First, we were asked we asked senator senate emeritus historian richie for his perspective on that time in American History. When we think of this time as we think of this time as demonstrations in the street. What is important is that leading u. S. Senators were siding with the end the war faction. They were doing it in a very cool and calm and rational and thoughtful way. This was a very Important Movement for the antiwar movement. That it was not just in the streets. You had not seen this before. What is your impression . Your first reaction to the tone of this thing . It is a very serious piece. These are very earnest men, who are both republicans and democrats, moderate and liberal. People who come to the conclusion that the United States should not be fighting in this war. The tragedy has mounted so much that they have to intervene to stop it. They are trying to use the legislative branch to bring the war to an end. In essence, creating a bit of a constitutional clash with the president of the United States. It is a very moving piece. Those are all very prominent senators. I knew several of them and work with them. They look much younger, but they are really earnest about what they are saying. There were very convincing to the television audiences. They had to fight to get that Television Program in the first place. They made the most of it. Article one, section eight of the constitution reads as follows. Congress shall have power to raise and support armies but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years. Our amendment to end the war fulfilled the obligations that we have under the constitution. The mcgovernhatfield amendment, it was sometimes referred to. Who were they and what would this really have done if it passed . To back up just a little bit, the president of the United States, richard nixon, had announced in november, 1969 the program to remove american troops from vietnam. The thought at that point was that maybe this was the end of the war, this was cooling down. It was good for me. I was a marine corps supply clerk. I was sent to pearl harbor, hawaii instead. A lot of us breathe a sigh of relief. Instead of the war going down and reducing, it seemed to increase, to escalate. It seemed to be getting more violent. And it seemed to be spreading intothe rest of indochina, laos and cambodia. That is why senator cooper and frank church introduced the cooperchurch amendment to stop any american activity in laos and cambodia. Hatfield,enator mark a republican for morgan, and mcgovern got together to create the mcgovernhatfield amendment that would have ended the United States participation in the war. It wouldve stopped military actions that year and the next year wouldve withdrawn all troops. So it was a sweeping amendment. They knew they could not introduce it as a piece of legislation, so they put it on as an amendment to an appropriations bill that was going to pass. They thought they had a chance that way. They had to develop american support. The day they introduced that april 30, 1970, that night president nixon went on television and announced that he was authorizing american troops in cambodia to attack enclaves of vietnamese. In cooperation with the forces of South Vietnam, attacks are being launched this week to clean out nature enemy sanctuaries on the cambodianvietnam border. So, this was a huge step forward, escalation of the war. All hell broke out on american campuses. There were demonstrations even on the most conservative campuses had demonstrations. The most dramatic, the most state,took place at kent just a few days after nixons announcement. When National Guardsmen killed students on campus. A week later there was a similar shooting at jackson state, in mississippi. This is a really tragic moment. There were 100,000 people marched on washington to protest. The senators felt that the president could get airtime anytime he wanted. He could make these announcements to the public. But they could not respond. Of course, there was no cspan in the chamber at that stage. If you were lucky enough to be on the news, it was just for a minute or two. Maybe you would get on the sunday morning news program. They wanted a chance to respond. They went to the fcc. They asked for equal time. They wanted free time on national television. The fcc would not grant that. They basically took out a 60,000 loan and purchased half an hours time on nbc. And it broadcast on the evening of may 12, 1970. Right after the news. It was up against Walter Cronkites news on cbs at that time. They made the program. Several stations felt the program was so important they ran it later. So, cbs for instance, ran it the following sunday. Other networks followed, local stations followed. The program ends with an appeal for money, and an appeal for petition. Raisedso successful it 500,000. At that time it was maybe over 3 million today. There are huge bags of mail with people writing in, telling them people supported this. It wasnt enough because when the senate eventually got around to voting on the mcgovernhatfield, it was defeated 5539. That was substantial. There were several major antiwar senators who voted against it because they didnt like the principal of telling a president in the middle of a war that he had to stop. They were willing to give the president a little more time to withdraw. But, it was showing that there was significant sentiment in congress or for ending the war. They did pass the cooperchurch amendment, although the president had removed troops from cambodia. It was making the first steps towards eventually the passage of the war powers act, which was passed over president nixons ito. Firstas an important step. It also introduced senator mcgovern to the public. Just two years later, he would be the democratic nominee for president. He would lose very badly, but still it was an indication of the growing strength of the antiwar movement. Think that the principal stumbling block now is that we are somehow worried about losing face. We are worried about embarrassing the policymakers that sent us in there. We are worried about admitting that perhaps we made a mistake. Tohink it will contribute the greatness of the United States if as a free people we could admit that we are capable of making a mistake and then do the best we can to put an early end to it. Vietnam is asian is not a change in policy at all. Vietnamization is not a change in policy at all. It is a continuation of the old policy. What could be learned today as we are about to watch this program from just listening to how the senators framed the debate . Why is it important to study this . Well, when you consider how polarized politics had become, it is fascinating to see this as a bipartisan group. Two republicans and three democrats. When you consider how flamboyant politics had gotten, is a very sober minded people. They are not making outrageous statements. They are making serious statements. Theyre having a dialogue about what needed to be done. They are also pointing out the tragic nature of the war. At that point about 40,000 americans had died in the war. Countless vietnamese had died in the war. That ifhe senators said we dont pass this now, we could have another 20,000 casualties. War wall vietnam in washington has 50,000. Almost 20,000 more names were added after this broadcast was made. They were quite right about the seriousness. Of course, the conclusion of the or was no different in 1973 1975 that wouldve been. Back, they were right. President johnson and president nixon were absolutely wrong about what they did. The United States has suffered from that ever since. Donald ritchie, think you very much for joining us. 1970, here is12, that broadcast. Today, the United States of america has been ripped apart. Citizens bludgeon each other in the streets of new york. Students die in campus abruption. The population is polarized and there are protests everywhere. Days of the civil war have americans treated each other like this. At the heart of the trouble lies the war in vietnam. It is a strange war. A war that we have to keep explaining to ourselves year after year after year. And it is a difficult war to explain, particularly to the fight who have to go and on its inconclusive battlefields. While all the talk goes on, the war goes on, too. It continues tonight, as it has continued for a decade. Tonight, americans will die in vietnam. Tonight, americans will die in cambodia. What can we do . On the day before we went into cambodia, amendment 609 was introduced on the floor of the United States senate. It was cosponsored by a Bipartisan Coalition of 20 senators. These republicans and democrats call it the amendment to end the war. They regard it as a realistic thrust for peace. The Senate Debate will begin in just a few days. In the next half hour, five of these senators will make a case for this amendment. If the American People can effectively urge its passage, if the amendment to end the war is passed, then the traditional right of declaring whether or not we should commit americans to battle will be returned to the congress, where it belongs. Through protest, petition, and an act of law, we shall have at last ended the vietnam war. There is no way under the constitution by which the congress of the United States can act either to continue this war or to end it, except by a decision on whether we will appropriate funds to finance the war. Article one, section eight of the constitution reads as follows. The Congress Shall have power to raise and support armies. But no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years. Our amendment to end the war fulfills the obligations we have under the constitution. The amendment clearly states that unless the Congress Shall have declared war, that no moneys appropriated on the act to which we attach the amendment, or any other law, shall be used in vietnam after december 30, 1970. Except for the withdrawal of american troops and other provisions. It provides that no money shall be used for military operations in the country of laos after december, 1970. It provides that no moneys shall be authorized for the use of any military operations in cambodia. 30 days following the adoption of the amendment. And that all troops shall be withdrawn from vietnam. All american troops, by june, 1971, unless the United States the president of the United States shall deem it important enough to extend that time by requesting the congress to pass a joint resolution authorizing such extension time. The amendment to end the war provides continuing funding for the full protection of american troops during the total period of our withdrawal. It also provides Adequate Funding to provide political asylum for all those South Vietnamese and other civilians for which there may be great concern about a bloodbath. There are adequate provisions that these civilians may be placed in other places for their own protection. It also provides for a continuing negotiation of exchange of prisoners. Very soon the senate will be acting on another amendment, offered by senator cooper and myself, which is addressed to the cambodian situation and sets the limits on that adventure to those declared by the president. This end the war amendment, takes the full step and provides an orderly extrication for the extrication of the United States from the war in South Vietnam. What we are looking for is a reasonable way to accomplish that withdrawal. And i think that the principal stumbling block now is that we are somehow worried about losing face. We are worried about embarrassing the policy makers that sent us in there. We are worried about, perhaps, admitting that we made a mistake. I think it would contribute to the greatness of the United States if, as a free people, he could just admit that we are capable of making a mistake and do our best to put an end to it. The motivation is not a change in policy at all. It is a continuation of the old , old policy. Is dedicated to the war, not to peace, but that the war will go on and continue to go on for years. It means there has been no one speaking in this administration or the last two end of the support to commitment in vietnam. It means we can look into the future for at least a decade to a quarter of a million men involved in vietnam. I think every mother and father in america who has a son right now that is five or six years old, up to 15 or 16 should well realize that boy is going to be involved in our future commitment in vietnam under the existing policy. We have come to the point where we realize, and i think the president realized when we went into cambodia, that deescalation will not work. Ization will not work. I think it is time that the American People recognize that the president doesnt have the power to declare war or make war alone. He can ask congress to declare. I think that is why what we are discussing here, in urging support from the American People is so important. Congress can do this and it is not an irresponsible action. With the walls all falling down around american prestige and power in the world, if we decide we are going to get out. Congress would simply be saying, ok, we have fought for seven years, we have spent our resources on this and now the time has come to say to the South Vietnamese, take it over. We will give you time. Over a period of time we are going to be withdrawing. You can go on getting aid, if you fight for yourself, in your own civil war. We are not going to bleed and die for you any longer. The point is this. It is no longer the opinion of president s, and no longer the opinion of senators. It is the evidence of history. 40,000 deaths. This amount of resource expenditure that has proven each one of those escalations to be wrong. I say, how many more american men have to be heaped upon that funeral pyre of war to disprove a theory of military action that has been proven wrong each time it has been acted upon. After all, the United States is not going to impose any permanent solution in asia, to settle asian problems among asian people on the asian mainland. The idea that we are going to do that runs against the whole current of history. What is happening in asia is the western powers are moving out. And that the asians are taking over for themselves. Vietnamization, is not the method for extricating us from this morass. It will merely perpetuate our involvement in this war. Half the troops may come home, the other half will stay. Indefinitely. It does not serve the interests of the United States to maintain a Permanent Military base in Southeast Asia. As the president reiterated the other night that he was going to continue to bring back these 150,000 men in the next 12 months. Many americans may feel that that means they are all going to be coming back and nobody is going to be going. Under a policy of bringing back 150,000 men in the next 12 months, we will send to South Vietnam, 276,000 men. Who are not there now. Who are in the military or about to go into the military. We will bring back more, 150,000 more than we send, but in the rotation process there will be this 276,000 men that will fight, and perhaps die. What would we have accomplished . What evidence is there based on past history to lead us to believe that we would be in any better position, or that South Vietnam would be in any better position one year, or five years, or 10 years hence after tens of thousands of additional americans have been killed and killed . What would we have gained . We have created a crisis and a deep disillusionment and an alienation that doesnt just affect the narrow fringe of radicals on campus. Anyone who goes to the campuses knows that this feeling extends to millions of young americans. If they grow up without a belief in this system, that seems to me has far greater bearing on the future of the United States than anything we have now or have ever had at stake in indochina. I think one of the great, tragic byproducts of all of this has been the spiritual scarring of our own people. The questioning of our own minds, why we are involved in a body count war with total military supremacy, with indiscriminate bombing and far ranging effects on the ecology of those nations. Spraying chemicals and driving the people off of the land, into the cities, completely changing the complex of that Little Nation involving 16 million can 16 million to 18 Million People. We be happy about the fact that we killed 10,000 vietnamese and suffered 300 deaths ourselves . In the process that this complete psychology that we have of destroying life, you know, at any expense. And what the results of it are. Brutalizing our own society. It is brutalizing us internally. We find our young people turning away from it. Fleeing to canada to avoid a war they consider immoral and attitudes that they consider unrealistic in a time and in an age of where we are really questioning ourselves to find National Purpose again. What we need to understand is that there is no way to separate the cost of this war in asia from the cost of our own society. Now, there were stories in the press recently that some of our poor people, some of the black citizens and other minority groups, have shied away from participating in protests against the war on the grounds that their concerns are with hunger, and with racism, and with poverty. But what i think all of our fellow americans need to understand is that the answer to these other problems will not come until we put this war behind us and the enormous drain it is taking on our society. The person who is worried about inflation ought to realize that war is a principal cause of it. The man who is worried about the stock market skidding, ought to realize that the stock market jitters are associated, to a great extent, with the war. And as you have said so many times, the governors and the city councilman and others who are worried about where the money is going to come from for those new schools or sewage projects or other things, they have to understand the war is robbing them of those possibilities. We are talking about 16 million to 18 Million People in South Vietnam. We have 23 million blacks in america who have not been able to find justice in this great country. Untold thousands of American Indians who have never been brought to their fulfillment, you who have worked so long and so energetic and american poverty, with some 35 Million People living in poverty with the very foundations shaking of every major city in the nation. Undergird eat, basic ing of this nation, which has always kept it able with those minorities, is now being drained off and siphoned off in the name of somehow saving face in Southeast Asia. When we talk, i think you would agree, there seems to be a great paradox in this. The cost of the war last year was 23 billion. You can say, in just about specific terms, that one years cost of this war would clean up all our waters in the United States. The halfhour this program is being telecast to the american public, to reduce that or to translate that in terms of the cost of the war, the federal government will be spending 1 million just in this one half hour period. In vietnam . Just in vietnam. I think that of all the arguments that are made, that is the least impressive. Actually, the world knows we have the power to exterminate every living inhabitant of vietnam. If we unloosed that power, we could solve the problem the way rome did over carthage. It is not our power that is in question out there. It is the wisdom of our policy. And the world sees the biggest, richest, strongest nation dropping more bombs on North Vietnam then we dropped on all of europe during the second world war. They see a tremendous disproportion of strength and wealth. And that puts us in a very bad light in the world. In fact, this war has done more to undermine americas moral leadership in the world than anything that has ever happened to us. The faster we put the matter right in Southeast Asia, and end this war, the sooner we win back again the respect this country ought to have throughout the world. What do you say to people who are really concerned i know they are concerned about the fact that we will lose face in the world . That we really will not be a first rate power, as has been implied by our chief executives . And the concern of honest americans that want to get out of the war, want to stop the killing, the dying, and yet they say this is americas place in the world. That unless we accept this challenge, we are somehow failing in world leadership. I think this is the question on the minds of millions of americans today. What constitutes leadership . Not just power of armament. But power of ideals. I say we are losing in the world today by continuing to be in vietnam. It is not a matter of national pride, it is a matter of whether we are practicing what we preach. It is a matter whether our ideals that were embodied in the constitution and in the hearts of American People are really at the center of our policy or we are out here with some peripheral object of facesaving. I say, it is to be humiliated to admit we are wrong and save lives, then the sooner we do this the better it will be for our nation. I consider this greatness, because only the powerful can take the chance of admitting error. We are that powerful today. Most civilizations that have died have died from within. And that is happening now in the United States of america if we dont get out of this war. Close this war, in the sacred words of justice, and freedom, and peace. But justice, and freedom, and peace arent at stake out there. The government we are supporting is not a democratic government. It is an incompetent and corrupt military dictatorship. It is involved in a war with another dictatorship. This is a war between two dictatorships for control of vietnam. I think we make a grave mistake when we try to close such a war in terms of the ideals for which this country should stand. Freedom is not at issue for the people of vietnam. One way or the other, the kind of freedom we know is not going to be the gift of this war out there. The question though, when we are talking about this amendment to end the war. To most americans, how can i support this amendment and at the same time support my country in an involvement we have had over the last 15 years . I think if people could resolve this in their own minds, they would willingly bring this war to an end through this amendment. The president said the other night if we leave vietnam now we are going to be through i think he said we are going to be finished as a peacemaker in asia. Well, now i think we ought to quit trying to be the policeman for asia. Lets quit trying to be a solo policeman, banker, pacifier, in asia alone. How ironic it would be if at long last we succeeded in pacifying Southeast Asia and couldnt pacify our own society. The invasion of cambodia was truly the straw that broke the camels back. They are writing to me at about 10 to one against the president s posture in Southeast Asia. In the belief in the hope that the senate of the United States will offer the leadership to alter this posture. Everything we have said here tonight is completely unpartisan. I think we have all been as critical of the democratic president s as we have of republican president s, and we should not be considering this in terms of political or partisan advantage, one way or another. I know a great many republicans as well as democrats who think our policy now is wrong and we ought to get out. I think the overwhelming number of all americans, whatever their political party, believe this. I think what we are trying to do with our amendment to end the war is to say, that is too important a decision to place on the shoulders of one man. It is too big a risk to ask one man to decide alone. The president ought not to have to make that judgment alone. And under the constitution, he is not supposed to make that decision alone. What we are proposing to do is to share that responsibility and whatever Political Risk or whatever opportunity, whatever hazard is involved in making the decision to end this war, we are prepared as elected officials to stand up on that question and answer yes or no, then take whatever blame or credit is involved. In effect, youre providing a situation where the president can withdraw faster, where he can make a determination the war is going to end by a fixed date. And he will not bear the whole onus himself. We recognize when you make such a tragic mistake there is no painless way to get out of that mistake. We are saying we will share that pain, we will share that responsibility, but lets recognize that mistake and get out of it. What do we say to the American Parents who have sons fighting in vietnam . Is this a patriotic move that we are taking in this amendment to end the war . Is this supportive of sons and those fighting in vietnam . There is no better way to protect the young men who are fighting over there than to bring them home. I dont know of any military person in any responsible position who doubts that if we made our declaration, they would be brought home safely. As long as we stay there, the casualties are going to go up. And if president nixons Program Works over the next three years, we are talking about a minimum of 5000 more americans dead, and probably closer to 20,000. 45 times that many casualties and 45 times that many vietnamese deaths in that process. What we are proposing is not a disorganized outcry, we are proposing a specific legislative act that will have the full force of law, and it will say, in effect, no more money for Southeast Asia, for any purpose other than arranging for the systematic and safe withdrawal of our forces for the exchange of prisoners, for asylum for those people that might be threatened by our withdrawal. It is an orderly, constitutional procedure for bringing about an end to this war. This brings the congress back to the role it shouldve been playing all along. It asks the congress to assume its responsibility to the American People. And it brings our democratic system back to life again in a balanced, constitutional manner. And that in itself is as important, in the long run, to the life of this republic as ending the war in vietnam. What do we say to the American People who have been watching . Who would say, we agree with you, but our voice is not very loud. I am only one person. I am just a little person. Socalled little person. You hear that many times. Does that voice have a place in this great issue of war and peace . We are tired of speeches, we want action. A lot of the young people say this to us. A lot of the older people say, turn it off. What have you done about it . What if you what can we do . We are asking people to make views known responsibly to their congressman. We are asking the congress and the senate of the United States particularly to assume its responsibility under the constitution. For years and years now we have advocated, we have given all of the power to the president when it came to war. We have sat on our hands and done nothing. And hoped that the people would look the other way. The time has come to reassume our responsibility and to stand up and vote on the question of war and peace. Weve sort of enshrined silence as the virtue of patriotism in the last year or so. And actually, i think the highest patriotic duty that any citizen has is to speak up, to speak his convictions and his mind. Thats the hope that weve got to give to all American People. That there is this method, there is this channel open to them and that we and others like them are receptive, we are not only receptive, but we are inviting them to participate in this amendment to end the war. This is what we must do. We need their help. Even if we had 40 senators presently on this amendment. We need the help of the people of the United States. There is no other way that we can succeed. And the voice of the people counts. Judgment exercise my and follow my conscience in a position of responsibility, i must tell the people when i think we are right, and i must tell them when i think we are wrong. And expect them to support those positions or oppose them. For lords sake, dont be quiet. Right. Support or oppose, but do something in this critical time. If you want to cast your vote to end the war in indochina, there is something you must do. Write to your congressman or senator. Vote forsimple words i the amendment to end the war in South Vietnam. Take the people amend though decision to the war. Collect signatures, and get people to sign who agree with you. Send those petitions to your congressman and your senators. Of the unitednt states rightfully can command all media to bring a message to the people of the United States. Any time he deems he has a message of importance, for those of us who have different viewpoints and wish to express those to you in the American People, it requires we seek your assistance. A dollar per piece could go a long way. Send your contribution, whatever it may be, so we can continue to speak out. Make your checks out to amendment to end the war, po box 1a ben franklin station, washington, d. C. That me close this broadcast on a very concrete and specific point. What we are proposing here is that for the first time in the long history of this war, the senate of the United States stand up and be counted yes or no on the question of whether we wish the war to continue or to be ended. We propose to do that in a vote that will come in a very short time. We pledge you that that vote will be held. This is not a sense of the congress resolution, not a debaters point but inactive law which if carried will put an end to the war in a systematic way. We ask earnestly tonight for your support and that effort in in that effort. In 1968, a new phase is starting. The general westmoreland strategy is producing results. The enemys are down. Gone,when the chips are the worlds most powerful nation acts like a pitiful, published selfish giant. The debate to end the war would begin on the floor of the United States senate. If the American People can effectively urge its passage on the members of the house and senate, and if the amendment to end the war is passed, then the traditional rite of declaring on whether or not we should admit americans to battle will be returned to the rights of the congress, where it belongs. Through protest, petition, and an active law, we shall have at last ended the vietnam war. This is American History tv on cspan3, where each weekend we feature 48 hours of programs exploring our nations past. Announcer next on reel america, we travel back to 1971 to see how the vietnam war changed peoples lives. And another family for peace is an antiwar film featuring five grieving families with stops in california, massachusetts, florida, texas, and iowa. We learn about two sons who were killed. One who was a prisoner in North Vietnam, a veteran who lost a leg, and a quaker spending time in federal prison for refusing to serve. In an early crowdfunding effort, the film was produced by another mother for peace using 1 donations from 20,000 people. [car noises] i know if i do not go now, im going to go later on against my will. Im going to get it over with. Do you have any family . I have a mother and father