Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 4 · column 1 of 9 · from the scan, no model involved
By GEORGE BOWLES
4rundel Newspapers Writer
Since President Jimmy Carter's staff is requiring department heads to fill out "Report Cards” on the performance of their subordinates, it seemed fair that a similar fitness report be prepared on the perfrontance of the President by Virginia Democrats.
Accordingly, 10 high ranking party leaders in the state were interviewed and asked to grade Carter on how well or poorly he is doing his job. To obtain candid answers. thoseiinterviewed were assured their identities would not be revealed. All of them, however, have been strong Carter supporters in the past although three of them said he had not been their first choice for the 1976 presidential nomination.
The results of this highly limited and totally unscientific poll paint a dismal picture of the President's political future. both nationally and in the Commonwealth.
Those interviewed were asked to rate Carter's performance. on a scale of zero to 10. in the major areas of his responsibility.
These included foreign policy, domestic policy, effectiveness in working with the Congnwb-nmd his overall capacity f»i^ leadership. They were also asked to evaluate the net political effect of the "Seven Days in July,’’ that period from his energy speech through his cabinet shake-up, and the impact of his actions during that period on his re-election prospects.
Since Carter summarily has knocked some of the major blocks from under his recently announced "New Foundation” program this critical look at his presidency appeared to be eminently in order.
The President received his highest marks in foreign policy, although in a sense it was damnation by faint
74.5%