Subject: Re: Research Paper
From: "Michael Muldoon" <[email-masked]>
To: "Hunter Biden" <[email-masked]>
Cc: "Eric Schwerin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 13:25:20 -0400

Do you normally just make edits or track changes?

On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Hunter Biden <[email-masked]> wrote:
>
>
> R. Hunter Biden
> Rosemont Seneca Partners
> 202-333-1880
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: "Naomi Biden" <[email-masked]>
> Date: April 15, 2011 11:58:18 AM CDT
> To: "Hunter Biden" <[email-masked]>
> Subject: Research Paper
>
>
>
> Watergate's effect on the 1974 Congressional Elections
>
> Naomi Biden
>
> "In their minds, their scandal will always and forever be bigger than anyone
> else's; and never again will living be quite so important."[1]
> <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn1>
>
>            The quote above refers to the absolute sense of responsibility
> the newly elected senators and representatives felt to the nation. There is
> no denying that Watergate and the exposed corruption and abuse of power in
> the Nixon administration shook America's confidence in democracy. As the
> scandal was publicized American faith in the men and women that were
> representing and supposedly protecting their interest in congress was
> dwindling. Although there is sufficient evidence that even prior to
> Watergate being exposed there was a growing distrust in the federal
> government, as the scandal progressed and the American public became
> increasingly aware whatever doubts they were having were only magnified. The
> most significant effects of Watergate were therefore short-term. Watergate
> had both a direct and indirect effect on the Democratic sweep of the 1974
> congressional elections, in that although Watergate was not the only
> determining factor in the outcome of the elections, its effect on almost of
> the factors that contributed to voter turn out and party affiliation is
> undeniable. The 4 democratic senators and 49 Democratic representatives
> elected to congress in this year have been especially keen about their
> responsibility to be honest and recognize the laws and regulations put in
> place so that there is not an abuse in power on the scale of that of the
> Nixon administration. Often referred to as the 'Watergate Class' the
> senators and representatives elected in the year 1974 that continue to serve
> today because they were often elected on promises that they would limit
> federal corruption have not forgotten the dangers of an executive office
> with no reigns.
>
>            The break in at the Democratic National Committee offices in the
> Watergate Hotel, was a only a small part of the enormous abuse of power on
> the behalf of the Nixon administration during his 5 and half years in
> office. When the break in was first reported there was almost no speculation
> that any high-ranking government officials could have been involved, let
> alone the President himself. As reporters, most well known being Bob
> Woodward and Carl Bernstein of the Washington Post, uncovered more and more
> complex connections between the break in and the government it became clear
> that the corruption was on a scale that know one could have imagined. The
> Nixon administration had undoubtedly violated the trust of their political
> constituents and the entire Nation. The amount of people familiar with what
> happened and what the Watergate scandal really was sky rocketed from
> fifty-two percent of Americans in 1972 to ninety-eight percent in 1973[2]
> <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn2>
> . Although as Nixon resigned he claimed that he was not a crook and that
> anything he did while in office he believed to be in the "best interest of
> the nation", people no longer trusted President Nixon[3]
> <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn3>
> . The highly public trials and nationally covered scandal brought corruption
> in the federal government to the forefront of voters concerns.
>
>            The economic state of the nation in 1974 and public discontent
> with their economic status can't be ignored when considering the reasons
> that contributed to the outcome of both the house and senate elections. The
> Yom Kippur war caused a brief but serious oil price shock. The result of
> that was an inflation level of about 11 percent and an unemployment rate
> close to 5 percent. Inflation became a forefront concern of the American
> people. A poll taken prior to elections that year gathered that 50.2 percent
> of Americans believed that inflation was the most significant economic
> issue. The decline in disposable income was the largest decline since 1946,
> when there was a shift in majority from democrats to republicans comparable
> to that of republicans to democrats in 1974[4]
> <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn4>
> . Therefore the most common debates occurring between candidates running for
> election or re-election around the country focused on two main issues:
> corruption and the economy. Even the Republican National Committee chairman
> at the time, Mary Louise Smith admitted, "Watergate and the economy have
> combined to influence voters". What she did not say but was inferred is that
> these to issues were primarily influencing voters to not vote for republican
> candidates, particularly conservative ones running for re-election.
>  Republican leaders also downplayed Watergate and lack of trust in the
> government as a leading issue. A poll taken prior to the election asking
> "What do you think will be the most important national issues in the coming
> congressional elections" reported that 71 percent of Republican chairmen
> cited inflation and high cost of living, 65 percent named fuel shortages and
> the energy crises, and only 32 percent mentioned Watergate and honesty in
> government[5]
> <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn5>
> . In contrast a survey by the Republican National Committee by Market
> Opinion Research of Detroit showed that 73 percent of the voters did in fact
> think that Watergate was the number one issue[6]
> <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn6>
> . However as obvious as the correlation between economic discontent and
> election outcome may seem surveys and polls have time and time again failed
> to find any connection between the two[7]
> <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn7>
> . However numbers and data are not nearly as powerful as having the benefit
> of looking over our shoulder as opposed to straining our eyes in an attempt
> to look ahead. With that in mind, conventional wisdom seems to toward
> believing that the economy lead to even more bitterness on the behalf of
> voters towards Nixon and the Nixon administration which made voting
> Republican in the 1974 elections even less appealing.
>
>            A less obvious but equally as important question to ask is
> whether the Democratic candidates running for election in the year following
> Nixon's resignation were simply stronger running mates than those the
> Republican's serving faced in 1972 or if the Watergate scandal allowed for a
> stronger class of Democratic candidates. A correlation between a party with
> a worse outlook, to weak candidates and therefore fewer funds has time and
> time again been drawn clearly[8]
> <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn8>
> . Nixon's administration cast a dark cloud over the heads of the Republican
> Party. A notable number of Republican retirements can be attributed to
> recognition of probable defeat due to this 'cloud' and furthermore an
> awareness that Republican's will remain the minority party and therefore not
> have the opportunity to become committee chairmen[9]
> <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn9>
> . Age and an improved pension may also be factors, but that does not explain
> why the Republican retirement rate was twice that of the Democrat's[10]
> <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn10>
> . Although people were selective in whom they punished for the corruption in
> the early 1970's, conservative or loyal republicans did not have an easy
> time facing their democratic opponent's in 1974[11]
> <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn11>
> . The party's being in trouble was no secret and it could be argued that for
> that reason stronger democrats faced weaker republican causing the upturn in
> republican dominancy in congress. If this were to be true, Watergate would
> indirectly be the reason for the comparative lack of power behind Republican
> Party incumbents.
>
>            Voter turnout at the 1974 congressional elections was low, while
> it had been steadily decreasing over the years prior Watergate was a factor
> in the lack of enthusiasm in electing officials. The youth vote in
> particular was dwindling as the publics respect in the 'system' reached an
> all time low. The scandal and corruption undermined voter respect for
> anybody participating in government affairs. 62 percent of the electorate
> did not vote during the midterm elections. Many of who claim it was not a
> disinterest in politics but rather a legitimate form of protest. Furthermore
> voters were becoming increasingly cynical about the democratic process
> claiming, "One vote doesn't make any difference"[12]
> <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn12>
> . Cynical and frustrated voters are just so because of economic despair and
> a widely criticized dishonest government.
>
>            Watergate contributed to the elevated number of 'switch voters'
> or voters who are affiliated with one party but vote for another, recorded
> in the 1974 midterm elections. Furthermore independents that voted in those
> elections primarily voted democratically.  Nixon made running as a democrat
> an advantage in that he momentarily harmed or hurt his own party's
> reputation.  The majority of 'switchers' found themselves partial to
> Democratic candidates and platforms because of both economic and Watergate
> grievances directed towards Republican candidates.[13]
> <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn13>
>  Often times votes swinging to the degree in which the halls of congress are
> overturned occurs during midterm elections as it did in 1946 1958 1966 and
> than 1974[14]
> <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn14>
> . That's not to say that it was not because of Watergate, rather that
> midterm elections made it even more possible. It was because in changes at
> the margin by voters.
>
>            Another tool useful in determining the Watergate scandals effect
> on the congressional midterm elections in 1974 is the campaign strategies
> used by the candidates that won and the dilemmas the candidates that lost
> faced. When Democrats won a difficult victory in Grand Rapid Michigan it
> became evident to reporters and candidates alike, the failures of the Nixon
> Administration was the "most powerful current in American Politics"[15]
> <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn15>
> .  Republicans did not have difficult speaking their disapproval of the
> Watergate Scandal but rather of their President. While a growing majority of
> the population was discontent with Richard Nixon the person and the Nixon
> administration as a whole, as Wisconsin Republican representative William A
> Steiger best put it "Republican's can't be flatly anti Nixon and survive".
> [16]
> <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn16>
> The delicacy with which Republicans faced their predicament was one that
> could be easily seen through by voters. As Republican candidates resentment
> towards the president was evident, while their fear of speaking out against
> him remained. The dilemma Republicans faced in 1974 was one with no clear
> solution, it was "precarious to be associated" with the President, but
> "suicidal to speak against him."[17]
> <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn17>
>  Democratic opponents used their knowledge of the difficult situation
> Republican's were in to their advantage.  Even Vice President Ford admitted
> that in private talks with the President "He recognized, as I did, that it
> could be the way the Democrats skillfully used the issue" the issue being
> Watergate.[18]
> <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn18>
>  In fact in the opinion of the President and Vice President alike, the
> Democrats exploited Watergate, blowing it entirely out of proportion to win
> votes. Blown out of proportions or not, in hindsight not, the Democrats did
> win votes because of Watergate.[19]
> <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn19>
>
>
>            The newly elected senators and representatives in the year 1974
> are called the Watergate babies for more reasons than one. They were
> referred to as 'Babies' not only because they were new to the Senate and
> House but also because they were so young. Six of them were under thirty and
> as a group the brought the average age of House Members down to under fifty
> for the first time since World War II[20]
> <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn20>
> . A vast amount of the winning candidates were substantially younger than
> the officials they ran against.  The new congressman and senators elected
> were like any other new group of electees fresh and excited to demand change
> from their older more experienced constituents. What made them unique
> however was their large size, which gave them the unique ability to actually
> instate the changes. As Rep. John LaFalce put it "Smaller classes can have
> the same missionary zeal, but not have the same impact we had by our force
> of numbers"[21]
> <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn21>
> . As soon as they came to office long time committee chairmen were replaced
> and their voices were heard, their missions, make Washington more
> accountable to the ordinary, tax-paying citizens of the United States[22]
> <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn22>
> . They were able to overthrow old party power partly because the majority of
> them owed little to party bosses. Remembers Sam M. Gibbons (D-Fla.) ``we
> didn't expect a lot of the Watergate class to win, we just put them on the
> ballot to have a Democratic name there.''[23]
> <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn23>
>  They largely fought against war and corruption and pushed environmental and
> economic reform.
>
> Although some argue that like so many public officials before and after them
> they were jaded by money and dirty politics their work while in office
> proves quite the opposite. They are the biggest proof that Watergate
> influenced who ran in the 1974 elections and why.  To an extent they have
> all kept the careful balance of power and accountability and transparency in
> all government affairs close to heart as they served their terms.
>
>            Even though President Richard Nixon's name was not on the ballot
> during the 1974-midterm elections he was on the minds of the voters[24]
> <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn24>
> . Republicans were often equated with Nixon and in turn with Watergate and
> all of the corruption that is associated with the break in.  The Democrats
> that year won a 2/3 majority in the house and a 3/5 majority in the
> senate[25]
> <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn25>
> . There is no question that the voters sent a clear message: the current
> administration was not acceptable. They wanted change. They wanted economic
> security and an honest government. There lack of faith in the Republican
> Party to do so stems from Watergate and the corruption and scandal it
> represented and continues to represent.  The democratic sweep brought a
> younger, reformist, eager, class of freshman senators and congressman alike.
>  In a nation wide poll at the time Watergate was ranked the worst scandal in
> American history by 57 percent of the population[26]
> <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn26>
> . To say it had little or no effect on the 1974 elections would be
> ludicrous.
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Hunter Biden [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Mon 4/11/2011 4:05 PM
> To: Naomi Biden
> Subject:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

-- 
Mike Muldoon
Rosemont Seneca Partners, LLC
1010 Wisconsin Ave., NW
Suite 705
Washington, DC 20007
(202) 333-1880
[email-masked]
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE plist PUBLIC "-//Apple//DTD PLIST 1.0//EN" "http://www.apple.com/DTDs/PropertyList-1.0.dtd">
<plist version="1.0">
<dict>
	<key>conversation-id</key>
	<integer>103342</integer>
	<key>date-last-viewed</key>
	<integer>0</integer>
	<key>date-received</key>
	<integer>1302888340</integer>
	<key>flags</key>
	<integer>8623750145</integer>
	<key>remote-id</key>
	<string>43365</string>
</dict>
</plist>