agree that this is a rather dangerous condition. The entire electoral system should be repealed, amended or modified. Can you imagine if someone spiked the punch bowls at the Electoral College meetings and the electors all voted for themselves, a 538-way tie for President!

Could 270 electors decide to vote for Henry Kissinger instead of Reagan, Carter or Anderson? That's the necessary majority and sounds okay. Perfectly constitutional as far as the Electoral College is concerned, but the political parties might be slightly upset. The electors would be informed of a constitutional breach: that is, that Henry wasn't born in the United States, so therefore, no White House!

If there is no decisive majority in the Electoral College, for any reason, Congress elects the president with a method that allows one vote per state.

Could Henry be an elector himself? Sure, he could have been born on the moon. The only restriction one can find is that an elector, sane or insane, cannot be a member of Congress or any person holding federal office. Incidentally, it was this law that allowed the Republicans to begin their conspiracy to steal the election of 1876.

An Oregon postmaster was disbarred as a Republican elector and replaced by act of the Democratic governor with a Democratic elector. But the Postmaster had resigned — and on went the intrigue. The whole 1876 story would make Watergate look like grammar school hide and seek.

In 1872 Horace Greeley, the Democrat, was the victim of an untimely demise. Yes, he passed on to that great voting booth in the sky just after election day, but before the electors met in December. Can you believe, the electoral votes were up for grabs! Four different people did the grabbing — it's on the record. Most of the Democrat electors chose the governor-elect of Indiana, Thomas Hendricks.

Eighteen thought B. Gratz Brown of Missouri was the man. (He was the vice-presidential nominee.) Jenkins of Georgia and one David Davis of Illinois shared a few votes. But three Georgia electors stood fast — they voted for the late great Democratic presidential candidate himself, Horace Greeley, in complete disregard of his obviously indisposed condition.

Congress pondered what to do. After some debate they decided it was impossible to record the votes in favor of a corpus delicti and refused to count them. The electors protested again, and so it went, on and on! General Grant, the Republican candidate in the middle of the debacle, called off the Washington cocktail hour long enough to accept the bid of an Electoral College majority.

Editor's note: Vincent Baxter is a financial planer, lawyer and certified life underwriter.

Suggested Titles:

VOICE OF THE PEOPLE--STILL UNHEARD

ELECTORAL COLLEGE--THE DANGEROUS MIDDLEMAN OF PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS

THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE DEBACLE

THE FOLLY OF THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE

PRESIDENTIAL GAME OF CHANCE

PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION LOTTO

DECEMBER 19th--PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION DAY

Choice of Quotes:

"The basis of our political system is the right of the people, to
make and to alter their constitutions of government."

George Washington,
Farewell Address, September 17, 1796

"In a democratic society like ours relief must come through an
aroused popular conscience that sears the conscience of the people's
representatives."

Felix Frankfurter, Justice of the Supreme Court
Baker v. Carr 369 U.S. 186, 1962

On Monday, December 19th, forty-seven people will gather in
Sacramento at 2:00 p.m. to vote for the offices of president and vice
president of the United States. This December vote is the real, legal
and constitutional election. We, the people, will not be in attendance.

The most undemocratic and unrepresentative feature in the workings
of our national government today, a system which is outrageous and
ludicrous, defying all logic or common sense, is the procedure by
which we elect the president of the United States, the procedure called
the electoral college system!

Presidential primary elections during the last twenty years are
replacing the storied and colorful smoke-filled rooms of party bosses,
such as Chicago's Mayor Richard J. Daley, Kansas City's Bill Pendergast
and New York's Tammany Hall gang, thereby giving voters an increasingly
direct voice in nominating candidates. But there is a dangerous
bottleneck in the whole election process which has been likened to a
time-bomb with a lit fuse.

VINCENT N. BAXTER
1101 S. WINCHESTER BLVD., BLDG. M
SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95126
(408) 249-5678
FAX (408) 984-7154

2

Most citizens are still unaware that the November 8 election was not, in fact, or in law, the presidential election day at all. On that day we qualify electors to vote in the true presidential election which is held in December. After a total of 536 qualified electors vote during meetings at the different state capitals, the results are signed, certified, sealed and forwarded to the President of the Senate in Washington, D.C. Before a joint session of Congress in January, 1989 the votes will be tallied and the winner declared.

The electoral votes displayed by the TV media on the colorful tabulation boards are not actually votes for president. They are merely indicating the number of _people_ who would _probably_ vote for the respective candidates in December. The election does not occur in November at all! On November 8th and until December 19th George Bush has no electoral votes. When challenger Michael Dukakis appeared on TV to concede defeat, he was conceding that the vast preponderance of those _people_ who were _qualified_ that day would end up voting for George Bush in the real presidential election, December 19th.

Bush is being referred to as the "president-elect". He is no such thing until, and if, he is elected on December 19. The proof is that if George Bush dies before the legally constituted election day it is certain that he would receive zero electoral votes in the election. That would be recorded instead of the 426 votes as falsely represented in the press and media.

Dan Quayle would not become president in this case, since he hasn't been elected to any office yet. In fact, even if Bush lives to election day, December 19th, and gets elected, the Republican electors, who use separate ballots for president and vice-president, can constitutionally select Bob Dole or Jack Kemp as vice-president. The general public had no choice for electors pledged to a vice-president. Bush had dictated his personal choice without any consideration or approval of the general public.

On our so-called "Election Day", 4,756,490 Californian Bush fans voted for 47 people they probably never met and, in most cases, never heard of. They qualified these strangers to take their place at the upcoming election and, in turn, hopefully vote for their choice, George Bush.

Although California Republican electors, Mike Curb, Ed Zschau and George Deukmejian are fairly recognizable names, having been candidates for office in the past, other qualified electors are rather remote and unknown persons. Dr. Everett Roden, Carl Murphy, Ali Ragi, Kien Nhieu Do, June Wallin, Dr. T. Kong Lee, and Katie Boyd are not exactly your typical political celebrities, but they were elected to office.

Incidentally, the first elector I interviewed in the last presidential election in California did not even know she was a duly qualified elector. The date of the interview was November 17, 1984, almost two weeks after her election by 5,305,434 votes. Informed of her

VINCENT N. BAXTER

1101 S. WINCHESTER BLVD., BLDG. M
SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95128

3

[lc]

designation, she was surprised and delighted. This situation is
rather characteristic of the system throughout other states--a bit
casual and unstructured. Bob Williams, the man in charge of
California's electoral college procedures, in an interview, said the
"whole thing is a 19th century ritual, almost like a party!" And yet
these people can have the very fate of the nation in their hands.

Anna Eshoo received 112,442 votes as a California democratic congressional candidate on November 8. On the same day Karen Eshoo, her daughter, a nineteen year old San Diego State student, received an incredible 4,448,393 votes in the Golden State. No, you did not see her name on the ballot in California because state law does not require Karen to disclose that she was running for an extremely important office. If Californians were confused by all the propositions on the November 8 ballot, this one should boggle their minds. Simply put, Karen Eshoo was a United States presidential elector candidate.

In 1980 if black Mayor Tom Bradley of Los Angeles and Assembly
leader, Willie Brown, thought they voted for Jimmy Carter, they
were mistaken. They actually voted unknowingly for elector Lew
Moore, an avowed and active member of the Klu Klux Klan¹. In an
interview Mr. Moore was very pleasant, direct and specific, making
it abundantly clear that he was a 100% genuine white supremacist
KKK person. He was very much aware of the power that he possessed
to vote for anyone he desired. The whole affair was a travesty, not
because of Mr. Moore's beliefs, (he has constitutional rights, too),
but because of the system which allowed this fiasco to occur.

The only qualification to becoming a presidential elector is that
you not be a federal office holder or member of Congress. Many
methods are used by politicians to name electors throughout the
country. In California, for example, each Democratic congressional
candidate, sitting congressman or senator is allowed one designation.
In September Anna Eshoo designated her daughter. Many candidates
designated themselves to be electors. In this case Anna could have
named herself since she was a nominee of the Democratic party, not
a sitting congressperson.

In 1984, on the national scene, 525 electors cast their votes for
Reagan and Bush, but they were not constitutionally bound to do
so. In 1988, 426 electors are free again. They say they will vote
for Bush, but they can vote for whomsoever they please. Their
choice could be their father, daughter, mother-in-law or their favorite
entertainer, like Michael Jackson, Cher or Bob Hope. In fact, the
electors have actually voted for a local judge, a friend, and in
numerous instances, candidates of other parties. Imagine spiking
the punchbowls at various state capital festivities in December and
having all the electors vote for themselves--a 538 way tie for first
place! If you think this is farfetched, in 1872 three electors voted
for a dead man, Horace Greeley.

According to the U.S. Constitution, if the electors can't decide
on a candidate at the December 19th election by majority vote, the

VINCENT N. BAXTER

SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95126

[L]

4

House of Representatives elects the President. This type of election has occurred twice, in 1801 and in 1825. In 1877 a joint session of Congress was called to declare a winner after an electoral college debacle that lasted for months. In all three instances these legislative settlements of the elections took place early in the years following what we traditionally think of as election years, 1800, 1824, and 1876 when the general public voted. Very little was ever said about going to a general election (that's you and I voting) in these predicaments.

Law professors and political scientists almost unanimously agree that once qualified, or elected, a presidential elector has absolute freedom of choice, restricted only by a conglomeration of pledges, promises, and weak state laws with virtually no serious penalties and no means of federal constitutional enforcement. Even though the Supreme Court in Ray v. Blair (343 U.S. 214) 1952 decided that such state laws were valid, this case confirmed that the electoral college system was flawed and was never effective as to its original intent. In fact, the entire report of this case could be used as prime evidence for Congress to get on to the job of amendment and modification of the whole system. The constitutional conflict can only be settled by such procedures.

The general voting public, on our "Election Day", November 8th, completely lost control of the vote and placed it in the hands of these few mostly unknown and unscreened people. This situation is fraught with infinite manipulative possibilities, many of which have been blatantly demonstrated in our presidential election history.

The founding fathers made it abundantly clear in their final enactments, after lengthy debate, that the citizens were to have no direct popular vote in presidential elections. This attitude was exemplified by George Mason's remark, concerning direct voting, that "It would be as unnatural to refer the choice of a proper magistrate to the people, as it would, to refer a trial of colors to a blind man." Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts went further saying a proposal for a general election for president was "radically vicious" and, "The people are uninformed and would be misled by a few designing men." In form, that political philosophy has remained substantially unchanged for over 200 years.

Criticism of the workings of our presidential electoral system has long existed, and long been expounded in loud and continuing protest. Thomas Jefferson proposed the abolition of the electoral college as early as 1801. In a letter to Albert Gallatin he advocated a constitutional amendment, "to have no electors but the people vote directly". Incidentally, Jefferson's vice presidential running mate, Aaron Burr, tried to usurp the presidency through a loophole in the electoral college proceedings. He thereafter murdered Alexander Hamilton, in a duel which was precipitated by a hatred between the two men starting with that heated electoral college dispute. In today's terms that's equivalent to a scene where Dan Quayle would shoot Michael Dukakis because he didn't cooperate in a Quayle conspiracy to take the election away from George Bush in the electoral college of 1988.

VINCENT N. BAXTER

5

[LC]

Andrew Jackson, in his first annual message to Congress in 1829, recommended "such an amendment to the constitution as may remove all intermediate agency in the election of the president and vice president." He should have indeed asked for some change. In the prior election in 1824 he received the most popular votes and the most electoral votes, but still didn't win the presidency. By using the flaws in electoral college system process the House of Representatives decided that John Q. Adams would be president instead.

Jackson repeated his recommendation in each of his subsequent annual messages to the Congresses. In his address of 1830 he declared that "a provision which does not secure to the people a direct choice of their chief magistrate, but has a tendency to defeat their will, represents an inconsistency with the general spirit of our institutions."

In 1876 Samuel J. Tilden, the Democratic candidate for president, received a majority of the popular vote and was perceived also as the electoral college winner by the people and the press. However, through congressional manipulation of the electoral college system his Republican rival, Rutherford B. Hayes, was certified as the president-elect. In history books this election has been referred to as the "stolen election". The politicians in Washington couldn't have pulled the caper without their old friend, the electoral college system.

In 1888, Democrat President Grover Cleveland, in his re-election bid, obtained a greater popular vote than Republican Benjamin Harrison, but the electoral college cast the majority of their votes for Harrison. Harrison was declared the winner! There was an angry outcry at this occurrence since Cleveland was a very popular man in the 19th century, and obviously was the people's choice to stay in office.

In 1934 a proposed constitutional amendment for abolition of the electoral college failed by only two votes to win the necessary two-thirds majority in the Senate. During Jimmy Carter's administration a resolution to amend got to vote in the full Senate but fell miserably short of the two-thirds approval 51-48.

In the 1980's joint resolutions were introduced in the Congress for electoral college reform. Similar resolutions have been introduced over 500 times during the 19th and 20th centuries. They usually make good newspaper copy and are then put back to bed, mainly because of public apathy and inter-party political conspiracy.

Legislators will take up the identical resolutions again during the next ten years. However, without an enlightened and outraged citizenry, coupled with the diligent and enthusiastic support of the press and TV media there can be little hope of sustained support for amendment, modification or abolishment of the obsolete system.

This method of election cannot be fair or satisfactory in its present form, and is in great need for improvement. The most critical change is quite simple. Modify the electoral college system

VINCENT N. BAXTER

6

to eliminate the in-between people who take our place in the presidential election. When a candidate wins a state's popular vote the state's electoral vote should automatically become presidential votes instead of qualifying people called "electors" to vote for president.

This would placate the advocates of a state's right to wield power in the election with the unit rule which requires all of the electoral votes to one candidate and zero to his opponent. California has 47 electoral votes. If a candidate wins the popular vote by just one vote he gets all of those 47 votes in one unit. The opponent gets nothing. Millions of votes go out the window and don't count in the final tabulation.

An advanced modification would be that in the event of a national popular vote majority the winner takes it all, regardless of electoral vote outcome. If no candidate obtains a popular vote majority, then an electoral vote majority governs. If there is no majority established by either method then the top candidates enter a run-off general election. This simple procedure would be compatible with major party structure and eliminate the disproportionate campaign emphasis on "swing states", like Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, and California. Did you notice how the candidates concentrated in these states in a crazed frenzy during the last two weeks of the campaign? For example, they ignored over 4,000,000 votes in Florida as if it were an election in Singapore since both sides ceded Florida's electoral votes to Bush in September!

The right to vote is fundamental to our federal system of government, and the essence of our basic freedom. We should endeavor to correct this basic injustice and wrong in the presidential election system now, especially in a year when we hope there will be no chaos in the process as there has been at times past.

Instead of voting for a member of the Klu Klux Klan, a college student, a State Senator, a homemaker, or an unknown truck driver, we, the people, would be able to vote for the persons we want to be president and vice president of the United States directly for the first time in history.

The voice of the people should be heard loudly and clearly. Women, 18 year olds and blacks have won their inherent voting rights at great cost, effort and sacrifice over the years. Now let all of us join together in a common effort to demand from the politicians that we get to vote directly in the next presidential election of 1992--no more middle man!

¹I confirmed this designation with William Yee of the Elections Division of the State of California in Sacramento in November, 1980, and subsequently brought the fact to the attention of the news media.

VINCENT N. BAXTER
1101 S. WINCHESTER BLVD., BLDG. M
SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95128