Ask the Scholar
Page 1 of 1
I can add historical knowledge about this page.
Page image
OCR
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
S
S
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential
Library Staff.
Record Group/Collection:
George H.W. Bush Presidential Records
Collection/Office of Origin:
Speechwriting, White House Office of
Series:
Speech File Draft Files
Subseries:
Chron File, 1989-1993
OA/ID Number:
13546
Folder ID Number:
13546-007
Folder Title:
Budget Agreement Address 10/25/90 [OA 6026]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
26
16
5
3
Cash
Davis/Blymire
MARK
EDTS
->
Title: Harry
Date: Oct. 20, 1990
Draft: Two
PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: EAST ROOM
( (Time) WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 24, 1990
STBT
Welcome to the White House, please be seated.
After months of frustration and delay, Congress sent me a
deficit-reduction bill I could sign -- an agreement to save more
than $500 billion in five years. I want to tell you -- small
businessmen and women, and the American people -- what our
bipartisan federal budget agreement will achieve, what it won't
achieve, and what it reveals about the ways of Washington.
First, let me tell you why our agreement will benefit you
and your loved ones.
We faced this budget crisis because Congress writes the
checks, and it V overdrawn by as much as $300 billion. When you
write a bad check, you pay a fine. And when Congress writes bad
checks, we all pay a fine in the form of higher interest rates.
So had we failed, interest rates would have risen sharply.
But in the last week, interest rates fell by ((percent)). For
the typical American, every one-and-a-half percent drop in
interest rates can mean a reduction of about $110 per month
in
your monthly mortgage payments.
Lower interest rates will also mean tens of thousands of
housing starts, and better auto sales. Most of all, by reducing
the federal government's drain on our national savings, our
2
agreement will spur job creation and investment -- and give our
children a chance for a better future. III
You know it's almost impossible to get Congress to vote for
even minuscule spending cuts. No surprise, since federal
spending has ((doubled)) in a decade. But this time we got
Congress to agree to (($100)) million in spending cuts -- the
biggest ever -- and the first five-year curb on spending ever.
And, should the Congressional mood change -- and you can bet
it will -- Congress will find that these cuts cannot be
rescinded, because they are already enforced by law -- these
spending cuts and spending caps are real. III
We've also passed a law to put Congress on the pay-as-you-
go plan. No longer will Congress be able to fund programs on
promises. From now on, before Congress can pass new programs, it
will first have to pay for them. III
Finally, our agreement is a long-overdue show of national
resolve for the world. And it is an even greater show of
American confidence for an unprincipled predatory power -- Iraq.
Some liberals in the Congress wanted reckless cuts in defense
spending. But I held the line to protect our Armed Forces from
meat-ax cuts. Although I agreed to almost (($70 billion) ) in
defense reductions, I will never agree to jeopardize America, or
our servicemen and women in the Persian Gulf.\\\
So all in all, our agreement is unprecedented, long-overdue
and
absolutely necessary. But I am not here today to join the
Congress in a carnival of self-congratulation. We came to this
3
agreement too late -- six months too late. We could have had
this agreement in May, in June or in August. Instead, Congress
has once again busted its self-imposed deadlines and given me a
budget to sign at the 11th hour; so late, in fact, that we are
now at the brink of a downturn that could have been avoided.
Some compare this budget agreement to the Constitutional
Convention. And yet, how stunted the ambitions of the capital
seem when compared to those of its Founders; how petty this
budget deal seems when compared to the progressive Square Deal of
Teddy Roosevelt, the New Deal of Franklin Roosevelt, or the Fair
Deal of Harry Truman; how narrow our goals seem when compared to
those of a generation that built affordable homes for millions,
highways across a continent, and sent a man to the Moon.
Our government simply isn't equal to the American people and
their dreams. Why? Because for decades we've been ruled by a
divided government, especially by a Congress jealous of its
prerogatives, perks and powers.
We want America to grow, and to move, year by year, a little
closer to the stars. Yet this budget does little to actively
promote growth and progress, to keep this country moving. I
believe we can do more, much more. But in the name of bumper
sticker slogans about "fairness," the Congress resisted our every
effort to create incentives for growth.
I believe that with a $1.2 trillion budget, we can find ways
to renew our government -- to rethink and restructure our
4
programs from the ground up -- to throw ideas as well as money at
our problems.
But Congress makes its programs in its own image. And
Congress would rather raise taxes than raise the issue of reform.
So, to help the economy, I was forced against my every instinct
to agree to allow a modest increase in consumption taxes -- ((I
call it tax-broccoli.) ) This is a necessary price I had to pay
to keep the majority that rules Congress at the table. I make no
apologies. This is simply the cost of divided government.
But I also know most Americans watch the workings of
Congress with utter bafflement. And why not? I challenge any
Member of Congress, on either side of the aisle, to suggest that
good government can come from a body served by 30,000 staff
members, and with nearly 300 committees and subcommittees.
Congress is a chaos of committees, a confusion of command, an
anarchy of egos.
And when Congress speaks, it speaks in an arcane, Alice-in-
Wonderland language. For example, if you spend $1,000 on
groceries in one year, and $1,100 the next -- you'd consider that
a ten-percent increase. Only those who live in the never-never
land inside the Washington Beltway would call discretionary
spending increases of ((ten percent) ) every year "cuts" simply
because they fall short of extravagant expectations.
Congress views even the most solemn obligations of governing
as bonanzas. For example, when I urged Congress to pass
emergency funds to help new and fragile democracies in Panama and
5
Nicaragua -- their bill came to me three months late and loaded
with more than $1.3 billion in unrequested, unrelated
unworthy domestic spending.
transportation
Even under the pressure of a budget crisis, conferees on
Saturday still made us accept an 18.8 percent increase for
um
homestate projects, just business as usual in Washington, D.C.
((Other examples -- bigger tax break for rich art donors?) ) Even
as Congress voted to cut Medicare, they also voted to spend $1
million to develop a national transportation plan for walkers and
bicyclists. I say if Congress wants a plan to tell us how to
walk -- spending more in taxes than most people pay in their
lifetime -- then perhaps it's time Congress took a walk. III
Frankly, these items are about as welcome at the White House
as a Christmas fruitcake. A President isn't given the option of
?
paring this cake by a single slice, or even plucking one single
item. It's all or nothing.
Never have I felt more in need of a line-item veto. Never
should a people and their president have to accept this kind of
waste. And never again should a people and their president face
a Congress that plays chicken with the economy.
But the situation is far from hopeless. The American people
are watching. They see that when their Congress asks them to
tighten their belts, it always loosens its own.
And they will know that my greatest achievement in this
agreement is what I managed to prevent Congress from doing --
especially when I kept Congress from repealing "indexing."
6
Let me tell you what this means. For years, Washington was
a silent partner in inflation, using it to raise taxes on working
families year after year, all without a single up-and-down vote
in Congress. The rich remain unaffected by indexing, so this is
a tax on working America.
Well, eventually, working Americans rose up in outrage;
forcing Congress to pass a law to keep inflation from lifting you
into ever higher tax brackets by indexing your income.
Indexation became your protective shield against a form of
invisible taxation known as "bracket creep."
But had this Administration have not stood firm, the House of
Representatives would taken your shield away, exposing you to
"bracket creep" with a vengeance. If you are married with two
children and make $34,000 -- this House would have raised your
income taxes by $313.50 -- all without a single honest vote. Now
I ask you: Is that "fairness"?
This Congress -- lacking the courage of its convictions --
was willing to let inflation do their dirty work for them.
Well, that proposal appalled me.
That proposal angered me.
And as long as I'm your President -- the inflation tax will
never get past my desk.
Common sense tells us that when tax rates are too high,
incentives are too low for people to save, invest and help create
new jobs. But Congress doesn't know the difference between
milking a COW and sending it to slaughter. Congress, in its long
7
reign, has come to resemble the Bourbon kings of France: They
learn nothing and they forget nothing.
But we have learned something: When Congress raises income
taxes on the few, it is always the beginning of a backdoor
attempt to raise it on the many. That is why I am determined
Congress will never raise income tax rates on the middle-class.
Yes, I am also determined to reduce the deficit. But I am
even more determined to continue economic growth. Yes, I am
determined to cut government. But I am even more determined to
reform government, to make it work.
We have an almost sacred obligation not to squander the
generosity and compassion of the American people. There is so
much we could achieve if we could direct Washington to empower
people, to work with them.
In education, we want to empower parents to choose their
children's schools. In child care, we want to empower parents to
choose who will watch over their children. In the most desolate
inner cities, we strive to remove barriers to opportunity so the
spirit of enterprise can take root and bloom. bloosom
Yet this Congress would rather pass a "National Home Care
IAW
Week," instead of our housing bill to empower public housing
tenants, to let them take charge of their lives. This Congress
would rather pass a "Vocational/Technical Education Week,"
instead of our Educational Excellence Act to empower state and
1
local leaders, parents and teachers to reform our schools. This
Congress would rather pass a "National Crime Prevention Month,"
STET
8
our
instead of making our streets safer with
tough
new
crime
bill
-- now a year and a half in the hopper.
In short, this is a Congress long on words and short on
deeds. A lot of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
The status quo is stagnation incarnate. America needs
change. America needs a fresh start.
Harry Truman reminded us that only a President represents
all the people; only a President can stick up for the national
interest, and demand a fresh start. And make no mistake -- in
our lifetime, we have seen Congress itself become the biggest and
most entrenched special-interest of all time.
We have seen it become a perpetual Congress that expects to
rule for eternity. We have seen the House closest to the people
minimum Overtime?
become a House of Lords.
Like all aristocracies and elite institutions, Congress
maintains its privileges through the naked use of power. It
rejected our proposals for campaign finance reform. And when it
comes ( (to the Civil Rights Act, the American with Disabilities
Act, )) and government ethics laws -- Congress keeps itself exempt
and above the law.
Well, I believe it is again time for a fresh start -- if
Jim
wants tocut
in this election, then surely in the next. The American people
are slow to anger. But when they do, their anger is a splendid
and righteous thing to behold.
So in the remaining weeks of this campaign season, and for
the rest of my presidency, I will take a message to the people:
9
America doesn't need a House of Lords. America needs a new
Congress. 111 And I need a Congress that will work with me.
Let the American voters decide. Let them give America a
fresh start for reform and a better future.
Thank you, and may God bless you all and the United States
of America.
#
#
#
DRAFT [xinadno) 5 4000] as pey m
Davis/Blymire
Title: Harry
Date: Oct. 20, 1990
Draft: Two
PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: EAST ROOM
(Time)), WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 24, 1990
S
Welcome to the White House, please be seated.
why
After months of frustration and delay, Congress sent me a
deficit-reduction bill I could sign -- an agreement to save more
understand
than $500 billion over five years. I want to tell you -- small
balance way. I May wanted had reduce so deficit with carefule
spending cuts. the Democrate to clash
paty
my
I
businessmen and women, and the American people -- what our
bipartisan federal budget agreement will achieve, what it won't
While
member
go the other
achieve, and what it reveals about the ways of Washington.
First, let me tell you why our agreement will benefit you
and loved After ones reluctance. We could have had 2 much better agreement. And we could
First, I want to say that I signed this agreement with great
your affe have signed it six months ago Unfarturately we wait 4.11 Rve
mide Minutes minnight be carse to Corgressions budget process has broken
We faced this budget crisis because Congress writes the do wr. I hart
has
accept sainbe this deal
checks, and it overdrawn by as much as $300 billion. When you be the cause national
interest
write a bad check, you pay a fine. And when Congress writes bad requires .7.
But I'm nic
checks, we all pay a fine in the form of higher interest rates. + dired at
these who
So had we failed, interest rates would have risen sharply.
insist o
in articiption of this agrent.
the
But in the last week, interest rates fell by ((percent)) For
playing politics
with te
the typical American, every one-and-a-half percent drop in
economy
our future.
interest rates can mean a reduction of about $110 per month in
Eventually,
your monthly mortgage payments.
Lower interest rates will also mean tens of thousands of
housing starts, and better auto sales. Most of all, by reducing
the federal government's drain on our national savings, our
2
agreement will spur job creation and investment -- and give our
children a chance for a better future. III
You know it's almost impossible to get Congress to vote for
even minuscule spending cuts. No surprise, since federal
spending has ((doubled)) in a decade. But this time we got
reduce He rate of growth
Congress to agree to (($100)) million in spending cuts --the
'
biggest ever -- and the first five-year curb on spending ever. III
And, should the Congressional mood change -- and you can bet
it will -- Congress will find that these cuts cannot be
rescinded, because they are already enforced by law -- these
spending cuts and spending caps are real.
the agreement
We ve also passed a law to put Congress on the pay-as-you-
go plan. No longer will Congress be able to fund programs on
promises. From now on, before Congress can pass new programs, it
will first have to pay for them. III
at long 12st demonstrates to the world our
Finally, our agreement is a overdue show of national
resolve, for the world. And it is an even greater show of
American confidence for an unprincipled predatory power -- Iraq.
Some liberals in the Congress wanted reckless cuts in defense
spending. But I held the line to protect our Armed Forces from
meat-ax cuts. Although I agreed to almost (($70 billion)) in
defense reductions, I will never agree to jeopardize America, or
our servicemen and women in the Persian Gulf. III
this
So all in all, our agreement is unprecedented, long-overdue
here,
and absolutely necessary. But I am not here today to join the
Congress in a carnival of self-congratulation. We came to this
Congress
Democratic majorial held slourd the that economy down
3
The controls hostage langress while juy house it were they wn throthe
stored
agreement too late -- six months too late. We could have had
because were so
70
3
this agreement in May, in June or in August. Instead, Congress
- - money spend.
to
has once again busted all its self-imposed deadlines, and given
They didn't just writ hill the 11th hr., they united 2:11 well after michight 230 to maning
me a budget to sign at the 11th hour; so late, in fact, that we We the 24
days into to
are now at the brink of a downturn that could have been avoided. new fiscal yr.
The Democrate talk lot about friness. well let m tell you about really isn't for isn't fair.
Some compare this budget agreement to the Constitutional So
if
Dem.
Member of Congress
Convention. And yet, how stunted the ambitions of the capital
fells you
that res w she
seem when compared to those of its Founders; how petty this
against show
grants,
budget deal seems when compared to the progressive Square Deal of
ask him -
her why she
Teddy Roosevelt, the New Deal of Franklin Roosevelt, or the Fair
was pat
at re
Deal of Harry Truman; how narrow our goals seem when compared to
majorty
those of a generation that built affordable homes for millions,
that
blacked action
highways across a continent, and sent a man to the Moon.
-the people's
business
Our government simply isn't equal to the American people and
for half
their dreams. Why? Because for decades we've been ruled by a
a yen to
more + more
seize every Lost
divided government, especially by a Congress jealous of its
at shat term
prerogatives, perks and powers.
political
advantage
We want America to grow, and to move, year by year, a little
day canld.
only
them
closer to the stars. Yet this budget does little to actively
promote growth and progress, to keep this country moving. I
believe we can do more, much more. But in the name of bumper
sticker slogans about "fairness," the Congress resisted our every
effort to create incentives for growth. Such short-sighted thinking may
prevail in this Congress, but you can part count a me to pursue growth in He
I believe that with a $1.2 trillion budget, we can find ways next
to renew our government -- to rethink and restructure our
Congress.
The Democrate platform consists
J 2 lot of 3 letter words. tax, tar, tax.
The Democrate even demanded r tay
Their lips said soak the lick, but their
as a tax.
actions spoke londer defeat delay indexing,
will working Ares:-
10/ the crovdi had even deeser in to pocket of K
4
push new
throw
programs from the ground up -- to throw ideas as well as money at
our problems.
But Congress makes its programs in its own image. And
Congress would rather raise taxes than raise the issue of reform.
So, to help the economy, I was forced against my every instinct
to agree to allow a modest increase in consumption taxes -- ((I
call it tax-broccoli. This is a necessary price I had to pay
to keep the majority that rules Congress at the table. I make no
apologies. This is simply the cost of divided government.
But I also know most Americans watch the workings of
Congress with utter bafflement. And why not? I challenge any
Member of Congress, on either side of the aisle, to suggest that
good government can come from a body served by 30,000 staff
members, and with nearly 300 committees and subcommittees.
Congress is a chaos of committees, a confusion of command, an
But if Congress wanted h
anarchy of egos.
speed $ 1200, ruy 'J call to
increase to $1100 2 cut!
And when Congress speaks, it speaks in an arcane, Alice-in-
Wonderland language. For example, if you spend $1,000 on
groceries in one year, and $1,100 the next -- you'd consider that
a ten-percent increase. Only those who live in the never-never
land inside the Washington Beltway would call discretionary
spending increases of ((ten percent)) every year "cuts" simply
because they fall short of extravagant expectations. Discretionary service
thats the term day use here in Washington for He $ - billion in addition spending Think
Congress views even the most solemn obligations of governing Discritionary.
as bonanzas. For example, when I urged Congress to pass
Think
about
emergency funds to help new and fragile democracies in Panama and Are your
When times NY
dight Ma, what happy
by 10% you int back.
to your discretionary spend
Only in washington can lux my spending
Doyou increase optionsl spending
sand L. in tu budnets
5
Nicaragua -- their bill came to me three months late and loaded
with more than $1.3 billion in unrequested, unrelated and
unworthy domestic spending.
Even under the pressure of a budget crisis, conferees on
Saturday still made us accept an 18.8 percent increase for
homestate projects, just business as usual in Washington, D.C.
( (Other examples -- bigger tax break for rich art donors.) And,
as Congress voted to cut Medicare, they also voted to spend $1
million to develop a national transportation plan for walkers and
bicyclists. I say if Congress wants a plan to tell us how to
walk -- spending more in taxes than most people pay in their
lifetime -- then perhaps it's time this Congress took a walk.
budget
Frankly, these items are about as welcome at the White House
full of nutfy programs.
+
lots
T
lots
of
lit
at
sugar
as a Christmas fruitcake. A President isn't given the option of
paring this cake by a single slice, or even plucking one single
item. It's all or nothing.
Never have I felt more in need of a line-item veto. Never
should a people and their president have to accept this kind of
waste. And never again should a people and their president face
a Congress that plays chicken with the economy. III
But the situation is far from hopeless. The American people
are watching. They see that when their Congress asks them to
tighten their belts, it always loosens its own.
They will know that my greatest achievements in this
agreement is what I managed to prevent Congress from doing. And
I am proudest that I kept Congress from repealing "indexing."
6
Let me tell you what this means. For years, Washington was
a silent partner in inflation, using it to raise taxes on working
families year after year, all without a single up-and-down vote
because tey are already
in Congress. The rich remain unaffected by indexing so this is in
the top
a tax on working America, pure + simple
bracket.
Well, eventually, working Americans rose up in outrage;
forcing Congress to pass a law to keep inflation from lifting you
into ever higher tax brackets by indexing your income.
Indexation became your protective shield against a form of
invisible taxation known as "bracket creep."
But had this Administration not stood firm, the House of
Representatives would taken your shield away, exposing you to
"bracket creep" with a vengeance. If you are married with two
have a tarable income at
Democratically led
children and make $34,000 -- this House would have raised your
income taxes by $313.50 -- all without a single honest vote. Now
I call it: how to succeed in spending really
I ask you: Is that "fairness"?
dry.
This Congress -- lacking the courage of its convictions --
eage
was willing to let inflation do their dirty work for them.
Well, that proposal appalled me.
That proposal angered me.
And as long as I'm your President -- the inflation tax will
never get past my desk. III So when you Democratic Member of Congress tell, you
that the program state not "bir," tell Him that the House leadership plan to soak re
Common sense tells us that when tax rates are too high, middle class w/o
having to vote
incentives are too low for people to save, invest and help create an it
is
to most
new jobs. But Congress doesn't know the difference between
unfor
milking a COW and sending it to slaughter. Congress, in its long thing since
7
reign, has come to resemble the Bourbon kings of France: They
learn nothing and they forget nothing.
( (But we have learned something: When Congress raises income
taxes on the few, it is always the beginning of a backdoor
attempt to raise it on the many. That is why I am determined
working America
Congress will never raise income tax rates on the middle-class.)
Yes, I am also determined to reduce the deficit. But I am
even more determined to continue economic growth. Yes, I am
determined to cut government. But I am even more determined to
reform government, to make it work.
We have an almost sacred obligation not to squander the
generosity and compassion of the American people. There is so
much we could achieve if we could direct Washington to empower
people, and work with them fulfill tear dreams 1 become mare
competitive.
In education, we want to empower parents to choose the
schools their children will attend. In child care, we want to
empower parents to choose who will watch over their children. In
the most desolate inner cities, we want the spirit of enterprise
in new zones at oppatinity. And And me want those streets and all streets be safe In
wine
to blossom Throughout America, we want. to remove barriers to upward
equal opportunity We want
opportunity.
mobility + happiness.
Yet this Congress would rather pass a "National Home Care
Week," instead of our housing bill to empower public housing
tenants, to let them take charge of their lives. This Congress
proctomation on on
would rather pass a, "Vocational/Technical Education Week,"
instead of our Educational Excellence Act to empower state and
local leaders, parents and teachers to reform our schools. This
8
Congress would rather pass a "National Crime Prevention Month,"
instead of making our streets safer with our tough new crime bill
-- now a year and a half in the hopper.
In short, this is a Congress long on words and short on
deeds. A lot of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
The status quo is stagnation incarnate. America needs
change. America needs a fresh start. III
Harry Truman reminded us that only a President represents
all the people; only a President can stick up for the national
and stand up against the special interest. only He President can
interest, and demand a fresh start. And make no mistake -- in
our lifetime, we have seen Congress itself become the biggest and
most entrenched special-interest of all time. III
We have seen it become a perpetual Congress that expects to
intended to be Heched institution
rule for eternity. We have seen the House closest to the people
become a House of Lords. III
Like all aristocracies and elite institutions, Congress
maintains its privileges through the naked use of power.
to
UP It te dirty PAC
rejected our proposals for campaign finance reform. And when it politics
that
comes ( (to the Civil Rights Act, the American with Disabilities makes mables
insume bets
Act, )) and government ethics laws -- Congress keeps itself exempt to feather
duir nest
and above the laws that make America 2 better place.
ul special
interest
Well, I believe it is again time for a fresh start not
$.
in this election then surely in the next. The American people
are slow to anger. But when they do, their anger is a splendid
and righteous mum thing to behold.
9
So in the remaining weeks of this campaign season, and for
the rest of my presidency, I will take a message to the people:
America doesn't need a House of Lords. III America needs a new responsive,
America
responsible Congress. III And I need a Congress that will work with me. III
He President for to
Let the American voters decide. Let them give America a good all. of
fresh start for reform and a better future. Give me 1 new
Congress I can work with.
Thank you, and may God bless you all and the United States
of America.
#
#
#
hand is wekin pocket
failness
of
peare
slowing down
I
can
eron. had to as engine
why/tume
pooplem may
Dems. held eron. hostoq
gone
see other way
Their actively, tap the middle class
lips said the the 1.4
I wanted
to dol't spring with to
tax on tax (swtux)
The Ders. wanted
far do ml
So we and
Let me fax you memory
commonse
you must los r
Den.
electronics
Plattorm full of words B letter
CLOSE HOLD
Document No. 184647
WHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM
90 OCT 23 A9:
DATE: 10/22/90
ACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY:
NOON 10/23/90
SUBJECT:
PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: EAST ROOM
(10/20 draft four)
ACTION FYI
ACTION FYI
VICE PRESIDENT
MCCLURE
SUNUNU
NEWMAN
SCOWCROFT
PORTER
DARMAN
ROGICH
CARD
UNTERMEYER
CICCONI
ROGERS
DEMAREST
PINKERTON
FITZWATER
WINSTON
GRAY
HAGIN
HOLIDAY
REMARKS:
Please provide any comments/recommendations directly to Chriss
Winston by Noon on Tuesday, 10/23, with a copy to my office.
Thanks.
RESPONSE:
James W. Cicconi
Assistant to the President
and Deputy to the Chief of Staff
CLOSE HOLD
Ext. 2702
Davis/Blymire
90 OCT 22 PM 4: 58
Title: Harry
Date: Oct. 20, 1990
Draft: Four
PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: EAST ROOM
10:30 a.m., THURSDAY, OCTOBER 25, 1990
Welcome to the White House, please be seated.
After months of frustration and delay, Congress sent me a
deficit-reduction bill I could sign -- an agreement to save more
than $500 billion in five years. I want to tell you -- here in
this room, as well as the American people -- what our bipartisan
federal budget agreement will achieve, what it won't achieve, and
what it reveals about the ways of Washington. And I want to
register a message with Congress before I leave town.
((First, I signed this agreement with great reluctance. We
could have had done much better. Unfortunately, the
Congressional budget process broke down. It was five minutes
after midnight. And Congress left it to me to defend the
national interest.
((Of course, I understand why some members of my own party
may have had to go the other way. I wanted to reduce the deficit
with a careful balance of spending cuts. The Democrats wanted to
raise taxes and slash defense. Faced with this choice, I decided
it was better to lose the saddle than the horse. But we are all
sick and tired of those who play politics with America's future.
( (We faced this budget crisis because Congress writes the
checks, and was overdrawn by as much as $300 billion. When you
2
write a bad check, you pay a fine. But when Congress writes bad
checks, we all pay a fine in the form of higher interest rates.
( (Fortunately, the eventual lower interest rates this deal
could bring might mean tens of thousands of housing starts, and
better auto sales.
((You know it's almost impossible to get Congress to vote
for even minuscule spending cuts. No surprise, since federal
spending has ((doubled)) in a decade. But this time we got
Congress to agree to reduce the rate of growth with the first
five-year curb on spending ever.\\\
((And, should the Congressional mood change -- and you can
bet it will -- Congress will find that these cuts cannot be
rescinded, because they are already enforced by law -- these
spending cuts and spending caps are real.
((Also, this agreement puts Congress on the pay-as-you-go
plan. No longer will it be able to fund programs on promises.
From now on, before Congress can pass new programs, it will first
have to pay for them.
((Finally, our agreement at long last demonstrates to the
world our resolve. And it is an even greater show of American
confidence for an unprincipled predator -- Iraq. Some liberals
in the Congress wanted reckless cuts in defense spending. But I
held the line to protect our Armed Forces from meat-ax cuts.
Although I agreed to almost (($70 billion)) in defense
reductions, I will never agree to jeopardize America, or our
servicemen and women in the Persian Gulf. III))
3
So all in all, this agreement is unprecedented, long-
overdue, absolutely necessary. But I will not join the Congress
in a carnival of self-congratulation. We could have had this
agreement in May, in June or in August. Congress didn't have to
wait until 24 days into the new fiscal year, while it hunted for
every last morsel of political opportunity.
But the Democrat majority that controls Congress held a
slowing economy hostage, choking the throttle. Congress has once
again busted its self-imposed deadlines and given me a budget to
sign at the 11th hour; so late, in fact, that we are now at the
brink of a downturn that could have been avoided.
You hear the Democrats talk a lot about fairness. Well let
me tell you what really isn't fair: unemployment isn't fair. And
if you hear a Democrat Member of Congress bemoan a slow economy,
ask your legislator why their majority blocked the people's
business for half a year.
Some compare this budget agreement to the Constitutional
Convention. And yet, how stunted the ambitions of the Capitol
seem when compared to those of the Founders; how petty this
budget deal seems when compared to the progressive Square Deal of
Teddy Roosevelt, the New Deal of Franklin Roosevelt, or the Fair
Deal of Harry Truman; how narrow our goals seem when compared to
those of a generation that built affordable homes for millions,
highways across a continent, and sent a man to the Moon.
The problem isn't with the American people and their dreams.
It's with our government. Why? Because for decades we've been
4
ruled by a divided government, increasingly by a Congress jealous
of its prerogatives, perks and powers.
We want America to grow, and to become, year by year, an
ever greater nation. Yet this budget does only a little to
actively promote growth and progress. I believe we can do more,
much more. But in the name of bumper sticker slogans about
"fairness," the Congress resisted our every effort to create
incentives for growth. The Democrat's platform consists of a
three-letter word: tax, tax, tax. They say "soak the rich," but
their actions speak louder: get the government to dig ever deeper
into the pockets of working Americans. Such short-sighted
thinking may prevail in this Congress, but you can count on me to
pursue growth with the next Congress.
I believe that with a $1.2 trillion budget, we can find ways
to renew our government -- to rethink and restructure our
programs from the ground up -- to advance new ideas as well as
throw money at our problems.
But Congress makes its programs in its own image. And
Congress would rather raise taxes than raise the issue of reform.
For the good of the economy, we paid a price; and that price is
taxes. It is also the price paid to keep the majority that rules
Congress at the table. I make no apologies. This is simply the
cost of divided government.
But I also know most Americans watch the workings of
Congress with utter bafflement. And why not? I challenge any
Member of Congress, on either side of the aisle, to suggest that
5
good government can arise from a body served by 30,000 staff
members, and with nearly 300 committees and subcommittees.
Congress is a chaos of committees, a confusion of command, an
anarchy of egos.
And when Congress speaks, it speaks in an arcane, Alice-in-
Wonderland language. For example, if you spend $1,000 on
groceries in one year, and $1,100 the next -- you'd consider that
a ten-percent increase. Only those who live in the never-never
land inside the Washington Beltway would call discretionary
spending increases of ((ten percent)) every year "cuts" simply
because they fall short of extravagant expectations.
Congress views even the most solemn obligations of governing
as bonanzas. Even under the pressure of a budget crisis,
conferees on Saturday still forced through an 18.8 percent
increase for many homestate projects. ((Other examples -- bigger
tax break for rich art donors?)) Even as Congress voted to cut
Medicare, they also voted to spend $1 million to develop a
national transportation plan for walkers and bicyclists. I say
if Congress wants a plan to tell us how to walk -- spending more
in taxes than most people pay in their lifetime -- then perhaps
it's time Congress took a walk.
Never have I felt more in need of a line-item veto. Never
should a people and their president be presented with such waste.
And never again should a people and their president face a
Congress that plays chicken with the economy. III
6
But the situation is far from hopeless. The American people
are watching. They see that when their Congress asks them to
tighten their belts, it always loosens its own.
And they will know that my greatest achievement in this
agreement is what I managed to prevent Congress from doing: I
kept Congress from repealing "indexing. "\\\
For years, Washington was a silent partner in inflation,
using it to raise taxes on working families year after year, all
without a single up-and-down vote in Congress. The rich remain
unaffected by indexing because they are already in the top
bracket. This is a tax on working America, pure and simple.
Well, eventually, working America rose up in outrage;
forcing Congress to pass a law to keep inflation from lifting you
into ever higher tax brackets by indexing your income.
Indexation became your protective shield against a form of
invisible taxation known as "bracket creep."
But had this Administration not stood firm, the House of
Representatives would have taken away your shield, exposing you
to "bracket creep" with a vengeance. If you are married with two
children and have a taxable income of $34,000 -- this Democrat-
led House would have raised your income taxes by $313.50 --
without a single honest vote. Call it how to succeed in spending
without really trying. or just call it Democrat "fairness. "
This Congress -- lacking the courage of its convictions --
was eager to let inflation do their dirty work for them.
Well, that proposal appalled me.
7
That proposal angered me.
If Congress doesn't grasp the fact that the inflation tax is
history, then this Congress will be history.
Common sense tells us that when tax rates are too high,
incentives are too low for people to save, invest and help create
new jobs. But Congress doesn't know the difference between
milking a COW and sending it to slaughter. Congress, in its long
reign, has come to resemble the Bourbon kings of France: They
learn nothing and they forget nothing.
( (But we have learned something: When Congress raises income
taxes on the few, it is always the beginning of a backdoor
attempt to raise it on the many. That is why I am determined
Congress will never raise income tax rates on working America.)
Yes, I am also determined to reduce the deficit. But I am
even more determined to continue economic growth. Yes, I am
determined to cut government. But I am even more determined to
reform government, to make it work.
We have a sacred obligation not to squander the generosity
and compassion of the American people. There is so much we could
achieve if we could direct Washington to empower people, to work
with them to fulfill their dreams and become competitive.
In education, we want to empower parents to choose their
children's schools. In child care, we want to empower parents to
choose who will watch over their children. In the most desolate
inner cities, we strive to create zones of opportunity, to remove
8
barriers to mobility and success, so the spirit of enterprise can
take root and blossom.
Yet this Congress would rather pass a "National Home Care
Week," instead of our housing act to empower public housing
tenants to take charge of their lives. This Congress would
rather pass a proclamation on "Vocational/Technical Education
Week," instead of our Educational Excellence Act to empower state
and local leaders, parents and teachers to reform our schools.
This Congress would rather pass a "National Crime Prevention
Month," instead of making our streets safer with our proposed
tough new crime laws -- now a year and a half in the hopper.
In short, this is a Congress long on words and short on
deeds. A lot of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
Well if the status quo is stagnation incarnate, then America
needs a change. America needs a fresh start.\\\
Harry Truman reminded us that only a President represents
all the people; only a President can stick up for the national
interest, and stand up to special interests. Only the President
can demand a fresh start. And make no mistake -- in our
lifetime, we have seen Congress itself become the biggest and
most entrenched special-interest of all time.
We have seen it become a perpetual Congress that expects to
rule for eternity. We have seen the House intended to be closest
to the people become a House of Lords.
Like all aristocracies and elite institutions, Congress
maintains its privileges through the naked use of power. It
9
rejected our proposals for campaign finance reform to clean up
dirty PAC politics, allowing incumbents to feather their nest
with special-interest dollars. When it comes ( (to the Civil
Rights Act, the American with Disabilities Act,) ) and government
ethics laws -- Congress keeps itself exempt and above the law.
Now it even turns out that the leaders of Congress are
filling their gas tanks for free. I guess only the little
people have to pay gas taxes. III
So in the remaining weeks of this campaign season, and for
the rest of my presidency, I will take a message to the people:
America doesn't need a House of Lords. III America needs a new
responsible Congress. 111 America needs a Congress that will work
with the President for the good of all.
Let the American voters decide. Let them give America a
fresh start for reform and a better future. Give me a new
Congress I can work with.
Thank you, and may God bless you all and the United States
of America.
#
#
#
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
90 OCT 23 PM 10: 57
October 23, 1990
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
THROUGH:
CHRISS WINSTON
FROM:
MARK DAVIS MD
SUBJECT:
BUDGET ADDRESS
On Thursday morning, you will address an audience of 200 in the
East Room -- supporters and friends representing many
constituencies. length. Your remarks are approximately 18 minutes in
This speech is hardhitting, but fair. It sets the record
straight. And it launches a new strategy -- a new appeal to the
American people -- that you can take from Maine to Hawaii.
Davis/Blymire
Title: Harry
Date: Oct. 23, 1990
Draft: Eight
PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: EAST ROOM
10:30 a.m., THURSDAY, OCTOBER 25, 1990
Welcome to the White House, please be seated
d want to talk
I've asked you here today to talk about something that all
Americans are asking: "What on earth is wrong with Washington?"
I've seen many Congresses come and go. And I have never seen a
Congress more gridlocked, more paralyzed and ineffective than
today's.
Patience and goodwill are American virtues. And the
American people have been very patient during the budget
negotiations. But their patience is not unlimited. They have a
right to be angry. And that's a feeling I share.
[
After all, this is a Congress that talks about taking the
high road, but always takes the path of least resistance.
This is a Congress that cannot represent the national
interest, because it is beholden to special-interests.
This is a Congress that cannot move forward, because it is
stuck in an institutional rut. Served by 20,000 staff members,
divided into an arcane structure with nearly 300 committees and
subcommittees, Congress is a chaos of committees, a confusion of
command, an anarchy of egos.
This is bad enough. But the institutional problem is made
we've had
worse by nearly forty years of rule by one party dedicated to
perpetual re-election. And the one party that rules Congress,
AN
2
the Democrats, has a bias for solutions of the past -- a bias for
red-tape over choice; for the Capitol over community; for
bureaucracy over people. When you add all this up, you can see
why everything this Congress does is a variation on a theme: tax
and spend.
The final budget agreement is a sad example of how the
Democratic Congress works -- or doesn't work. For the sake of
the nation, we had to reduce the deficit now. That meant an
agreement had to be reached. But I felt strongly about reducing
the deficit with a careful balance of spending cuts. The
Democrats wanted to slash defense and raise income taxes for all
Americans. What we got was a compromise.
I understand why some members of my own party had to go the
other way. Plenty of Members on both sides of the aisle knew the
necessity and urgency of this agreement. They just couldn't vote
for it -- hoping that an easier vote would come along. I didn't
have that choice. Under our Constitution, only the President is
elected by all the people; only the President represents the
nation. Thus, the choice I faced was this agreement, or no
agreement. I decided it was better to lose the saddle than the
horse, and signed this bill with great reluctance. An agreement
was needed to get deficit reduction. But I am certain that the
American people are sick and tired of what they had to go through
during these eight long, unnecessary months.
of course, there is some good in this agreement. We got
$500 billion in deficit reduction -- including $300 billion in
3
spending cuts -- the largest cut in history. This is a solid
victory for our children's future.
We also got Congress to agree to reduce the rate of spending
growth with the first five-year curb on spending ever.
We put Congress on the pay-as-you-go plan, so Congress will
no longer be able to fund programs on promises. And, should
the Congressional mood change -- and you can bet it will --
Congress will find that these cuts are already enforced by law -
- these spending cuts and spending caps are real.
Finally, our agreement held the line against reckless cuts
of our Armed Forces. This Administration put a marker down early
-- I will never agree to jeopardize America. And now I will not
let down our servicemen and women in the Persian Gulf.
So all in all, this agreement is unprecedented, long-
overdue, absolutely necessary. But I will not join the Congress
in a carnival of self-congratulation. After all, we discussed
three kinds of proposals: the good, the bad and the ugly. I told
you about the good, now let me tell you about the rest. The bad:
We had to swallow $150 billion in taxes, taxes on gasoline and
alcohol. But we stopped them from enacting the ugliest proposal
-- to raise income taxes on working Americans.
We did even out the system to make it more fair: cutting the
tax rate for many, while raising it for the wealthy few. But had
this Administration not stood firm, the House of Representatives
would have slapped automatic tax increases on working families.
A family of four, with a taxable income of $34,000, would have
paid an additional $313.50 in income taxes.
4
This Democratic Congress was eager to raise taxes, and hoped
no one would notice by using this ugly backdoor maneuver.
Well that proposal is now history. 111
But to get an agreement, we had to negotiate with the
Democratic majority that rules Congress at the table. Because
the Democrats control Congress, we had to pay a price; and that
price was taxes. That is the cost of divided government.
We could have had this agreement in May, in June or in
August, any time during the eight months the economy worsened.
Congress didn't have to hunt for every last morsel of political
opportunity; didn't have to wait until 24 days into the new
fiscal year, about a dozen days before an election, to act.
But the Democratic majority that controls Congress choked
the throttle on a slowing economy -- all in the name of politics
and higher taxes. Thirty-seven times in nine years, Congress has
had to pass emergency measures to fund the government. This
makes thirty-eight.
By law, a budget was due April 15. Congress has once again
violated its lawful deadlines and given me a late budget to sign;
so late, in fact, that we are now at the brink of a downturn that
could have been avoided. We've been talking for eight months
while the economy deteriorated.
In April, when the budget was due, inflation was
( (percent) ) Last month it was ((percent) ) In April, when the
budget was due, unemployment was ( (percent) ) Unemployment last
month was ((percent) ) Economic growth last April, when the
budget was due, was ( (GNP percent) ) Last month it was ((GNP
5
percent) ) Even after the economy was threatened by higher oil
prices from the Persian Gulf crisis, Congress delayed. This
Congress was content to stall an agreement and stall the economy,
all in the name of politics and higher taxes. 111
The Democrats talk a lot about "fairness." Well let me tell
you what really isn't fair: High interest rates are not fair.
Inflation is not fair. And unemployment is not fair. And if you
hear a Democratic Member of Congress bemoan a slow economy, ask
your legislator why their majority blocked the people's business
for half a year -- again, in the name of politics and higher
taxes.
Some of the more self-congratulatory members of the process
have compared this budget agreement to the Constitutional
Convention. That is ludicrous. How stunted the ambitions of the
Capitol seem when compared to those of the Founders; how petty
this budget deal seems when compared to the progressive Square
Deal of Teddy Roosevelt, the New Deal of Franklin Roosevelt, or
the Fair Deal of Harry Truman; how narrow our goals seem when
compared to those of a generation that made home-ownership
affordable for millions, built highways across a continent, and
sent a man to the Moon.
I believe that a $1.3 trillion budget gives us ample room to
dream again, to advance new ideas to renew our government -- to
rethink and restructure our priorities from the ground up. But
Congress makes programs in its own image: unresponsive and
bureaucratic. And Congress would rather raise taxes than raise
6
the issue of reform. So the problem isn't with the American
people and their Dream. It's with the Congress.
Like all aristocratic, elite institutions,] Congress protects
its prerogatives, perks and privileges through the naked use of
power. In short, it protects its own. It rejects our proposals
for campaign finance reform, and to abolish special-interest
political action committees. It refuses to clean up the special-
interest politics that allows incumbents to feather their nests
with special-interest dollars. (When it comes to civil rights
and employee rights, Congress keeps itself exempt, and above the
law.)
And when Congress speaks, it speaks in the language of
Alice-in-Wonderland. For example, when Congress doesn't get the
The Democratic
spending increases it wants, 1 Congress calls that a "cut," even if
more dollars are actually spent. In other words, to the
Congress, up is down.
the
Domocribic
Even in the midst of a crisis, Congress looks for pork-
barrel bonanzas. Last Saturday, in the midst of the budget
crisis, Congressional conferees pushed through an almost 19
percent increase for pet projects. Even as Congress voted to cut
Medicare, they also voted to spend half a million dollars to
create a Lawrence Welk tourist attraction. ((Other examples to
come. ) )
Congress also spent $1 million for a national transportation
plan for walkers and bicyclists. Well I say if Congress wants a
plan to tell us how to walk -- spending more in taxes than most
on that project
7
people pay in their lifetime -- then perhaps Congress should take
a walk. III
As one Senator said: "It's time we started to spend some
money on this country. "
I say it's time we stopped spending and
running up big deficits. I'm willing to take my case to the
American people. They're watching -- and learning. They see
that when their Congress asks them to tighten their belts, it
always loosens its own. Never have I felt more strongly about
the line-item veto. Never has the country needed a balanced
budget amendment more than now. Never again should the people
and their president be presented with such waste. 111
We have a sacred obligation not to squander the generosity
and compassion of the American people. There is so much we could
achieve if we could reform Washington, to make it empower people,
not bureaucracies; to work with them to fulfill their potential
at home and be competitive around the world.
In education, we want reform -- to empower parents to choose
their children's schools. In child care, we want reform -- to
empower parents to choose who will watch over their children. In
the most desolate inner cities, we want reform -- so we strive to
create zones of opportunity, to remove barriers to mobility and
success, to empower people with the spirit of enterprise.
But this Congress would rather proclaim "National Digestive
Disease Awareness Month than health legislation. This Congress
would rather proclaim "National Crime Prevention Month, If than
pass our tough crime bill. And this Congress held up education
it all this makes
8
you and sick to your don
reform for a year. But at least they passed a proclamation
- stomach, they also Digestive passed Na Do
declaring "The Decade of the Brain." 111
Amareness wer
In short, this is a Congress that would rather issue feel-
good proclamations, than address problems. This Democratic
Congress is all sound and fury, signifying nothing. Make no
mistake -- we have seen Congress itself become the biggest, most
entrenched special-interest of our time. III
So if the status quo is stagnant, then America needs a
change. America needs a Better Deal.
INSERT
We need a Better Deal because this is a Congress wedded to
Washington solutions. We have seen it become a perpetual
Congress that expects to rule for eternity. Ninety-eight percent
of all incumbents who seek re-election are re-elected. They are
re-elected because tree they use -- or abuse -- all the powers of
incumbency, from franked mail to pork-barrel spending. We have commett
30,000 staff member;
seen the House intended to be closest to the people become a
House of Lords. 111
But it doesn't have to be this way. Everyone says Congress
is the problem, but not my Representative, not my Senator But
the only way to make an institution accountable is to make its
Members accountable. The only way to send a message to
Washington is not to send your elected representatives back. III
The American voter can return power to communities from
bureaucracies. We can do this by electing a [reform] Congress; and
we can begin thirteen days from today. This next election will
be a small step. But it will be the start of a momentum that
will build, and build, in the elections ahead.
that you do policies
believes in the
its time
to same Things The tax and spend time to
of end the Democrate nm end to business It's noual. as
INSERT
America needs a Congress that will balance
the hudget by cutting spending -- not Democrats
who try to raise the income taxes of average
working Americans.
America needs a congress that will pass a
tongh crime, not Democrats who try to
gut that bill and gut the death
penalty-
America needs # a Congress that will
end the influence of special interests
and
eliminating special interest PAC money
not Democrats who are intent on
stamme in office forever ay
shalls W/ lobbyists money.
America need a congress that will improve one
Nation's competitiveness and preserve equal
opportunity -- not Democrate who try to impose
racial gnotas in every work place.
America needs a congress dedicated do the
national interest, not Democrato committed
to THE special interests.
9
In the remaining weeks of this campaign season, and for the
rest of my presidency, I will take a message to the people:
America doesn't need a House of Lords. 111 America needs a new
responsible Congress. America needs a Congress that will work
with the President for the good of all.\\ America needs a
Better Deal.
Harry Truman reminded us that only a President represents
all the people, can stand for the national interest, and stand
against the special interests.
I will travel from Massachusetts to Hawaii to challenge
Americans to take charge of their destiny. Let them give America
a fresh start for reform and a better future. Give America new
Congress, E II can work with
Thank you, and may God bless you all and the United States
of America.
Folder
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
October 23, 1990
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
THROUGH:
CHRISS WINSTON
and
FROM:
MARK DAVIS MD
SUBJECT:
BUDGET ADDRESS
On Thursday morning, you will address an audience of 200 in the
East Room -- supporters and friends representing many
constituencies. Your remarks are approximately 18 minutes in
length.
This speech is hardhitting, but fair. It sets the record
straight. And it launches a new strategy -- a new appeal to the
American people -- that you can take from Maine to Hawaii.
Davis/Blymire
Title: Harry
Date: Oct. 23, 1990
Draft: Eight
PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: EAST ROOM
10:30 a.m., THURSDAY, OCTOBER 25, 1990
Welcome to the White House, please be seated.
I've asked you here today to talk about something that all
Americans are asking: "What on earth is wrong with Washington?"
I've seen many Congresses come and go. And I have never seen a
Congress more gridlocked, more paralyzed and ineffective than
today's.
Patience and goodwill are American virtues. And the
American people have been very patient during the budget
negotiations. But their patience is not unlimited. They have a
right to be angry. And that's a feeling I share.
After all, this is a Congress that talks about taking the
high road, but always takes the path of least resistance.
This is a Congress that cannot represent the national
interest, because it is beholden to special-interests.
This is a Congress that cannot move forward, because it is
stuck in an institutional rut. Served by 20,000 staff members,
divided into an arcane structure with nearly 300 committees and
subcommittees, Congress is a chaos of committees, a confusion of
command, an anarchy of egos.
This is bad enough. But the institutional problem is made
worse by nearly forty years of rule by one party dedicated to
perpetual re-election. And the one party that rules Congress,
2
the Democrats, has a bias for solutions of the past -- a bias for
red-tape over choice; for the Capitol over community; for
bureaucracy over people. When you add all this up, you can see
why everything this Congress does is a variation on a theme: tax
and spend.
The final budget agreement is a sad example of how the
Democratic Congress works -- or doesn't work. For the sake of
the nation, we had to reduce the deficit now. That meant an
agreement had to be reached. But I felt strongly about reducing
the deficit with a careful balance of spending cuts. The
Democrats wanted to slash defense and raise income taxes for all
Americans. What we got was a compromise.
I understand why some members of my own party had to go the
other way. Plenty of Members on both sides of the aisle knew the
necessity and urgency of this agreement. They just couldn't vote
for it -- hoping that an easier vote would come along. I didn't
have that choice. Under our Constitution, only the President is
elected by all the people; only the President represents the
nation. Thus, the choice I faced was this agreement, or no
agreement. I decided it was better to lose the saddle than the
horse, and signed this bill with great reluctance. An agreement
was needed to get deficit reduction. But I am certain that the
American people are sick and tired of what they had to go through
during these eight long, unnecessary months.
of course, there is some good in this agreement. We got
$500 billion in deficit reduction -- including $300 billion in
3
spending cuts -- the largest cut in history. This is a solid
victory for our children's future.
We also got Congress to agree to reduce the rate of spending
growth with the first five-year curb on spending ever.
We put Congress on the pay-as-you-go plan, so Congress will
no longer be able to fund programs on promises. III And, should
the Congressional mood change -- and you can bet it will --
Congress will find that these cuts are already enforced by law -
- these spending cuts and spending caps are real.
Finally, our agreement held the line against reckless cuts
of our Armed Forces. This Administration put a marker down early
-- I will never agree to jeopardize America. And now I will not
let down our servicemen and women in the Persian Gulf.
So all in all, this agreement is unprecedented, long-
overdue, absolutely necessary. But I will not join the Congress
in a carnival of self-congratulation. After all, we discussed
three kinds of proposals: the good, the bad and the ugly. I told
you about the good, now let me tell you about the rest. The bad:
We had to swallow $150 billion in taxes, taxes on gasoline and
alcohol. But we stopped them from enacting the ugliest proposal
-- to raise income taxes on working Americans.
We did even out the system to make it more fair: cutting the
tax rate for many, while raising it for the wealthy few. But had
this Administration not stood firm, the House of Representatives
would have slapped automatic tax increases on working families.
A family of four, with a taxable income of $34,000, would have
paid an additional $313.50 in income taxes.
4
This Democratic Congress was eager to raise taxes, and hoped
no one would notice by using this ugly backdoor maneuver.
Well that proposal is now history.
But to get an agreement, we had to negotiate with the
Democratic majority that rules Congress at the table. Because
the Democrats control Congress, we had to pay a price; and that
price was taxes. That is the cost of divided government.
We could have had this agreement in May, in June or in
August, any time during the eight months the economy worsened.
Congress didn't have to hunt for every last morsel of political
opportunity; didn't have to wait until 24 days into the new
fiscal year, about a dozen days before an election, to act.
But the Democratic majority that controls Congress choked
the throttle on a slowing economy -- all in the name of politics
and higher taxes. Thirty-seven times in nine years, Congress has
had to pass emergency measures to fund the government. This
makes thirty-eight.
By law, a budget was due April 15. Congress has once again
violated its lawful deadlines and given me a late budget to sign;
so late, in fact, that we are now at the brink of a downturn that
could have been avoided. We've been talking for eight months
while the economy deteriorated.
In April, when the budget was due, inflation was
( (percent) ) Last month it was ((percent) ) In April, when the
budget was due, unemployment was ((percent) ) Unemployment last
month was ((percent) ) Economic growth last April, when the
budget was due, was ( (GNP percent) ) Last month it was ( (GNP
5
percent) ) Even after the economy was threatened by higher oil
prices from the Persian Gulf crisis, Congress delayed. This
Congress was content to stall an agreement and stall the economy,
all in the name of politics and higher taxes.
The Democrats talk a lot about "fairness." Well let me tell
you what really isn't fair: High interest rates are not fair.
Inflation is not fair. And unemployment is not fair. And if you
hear a Democratic Member of Congress bemoan a slow economy, ask
your legislator why their majority blocked the people's business
for half a year -- again, in the name of politics and higher
taxes.
Some of the more self-congratulatory members of the process
have compared this budget agreement to the Constitutional
Convention. That is ludicrous. How stunted the ambitions of the
Capitol seem when compared to those of the Founders; how petty
this budget deal seems when compared to the progressive Square
Deal of Teddy Roosevelt, the New Deal of Franklin Roosevelt, or
the Fair Deal of Harry Truman; how narrow our goals seem when
compared to those of a generation that made home-ownership
affordable for millions, built highways across a continent, and
sent a man to the Moon.
I believe that a $1.3 trillion budget gives us ample room to
dream again, to advance new ideas to renew our government -- to
rethink and restructure our priorities from the ground up. But
Congress makes programs in its own image: unresponsive and
bureaucratic. And Congress would rather raise taxes than raise
6
the issue of reform. So the problem isn't with the American
people and their Dream. It's with the Congress.
Like all aristocratic, elite institutions, Congress protects
its prerogatives, perks and privileges through the naked use of
power. In short, it protects its own. It rejects our proposals
for campaign finance reform, and to abolish special-interest
political action committees. It refuses to clean up the special-
interest politics that allows incumbents to feather their nests
with special-interest dollars. ( (When it comes to civil rights
and employee rights, Congress keeps itself exempt, and above the
law. ))
And when Congress speaks, it speaks in the language of
Alice-in-Wonderland. For example, when Congress doesn't get the
spending increases it wants, Congress calls that a "cut," even if
more dollars are actually spent. In other words, to the
Congress, up is down.
Even in the midst of a crisis, Congress looks for pork-
barrel bonanzas. Last Saturday, in the midst of the budget
crisis, Congressional conferees pushed through an almost 19
percent increase for pet projects. Even as Congress voted to cut
Medicare, they also voted to spend half a million dollars to
create a Lawrence Welk tourist attraction. ((Other examples to
come. ))
Congress also spent $1 million for a national transportation
plan for walkers and bicyclists. Well I say if Congress wants a
plan to tell us how to walk -- spending more in taxes than most
7
people pay in their lifetime -- then perhaps Congress should take
a walk.
As one Senator said: "It's time we started to spend some
money on this country." I say it's time we stopped spending and
running up big deficits. I'm willing to take my case to the
American people. They're watching -- and learning. They see
that when their Congress asks them to tighten their belts, it
always loosens its own. Never have I felt more strongly about
the line-item veto. Never has the country needed a balanced
budget amendment more than now. Never again should the people
and their president be presented with such waste. 111
We have a sacred obligation not to squander the generosity
and compassion of the American people. There is so much we could
achieve if we could reform Washington, to make it empower people,
not bureaucracies; to work with them to fulfill their potential
at home and be competitive around the world.
In education, we want reform -- to empower parents to choose
their children's schools. In child care, we want reform -- to
empower parents to choose who will watch over their children. In
the most desolate inner cities, we want reform -- so we strive to
create zones of opportunity, to remove barriers to mobility and
success, to empower people with the spirit of enterprise.
But this Congress would rather proclaim "National Digestive
Disease Awareness Month, than health legislation. This Congress
would rather proclaim "National Crime Prevention Month, than
pass our tough crime bill. And this Congress held up education
8
reform for a year. But at least they passed a proclamation
declaring "The Decade of the Brain. " 111
In short, this is a Congress that would rather issue feel-
good proclamations, than address problems. This Democratic
Congress is all sound and fury, signifying nothing. Make no
mistake -- we have seen Congress itself become the biggest, most
entrenched special-interest of our time.
So if the status quo is stagnant, then America needs a
change. America needs a Better Deal.
We need a Better Deal because this is a Congress wedded to
Washington solutions. We have seen it become a perpetual
Congress that expects to rule for eternity. Ninety-eight percent
of all incumbents who seek re-election are re-elected. They are
re-elected because they use -- or abuse -- all the powers of
incumbency, from franked mail to pork-barrel spending. We have
seen the House intended to be closest to the people become a
House of Lords.
But it doesn't have to be this way. Everyone says Congress
is the problem -- but not my Representative, not my Senator. But
the only way to make an institution accountable is to make its
Members accountable. The only way to send a message to
Washington is not to send your elected representatives back.
The American voter can return power to communities from
bureaucracies. We can do this by electing a reform Congress; and
we can begin thirteen days from today. This next election will
be a small step. But it will be the start of a momentum that
will build, and build, in the elections ahead.
9
In the remaining weeks of this campaign season, and for the
rest of my presidency, I will take a message to the people:
America doesn't need a House of Lords. America needs a new
responsible Congress. America needs a Congress that will work
with the President for the good of all.\\ America needs a
Better Deal.
Harry Truman reminded us that only a President represents
all the people, can stand for the national interest, and stand
against the special interests.
I will travel from Massachusetts to Hawaii to challenge
Americans to take charge of their destiny. Let them give America
a fresh start for reform and a better future. Give me a new
Congress I can work with.
Thank you, and may God bless you all and the United States
of America.
#
#
#
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
90 OCT 22 P6 39
October 22, 1990
MEMORANDUM FOR CHRISS WINSTON
FROM:
JIM PINKERTON
SUBJECT:
Draft Presidential Remarks On The Budget
Agreement For The East Room, Wednesday,
October 24th, 1990.
This speech will really set a much-needed tone for the
Administration in coming days. If we can keep this up,
then from now on we will impart to the President's
language a sense of single-minded purpose and generate new
confidence. A few comments follow:
pg. 2, para. 3, line 1 "Eventually, lower interest
rates will also mean tens of thousands of housing
starts
"
The listing of the benefits of the agreement, starting
with this passage and continuing for the rest of the page,
seems a logical place to trim back excess length: too
much extolling of the agreement's virtues will dilute the
message that Congress has stuck it to the taxpayers with
this agreement.
4,3,7 "The Democrat's platform consists of three-letter
word: tax, tax, tax."
The word "a" is need between "of" and "three-letter."
5,4,2 "For example, if you spend $1000 on groceries....
"
The explanation of this complicated topic is well-done.
6,3,1 "Never have I felt more in need of a line-item
veto."
We ought not to personalize this with the words "I
feel, " but rather make it the country's need: "Never has
the country needed the line-item veto more."
8,1,4 " sordid maneuver since, sneaky and unfair."
2
A typo here. We suggest substituting "cynical" for
"since."
9,1,1 "spirit of enterprise can take root and blossom in
a zones "
Typo: the "a" before "zones" should be omitted.
10,1,5 "Now it turns out that the leaders of Congress
Even though we suggested the idea for this passage, on
reflection we think that perhaps we ought to take care
that the Administration does not engage in some practice
that appears to be similar to this Congressional
procedure. At the least, we ought to check the reactions
to today's story in the subsequent newspapers.
###
Page data
- Page
- 1
- Source index
- 0
- Type
- document
- Media ID
- e46f1bdc074841f2
- Size
- unknown
Document data
- ID
- 323151237
- Core
- doc
- Type
- document
DTO data
{
"id": "323151237",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/323151237",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Budget Agreement Address 10/25/90 [OA 6026]",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/323151237",
"identifierLocal": "13546-007",
"collections": [
"Records of the White House Office of Speechwriting (George H. W. Bush Administration)",
"Speech Draft Files"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/bush/gb-spe/speechwriting_draft_chron_578973/41-bpr-speech-draft-chron-13546-007_323151237.pdf",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/bush/gb-spe/speechwriting_draft_chron_578973/41-bpr-speech-draft-chron-13546-007_323151237.pdf",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/bush/gb-spe/speechwriting_draft_chron_578973/41-bpr-speech-draft-chron-13546-007_323151237.pdf",
"imageCount": 1,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Context sent to Scholar
Document identity
{
"localId": "323151237",
"label": "Budget Agreement Address 10/25/90 [OA 6026]",
"core": "doc",
"dtoType": "document",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/323151237"
}
Document source metadata
{
"id": "323151237",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/323151237",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Budget Agreement Address 10/25/90 [OA 6026]",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/323151237",
"identifierLocal": "13546-007",
"collections": [
"Records of the White House Office of Speechwriting (George H. W. Bush Administration)",
"Speech Draft Files"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/bush/gb-spe/speechwriting_draft_chron_578973/41-bpr-speech-draft-chron-13546-007_323151237.pdf",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/bush/gb-spe/speechwriting_draft_chron_578973/41-bpr-speech-draft-chron-13546-007_323151237.pdf",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/bush/gb-spe/speechwriting_draft_chron_578973/41-bpr-speech-draft-chron-13546-007_323151237.pdf",
"imageCount": 1,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras
{
"url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/323151237",
"naId": 323151237,
"levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
"recordType": "description",
"ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}
Page context
{
"seq": 1,
"pageIndex": 0,
"type": "document",
"url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/bush/gb-spe/speechwriting_draft_chron_578973/41-bpr-speech-draft-chron-13546-007_323151237.pdf",
"mediaId": "e46f1bdc074841f2",
"ocrText": "Originally Processed With FOIA(s):\nFOIA Number:\nS\nS\nFOIA\nMARKER\nThis is not a textual record. This is used as an\nadministrative marker by the George Bush Presidential\nLibrary Staff.\nRecord Group/Collection:\nGeorge H.W. Bush Presidential Records\nCollection/Office of Origin:\nSpeechwriting, White House Office of\nSeries:\nSpeech File Draft Files\nSubseries:\nChron File, 1989-1993\nOA/ID Number:\n13546\nFolder ID Number:\n13546-007\nFolder Title:\nBudget Agreement Address 10/25/90 [OA 6026]\nStack:\nRow:\nSection:\nShelf:\nPosition:\nG\n26\n16\n5\n3\nCash\nDavis/Blymire\nMARK\nEDTS\n->\nTitle: Harry\nDate: Oct. 20, 1990\nDraft: Two\nPRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: EAST ROOM\n( (Time) WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 24, 1990\nSTBT\nWelcome to the White House, please be seated.\nAfter months of frustration and delay, Congress sent me a\ndeficit-reduction bill I could sign -- an agreement to save more\nthan $500 billion in five years. I want to tell you -- small\nbusinessmen and women, and the American people -- what our\nbipartisan federal budget agreement will achieve, what it won't\nachieve, and what it reveals about the ways of Washington.\nFirst, let me tell you why our agreement will benefit you\nand your loved ones.\nWe faced this budget crisis because Congress writes the\nchecks, and it V overdrawn by as much as $300 billion. When you\nwrite a bad check, you pay a fine. And when Congress writes bad\nchecks, we all pay a fine in the form of higher interest rates.\nSo had we failed, interest rates would have risen sharply.\nBut in the last week, interest rates fell by ((percent)). For\nthe typical American, every one-and-a-half percent drop in\ninterest rates can mean a reduction of about $110 per month\nin\nyour monthly mortgage payments.\nLower interest rates will also mean tens of thousands of\nhousing starts, and better auto sales. Most of all, by reducing\nthe federal government's drain on our national savings, our\n2\nagreement will spur job creation and investment -- and give our\nchildren a chance for a better future. III\nYou know it's almost impossible to get Congress to vote for\neven minuscule spending cuts. No surprise, since federal\nspending has ((doubled)) in a decade. But this time we got\nCongress to agree to (($100)) million in spending cuts -- the\nbiggest ever -- and the first five-year curb on spending ever.\nAnd, should the Congressional mood change -- and you can bet\nit will -- Congress will find that these cuts cannot be\nrescinded, because they are already enforced by law -- these\nspending cuts and spending caps are real. III\nWe've also passed a law to put Congress on the pay-as-you-\ngo plan. No longer will Congress be able to fund programs on\npromises. From now on, before Congress can pass new programs, it\nwill first have to pay for them. III\nFinally, our agreement is a long-overdue show of national\nresolve for the world. And it is an even greater show of\nAmerican confidence for an unprincipled predatory power -- Iraq.\nSome liberals in the Congress wanted reckless cuts in defense\nspending. But I held the line to protect our Armed Forces from\nmeat-ax cuts. Although I agreed to almost (($70 billion) ) in\ndefense reductions, I will never agree to jeopardize America, or\nour servicemen and women in the Persian Gulf.\\\\\\\nSo all in all, our agreement is unprecedented, long-overdue\nand\nabsolutely necessary. But I am not here today to join the\nCongress in a carnival of self-congratulation. We came to this\n3\nagreement too late -- six months too late. We could have had\nthis agreement in May, in June or in August. Instead, Congress\nhas once again busted its self-imposed deadlines and given me a\nbudget to sign at the 11th hour; so late, in fact, that we are\nnow at the brink of a downturn that could have been avoided.\nSome compare this budget agreement to the Constitutional\nConvention. And yet, how stunted the ambitions of the capital\nseem when compared to those of its Founders; how petty this\nbudget deal seems when compared to the progressive Square Deal of\nTeddy Roosevelt, the New Deal of Franklin Roosevelt, or the Fair\nDeal of Harry Truman; how narrow our goals seem when compared to\nthose of a generation that built affordable homes for millions,\nhighways across a continent, and sent a man to the Moon.\nOur government simply isn't equal to the American people and\ntheir dreams. Why? Because for decades we've been ruled by a\ndivided government, especially by a Congress jealous of its\nprerogatives, perks and powers.\nWe want America to grow, and to move, year by year, a little\ncloser to the stars. Yet this budget does little to actively\npromote growth and progress, to keep this country moving. I\nbelieve we can do more, much more. But in the name of bumper\nsticker slogans about \"fairness,\" the Congress resisted our every\neffort to create incentives for growth.\nI believe that with a $1.2 trillion budget, we can find ways\nto renew our government -- to rethink and restructure our\n4\nprograms from the ground up -- to throw ideas as well as money at\nour problems.\nBut Congress makes its programs in its own image. And\nCongress would rather raise taxes than raise the issue of reform.\nSo, to help the economy, I was forced against my every instinct\nto agree to allow a modest increase in consumption taxes -- ((I\ncall it tax-broccoli.) ) This is a necessary price I had to pay\nto keep the majority that rules Congress at the table. I make no\napologies. This is simply the cost of divided government.\nBut I also know most Americans watch the workings of\nCongress with utter bafflement. And why not? I challenge any\nMember of Congress, on either side of the aisle, to suggest that\ngood government can come from a body served by 30,000 staff\nmembers, and with nearly 300 committees and subcommittees.\nCongress is a chaos of committees, a confusion of command, an\nanarchy of egos.\nAnd when Congress speaks, it speaks in an arcane, Alice-in-\nWonderland language. For example, if you spend $1,000 on\ngroceries in one year, and $1,100 the next -- you'd consider that\na ten-percent increase. Only those who live in the never-never\nland inside the Washington Beltway would call discretionary\nspending increases of ((ten percent) ) every year \"cuts\" simply\nbecause they fall short of extravagant expectations.\nCongress views even the most solemn obligations of governing\nas bonanzas. For example, when I urged Congress to pass\nemergency funds to help new and fragile democracies in Panama and\n5\nNicaragua -- their bill came to me three months late and loaded\nwith more than $1.3 billion in unrequested, unrelated\nunworthy domestic spending.\ntransportation\nEven under the pressure of a budget crisis, conferees on\nSaturday still made us accept an 18.8 percent increase for\num\nhomestate projects, just business as usual in Washington, D.C.\n((Other examples -- bigger tax break for rich art donors?) ) Even\nas Congress voted to cut Medicare, they also voted to spend $1\nmillion to develop a national transportation plan for walkers and\nbicyclists. I say if Congress wants a plan to tell us how to\nwalk -- spending more in taxes than most people pay in their\nlifetime -- then perhaps it's time Congress took a walk. III\nFrankly, these items are about as welcome at the White House\nas a Christmas fruitcake. A President isn't given the option of\n?\nparing this cake by a single slice, or even plucking one single\nitem. It's all or nothing.\nNever have I felt more in need of a line-item veto. Never\nshould a people and their president have to accept this kind of\nwaste. And never again should a people and their president face\na Congress that plays chicken with the economy.\nBut the situation is far from hopeless. The American people\nare watching. They see that when their Congress asks them to\ntighten their belts, it always loosens its own.\nAnd they will know that my greatest achievement in this\nagreement is what I managed to prevent Congress from doing --\nespecially when I kept Congress from repealing \"indexing.\"\n6\nLet me tell you what this means. For years, Washington was\na silent partner in inflation, using it to raise taxes on working\nfamilies year after year, all without a single up-and-down vote\nin Congress. The rich remain unaffected by indexing, so this is\na tax on working America.\nWell, eventually, working Americans rose up in outrage;\nforcing Congress to pass a law to keep inflation from lifting you\ninto ever higher tax brackets by indexing your income.\nIndexation became your protective shield against a form of\ninvisible taxation known as \"bracket creep.\"\nBut had this Administration have not stood firm, the House of\nRepresentatives would taken your shield away, exposing you to\n\"bracket creep\" with a vengeance. If you are married with two\nchildren and make $34,000 -- this House would have raised your\nincome taxes by $313.50 -- all without a single honest vote. Now\nI ask you: Is that \"fairness\"?\nThis Congress -- lacking the courage of its convictions --\nwas willing to let inflation do their dirty work for them.\nWell, that proposal appalled me.\nThat proposal angered me.\nAnd as long as I'm your President -- the inflation tax will\nnever get past my desk.\nCommon sense tells us that when tax rates are too high,\nincentives are too low for people to save, invest and help create\nnew jobs. But Congress doesn't know the difference between\nmilking a COW and sending it to slaughter. Congress, in its long\n7\nreign, has come to resemble the Bourbon kings of France: They\nlearn nothing and they forget nothing.\nBut we have learned something: When Congress raises income\ntaxes on the few, it is always the beginning of a backdoor\nattempt to raise it on the many. That is why I am determined\nCongress will never raise income tax rates on the middle-class.\nYes, I am also determined to reduce the deficit. But I am\neven more determined to continue economic growth. Yes, I am\ndetermined to cut government. But I am even more determined to\nreform government, to make it work.\nWe have an almost sacred obligation not to squander the\ngenerosity and compassion of the American people. There is so\nmuch we could achieve if we could direct Washington to empower\npeople, to work with them.\nIn education, we want to empower parents to choose their\nchildren's schools. In child care, we want to empower parents to\nchoose who will watch over their children. In the most desolate\ninner cities, we strive to remove barriers to opportunity so the\nspirit of enterprise can take root and bloom. bloosom\nYet this Congress would rather pass a \"National Home Care\nIAW\nWeek,\" instead of our housing bill to empower public housing\ntenants, to let them take charge of their lives. This Congress\nwould rather pass a \"Vocational/Technical Education Week,\"\ninstead of our Educational Excellence Act to empower state and\n1\nlocal leaders, parents and teachers to reform our schools. This\nCongress would rather pass a \"National Crime Prevention Month,\"\nSTET\n8\nour\ninstead of making our streets safer with\ntough\nnew\ncrime\nbill\n-- now a year and a half in the hopper.\nIn short, this is a Congress long on words and short on\ndeeds. A lot of sound and fury, signifying nothing.\nThe status quo is stagnation incarnate. America needs\nchange. America needs a fresh start.\nHarry Truman reminded us that only a President represents\nall the people; only a President can stick up for the national\ninterest, and demand a fresh start. And make no mistake -- in\nour lifetime, we have seen Congress itself become the biggest and\nmost entrenched special-interest of all time.\nWe have seen it become a perpetual Congress that expects to\nrule for eternity. We have seen the House closest to the people\nminimum Overtime?\nbecome a House of Lords.\nLike all aristocracies and elite institutions, Congress\nmaintains its privileges through the naked use of power. It\nrejected our proposals for campaign finance reform. And when it\ncomes ( (to the Civil Rights Act, the American with Disabilities\nAct, )) and government ethics laws -- Congress keeps itself exempt\nand above the law.\nWell, I believe it is again time for a fresh start -- if\nJim\nwants tocut\nin this election, then surely in the next. The American people\nare slow to anger. But when they do, their anger is a splendid\nand righteous thing to behold.\nSo in the remaining weeks of this campaign season, and for\nthe rest of my presidency, I will take a message to the people:\n9\nAmerica doesn't need a House of Lords. America needs a new\nCongress. 111 And I need a Congress that will work with me.\nLet the American voters decide. Let them give America a\nfresh start for reform and a better future.\nThank you, and may God bless you all and the United States\nof America.\n#\n#\n#\nDRAFT [xinadno) 5 4000] as pey m\nDavis/Blymire\nTitle: Harry\nDate: Oct. 20, 1990\nDraft: Two\nPRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: EAST ROOM\n(Time)), WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 24, 1990\nS\nWelcome to the White House, please be seated.\nwhy\nAfter months of frustration and delay, Congress sent me a\ndeficit-reduction bill I could sign -- an agreement to save more\nunderstand\nthan $500 billion over five years. I want to tell you -- small\nbalance way. I May wanted had reduce so deficit with carefule\nspending cuts. the Democrate to clash\npaty\nmy\nI\nbusinessmen and women, and the American people -- what our\nbipartisan federal budget agreement will achieve, what it won't\nWhile\nmember\ngo the other\nachieve, and what it reveals about the ways of Washington.\nFirst, let me tell you why our agreement will benefit you\nand loved After ones reluctance. We could have had 2 much better agreement. And we could\nFirst, I want to say that I signed this agreement with great\nyour affe have signed it six months ago Unfarturately we wait 4.11 Rve\nmide Minutes minnight be carse to Corgressions budget process has broken\nWe faced this budget crisis because Congress writes the do wr. I hart\nhas\naccept sainbe this deal\nchecks, and it overdrawn by as much as $300 billion. When you be the cause national\ninterest\nwrite a bad check, you pay a fine. And when Congress writes bad requires .7.\nBut I'm nic\nchecks, we all pay a fine in the form of higher interest rates. + dired at\nthese who\nSo had we failed, interest rates would have risen sharply.\ninsist o\nin articiption of this agrent.\nthe\nBut in the last week, interest rates fell by ((percent)) For\nplaying politics\nwith te\nthe typical American, every one-and-a-half percent drop in\neconomy\nour future.\ninterest rates can mean a reduction of about $110 per month in\nEventually,\nyour monthly mortgage payments.\nLower interest rates will also mean tens of thousands of\nhousing starts, and better auto sales. Most of all, by reducing\nthe federal government's drain on our national savings, our\n2\nagreement will spur job creation and investment -- and give our\nchildren a chance for a better future. III\nYou know it's almost impossible to get Congress to vote for\neven minuscule spending cuts. No surprise, since federal\nspending has ((doubled)) in a decade. But this time we got\nreduce He rate of growth\nCongress to agree to (($100)) million in spending cuts --the\n'\nbiggest ever -- and the first five-year curb on spending ever. III\nAnd, should the Congressional mood change -- and you can bet\nit will -- Congress will find that these cuts cannot be\nrescinded, because they are already enforced by law -- these\nspending cuts and spending caps are real.\nthe agreement\nWe ve also passed a law to put Congress on the pay-as-you-\ngo plan. No longer will Congress be able to fund programs on\npromises. From now on, before Congress can pass new programs, it\nwill first have to pay for them. III\nat long 12st demonstrates to the world our\nFinally, our agreement is a overdue show of national\nresolve, for the world. And it is an even greater show of\nAmerican confidence for an unprincipled predatory power -- Iraq.\nSome liberals in the Congress wanted reckless cuts in defense\nspending. But I held the line to protect our Armed Forces from\nmeat-ax cuts. Although I agreed to almost (($70 billion)) in\ndefense reductions, I will never agree to jeopardize America, or\nour servicemen and women in the Persian Gulf. III\nthis\nSo all in all, our agreement is unprecedented, long-overdue\nhere,\nand absolutely necessary. But I am not here today to join the\nCongress in a carnival of self-congratulation. We came to this\nCongress\nDemocratic majorial held slourd the that economy down\n3\nThe controls hostage langress while juy house it were they wn throthe\nstored\nagreement too late -- six months too late. We could have had\nbecause were so\n70\n3\nthis agreement in May, in June or in August. Instead, Congress\n- - money spend.\nto\nhas once again busted all its self-imposed deadlines, and given\nThey didn't just writ hill the 11th hr., they united 2:11 well after michight 230 to maning\nme a budget to sign at the 11th hour; so late, in fact, that we We the 24\ndays into to\nare now at the brink of a downturn that could have been avoided. new fiscal yr.\nThe Democrate talk lot about friness. well let m tell you about really isn't for isn't fair.\nSome compare this budget agreement to the Constitutional So\nif\nDem.\nMember of Congress\nConvention. And yet, how stunted the ambitions of the capital\nfells you\nthat res w she\nseem when compared to those of its Founders; how petty this\nagainst show\ngrants,\nbudget deal seems when compared to the progressive Square Deal of\nask him -\nher why she\nTeddy Roosevelt, the New Deal of Franklin Roosevelt, or the Fair\nwas pat\nat re\nDeal of Harry Truman; how narrow our goals seem when compared to\nmajorty\nthose of a generation that built affordable homes for millions,\nthat\nblacked action\nhighways across a continent, and sent a man to the Moon.\n-the people's\nbusiness\nOur government simply isn't equal to the American people and\nfor half\ntheir dreams. Why? Because for decades we've been ruled by a\na yen to\nmore + more\nseize every Lost\ndivided government, especially by a Congress jealous of its\nat shat term\nprerogatives, perks and powers.\npolitical\nadvantage\nWe want America to grow, and to move, year by year, a little\nday canld.\nonly\nthem\ncloser to the stars. Yet this budget does little to actively\npromote growth and progress, to keep this country moving. I\nbelieve we can do more, much more. But in the name of bumper\nsticker slogans about \"fairness,\" the Congress resisted our every\neffort to create incentives for growth. Such short-sighted thinking may\nprevail in this Congress, but you can part count a me to pursue growth in He\nI believe that with a $1.2 trillion budget, we can find ways next\nto renew our government -- to rethink and restructure our\nCongress.\nThe Democrate platform consists\nJ 2 lot of 3 letter words. tax, tar, tax.\nThe Democrate even demanded r tay\nTheir lips said soak the lick, but their\nas a tax.\nactions spoke londer defeat delay indexing,\nwill working Ares:-\n10/ the crovdi had even deeser in to pocket of K\n4\npush new\nthrow\nprograms from the ground up -- to throw ideas as well as money at\nour problems.\nBut Congress makes its programs in its own image. And\nCongress would rather raise taxes than raise the issue of reform.\nSo, to help the economy, I was forced against my every instinct\nto agree to allow a modest increase in consumption taxes -- ((I\ncall it tax-broccoli. This is a necessary price I had to pay\nto keep the majority that rules Congress at the table. I make no\napologies. This is simply the cost of divided government.\nBut I also know most Americans watch the workings of\nCongress with utter bafflement. And why not? I challenge any\nMember of Congress, on either side of the aisle, to suggest that\ngood government can come from a body served by 30,000 staff\nmembers, and with nearly 300 committees and subcommittees.\nCongress is a chaos of committees, a confusion of command, an\nBut if Congress wanted h\nanarchy of egos.\nspeed $ 1200, ruy 'J call to\nincrease to $1100 2 cut!\nAnd when Congress speaks, it speaks in an arcane, Alice-in-\nWonderland language. For example, if you spend $1,000 on\ngroceries in one year, and $1,100 the next -- you'd consider that\na ten-percent increase. Only those who live in the never-never\nland inside the Washington Beltway would call discretionary\nspending increases of ((ten percent)) every year \"cuts\" simply\nbecause they fall short of extravagant expectations. Discretionary service\nthats the term day use here in Washington for He $ - billion in addition spending Think\nCongress views even the most solemn obligations of governing Discritionary.\nas bonanzas. For example, when I urged Congress to pass\nThink\nabout\nemergency funds to help new and fragile democracies in Panama and Are your\nWhen times NY\ndight Ma, what happy\nby 10% you int back.\nto your discretionary spend\nOnly in washington can lux my spending\nDoyou increase optionsl spending\nsand L. in tu budnets\n5\nNicaragua -- their bill came to me three months late and loaded\nwith more than $1.3 billion in unrequested, unrelated and\nunworthy domestic spending.\nEven under the pressure of a budget crisis, conferees on\nSaturday still made us accept an 18.8 percent increase for\nhomestate projects, just business as usual in Washington, D.C.\n( (Other examples -- bigger tax break for rich art donors.) And,\nas Congress voted to cut Medicare, they also voted to spend $1\nmillion to develop a national transportation plan for walkers and\nbicyclists. I say if Congress wants a plan to tell us how to\nwalk -- spending more in taxes than most people pay in their\nlifetime -- then perhaps it's time this Congress took a walk.\nbudget\nFrankly, these items are about as welcome at the White House\nfull of nutfy programs.\n+\nlots\nT\nlots\nof\nlit\nat\nsugar\nas a Christmas fruitcake. A President isn't given the option of\nparing this cake by a single slice, or even plucking one single\nitem. It's all or nothing.\nNever have I felt more in need of a line-item veto. Never\nshould a people and their president have to accept this kind of\nwaste. And never again should a people and their president face\na Congress that plays chicken with the economy. III\nBut the situation is far from hopeless. The American people\nare watching. They see that when their Congress asks them to\ntighten their belts, it always loosens its own.\nThey will know that my greatest achievements in this\nagreement is what I managed to prevent Congress from doing. And\nI am proudest that I kept Congress from repealing \"indexing.\"\n6\nLet me tell you what this means. For years, Washington was\na silent partner in inflation, using it to raise taxes on working\nfamilies year after year, all without a single up-and-down vote\nbecause tey are already\nin Congress. The rich remain unaffected by indexing so this is in\nthe top\na tax on working America, pure + simple\nbracket.\nWell, eventually, working Americans rose up in outrage;\nforcing Congress to pass a law to keep inflation from lifting you\ninto ever higher tax brackets by indexing your income.\nIndexation became your protective shield against a form of\ninvisible taxation known as \"bracket creep.\"\nBut had this Administration not stood firm, the House of\nRepresentatives would taken your shield away, exposing you to\n\"bracket creep\" with a vengeance. If you are married with two\nhave a tarable income at\nDemocratically led\nchildren and make $34,000 -- this House would have raised your\nincome taxes by $313.50 -- all without a single honest vote. Now\nI call it: how to succeed in spending really\nI ask you: Is that \"fairness\"?\ndry.\nThis Congress -- lacking the courage of its convictions --\neage\nwas willing to let inflation do their dirty work for them.\nWell, that proposal appalled me.\nThat proposal angered me.\nAnd as long as I'm your President -- the inflation tax will\nnever get past my desk. III So when you Democratic Member of Congress tell, you\nthat the program state not \"bir,\" tell Him that the House leadership plan to soak re\nCommon sense tells us that when tax rates are too high, middle class w/o\nhaving to vote\nincentives are too low for people to save, invest and help create an it\nis\nto most\nnew jobs. But Congress doesn't know the difference between\nunfor\nmilking a COW and sending it to slaughter. Congress, in its long thing since\n7\nreign, has come to resemble the Bourbon kings of France: They\nlearn nothing and they forget nothing.\n( (But we have learned something: When Congress raises income\ntaxes on the few, it is always the beginning of a backdoor\nattempt to raise it on the many. That is why I am determined\nworking America\nCongress will never raise income tax rates on the middle-class.)\nYes, I am also determined to reduce the deficit. But I am\neven more determined to continue economic growth. Yes, I am\ndetermined to cut government. But I am even more determined to\nreform government, to make it work.\nWe have an almost sacred obligation not to squander the\ngenerosity and compassion of the American people. There is so\nmuch we could achieve if we could direct Washington to empower\npeople, and work with them fulfill tear dreams 1 become mare\ncompetitive.\nIn education, we want to empower parents to choose the\nschools their children will attend. In child care, we want to\nempower parents to choose who will watch over their children. In\nthe most desolate inner cities, we want the spirit of enterprise\nin new zones at oppatinity. And And me want those streets and all streets be safe In\nwine\nto blossom Throughout America, we want. to remove barriers to upward\nequal opportunity We want\nopportunity.\nmobility + happiness.\nYet this Congress would rather pass a \"National Home Care\nWeek,\" instead of our housing bill to empower public housing\ntenants, to let them take charge of their lives. This Congress\nproctomation on on\nwould rather pass a, \"Vocational/Technical Education Week,\"\ninstead of our Educational Excellence Act to empower state and\nlocal leaders, parents and teachers to reform our schools. This\n8\nCongress would rather pass a \"National Crime Prevention Month,\"\ninstead of making our streets safer with our tough new crime bill\n-- now a year and a half in the hopper.\nIn short, this is a Congress long on words and short on\ndeeds. A lot of sound and fury, signifying nothing.\nThe status quo is stagnation incarnate. America needs\nchange. America needs a fresh start. III\nHarry Truman reminded us that only a President represents\nall the people; only a President can stick up for the national\nand stand up against the special interest. only He President can\ninterest, and demand a fresh start. And make no mistake -- in\nour lifetime, we have seen Congress itself become the biggest and\nmost entrenched special-interest of all time. III\nWe have seen it become a perpetual Congress that expects to\nintended to be Heched institution\nrule for eternity. We have seen the House closest to the people\nbecome a House of Lords. III\nLike all aristocracies and elite institutions, Congress\nmaintains its privileges through the naked use of power.\nto\nUP It te dirty PAC\nrejected our proposals for campaign finance reform. And when it politics\nthat\ncomes ( (to the Civil Rights Act, the American with Disabilities makes mables\ninsume bets\nAct, )) and government ethics laws -- Congress keeps itself exempt to feather\nduir nest\nand above the laws that make America 2 better place.\nul special\ninterest\nWell, I believe it is again time for a fresh start not\n$.\nin this election then surely in the next. The American people\nare slow to anger. But when they do, their anger is a splendid\nand righteous mum thing to behold.\n9\nSo in the remaining weeks of this campaign season, and for\nthe rest of my presidency, I will take a message to the people:\nAmerica doesn't need a House of Lords. III America needs a new responsive,\nAmerica\nresponsible Congress. III And I need a Congress that will work with me. III\nHe President for to\nLet the American voters decide. Let them give America a good all. of\nfresh start for reform and a better future. Give me 1 new\nCongress I can work with.\nThank you, and may God bless you all and the United States\nof America.\n#\n#\n#\nhand is wekin pocket\nfailness\nof\npeare\nslowing down\nI\ncan\neron. had to as engine\nwhy/tume\npooplem may\nDems. held eron. hostoq\ngone\nsee other way\nTheir actively, tap the middle class\nlips said the the 1.4\nI wanted\nto dol't spring with to\ntax on tax (swtux)\nThe Ders. wanted\nfar do ml\nSo we and\nLet me fax you memory\ncommonse\nyou must los r\nDen.\nelectronics\nPlattorm full of words B letter\nCLOSE HOLD\nDocument No. 184647\nWHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM\n90 OCT 23 A9:\nDATE: 10/22/90\nACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY:\nNOON 10/23/90\nSUBJECT:\nPRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: EAST ROOM\n(10/20 draft four)\nACTION FYI\nACTION FYI\nVICE PRESIDENT\nMCCLURE\nSUNUNU\nNEWMAN\nSCOWCROFT\nPORTER\nDARMAN\nROGICH\nCARD\nUNTERMEYER\nCICCONI\nROGERS\nDEMAREST\nPINKERTON\nFITZWATER\nWINSTON\nGRAY\nHAGIN\nHOLIDAY\nREMARKS:\nPlease provide any comments/recommendations directly to Chriss\nWinston by Noon on Tuesday, 10/23, with a copy to my office.\nThanks.\nRESPONSE:\nJames W. Cicconi\nAssistant to the President\nand Deputy to the Chief of Staff\nCLOSE HOLD\nExt. 2702\nDavis/Blymire\n90 OCT 22 PM 4: 58\nTitle: Harry\nDate: Oct. 20, 1990\nDraft: Four\nPRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: EAST ROOM\n10:30 a.m., THURSDAY, OCTOBER 25, 1990\nWelcome to the White House, please be seated.\nAfter months of frustration and delay, Congress sent me a\ndeficit-reduction bill I could sign -- an agreement to save more\nthan $500 billion in five years. I want to tell you -- here in\nthis room, as well as the American people -- what our bipartisan\nfederal budget agreement will achieve, what it won't achieve, and\nwhat it reveals about the ways of Washington. And I want to\nregister a message with Congress before I leave town.\n((First, I signed this agreement with great reluctance. We\ncould have had done much better. Unfortunately, the\nCongressional budget process broke down. It was five minutes\nafter midnight. And Congress left it to me to defend the\nnational interest.\n((Of course, I understand why some members of my own party\nmay have had to go the other way. I wanted to reduce the deficit\nwith a careful balance of spending cuts. The Democrats wanted to\nraise taxes and slash defense. Faced with this choice, I decided\nit was better to lose the saddle than the horse. But we are all\nsick and tired of those who play politics with America's future.\n( (We faced this budget crisis because Congress writes the\nchecks, and was overdrawn by as much as $300 billion. When you\n2\nwrite a bad check, you pay a fine. But when Congress writes bad\nchecks, we all pay a fine in the form of higher interest rates.\n( (Fortunately, the eventual lower interest rates this deal\ncould bring might mean tens of thousands of housing starts, and\nbetter auto sales.\n((You know it's almost impossible to get Congress to vote\nfor even minuscule spending cuts. No surprise, since federal\nspending has ((doubled)) in a decade. But this time we got\nCongress to agree to reduce the rate of growth with the first\nfive-year curb on spending ever.\\\\\\\n((And, should the Congressional mood change -- and you can\nbet it will -- Congress will find that these cuts cannot be\nrescinded, because they are already enforced by law -- these\nspending cuts and spending caps are real.\n((Also, this agreement puts Congress on the pay-as-you-go\nplan. No longer will it be able to fund programs on promises.\nFrom now on, before Congress can pass new programs, it will first\nhave to pay for them.\n((Finally, our agreement at long last demonstrates to the\nworld our resolve. And it is an even greater show of American\nconfidence for an unprincipled predator -- Iraq. Some liberals\nin the Congress wanted reckless cuts in defense spending. But I\nheld the line to protect our Armed Forces from meat-ax cuts.\nAlthough I agreed to almost (($70 billion)) in defense\nreductions, I will never agree to jeopardize America, or our\nservicemen and women in the Persian Gulf. III))\n3\nSo all in all, this agreement is unprecedented, long-\noverdue, absolutely necessary. But I will not join the Congress\nin a carnival of self-congratulation. We could have had this\nagreement in May, in June or in August. Congress didn't have to\nwait until 24 days into the new fiscal year, while it hunted for\nevery last morsel of political opportunity.\nBut the Democrat majority that controls Congress held a\nslowing economy hostage, choking the throttle. Congress has once\nagain busted its self-imposed deadlines and given me a budget to\nsign at the 11th hour; so late, in fact, that we are now at the\nbrink of a downturn that could have been avoided.\nYou hear the Democrats talk a lot about fairness. Well let\nme tell you what really isn't fair: unemployment isn't fair. And\nif you hear a Democrat Member of Congress bemoan a slow economy,\nask your legislator why their majority blocked the people's\nbusiness for half a year.\nSome compare this budget agreement to the Constitutional\nConvention. And yet, how stunted the ambitions of the Capitol\nseem when compared to those of the Founders; how petty this\nbudget deal seems when compared to the progressive Square Deal of\nTeddy Roosevelt, the New Deal of Franklin Roosevelt, or the Fair\nDeal of Harry Truman; how narrow our goals seem when compared to\nthose of a generation that built affordable homes for millions,\nhighways across a continent, and sent a man to the Moon.\nThe problem isn't with the American people and their dreams.\nIt's with our government. Why? Because for decades we've been\n4\nruled by a divided government, increasingly by a Congress jealous\nof its prerogatives, perks and powers.\nWe want America to grow, and to become, year by year, an\never greater nation. Yet this budget does only a little to\nactively promote growth and progress. I believe we can do more,\nmuch more. But in the name of bumper sticker slogans about\n\"fairness,\" the Congress resisted our every effort to create\nincentives for growth. The Democrat's platform consists of a\nthree-letter word: tax, tax, tax. They say \"soak the rich,\" but\ntheir actions speak louder: get the government to dig ever deeper\ninto the pockets of working Americans. Such short-sighted\nthinking may prevail in this Congress, but you can count on me to\npursue growth with the next Congress.\nI believe that with a $1.2 trillion budget, we can find ways\nto renew our government -- to rethink and restructure our\nprograms from the ground up -- to advance new ideas as well as\nthrow money at our problems.\nBut Congress makes its programs in its own image. And\nCongress would rather raise taxes than raise the issue of reform.\nFor the good of the economy, we paid a price; and that price is\ntaxes. It is also the price paid to keep the majority that rules\nCongress at the table. I make no apologies. This is simply the\ncost of divided government.\nBut I also know most Americans watch the workings of\nCongress with utter bafflement. And why not? I challenge any\nMember of Congress, on either side of the aisle, to suggest that\n5\ngood government can arise from a body served by 30,000 staff\nmembers, and with nearly 300 committees and subcommittees.\nCongress is a chaos of committees, a confusion of command, an\nanarchy of egos.\nAnd when Congress speaks, it speaks in an arcane, Alice-in-\nWonderland language. For example, if you spend $1,000 on\ngroceries in one year, and $1,100 the next -- you'd consider that\na ten-percent increase. Only those who live in the never-never\nland inside the Washington Beltway would call discretionary\nspending increases of ((ten percent)) every year \"cuts\" simply\nbecause they fall short of extravagant expectations.\nCongress views even the most solemn obligations of governing\nas bonanzas. Even under the pressure of a budget crisis,\nconferees on Saturday still forced through an 18.8 percent\nincrease for many homestate projects. ((Other examples -- bigger\ntax break for rich art donors?)) Even as Congress voted to cut\nMedicare, they also voted to spend $1 million to develop a\nnational transportation plan for walkers and bicyclists. I say\nif Congress wants a plan to tell us how to walk -- spending more\nin taxes than most people pay in their lifetime -- then perhaps\nit's time Congress took a walk.\nNever have I felt more in need of a line-item veto. Never\nshould a people and their president be presented with such waste.\nAnd never again should a people and their president face a\nCongress that plays chicken with the economy. III\n6\nBut the situation is far from hopeless. The American people\nare watching. They see that when their Congress asks them to\ntighten their belts, it always loosens its own.\nAnd they will know that my greatest achievement in this\nagreement is what I managed to prevent Congress from doing: I\nkept Congress from repealing \"indexing. \"\\\\\\\nFor years, Washington was a silent partner in inflation,\nusing it to raise taxes on working families year after year, all\nwithout a single up-and-down vote in Congress. The rich remain\nunaffected by indexing because they are already in the top\nbracket. This is a tax on working America, pure and simple.\nWell, eventually, working America rose up in outrage;\nforcing Congress to pass a law to keep inflation from lifting you\ninto ever higher tax brackets by indexing your income.\nIndexation became your protective shield against a form of\ninvisible taxation known as \"bracket creep.\"\nBut had this Administration not stood firm, the House of\nRepresentatives would have taken away your shield, exposing you\nto \"bracket creep\" with a vengeance. If you are married with two\nchildren and have a taxable income of $34,000 -- this Democrat-\nled House would have raised your income taxes by $313.50 --\nwithout a single honest vote. Call it how to succeed in spending\nwithout really trying. or just call it Democrat \"fairness. \"\nThis Congress -- lacking the courage of its convictions --\nwas eager to let inflation do their dirty work for them.\nWell, that proposal appalled me.\n7\nThat proposal angered me.\nIf Congress doesn't grasp the fact that the inflation tax is\nhistory, then this Congress will be history.\nCommon sense tells us that when tax rates are too high,\nincentives are too low for people to save, invest and help create\nnew jobs. But Congress doesn't know the difference between\nmilking a COW and sending it to slaughter. Congress, in its long\nreign, has come to resemble the Bourbon kings of France: They\nlearn nothing and they forget nothing.\n( (But we have learned something: When Congress raises income\ntaxes on the few, it is always the beginning of a backdoor\nattempt to raise it on the many. That is why I am determined\nCongress will never raise income tax rates on working America.)\nYes, I am also determined to reduce the deficit. But I am\neven more determined to continue economic growth. Yes, I am\ndetermined to cut government. But I am even more determined to\nreform government, to make it work.\nWe have a sacred obligation not to squander the generosity\nand compassion of the American people. There is so much we could\nachieve if we could direct Washington to empower people, to work\nwith them to fulfill their dreams and become competitive.\nIn education, we want to empower parents to choose their\nchildren's schools. In child care, we want to empower parents to\nchoose who will watch over their children. In the most desolate\ninner cities, we strive to create zones of opportunity, to remove\n8\nbarriers to mobility and success, so the spirit of enterprise can\ntake root and blossom.\nYet this Congress would rather pass a \"National Home Care\nWeek,\" instead of our housing act to empower public housing\ntenants to take charge of their lives. This Congress would\nrather pass a proclamation on \"Vocational/Technical Education\nWeek,\" instead of our Educational Excellence Act to empower state\nand local leaders, parents and teachers to reform our schools.\nThis Congress would rather pass a \"National Crime Prevention\nMonth,\" instead of making our streets safer with our proposed\ntough new crime laws -- now a year and a half in the hopper.\nIn short, this is a Congress long on words and short on\ndeeds. A lot of sound and fury, signifying nothing.\nWell if the status quo is stagnation incarnate, then America\nneeds a change. America needs a fresh start.\\\\\\\nHarry Truman reminded us that only a President represents\nall the people; only a President can stick up for the national\ninterest, and stand up to special interests. Only the President\ncan demand a fresh start. And make no mistake -- in our\nlifetime, we have seen Congress itself become the biggest and\nmost entrenched special-interest of all time.\nWe have seen it become a perpetual Congress that expects to\nrule for eternity. We have seen the House intended to be closest\nto the people become a House of Lords.\nLike all aristocracies and elite institutions, Congress\nmaintains its privileges through the naked use of power. It\n9\nrejected our proposals for campaign finance reform to clean up\ndirty PAC politics, allowing incumbents to feather their nest\nwith special-interest dollars. When it comes ( (to the Civil\nRights Act, the American with Disabilities Act,) ) and government\nethics laws -- Congress keeps itself exempt and above the law.\nNow it even turns out that the leaders of Congress are\nfilling their gas tanks for free. I guess only the little\npeople have to pay gas taxes. III\nSo in the remaining weeks of this campaign season, and for\nthe rest of my presidency, I will take a message to the people:\nAmerica doesn't need a House of Lords. III America needs a new\nresponsible Congress. 111 America needs a Congress that will work\nwith the President for the good of all.\nLet the American voters decide. Let them give America a\nfresh start for reform and a better future. Give me a new\nCongress I can work with.\nThank you, and may God bless you all and the United States\nof America.\n#\n#\n#\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\n90 OCT 23 PM 10: 57\nOctober 23, 1990\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT\nTHROUGH:\nCHRISS WINSTON\nFROM:\nMARK DAVIS MD\nSUBJECT:\nBUDGET ADDRESS\nOn Thursday morning, you will address an audience of 200 in the\nEast Room -- supporters and friends representing many\nconstituencies. length. Your remarks are approximately 18 minutes in\nThis speech is hardhitting, but fair. It sets the record\nstraight. And it launches a new strategy -- a new appeal to the\nAmerican people -- that you can take from Maine to Hawaii.\nDavis/Blymire\nTitle: Harry\nDate: Oct. 23, 1990\nDraft: Eight\nPRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: EAST ROOM\n10:30 a.m., THURSDAY, OCTOBER 25, 1990\nWelcome to the White House, please be seated\nd want to talk\nI've asked you here today to talk about something that all\nAmericans are asking: \"What on earth is wrong with Washington?\"\nI've seen many Congresses come and go. And I have never seen a\nCongress more gridlocked, more paralyzed and ineffective than\ntoday's.\nPatience and goodwill are American virtues. And the\nAmerican people have been very patient during the budget\nnegotiations. But their patience is not unlimited. They have a\nright to be angry. And that's a feeling I share.\n[\nAfter all, this is a Congress that talks about taking the\nhigh road, but always takes the path of least resistance.\nThis is a Congress that cannot represent the national\ninterest, because it is beholden to special-interests.\nThis is a Congress that cannot move forward, because it is\nstuck in an institutional rut. Served by 20,000 staff members,\ndivided into an arcane structure with nearly 300 committees and\nsubcommittees, Congress is a chaos of committees, a confusion of\ncommand, an anarchy of egos.\nThis is bad enough. But the institutional problem is made\nwe've had\nworse by nearly forty years of rule by one party dedicated to\nperpetual re-election. And the one party that rules Congress,\nAN\n2\nthe Democrats, has a bias for solutions of the past -- a bias for\nred-tape over choice; for the Capitol over community; for\nbureaucracy over people. When you add all this up, you can see\nwhy everything this Congress does is a variation on a theme: tax\nand spend.\nThe final budget agreement is a sad example of how the\nDemocratic Congress works -- or doesn't work. For the sake of\nthe nation, we had to reduce the deficit now. That meant an\nagreement had to be reached. But I felt strongly about reducing\nthe deficit with a careful balance of spending cuts. The\nDemocrats wanted to slash defense and raise income taxes for all\nAmericans. What we got was a compromise.\nI understand why some members of my own party had to go the\nother way. Plenty of Members on both sides of the aisle knew the\nnecessity and urgency of this agreement. They just couldn't vote\nfor it -- hoping that an easier vote would come along. I didn't\nhave that choice. Under our Constitution, only the President is\nelected by all the people; only the President represents the\nnation. Thus, the choice I faced was this agreement, or no\nagreement. I decided it was better to lose the saddle than the\nhorse, and signed this bill with great reluctance. An agreement\nwas needed to get deficit reduction. But I am certain that the\nAmerican people are sick and tired of what they had to go through\nduring these eight long, unnecessary months.\nof course, there is some good in this agreement. We got\n$500 billion in deficit reduction -- including $300 billion in\n3\nspending cuts -- the largest cut in history. This is a solid\nvictory for our children's future.\nWe also got Congress to agree to reduce the rate of spending\ngrowth with the first five-year curb on spending ever.\nWe put Congress on the pay-as-you-go plan, so Congress will\nno longer be able to fund programs on promises. And, should\nthe Congressional mood change -- and you can bet it will --\nCongress will find that these cuts are already enforced by law -\n- these spending cuts and spending caps are real.\nFinally, our agreement held the line against reckless cuts\nof our Armed Forces. This Administration put a marker down early\n-- I will never agree to jeopardize America. And now I will not\nlet down our servicemen and women in the Persian Gulf.\nSo all in all, this agreement is unprecedented, long-\noverdue, absolutely necessary. But I will not join the Congress\nin a carnival of self-congratulation. After all, we discussed\nthree kinds of proposals: the good, the bad and the ugly. I told\nyou about the good, now let me tell you about the rest. The bad:\nWe had to swallow $150 billion in taxes, taxes on gasoline and\nalcohol. But we stopped them from enacting the ugliest proposal\n-- to raise income taxes on working Americans.\nWe did even out the system to make it more fair: cutting the\ntax rate for many, while raising it for the wealthy few. But had\nthis Administration not stood firm, the House of Representatives\nwould have slapped automatic tax increases on working families.\nA family of four, with a taxable income of $34,000, would have\npaid an additional $313.50 in income taxes.\n4\nThis Democratic Congress was eager to raise taxes, and hoped\nno one would notice by using this ugly backdoor maneuver.\nWell that proposal is now history. 111\nBut to get an agreement, we had to negotiate with the\nDemocratic majority that rules Congress at the table. Because\nthe Democrats control Congress, we had to pay a price; and that\nprice was taxes. That is the cost of divided government.\nWe could have had this agreement in May, in June or in\nAugust, any time during the eight months the economy worsened.\nCongress didn't have to hunt for every last morsel of political\nopportunity; didn't have to wait until 24 days into the new\nfiscal year, about a dozen days before an election, to act.\nBut the Democratic majority that controls Congress choked\nthe throttle on a slowing economy -- all in the name of politics\nand higher taxes. Thirty-seven times in nine years, Congress has\nhad to pass emergency measures to fund the government. This\nmakes thirty-eight.\nBy law, a budget was due April 15. Congress has once again\nviolated its lawful deadlines and given me a late budget to sign;\nso late, in fact, that we are now at the brink of a downturn that\ncould have been avoided. We've been talking for eight months\nwhile the economy deteriorated.\nIn April, when the budget was due, inflation was\n( (percent) ) Last month it was ((percent) ) In April, when the\nbudget was due, unemployment was ( (percent) ) Unemployment last\nmonth was ((percent) ) Economic growth last April, when the\nbudget was due, was ( (GNP percent) ) Last month it was ((GNP\n5\npercent) ) Even after the economy was threatened by higher oil\nprices from the Persian Gulf crisis, Congress delayed. This\nCongress was content to stall an agreement and stall the economy,\nall in the name of politics and higher taxes. 111\nThe Democrats talk a lot about \"fairness.\" Well let me tell\nyou what really isn't fair: High interest rates are not fair.\nInflation is not fair. And unemployment is not fair. And if you\nhear a Democratic Member of Congress bemoan a slow economy, ask\nyour legislator why their majority blocked the people's business\nfor half a year -- again, in the name of politics and higher\ntaxes.\nSome of the more self-congratulatory members of the process\nhave compared this budget agreement to the Constitutional\nConvention. That is ludicrous. How stunted the ambitions of the\nCapitol seem when compared to those of the Founders; how petty\nthis budget deal seems when compared to the progressive Square\nDeal of Teddy Roosevelt, the New Deal of Franklin Roosevelt, or\nthe Fair Deal of Harry Truman; how narrow our goals seem when\ncompared to those of a generation that made home-ownership\naffordable for millions, built highways across a continent, and\nsent a man to the Moon.\nI believe that a $1.3 trillion budget gives us ample room to\ndream again, to advance new ideas to renew our government -- to\nrethink and restructure our priorities from the ground up. But\nCongress makes programs in its own image: unresponsive and\nbureaucratic. And Congress would rather raise taxes than raise\n6\nthe issue of reform. So the problem isn't with the American\npeople and their Dream. It's with the Congress.\nLike all aristocratic, elite institutions,] Congress protects\nits prerogatives, perks and privileges through the naked use of\npower. In short, it protects its own. It rejects our proposals\nfor campaign finance reform, and to abolish special-interest\npolitical action committees. It refuses to clean up the special-\ninterest politics that allows incumbents to feather their nests\nwith special-interest dollars. (When it comes to civil rights\nand employee rights, Congress keeps itself exempt, and above the\nlaw.)\nAnd when Congress speaks, it speaks in the language of\nAlice-in-Wonderland. For example, when Congress doesn't get the\nThe Democratic\nspending increases it wants, 1 Congress calls that a \"cut,\" even if\nmore dollars are actually spent. In other words, to the\nCongress, up is down.\nthe\nDomocribic\nEven in the midst of a crisis, Congress looks for pork-\nbarrel bonanzas. Last Saturday, in the midst of the budget\ncrisis, Congressional conferees pushed through an almost 19\npercent increase for pet projects. Even as Congress voted to cut\nMedicare, they also voted to spend half a million dollars to\ncreate a Lawrence Welk tourist attraction. ((Other examples to\ncome. ) )\nCongress also spent $1 million for a national transportation\nplan for walkers and bicyclists. Well I say if Congress wants a\nplan to tell us how to walk -- spending more in taxes than most\non that project\n7\npeople pay in their lifetime -- then perhaps Congress should take\na walk. III\nAs one Senator said: \"It's time we started to spend some\nmoney on this country. \"\nI say it's time we stopped spending and\nrunning up big deficits. I'm willing to take my case to the\nAmerican people. They're watching -- and learning. They see\nthat when their Congress asks them to tighten their belts, it\nalways loosens its own. Never have I felt more strongly about\nthe line-item veto. Never has the country needed a balanced\nbudget amendment more than now. Never again should the people\nand their president be presented with such waste. 111\nWe have a sacred obligation not to squander the generosity\nand compassion of the American people. There is so much we could\nachieve if we could reform Washington, to make it empower people,\nnot bureaucracies; to work with them to fulfill their potential\nat home and be competitive around the world.\nIn education, we want reform -- to empower parents to choose\ntheir children's schools. In child care, we want reform -- to\nempower parents to choose who will watch over their children. In\nthe most desolate inner cities, we want reform -- so we strive to\ncreate zones of opportunity, to remove barriers to mobility and\nsuccess, to empower people with the spirit of enterprise.\nBut this Congress would rather proclaim \"National Digestive\nDisease Awareness Month than health legislation. This Congress\nwould rather proclaim \"National Crime Prevention Month, If than\npass our tough crime bill. And this Congress held up education\nit all this makes\n8\nyou and sick to your don\nreform for a year. But at least they passed a proclamation\n- stomach, they also Digestive passed Na Do\ndeclaring \"The Decade of the Brain.\" 111\nAmareness wer\nIn short, this is a Congress that would rather issue feel-\ngood proclamations, than address problems. This Democratic\nCongress is all sound and fury, signifying nothing. Make no\nmistake -- we have seen Congress itself become the biggest, most\nentrenched special-interest of our time. III\nSo if the status quo is stagnant, then America needs a\nchange. America needs a Better Deal.\nINSERT\nWe need a Better Deal because this is a Congress wedded to\nWashington solutions. We have seen it become a perpetual\nCongress that expects to rule for eternity. Ninety-eight percent\nof all incumbents who seek re-election are re-elected. They are\nre-elected because tree they use -- or abuse -- all the powers of\nincumbency, from franked mail to pork-barrel spending. We have commett\n30,000 staff member;\nseen the House intended to be closest to the people become a\nHouse of Lords. 111\nBut it doesn't have to be this way. Everyone says Congress\nis the problem, but not my Representative, not my Senator But\nthe only way to make an institution accountable is to make its\nMembers accountable. The only way to send a message to\nWashington is not to send your elected representatives back. III\nThe American voter can return power to communities from\nbureaucracies. We can do this by electing a [reform] Congress; and\nwe can begin thirteen days from today. This next election will\nbe a small step. But it will be the start of a momentum that\nwill build, and build, in the elections ahead.\nthat you do policies\nbelieves in the\nits time\nto same Things The tax and spend time to\nof end the Democrate nm end to business It's noual. as\nINSERT\nAmerica needs a Congress that will balance\nthe hudget by cutting spending -- not Democrats\nwho try to raise the income taxes of average\nworking Americans.\nAmerica needs a congress that will pass a\ntongh crime, not Democrats who try to\ngut that bill and gut the death\npenalty-\nAmerica needs # a Congress that will\nend the influence of special interests\nand\neliminating special interest PAC money\nnot Democrats who are intent on\nstamme in office forever ay\nshalls W/ lobbyists money.\nAmerica need a congress that will improve one\nNation's competitiveness and preserve equal\nopportunity -- not Democrate who try to impose\nracial gnotas in every work place.\nAmerica needs a congress dedicated do the\nnational interest, not Democrato committed\nto THE special interests.\n9\nIn the remaining weeks of this campaign season, and for the\nrest of my presidency, I will take a message to the people:\nAmerica doesn't need a House of Lords. 111 America needs a new\nresponsible Congress. America needs a Congress that will work\nwith the President for the good of all.\\\\ America needs a\nBetter Deal.\nHarry Truman reminded us that only a President represents\nall the people, can stand for the national interest, and stand\nagainst the special interests.\nI will travel from Massachusetts to Hawaii to challenge\nAmericans to take charge of their destiny. Let them give America\na fresh start for reform and a better future. Give America new\nCongress, E II can work with\nThank you, and may God bless you all and the United States\nof America.\nFolder\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nOctober 23, 1990\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT\nTHROUGH:\nCHRISS WINSTON\nand\nFROM:\nMARK DAVIS MD\nSUBJECT:\nBUDGET ADDRESS\nOn Thursday morning, you will address an audience of 200 in the\nEast Room -- supporters and friends representing many\nconstituencies. Your remarks are approximately 18 minutes in\nlength.\nThis speech is hardhitting, but fair. It sets the record\nstraight. And it launches a new strategy -- a new appeal to the\nAmerican people -- that you can take from Maine to Hawaii.\nDavis/Blymire\nTitle: Harry\nDate: Oct. 23, 1990\nDraft: Eight\nPRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: EAST ROOM\n10:30 a.m., THURSDAY, OCTOBER 25, 1990\nWelcome to the White House, please be seated.\nI've asked you here today to talk about something that all\nAmericans are asking: \"What on earth is wrong with Washington?\"\nI've seen many Congresses come and go. And I have never seen a\nCongress more gridlocked, more paralyzed and ineffective than\ntoday's.\nPatience and goodwill are American virtues. And the\nAmerican people have been very patient during the budget\nnegotiations. But their patience is not unlimited. They have a\nright to be angry. And that's a feeling I share.\nAfter all, this is a Congress that talks about taking the\nhigh road, but always takes the path of least resistance.\nThis is a Congress that cannot represent the national\ninterest, because it is beholden to special-interests.\nThis is a Congress that cannot move forward, because it is\nstuck in an institutional rut. Served by 20,000 staff members,\ndivided into an arcane structure with nearly 300 committees and\nsubcommittees, Congress is a chaos of committees, a confusion of\ncommand, an anarchy of egos.\nThis is bad enough. But the institutional problem is made\nworse by nearly forty years of rule by one party dedicated to\nperpetual re-election. And the one party that rules Congress,\n2\nthe Democrats, has a bias for solutions of the past -- a bias for\nred-tape over choice; for the Capitol over community; for\nbureaucracy over people. When you add all this up, you can see\nwhy everything this Congress does is a variation on a theme: tax\nand spend.\nThe final budget agreement is a sad example of how the\nDemocratic Congress works -- or doesn't work. For the sake of\nthe nation, we had to reduce the deficit now. That meant an\nagreement had to be reached. But I felt strongly about reducing\nthe deficit with a careful balance of spending cuts. The\nDemocrats wanted to slash defense and raise income taxes for all\nAmericans. What we got was a compromise.\nI understand why some members of my own party had to go the\nother way. Plenty of Members on both sides of the aisle knew the\nnecessity and urgency of this agreement. They just couldn't vote\nfor it -- hoping that an easier vote would come along. I didn't\nhave that choice. Under our Constitution, only the President is\nelected by all the people; only the President represents the\nnation. Thus, the choice I faced was this agreement, or no\nagreement. I decided it was better to lose the saddle than the\nhorse, and signed this bill with great reluctance. An agreement\nwas needed to get deficit reduction. But I am certain that the\nAmerican people are sick and tired of what they had to go through\nduring these eight long, unnecessary months.\nof course, there is some good in this agreement. We got\n$500 billion in deficit reduction -- including $300 billion in\n3\nspending cuts -- the largest cut in history. This is a solid\nvictory for our children's future.\nWe also got Congress to agree to reduce the rate of spending\ngrowth with the first five-year curb on spending ever.\nWe put Congress on the pay-as-you-go plan, so Congress will\nno longer be able to fund programs on promises. III And, should\nthe Congressional mood change -- and you can bet it will --\nCongress will find that these cuts are already enforced by law -\n- these spending cuts and spending caps are real.\nFinally, our agreement held the line against reckless cuts\nof our Armed Forces. This Administration put a marker down early\n-- I will never agree to jeopardize America. And now I will not\nlet down our servicemen and women in the Persian Gulf.\nSo all in all, this agreement is unprecedented, long-\noverdue, absolutely necessary. But I will not join the Congress\nin a carnival of self-congratulation. After all, we discussed\nthree kinds of proposals: the good, the bad and the ugly. I told\nyou about the good, now let me tell you about the rest. The bad:\nWe had to swallow $150 billion in taxes, taxes on gasoline and\nalcohol. But we stopped them from enacting the ugliest proposal\n-- to raise income taxes on working Americans.\nWe did even out the system to make it more fair: cutting the\ntax rate for many, while raising it for the wealthy few. But had\nthis Administration not stood firm, the House of Representatives\nwould have slapped automatic tax increases on working families.\nA family of four, with a taxable income of $34,000, would have\npaid an additional $313.50 in income taxes.\n4\nThis Democratic Congress was eager to raise taxes, and hoped\nno one would notice by using this ugly backdoor maneuver.\nWell that proposal is now history.\nBut to get an agreement, we had to negotiate with the\nDemocratic majority that rules Congress at the table. Because\nthe Democrats control Congress, we had to pay a price; and that\nprice was taxes. That is the cost of divided government.\nWe could have had this agreement in May, in June or in\nAugust, any time during the eight months the economy worsened.\nCongress didn't have to hunt for every last morsel of political\nopportunity; didn't have to wait until 24 days into the new\nfiscal year, about a dozen days before an election, to act.\nBut the Democratic majority that controls Congress choked\nthe throttle on a slowing economy -- all in the name of politics\nand higher taxes. Thirty-seven times in nine years, Congress has\nhad to pass emergency measures to fund the government. This\nmakes thirty-eight.\nBy law, a budget was due April 15. Congress has once again\nviolated its lawful deadlines and given me a late budget to sign;\nso late, in fact, that we are now at the brink of a downturn that\ncould have been avoided. We've been talking for eight months\nwhile the economy deteriorated.\nIn April, when the budget was due, inflation was\n( (percent) ) Last month it was ((percent) ) In April, when the\nbudget was due, unemployment was ((percent) ) Unemployment last\nmonth was ((percent) ) Economic growth last April, when the\nbudget was due, was ( (GNP percent) ) Last month it was ( (GNP\n5\npercent) ) Even after the economy was threatened by higher oil\nprices from the Persian Gulf crisis, Congress delayed. This\nCongress was content to stall an agreement and stall the economy,\nall in the name of politics and higher taxes.\nThe Democrats talk a lot about \"fairness.\" Well let me tell\nyou what really isn't fair: High interest rates are not fair.\nInflation is not fair. And unemployment is not fair. And if you\nhear a Democratic Member of Congress bemoan a slow economy, ask\nyour legislator why their majority blocked the people's business\nfor half a year -- again, in the name of politics and higher\ntaxes.\nSome of the more self-congratulatory members of the process\nhave compared this budget agreement to the Constitutional\nConvention. That is ludicrous. How stunted the ambitions of the\nCapitol seem when compared to those of the Founders; how petty\nthis budget deal seems when compared to the progressive Square\nDeal of Teddy Roosevelt, the New Deal of Franklin Roosevelt, or\nthe Fair Deal of Harry Truman; how narrow our goals seem when\ncompared to those of a generation that made home-ownership\naffordable for millions, built highways across a continent, and\nsent a man to the Moon.\nI believe that a $1.3 trillion budget gives us ample room to\ndream again, to advance new ideas to renew our government -- to\nrethink and restructure our priorities from the ground up. But\nCongress makes programs in its own image: unresponsive and\nbureaucratic. And Congress would rather raise taxes than raise\n6\nthe issue of reform. So the problem isn't with the American\npeople and their Dream. It's with the Congress.\nLike all aristocratic, elite institutions, Congress protects\nits prerogatives, perks and privileges through the naked use of\npower. In short, it protects its own. It rejects our proposals\nfor campaign finance reform, and to abolish special-interest\npolitical action committees. It refuses to clean up the special-\ninterest politics that allows incumbents to feather their nests\nwith special-interest dollars. ( (When it comes to civil rights\nand employee rights, Congress keeps itself exempt, and above the\nlaw. ))\nAnd when Congress speaks, it speaks in the language of\nAlice-in-Wonderland. For example, when Congress doesn't get the\nspending increases it wants, Congress calls that a \"cut,\" even if\nmore dollars are actually spent. In other words, to the\nCongress, up is down.\nEven in the midst of a crisis, Congress looks for pork-\nbarrel bonanzas. Last Saturday, in the midst of the budget\ncrisis, Congressional conferees pushed through an almost 19\npercent increase for pet projects. Even as Congress voted to cut\nMedicare, they also voted to spend half a million dollars to\ncreate a Lawrence Welk tourist attraction. ((Other examples to\ncome. ))\nCongress also spent $1 million for a national transportation\nplan for walkers and bicyclists. Well I say if Congress wants a\nplan to tell us how to walk -- spending more in taxes than most\n7\npeople pay in their lifetime -- then perhaps Congress should take\na walk.\nAs one Senator said: \"It's time we started to spend some\nmoney on this country.\" I say it's time we stopped spending and\nrunning up big deficits. I'm willing to take my case to the\nAmerican people. They're watching -- and learning. They see\nthat when their Congress asks them to tighten their belts, it\nalways loosens its own. Never have I felt more strongly about\nthe line-item veto. Never has the country needed a balanced\nbudget amendment more than now. Never again should the people\nand their president be presented with such waste. 111\nWe have a sacred obligation not to squander the generosity\nand compassion of the American people. There is so much we could\nachieve if we could reform Washington, to make it empower people,\nnot bureaucracies; to work with them to fulfill their potential\nat home and be competitive around the world.\nIn education, we want reform -- to empower parents to choose\ntheir children's schools. In child care, we want reform -- to\nempower parents to choose who will watch over their children. In\nthe most desolate inner cities, we want reform -- so we strive to\ncreate zones of opportunity, to remove barriers to mobility and\nsuccess, to empower people with the spirit of enterprise.\nBut this Congress would rather proclaim \"National Digestive\nDisease Awareness Month, than health legislation. This Congress\nwould rather proclaim \"National Crime Prevention Month, than\npass our tough crime bill. And this Congress held up education\n8\nreform for a year. But at least they passed a proclamation\ndeclaring \"The Decade of the Brain. \" 111\nIn short, this is a Congress that would rather issue feel-\ngood proclamations, than address problems. This Democratic\nCongress is all sound and fury, signifying nothing. Make no\nmistake -- we have seen Congress itself become the biggest, most\nentrenched special-interest of our time.\nSo if the status quo is stagnant, then America needs a\nchange. America needs a Better Deal.\nWe need a Better Deal because this is a Congress wedded to\nWashington solutions. We have seen it become a perpetual\nCongress that expects to rule for eternity. Ninety-eight percent\nof all incumbents who seek re-election are re-elected. They are\nre-elected because they use -- or abuse -- all the powers of\nincumbency, from franked mail to pork-barrel spending. We have\nseen the House intended to be closest to the people become a\nHouse of Lords.\nBut it doesn't have to be this way. Everyone says Congress\nis the problem -- but not my Representative, not my Senator. But\nthe only way to make an institution accountable is to make its\nMembers accountable. The only way to send a message to\nWashington is not to send your elected representatives back.\nThe American voter can return power to communities from\nbureaucracies. We can do this by electing a reform Congress; and\nwe can begin thirteen days from today. This next election will\nbe a small step. But it will be the start of a momentum that\nwill build, and build, in the elections ahead.\n9\nIn the remaining weeks of this campaign season, and for the\nrest of my presidency, I will take a message to the people:\nAmerica doesn't need a House of Lords. America needs a new\nresponsible Congress. America needs a Congress that will work\nwith the President for the good of all.\\\\ America needs a\nBetter Deal.\nHarry Truman reminded us that only a President represents\nall the people, can stand for the national interest, and stand\nagainst the special interests.\nI will travel from Massachusetts to Hawaii to challenge\nAmericans to take charge of their destiny. Let them give America\na fresh start for reform and a better future. Give me a new\nCongress I can work with.\nThank you, and may God bless you all and the United States\nof America.\n#\n#\n#\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\n90 OCT 22 P6 39\nOctober 22, 1990\nMEMORANDUM FOR CHRISS WINSTON\nFROM:\nJIM PINKERTON\nSUBJECT:\nDraft Presidential Remarks On The Budget\nAgreement For The East Room, Wednesday,\nOctober 24th, 1990.\nThis speech will really set a much-needed tone for the\nAdministration in coming days. If we can keep this up,\nthen from now on we will impart to the President's\nlanguage a sense of single-minded purpose and generate new\nconfidence. A few comments follow:\npg. 2, para. 3, line 1 \"Eventually, lower interest\nrates will also mean tens of thousands of housing\nstarts\n\"\nThe listing of the benefits of the agreement, starting\nwith this passage and continuing for the rest of the page,\nseems a logical place to trim back excess length: too\nmuch extolling of the agreement's virtues will dilute the\nmessage that Congress has stuck it to the taxpayers with\nthis agreement.\n4,3,7 \"The Democrat's platform consists of three-letter\nword: tax, tax, tax.\"\nThe word \"a\" is need between \"of\" and \"three-letter.\"\n5,4,2 \"For example, if you spend $1000 on groceries....\n\"\nThe explanation of this complicated topic is well-done.\n6,3,1 \"Never have I felt more in need of a line-item\nveto.\"\nWe ought not to personalize this with the words \"I\nfeel, \" but rather make it the country's need: \"Never has\nthe country needed the line-item veto more.\"\n8,1,4 \" sordid maneuver since, sneaky and unfair.\"\n2\nA typo here. We suggest substituting \"cynical\" for\n\"since.\"\n9,1,1 \"spirit of enterprise can take root and blossom in\na zones \"\nTypo: the \"a\" before \"zones\" should be omitted.\n10,1,5 \"Now it turns out that the leaders of Congress\nEven though we suggested the idea for this passage, on\nreflection we think that perhaps we ought to take care\nthat the Administration does not engage in some practice\nthat appears to be similar to this Congressional\nprocedure. At the least, we ought to check the reactions\nto today's story in the subsequent newspapers.\n###"
}