Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 13, 1973 Testimony of Maurice Stans
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 13, 1973 Testimony of Maurice Stans
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 13, 1973 Testimony of Maurice Stans
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 13, 1973 Testimony of Maurice Stans
Sam Ervin (D - North Carolina). Now, did the Committee To Re-Elect the President and the Finance Committee To Re-Elect the President have offices in the same building? Maurice Stans. Yes, they did, separated by several floors. Sam Ervin (D - North Carolina). And Mr. Mitchell was the head of the other committee? Maurice Stans. Until July 1. Sam Ervin (D - North Carolina). And Mr. Magruder was deputy under Mr. Mitchell? Maurice Stans. That is correct. Sam Ervin (D - North Carolina). And you have told this committee, as I construe your testimony that Mr. Mitchell wouldn t tell what he was going to spend the money for and that you did not inquire. Is that correct? Maurice Stans. Mr. Chairman, the whole understanding of the arrangement was that it wasn't necessary for them in the campaign committee to tell us what they were going spend the money for except in the major categories as discussed in the meetings of the budget committee. Sam Ervin (D - North Carolina). And you did not have enough curiosity to inquire as to what they were going to spend the money for? Maurice Stans. Mr. Chairman, I did not have any time for curiosity. I had to raise $40 million and I worked at a frenzied pace during the entire period I was there. Sam Ervin (D - North Carolina). Well, you did have some authority in determining amounts of money that were to be expended, didn t you? Maurice Stans. Only in the aggregate by categories and I had very little authority on that.
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 13, 1973 Testimony of Maurice Stans
Sam Ervin (D - North Carolina). Well now you were a member of the budgetary committee, weren't you? Maurice Stans. That is correct. Sam Ervin (D - North Carolina). Now the budgetary committee was composed of you and two other representatives from the Finance Committee To Re-Elect the President? Maurice Stans. Correct. Sam Ervin (D - North Carolina). Who were the other two members? Maurice Stans. Mr. Sloan and Mr. Nunn. Sam Ervin (D - North Carolina). And who were the members of the budgetary committee from the Committee To Re-Elect the President? Maurice Stans. Mr. Mitchell, Mr. Magruder and, I think, Mr. Porter. But I am not, quite sure. Sam Ervin (D - North Carolina). Well, you all met, didn t you? Maurice Stans. Yes, we met regularly. Sam Ervin (D - North Carolina). Did you not confer about how much money you were going to spend? Maurice Stans. Yes, we did. Sam Ervin (D - North Carolina). And you had some authority to say something about how much money was to be spent, didn t you? Maurice Stans. I had no authority, Mr. Chairman. I only had the authority to argue. Sam Ervin (D - North Carolina). Well, you claim you were just a puppet of John Mitchell s, is that what you are claiming? Maurice Stans. No, I am not saying that at all. I am saying that
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 13, 1973 Testimony of Maurice Stans
Sam Ervin (D - North Carolina). Well, Mr. Stans, I wish you would explain to me You did say something about the expenditures, didn t you? The amounts of the expenditures? Maurice Stans. Mr. Chairman, as I said in my statement and as I testified this morning in some detail, the budget was broken down in to about a dozen items. And it is that which we argued about in the budget committee meetings. An item of research and planning, direct mail and telephone, $6,785,000. That included $4,500,000 for direct mail, $1,900,000 for telephone, and $180,000 for computer maps and so on. Sam Ervin (D - North Carolina). Well, that was an overall budget, wasn't it? Maurice Stans. This was in the overall budget. Sam Ervin (D - North Carolina). And you agreed on an overall budget all at one time, didn t you? Maurice Stans. Oh, no, we debated the overall budget right up to the end. Sam Ervin (D - North Carolina). You debated and re-debated the same thing each time? Maurice Stans. Every time we met because I was trying to get the spending reduced. Sam Ervin (D - North Carolina). If you had no authority in the matter, why did you debate it? Maurice Stans. That s the authority I had, to debate.
Watergate Hearings: Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, June 13, 1973 Testimony of Maurice Stans
Sam Ervin (D - North Carolina). Well now, did they not ever ask you your judgment about the amounts that should be spend for this, that, or the other? Maurice Stans. No. They presented figures to me, they presented programs to me, and I was in a position of either agreeing or challenging and that is why, Mr. Chairman, I wrote the letter of May 10 to Mr. Mitchell. I d sat in a number of these budget meetings. I had made very little progress in reducing the figures that were proposed and I wrote a letter and said I think we ought to cut the budget, a fairly significant amount of money. I didn t succeed. I think it is well known I Sam Ervin (D - North Carolina). Are you telling the committee that Mr. Mitchell was the supreme authority in that field? Maurice Stans. No, I am not saying that at all. I am saying that the budgets were prepared by the people under Mr. Mitchell who had charge of the various functions. There were about a dozen different divisions of the budget and each was under an individual. He prepared his budget. He came in and argued for it. And I was in the position of being the devil s advocate in every case and saying, that s too much money and the total is too high.