Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
118567584
label
[JGR/Article on the Presidency - Notes, Drafts, Background] (1 of 4)
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
118567584
contentType
document
title
[JGR/Article on the Presidency - Notes, Drafts, Background] (1 of 4)
citationUrl
identifierLocal
485
collections
Records of the Office of Counsel to the President (Reagan Administration)
John Roberts' Subject Files
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
118567584
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1986-12-31
year
1986
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1982-01-01
year
1982
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
6029782a506abaf3
ocrText
Ronald Reagan Presidential Library
Digital Library Collections
This is a PDF of a folder from our textual collections.
Collection: Roberts, John G.: Files
Folder Title: [JGR/Article on the Presidency -
Notes, Drafts, Background] (1 of 4)
Box: 4
To see more digitized collections visit:
https://reaganlibrary.gov/archives/digital-library
To see all Ronald Reagan Presidential Library inventories visit:
https://reaganlibrary.gov/document-collection
Contact a reference archivist at: [email protected]
Citation Guidelines: https://reaganlibrary.gov/citing
National Archives Catalogue: https://catalog.archives.gov/
lervices of Mead Data Central
PAGE 10
46TH DOCUMENT of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Public Papers of the Presidents
School Prayer Day
Remarks at a Candle-Lighting Ceremony.
18 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1214
September 25, 1982
LENGTH: 855 words
We want to welcome each of you to the White House. We gather together to draw
attention to an issue that is as vital to the future of this country as any that
we face. No one should doubt that economic and technological progress will have
very little impact unless the spirit of our people remains strong.
Calvin Coolidge, a President whom I greatly admire, once said, "The
government of a country never gets ahead of the religion of a country."
Fostering the faith and character of our people is one of the great trusts of
responsible leadership. I deeply believe that if those in government offer a
good example, and if the people preserve the freedom which is their birthright
as Americans, no one need fear the future.
Unfortunately, in the last two decades we've experienced an onslaught of such
twisted logic that if Alice were visiting America, she might think she'd never
left Wonderland. [Laughter] We're told that it somehow violates the rights of
others to permit students in school who desire to pray to do SO. Clearly this
infringes on the freedom of those who choose to pray - a freedom taken for
granted since the time of our Founding Fathers.
This would be bad enough, but the purge of God from our schools went much
farther. In one case, a Federal court ruled against the right of children to
voluntarily say grace before lunch in the school cafeteria. In another
situation a group of children, again on their own initiative and with their
parents' approval, wanted to begin the schoolday with a minute of prayer and
meditation, and they, too, were prohibited from doing 50. Students have even
been prevented from having voluntary prayer groups on school property after
class hours just on their own.
Now, no one is suggesting that others should be forced into any religious
activity, but to prevent those who believe in God from expressing their faith is
an outrage. And the relentless drive to eliminate God from our schools can and
should be stopped.
This issue has brought people of good will and every faith together to make
the situation right. We believe that permitting voluntary prayer in public
schools is within the finest traditions of this country and consistent with the
principles of American liberty. Neither the constitutional amendment that I've
endorsed nor the legislative remedies offered by others permits anyone to be
coerced into religious activity. Instead, these measures are designed to
protect the rights of those who choose to pray as well as those who choose not
to.
LEXIS NEXIS LEXIS NEXIS
ervices ot.Mead Data Central
PAGE
11
18 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1214
I want to thank all of you and all of those who'll gather on the Capitol Mall
this evening for what you're doing on this vital issue. And a special thanks to
Senator Helms and Senator Thurmond and Congressman Kindness for all that they
have done.
And today I'd like to take this opportunity to urge the Senate to move
directly on the constitutional amendment now awaiting action. But Senate action
is not enough. The leadership in the House has the proposed constitutional
amendment bottled up and has, thus far, failed to hold the appropriate hearings.
Some suggest we should keep religion out of politics. Well, the opposite is
also true. Those in politics should keep their hands off of the religious
freedom of our people, and especially our children.
Earlier I quoted Calvin Coolidge. He had some other words I'd like to share
with you. "It would be difficult for me to conceive," President Coolidge said,
"of anyone being able to administer the duties of a great office like the
Presidency without a belief in the guidance of Divine Providence. Unless the
President is sustained by an abiding faith in the divine power, I cannot
understand how he would have the courage to attempt to meet the various problems
that constantly pour in upon him from all parts of the earth."
Well, after 20 months I can attest to the truth of those words. Faith in God
is a vital guidepost, a source of inspiration, and a pillar of strength in times
of trial. In recognition of this, the Congress and the Supreme Court begin each
day with a prayer, and that's why we provide chaplains for the Armed Forces. We
can and must respect the rights of those who are nonbelievers, but WE must not
cut ourselves off from this indispensable source of strength and guidance.
I think it'd be a tragedy for us to deny our children what the rest of us, in
and out of government, find 50 valuable. If the President of the United States
can pray with others in the Oval Office -- and I have on a number of occasions
-- then let's make certain that our children have the same right as they go
about preparing for their futures and for the future of this country.
And now I understand that we're to light some candles. I think you children
are to go down there and someone is to present me with a - there it is. These
- [inaudible] - candles, as I understand it, will start the ceremony tonight
on the Mall.
Happy that we've had this opportunity this morning. God bless you all.
Note: The President spoke at 12:30 p.m. in the State Dining Room at the White
House.
LEXIS NEXIS LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
4
36TH DOCUMENT of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Public Papers of the Presidents
Young Presidents Organization
Remarks and a Question-and-Answer Session via Satellite to
the Organization's Arizona '83 University.
19 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 232
February 14, 1983
LENGTH: 2977 words
The President. Good morning.
It's a pleasure and a privilege to join such an accomplished group of
producers and achievers. I almost thought about wearing snow clothes here,
being in Washington. But you all became presidents of sizable corporations by
the time you were 40. That says a lot about your energy, drive, and vision -
some of us take a little longer.
You're the people most able to lead the coming economic recovery, increase
its momentum, and bring renewed prosperity to America and the world. By
definition, you are risk takers, capitalists, and entrepreneurs. Your
comparative youth also indicates you're open to new ideas, ready to try new ways
of doing things. And that's just the kind of attitude we need to guide American
into her next period of economic greatness.
Those of you from the Midwest are well aware that the recession has hit
hardest in areas dependent on what has been called our bedrock industries -
autos, steel, chemicals. At the same time, some of our service industries such
as banking, computers, and communications are not as affected by the slump.
They are becoming pillars of our economy.
We're stepping into a new economic era and one of the most challenging and
exciting decades in our history. High technology is revolutionizing our
industries, renewing our economy, and promising new hope and opportunity in the
years ahead.
America is emerging from a painful period of adjustment. We're paying the
price for years and years of big spending, big taxing, and overregulation.
We're also suffering the structural problems of an industrial society
transforming into more of a service and information society. Our traditional
basic industries are not about to die away. America must never abandon them.
They're fundamental to our economic base. But each of us, from corporate
president to government official to millions of men and women in the
marketplace, must recognize what is happening so that WE can harness the forces
of change to help all of our people.
This technology phenomenon is not new, but it is accelerating. Since 1945
service industries have been providing an increasing share of American jobs.
Between 1977 and 1980, jobs in computers and data processing increased by 64
percent. By the year I took office, nearly three-quarters of all Americans
worked in the service industries. In 1982 the service and information sector of
our economy made up 50 percent of our total gross national product. For this
LEXIS NEXIS LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
5
19 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 232
growth to continue, we must both revitalize our industrial complex and encourage
the boom in our service industries. They depend on each other, and both have a
vital role in tomorrow's free market economy.
Our basic industries must move into this new era by using and catering to new
technology. Our factories must be retooled and recharged, and our systems must
integrate high technology whenever possible. If we're to compete
internationally, we must, as someone once said, "walk forward, not backward into
the future."
You, the captains of industry and commerce, and we in government share the
responsibility for moving our people and our economies over the threshold. We
share an obligation to lift all our people into a new age of prosperity,
bringing skills to the untrained and opportunity to those without hope. But as
Franklin Roosevelt said, "We cannot attain a lasting prosperity in a nation half
boom and half broke."
In the long run, if men and women like you fulfill your visions, economic
growth will put our unemployed back to work, revive idle factories, and open the
necessary doors of opportunity. As we've seen with the reopening of the
Chrysler plants in Fenton, Missouri, and the rehiring of a total of 3,200
workers there, the developing recovery is beginning to provide jobs. But as
I've said before, our people continue to hurt. Those of us in government and
you in the private sector cannot afford to sit back. We must act. We'll not rest
until every American who wants a job can find one.
In the short term, I have twice extended the unemployment benefit of workers
whose insurance had run out. And I'm asking all Federal departments and
agencies to study the prospects for speeding up already budgeted construction to
provide jobs sooner than later. But there are other challenges. We must bridge
the growing gap between the skills of today's work force and the future needs of
business and industry. That's why last October I signed the Job Training
Partnership Act which will train more than 1 million of our citizens every year
in skills that local business, civic, municipal, and labor leaders say are
needed in their communities.
Shortly, I will submit to the Congress the Employment Act of 1983, designed
to get at the special problems of the long-term unemployed as well as aid young
people trying to enter the job market. I'll propose extending unemployment
benefits, special incentives to employers who hire the long-term unemployed, and
support for programs for displaced workers, training, and relocation assistance.
Our proposal will also include new incentives for summer youth employment to
help young people get a start in the job market.
In our commitment to ensure that all of our people share tomorrow's
opportunities, this administration is also moving to assure legal and economic
equity for women. We will also seek extension of the Civil Rights Commission.
And we will propose measures to contain the skyrocketing costs of health care.
Government must get a hammerlock on the budget monster that threatens the
road to recovery. I recently sent to the Congress a budget that is fair,
prudent, and realistic. It includes, first, the strong but necessary medicine
of a Federal spending freeze; second, specific measures to control the
uncontrollable entitlement programs, third, $55 billion in defense savings; and,
fourth, to ensure the reduction and eventual elimination of deficits, a
LEXIS NEXIS LEXIS NEXIS
lervices of Mead Data Central
PAGE
6
19 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 232
standby tax limited to no more than 1 percent of the gross national product, to
start in fiscal 1986, but to start only if Congress has implemented the proposed
spending cuts and if the deficit is more than 2 1/2 percent of gross national
product.
At the same time, however, this administration will fight to preserve the
third year of the tax break coming to working men and women this July and the
tax indexing provision which will protect all Americans from inflationary
bracket creep. We must not allow inflation to flare up again because of deficit
spending, as it has in the past. But let's not lose sight of one vital point:
America didn't run up a trillion-dollar debt because government didn't tax
enough; we're saddled with a trillion-dollar debt because government spent too
much.
I urge you, as leaders of the private sector, to join us in our campaign to
forge a working partnership for recovery between business, labor, education, and
government. Already, such a partnership is addressing the training needs of
American workers. With the help of our Task Force on Private Sector
Initiatives, thousands of working people at the community level have already
made the shift from dead-end jobs and low-demand skills to the growth areas of
high technology and the service economy.
There is 50 much more to be done. Together, we can claim this new world of
technology and innovation for America and all of our people.
Now, I understand you may have some questions for me.
Moderator. Mr. President, first a question from Fritz Groupe, who is
president of the Groupe Company.
The President. All right, Jack.
Heavy Industry in the U.S.
Q. Mr. President, you indicated in your address to us that we're seeing a
trend towards the high tech and service industries, the information society.
What role do you see the U.S. playing in heavy industry?
The President. Well, there's no question that this doesn't mean - or
possibility that this means that we're going to do away with those industries,
or see if we can do without them. That would be impossible; they are still a
strong base. But this transition we're going through does not so much mean the
disappearance of, say, one of the smokestack industries. It means that high
technology is moving in, even there.
Recently, visiting the automobile company that I mentioned in my remarks, I
stood at an assembly line that once used to be lined with workers -- but the
work was all being done by robots. In other words, we will still have the auto
industry and the steel industry and all those things that go with it. We must
have them. But they will not require the same number of workers they did
before.
Moderator. We have a question from Jiggs Davis, president of Baron Data
Systems.
Reduction in Capital Gains Tax
LEXIS NEXIS LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
7
19 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 232
Q. Lowering the capital gains tax has increased the formation of new
businesses in the United States. What else can be done to really increase the
formation and to increase business in the United States and to help compete in
the world market?
The President. Well, we have already put some things in place. One of them
is that third installment of the income tax [cut] that I mentioned. But in our
tax program of 1981, we made great changes, as you know, in business tax, to
make it more possible - faster write-off, and so forth, for replacing plant and
equipment. A number of things of that kind were done to have the same effect
that the lowering of the capital gains tax has had. And that is the greater
investment as a matter of fact, government is getting more revenue as a
result of the reduction of that tax rate.
So, we have a number of tax proposals in there that are already in place.
We're looking at other things of the same kind.
And the improvement that has been made in personal savings ********* we're in the
best situation in that, that we've been in since 1976. And that has added
billions and tens of billions of dollars to the pool of private capital that is
available for investment, so that when we can once get at the task of reducing
these dificits, which we're going to do, but even with the deficits, there will
still be money left for private investors, as well as to fund those government
deficits.
Moderator. John Darden, president of Sands and Company.
Defense Spending
Q. Mr. President, among rising concerns about the cost of the arms race, how
can you justify the large increase in your budget for defense spending for the
next several decades?
The President. Well, now, I know there's been a constant drumbeat about
defense spending, as if that's responsible for all our ills. And it makes me
able to understand why such a question would come.
In the first place, we are spending a lower percentage of the gross national
product on defense than has been customary in the past, with the exception of
just the few years before we came here, when there was a real decline in defense
spending and a real decline in our ability to protect the freedoms and the
people of america.
Now, not only have we reduced the percentage to about 7 percent of gross
national product - and back in the fifties and sixties, it averaged 9 and 10
percent of gross national product - but we also are taking a much smaller
percentage of the budget as a whole. Defense spending that we've asked for is
only 26.7 percent of the budget. Historically, defense spending has been around
50 percent. And in the time of John F. Kennedy, in his administration, it was
about 46 percent.
So, we feel that it is necessary to do what we're doing. But the budget that
has grown the fastest, that is taking the greatest share, is that of the
transfer payments, the so-called entitlement programs, where the money is being
taken from workers and earners by way of tax and is being distributed.
LEXIS NEXIS LEXIS NEXIS
ervices of Mead Data Central
PAGE
8
19 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 232
Now, WE are going to be very careful and are careful that we preserve what we
call the "safety net" and make sure that those transfers will continue to the
people who are truly needy and who must, through no fault of their own, depend
on the rest of us. But we have found that those programs had become 50 loose
administratively that there were people that were sometimes better off than
those who were being taxed to support them, who were receiving those transfer
payments. We have done our best to tighten that up. We are making gains in
this '84 budget, if the Congress will pass it, that will remedy the situation
with those so-called uncontrollable items, the entitlement programs, these
transfer payments.
But again, let me point out that the biggest amount of the defense spending
is not, as some believe, the investing in great, new weapons systems. It is the
simple fact that we began paying the military something a little more
commensurate with the service that they're rendering to our country, and the
result has been, in these 2 years, a fantastic improvement in the quality and
the quantity in our volunteer military. As of 2 years ago, people were saying
it was a failure and that we would have to resort to the draft. Today, we have
waiting lines. Today, we have an intelligence level and a number, a percentage
of high school graduates in the military that is higher than we've ever had
before, even when we were using the draft.
But I don't 522 how those who are criticizing can justify it that we are
spending an inordinate amount on the military. I've given you the figures on
that, the percentages, and so forth, and I have to say that - and,
incidentally, I pointed out in my remarks that over the next 5 years, we,
ourselves, are cutting $55 billion out of our original program. We have already
cut some 41 voluntarily - billion dollars - out of that, and the Congress has
cut some more, which I wish they hadn't, because it did throw us off balance.
But we're going to continue to find the efficiencies and the economies
wherever we can that will get the best out of every dollar that's being spent on
defense.
Moderator. Ed Stanley, the president of Stanley Investment and Management
Company.
Reflections on the Presidency
Q. Mr. President, all of us serve as chief executive officers of our
companies. You're the chief executive officer of the biggest enterprise on the
face of the Earth. We would be interested in your personal reflections on the
job, how you deal with the decisionmaking process, and the pressures that make
your job as difficult as it really is.
The President. Well, we do have a lot in common. And I think, maybe, one of
the things I do that I learned as Governor of California is pretty similar to
what you, as chief executives, have to do in your businesses.
First of all, I want all the input I can get. Now, I had learned over the
years - or at least was informed - that Cabinet meetings in government, in
Washington for example, were kind of once-a-month ceremonies where the Cabinet
got together and various Cabinet members reported on the doings of their
particular agency. Well, I changed that in California and changed it here. Our
Cabinet operates as kind of a board of directors. And if the issue involves one
particular agency, that individual just doesn't have the floor all to himself.
NEXIS LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
9
19 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 232
Everyone is affected. So, everyone gets into the debate and the discussion as
they would around a board of directors table.
Now, the one place where we differ is we don't take a vote. I realize that I
have to make the decision. So when I've heard all the pros and cons - and I
insist on hearing all views - when I've heard enough to feel that I am soundly
briefed, I make the decision. Sometimes I wait a little bit and go back in the
office and stew around with it myself for awhile; sometimes I make it right
there at the Cabinet table.
But that, I have found, is one of the most effective ways to get things done
and also to have some confidence that I had had all the input that there is on a
particular subject. And, as I say, I think to that extent it's pretty much what
you yourselves do. I have a staff just as you also do. And they're involved in
all of this, and I hear their views, also.
Yes, it is an awesome responsibility. I am grateful for the 8 years that I
had in California in that position, because it probably was the best training
that anyone could have for this particular job - much the same thing on a
little different scale. And, of course, we didn't have a foreign policy in
California; we have that now. But, once again, the same procedure - the
National Security Council, State, and Defense, and all. And this involves other
Cabinet members, also - Treasury and the Commerce Department and all are
involved in a great many of the international aspects of this job. So we've
followed the same process with them. That's the way it works.
Moderator. Thank you very much, Mr. President. Thank you.
The President. Well, thank you. And together, let me say, we're turning
America away from past policies of despair and stagnation. Yes, we still face
tough challenges. But we know they're not insurmountable. Just as our
forefathers tamed a wild continent and built unparalleled prosperity with their
vision, courage, and hard work, so we can claim the promise of tomorrow. If we
listen to our hearts, believe in ourselves, and pull together, nothing can stand
in our way.
Thank you all very much, and God bless you.
Note: The President spoke at 12:31 p.m. from the Washington, D.C., studios of
the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. His remarks were carried live to the
organization's meeting at the University of Arizona in Tucson.
The Young Presidents Organization is an international education association
limited to chief executives of corporations who reached their positions before
the age of 40.
LEXIS NEXIS LEXIS NEXIS
July 16 / Administration of Ronald Reagan, 1982
Secretary of State
may be dipping from the same well to find
quality people. I just want everyone to
Remarks at the Swearing-In Ceremony for
know that I'm fully aware that George and
George P. Shultz. July 16, 1982
Don Regan, as well as many other high-
ranking members of my administration, are
The President. Ladies and gentlemen,
all former Marines. [Laughter] And I don't
please. Today, I'm reminded of the old
find that a handicap in any way. [Laughter]
saying. "Let George do it." [Laughter] And,
Seriously, George's background gives him
George, from now on, 1 think I'll have a
a unique opportunity to be of service to his
few things for you to do.
country. Over the last few years in the pri-
On behalf of the American people, I want
vate sector leading one of the giants of
to compliment the Senate for its wisdom in
American enterprise, he has first-hand
approving so rapidly and decisively the
knowledge of the dynamics of economic
nomination of George Shultz as our next
progress. He brings with him perhaps a
Secretary of State. The Senate's swift action
deeper understanding of world economics
augurs well for continued cooperation be-
than any previous Secretary of State, having
tween the Congress and the executive
dealt internationally with leaders of com-
branch and for strong leadership at the
merce as well as heads of state. This experi-
State Department.
ence will, I have no doubt, add depth and
I also want to compliment George Shultz
meaning to the decisions that he'll be
on his impressive performance before the
making. I look forward to his counsel.
Senate Foreign Relations Committee. His
And with all of that said, George, wel-
articulate and convincing presentation sent
come to the team.
a strong signal to friend and foe alike. Our
[At this point, Attorney General William
country is fortunate to have a man of ex-
French Smith administered the oath of
ceptional character and qualifications for
office to Mr. Shultz.]
this vital position.
America's always been blessed in times
Secretary Shultz. Thank you very much.
such as these with citizens of stature who
Mr. President, I thank you. You have
come forward to make certain the job gets
done me a great honor, and I recognize
done and done right. George Shultz follows
fully the responsibilities placed upon me.
in that tradition. He has served three previ-
I said in my statement to the Committee
ous Presidents. He has been immensely suc-
on Foreign Relations that I would muster
cessful in his endeavors in the private
every ounce of energy and intelligence and
sector, and he's highly respected for his aca-
dedication I could and pour all of it into
demic achievements. Those who know him
performance on this job, and I restate that
testify that he's a man with character and
and remake that pledge to you on this occa-
common sense, affable, yet decisive. He's a
sion, Mr. President.
man who inspires confidence and leaves no
In the period of time that I've been pre-
doubt that he's capable of the vital task that
paring for this job and preparing for my
we're giving him.
examination by the Committee on Foreign
Of all the responsibilities of the Presiden-
Relations, of course I've been impressed
cy shaping American foreign policy is the
with the importance and depth and difficul-
most awesome It's in this arena that we
ty of the problems that we face. But also,
come to grips with the decisions which
Mr. President, as you so characteristically
most directly affect the delicate balance of
do, I think it's essential that we take that
peace and which secure both the immedi-
coin that has "problems" as its label on one
ate and long-term well-being of the United
side and turn it over and see that on the
States
other side is the word "opportunities." And
When looking for the best, sometimes one
I certainly want to approach this task fully
finds that the paths of talented men cross.
conscious and realistic about the problems,
Recently, George, there's been some criti-
but even more, conscious of the opportuni-
cism of your similar background to another
ties which with creative and constructive
member of my Cabinet. Now, I admit we
effort we may be able to do something
908
Administration of Ronald Reagan, 1982 / July 16
wonderful with I say that with some confi-
reserve in Alaska account in the Depart-
dence here, because I am with friends. And
ment of the Interior. The deferral affects
I feel the warmth of this gathering and that
the facilities and equipment account (Air-
it's a family affair, and it gives me a certain
port and Airway Trust Fund) in the Depart-
sense of both humility but also a sense of
ment of Transportation
support.
The details of the rescission proposals and
And in that regard I would like to thank
revised deferral are contained in the at-
especially the Members of the Congress, the
tached reports.
Members of the Senate who gave me such a
thorough working-over and examination-
Ronald Reagan
and, I think, in a very constructive way and
The White House,
thorough way-and in the end voted
July 16, 1982.
promptly and decisively to confirm me as
Secretary of State. And I appreciate that,
Note: The attachments detailing the pro-
and I recognize it as a kind of marker that
posed rescissions and deferral will be
we should approach these things together
printed in the Federal Register.
and in the spirit of bipartisanship and in
trying to find the broad consensus that sus-
tains our policies abroad and has done so for
so many decades.
Mr. President, in your Inaugural Address
Council on Environmental Quality
you said that no arsenal, no weapon in the
world "is so formidable as the will and
Nomination of Nancy A. Maloley To Be a
moral courage of free men and women." I
Member. July 16, 1982
think, as you often do, you put succinctly
the essence of the matter, and I say to you
that I will take these words of yours as my
The President today announced his inten-
touchstone and foundation as I approach
tion to nominate Nancy A. Maloley to be a
member of the Council on Environmental
the conduct of this great office.
I thank you very much, Mr. President,
Quality. She would succeed Jane Hurt Yarn.
and my friends.
She is currently serving as policy adviser,
Office of Policy Development, the White
Note: The President spoke at 10 a.m. in the
House. She was director for legislation for
Rose Garden at the White House.
the EPA transition team. She served as leg-
islative assistant to United States Senator
Richard G. Lugar in 1977-1981. She was
Special Assistant to the Administrator of the
EPA in 1971-1976. Prior to that, she served
Budget Rescissions and Deferral
on the staff of United States Representative
E. Ross Adair.
Message to the Congress. July 16, 1982
She graduated from the University of
Colorado (B.A., 1968). She resides in Wash-
To the Congress of the United States:
ington, D.C. She was born April 13, 1946.
In accordance with the Impoundment
Control Act of 1974. I herewith report two
new proposals to rescind $63.6 million in
budget authority previously provided to the
Congress and one revision to an existing
United Service Organizations, Inc.
deferral increasing the amount deferred by
$61.1 million.
Appointment of Five Members of the Board
The rescissions include $47.4 million pre-
of Governors. July 16, 1982
viously deferred for the employment and
training assistance program administered by
The President today announced his inten-
the Department of Labor, and $16.2 million
tion to appoint the following individuals to
for the exploration of national petroleum
be members of the Board of Governors of
909
w/
Dec. 2 / Administration of Ronald Reagan, 1983
PARTICIPANTS is the
Foundation PROGRAM
Administration of R
derson from Center High School, and I live
Now some of these who are squealing the
loudest are some of the bureaucrats that
that should be corrected. And, then, when
in Center, Texas. How do you react to the
etly in the bac
fairness issue being raised, suggesting that
were proven unnecessary and also some of
through a set of circumstances some people
there. And you
the people who never should have been on
prevailed upon me to run for Governor, I
your budget cuts in social services have
to go out mak.
the programs in the first place.
think what finally-and it came about
hurt the poor and those less able to afford,
this is a proble
you know, the aid like welfare and day care
For example, I had a message the other
through those speeches-why I saw it as an
affects our rela
and like that?
day from a man in a small town down in
opportunity to, instead of just talking about
you were doir
Mississippi. And he was writing to me about
these problems, to do something about
doing this-wh
The President. Well, this whole charge of
them. And that's it.
food stamps in his area, because there's a
is-believe me
fairness, I think, is political demagoguery
31-percent unemployment rate in that par-
Communication With the Soviet Union
much better."
and is done for political purposes. Having
ticular town. And he was telling of some of
Q. Mr. President, my name is Stephen
And I have to to
been a Governor for 8 years and thus par-
the things, of people getting $2,400 a
Carter. I'm from the Law Magnet High
Now, I think
ticipated in administering many of the Fed-
month and receiving food stamps. Well, for
School in Dallas, Texas. With Soviet Pre-
There are too n
eral programs, I was aware of what a high
them to do that means that someone else
mier Andropov sick, and with the recent
percentage of the money for those pro-
who really has need for them is being
Immigration ai
death of Brezhnev a couple years ago, do
grams went to the bureaucracy, was spent
cheated and is not being able to get the
you see any real, foreseeable problems for
Q. Hello, M
in administrative overhead.
help that they should have.
the United States in dealing with another
Aniette Laured
I give you an example of a program that
So I think we are being fair, and I think
Soviet premier should he die?
dan's High Sch
was supposed to-Federal program sup-
we're being fair, also, to the working men
The President. Well, it's true that there's
question is, does
posed to put 17 unemployed people in one
and women in this country who are sharing
difficulty, and there has been in this period
develop some k
of our counties in California into some jobs
their earnings to help those who are unable
and before his illness. When a new man is
policy to help al
helping out in the maintenance of parks.
to take care of themselves.
just taking over and getting his government
by the thousand
Now it sounds pretty logical, except that
Views on the Presidency
organized, there's a period in there in
shores in South
half of the budget was going to go to 11
which he's not ready to get out and start
States, year after
administrators-to make sure that the 17
Q. Mr. President, I am Vicki Kessler from
talking with someone else about interna-
The President
got to work on time, I guess. But it seemed
Manzano High School in Albuquerque, New
tional affairs. So, there would be that period
in this country
to me it was out of balance.
Mexico. What do you feel are the necessary
again, if there is a change of leadership.
immigration is t
What we've been doing is redirecting the
qualities for someone to run for a public
I will say this, on the other hand, though,
quotas. We kno
aid actually to the truly needy. You would
office, especially the Presidency?
that we are in communication at a number
So people are o
be surprised at how-under the manage-
The President. What is the necessary
of levels with people in the Soviet Union.
countries, deper
ment of those programs-how the ceiling
quality? Well, I'll tell you, I would put it
We're not just incommunicado. We have
quota has been
had gone up on earnings to where people
this way. I don't think that any public office
people that have channels and through the
As for refuge
who really were self-sustaining were getting
should be viewed by someone as just a good
State Department and all, that we're in
lem. Our countr
government grants and government aid at
job that they might like to have for their
contact. I have even communicated with
fered itself as a
the expense of their neighbors. And those
own personal career. I think you really have
personal, handwritten letters, myself.
neighbors weren't making as much money
to believe in something and think that you
And we feel that the two superpowers, in
persecuted and
cution and are
as they were.
can bring about an improvement by serving
the position we're in in the world today,
We have redirected this. And this is also
in public office in order to bring about this
with all the tensions and with all the possi-
people from Vie
true in the previous question of aid to the
reform or to do this good that you think the
bility for a tragic error, that we can't dis-
overall figure on
students. We found that people who should
government should be doing.
continue our conversation and our meetings
We have legisl
normally be expected to be able to send
Now, I don't know whether that answers
with them. But because you don't see an
gress right now,
their children to college were getting this
your question about me, but I do know that
awful lot about this in the public media, it is
get passed-and
help, financial help.
for about 25 years, before I ever dreamed
going on.
it passed-havin
So we have redirected more of these pro-
that I would seek public office-never
I happen to be a believer in what I've
problem and wi
wanted to, was very happy in my previous
called quiet diplomacy. For example, if you
to close our bord
grams to the people who truly need it. And
we're actually-this government is provid-
line of work-but some way, back from
make a demand on the other government
I should say, aga
ing 95 million meals a day. We are subsidiz-
being a sports announcer, I guess, I got on
and you say, "You've got to do this; we
immigrants or re
ing housing for more than 10 million fami-
don't like what you're doing," and it's on
into the countr
the mashed potato circuit, as I call it.
lies in the country today. There has been no
[Laughter] And since I didn't sing or dance,
the front page of the papers and on the TV
into the whole p
real cutback or decline in aid to the people
I usually wound up being an after dinner
news, in the world of politics you've put
certain extent lo
who through no fault of their own must
speaker at somebody's banquet. And I
that person in a position where he can
There are a gri
depend on the rest of us for help. We've
always did my own speeches. And I, over
hardly give in, because then in the eyes of
coming into our
just tried to make government a little bit
the years, was talking more and more about
their own people they would be accepting
with this legisla
more efficient.
the things that I saw wrong in government
orders from another government. So on
immigration and
many of the touchiest points, you deal qui-
door onen for the
iervices of Mead Data Central
PAGE
2
1ST DOCUMENT of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Public Papers of the Presidents
Foreign and Domestic Issues
Interview With Garry Clifford and Patricia Ryan of People
Magazine.
19 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1708
December 6, 1983
LENGTH: 3962 words
Q. Thank you very much for having us back. It's a great honor for us to be
here.
The President. Well, it's a pleasure.
Q. One of the things I wanted to ask you was I think that most Americans
thought the job of being President was impossible when you took office, and I
think things have changed, and they feel that you thrive on it. And I sort of
wanted to ask you how you disciplined yourself and how you plan your activities
50 that it won't overwhelm you?
The President. Well, maybe the 8 years as Governor gave me some advance
training for this, because I do remember that when I first become Governor there
was a period that I went through in which I thought the world had fallen on my
head. And I guess I learned there.
Q. But isn't this more difficult? I mean -
The President. oh, yes.
Q. - isn't there more people and more paper, and more - [inaudible]?
The President. Yes. And yet, I have to say that I think that the Presidency
- the nearest thing to it in the country is a governorship. You don't have a
foreign policy, which does add some problems, but it is the same thing. And
it used to be - if you'll look back at earlier days, in which our Presidents
were mainly found among the Governors. And I think that is a better training
place than, for instance, serving in the legislature or something.
Q. You'd still recommend it?
The President. Yes. But the other thing - I've never felt better in my
life, physically.
Q. You certainly look it, Mr. President.
The President. I have a little gym upstairs that I get to every afternoon
before the day is over.
Q. Tell me, would you recommend the job to a friend?
LEXIS NEXIS LEXIS NEXIS
ervices of Mead Data Central
PAGE
3
19 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1708
The President. Yes. [Laughing] - He might not be a friend afterwards, but,
no, I have to say that for someone who really wants to do some things that he
believes strongly in, this is the most fulfilling experience I've ever had in my
life.
Q. Mr. President, we were curious. Many times in the last 6 weeks you've
been awakened from a deep sleep with a world crisis. How do you get the news?
Who brings it to you? Do you have to have coffee? Do you stay up all night?
Does Mrs. Reagan get up with you?
The President. No, I try to slip out without her, although - it's usually
the phone.
Q. Is it a special phone?
The President. No, usually, just the bedside phone, that then - well, when
we were -- when it has happened - it happened at Atlanta, Georgia, when we were
on that weekend there. Well, there were two such calls and two such issues.
And one of them was the phone, and, simply, it was Bud McFarlane asking could I
come up in the living room and meet the Secretary of State there. So I
whispered that I was just going out in the living room for a little bit, hoping
that she'd go back to sleep, and I put on a robe and went out there. Then the
second incident down there, one of the stewards, he just slipped in, tiptoed in
and touched me on the shoulder and whispered to me, and I slid out and did the
same thing again. But then you stay there and do what has to be done.
Q. Well, are you alert immediately? Do you need coffee or anything?
The President. No, I wake up easy. And then, more recently at Camp David, it
was phone calls, not in the middle of the night in this case. I wasn't up yet,
but it was -
Q. Do you get to dislike having the phone ring because you think there's a
problem when it rings?
The President. Yes. I can't say that I pick it up with dread, because many
times it's just a correction or some information on something or other. But it
has to be faced.
Q. It's usually a problem, often a problem.
The President. Usually, yes.
Q. I wanted to ask you, do you think the American people are behind the
commitment of troops for military action, and do you think - this is a more
serious question - do you think that the number of casualties influences how
they feel about something?
The President. Oh, it has to. This has to be the hardest thing in all of
this job, and certainly in my life, and that is committing these splendid young
men and women to tasks where you know there is that threat. I've never been so
proud of anything as I am of the people in our Armed Forces.
A few years ago there was an entirely different situation. Everyone said the
volunteer military wouldn't work. Well, it is working, and there is an esprit
EXIS NEXIS LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
4
19 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1708
de corps, there's a pride out there among them. And this puts a lump in my
throat. And then to -- even one of them, to have a horrible accident or
incident such as the one in Lebanon, there just is no way to make that easy.
But the thing is to try and - well, first of all, I think many people jump
to events - not People - [inaudible] - such thing as the grassroots. But
press and political figures that -- on the Grenada rescue mission - that
immediately jumped to the conclusion that this was some kind of a warlike thing
that everyone would be angry at. It was kind of interesting to see so many of
them have to try to crawl back in off the end of the limb when they found out
that the American people understood very well what we were doing and supported
it.
Now it's harder for them to understand Labanon, because in Lebanon, they were
not sent there to fight; that, hopefully, there would be no combat. We knew
there was a risk because of the kind of violence that had been taking place in
the streets over there for a long time. But the whole idea of a multinational
force was in connection with out own peace proposal for the Middle East.
Lebanon was stalling that, if you remember. You had Israel and Syria both
in. Israel had corssed the border because PLO terrorist units were attacking
villages across their northern border from Lebanon. The Lebanon Government, as
of several years ago, was virtually powerless in the face of what can only be
termed warlords in their own country, of several factions, each with its own
militia, fighting each other and fighting the Government. And you couldn't
proceed with the peace mission until we resolved this problem.
So WE sent a force in with the idea that - well, first of all, they'd gotten
some ten thousand PLO out; now the idea was that both Israel and Syria get out,
then a stabilizing force there while the Lebanese Government reformed and
created a military force in which it could then take over jurisdiction of its
own territory.
Well, the first blow was that the Syrians, after saying, yes, they would get
out, said, no, they wouldn't. The Israelis were prepared to get out. Both
sides wanted - the idea was they would go out simultaneously. And so our force
is there for that purpose. And there wouldn't have been a shot fired by a
marine or by our Navy or Air Force if they had not been shot at. And when that
happened, I said wherever we send them, they're going to have the right to
defend themselves and fire back.
Q. Mr. President, I'm curious. Your political godfather, or grandfather, if
you will, Barry Goldwater, Senator Goldwater, is even calling for the boys to
come back from Beirut. I'm wondering, how far are you willing to commit troops,
or how far are you willing to escalate?
The President. It isn't a case of whether we will escalate. That is up to
the Syrians and to some of those rebel groups that are fighting the Lebanese
military. But we have only fired back when we have been attacked. And I am
hopeful that after this last exchange that the Syrians will decide that they
don't want to go on on that path.
Q. But, Mr. President, if they remain recalcitrant, if they remain -- the
Israelis have been bombing them and strafing them and haven't really budged
them. If they remain the same and they remain shooting at our reconnaissance
LEXIS NEXIS LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
5
19 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1708
flights and downing more fliers, what is the next step?
The President. Well, we're taking the next step right now. Don Runsfeld is
on his way back there, and we still are going to try for a political solution.
We're going to try to negotiate with the Syrians and make them understand.
Q. But if they don't want to negotiate, if they find it in their best
interests to be a thorn in your side, what do you do then?
The President. Well, that becomes a kind of a hypothetical question in thich
I almost have to wait and see what the circumstances are. Actually, the
Labanese military - which WE have helped to train and have equipped and which
is a very good military force - is supposed to be resolving the situation for
themselves as we try to maintain a little stability in Beirut while they can go
forward and do this.
Q. Do you 522 a day, either in your own in your next term, for instance,
or in the very near future, where President Assad could be a, sort of, the
dominant - the present day dominant force in the Arab world; there he could
become something like what Anwar Sadat became to us? I mean, do you ever see
that kind of relationship ever being able to develop?
The President. I don't see any reason why not. We've made great progress
with the other Arab States, the more moderate states. I think that they are
very ready for a negotiated settlement, continuing on with the Camp David
accords and the U.N. resolutions. Syria is the big kid and the U.N.
resolutions. Syria is the big kid and the bad kid on the block, and the other
Arab States have been trying, themselves, to persuade Syria to join in this
effort and to withdraw. And now a new element has been introduced by Syria.
They hadn't mentioned this before when earlier they said, oh, yes, they would
get out, too. They now are not pretending that there is any assault on them or
that they're in any danger and that's why they are staying there; they are now
claiming that Lebanon properly is a part of a greater Syria. This is outright
armed aggression now on their part, hoping to expand their territory at the
expense of Lebanon and - they've even indicated - at the expense of Jordan.
Q. Mr. President, moving off of that People Magazine question, how did you
assess the film "The Day After?" And do you think movies have a way of forming
political opinion?
The President. Well, any motion picture or any drama or play is based on one
thing: It isn't successful unless it has or evokes an emotional response. If
the audience does not have an emotional experience, whether it's one of hating
something or crying or having a lot of laughter, then you've got a failure out
there.
Well, certainly there was an emotional response to this type of horror film.
But apparently it has not had a lasting impact; I haven't seen very much
reference to it any more. And maybe one of the reasons was because it was --
[inaudible] - it was a horror film, showing you what I'm sure all of us all
knew, that a nuclear war is unthinkable, it is sheer horror, it must not happen.
But it left you with no idea or solution, no suggestion as to what to do about
it.
LEXIS NEXIS LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
6
19 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1708
And I think that my own reaction to it was, look, if anything, if this can
add to what we can say about the fact that there must not be a nuclear war, then
maybe the people will understand why we're trying 50 desperately to get a
reduction in those weapons worldwide. And I hope that if we start down the
reduction road that the other side will 582 the common sense in eliminating them
totally. Not since 1946 has there been such a suggestion, and that was made by
this country. And even then, when we were the only ones, really, with a stock
of such weapons, the Soviet Union refused.
Q. Let me ask you this question: If Yuriy Andropov had been in the room with
you watching the film that night, would you have said that very same thing to
him?
The President. Yes.
Q. And anything else?
The President. Yes, I would have told him that the only way there could be
war is if they start it; we're not going to start a war.
Q. Let me ask you this: Do you have any second thoughts about calling the
Soviet Union an evil empire? I think you called the Soviet Union that once. Do
you have second thoughts about that? Do you wish you hadn't done it?
The President. No. I think that it was high time that we got some realism
and got people thinking that for too long we have kind of viewed them as just a
mirror image of ourselves, and that maybe we could appeal to their good nature.
And we've gone through the experience in a number of years past of saying, well,
if we cancel weapons systems, if we unilaterally disarm, maybe they'll see that
we're nice people, too, and they'll disarm. Well, they didn't. They just kept
on increasing.
Q. So you see them as really a source of evil?
The President. Yes, because you have to look at the impact on what we were
just talking about, with Lebanon. There they are with thousands of military
advisers and technicians and 50 forth in Syria, have provided Syria with weapons
that are not purely defense weapons -- ground-to-ground missiles that can cover
virtually every target from Syria in Israel. And they are the ones that seek,
whether it's out of paranoia on their part - and, believe me, everyone's an
enemy, and so they have to be aggressive - or whether it is the
Marxist-Leninist theory, more than a theory -- commitment ***** * that was handed
them, and that was that they must support uprising wherever they take place in
the world to bring about a one-world Communist state.
Now, no Russian leader has ever refuted that. As a matter of fact, he hasn't
had time yet, but every Russian leader up to Andropov, at some time or other,
has publicly restated his commitment to world conquest - world communizing.
Q. Let me ask you a question out of that In The Jerusalem Post you were
quoted - and I don't know if the quote was accurate -- as saying that this
generation might see Armageddon, that a lot of the Biblical prophecies are sort
of being played out today, or could be -- [inaudible].
LEXIS NEXIS LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
7
19 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1708
The President. Where was that?
Q. In The Jerusalem Post. And I was going to say, is this really true? Do
you believe that?
The President. I've never done that publicly. I have talked here, and then I
wrote people, because some theologians quite some time ago were telling me,
calling attention to the fact that theologians have been studying the ancient
prophecies - What would portend the coming of Armageddon? - and have said that
never, in the time between the prophecies up until now has there ever been a
time in which 50 many of the prophecies are coming together. There have been
times in the past when people thought the end of the world was coming, and so
forth, but never anything like this.
And one of them, the first one who ever broached this to me - and I won't
use his name; I don't have permission to. He probably would give it, but I'm
not going to ask - had held a meeting with the then head of the German
Government, years ago when the war was over, and did not know that his hobby was
theology. And he asked this theologian what did he think was the next great
news event, worldwide. And the theologian, very wisely, said, "Well, I think
that you're asking that question in a case that you've had a thought along that
line.' And he did. It was about the prophecies and 50 forth.
So, no. I've talked conversationally about that.
Q. You've mused on it. You've considered it.
The President. [Laughing] Not to the extent of throwing up my hands and
saying, "Well, it's all over." No. I think whichever generation and at whatever
time, when the time comes, the generation that is there, I think will have to go
on doing what they believe 15 right.
Q. Even if it comes?
The President. Yes.
Q. To ask you a serious question which comes out of this, I see around -
since my last visit here -- many more signs that the government is worried about
terrorism, that it's - [inaudible]. Do you, yourself, think about dying, think
about the fear of the position you're in?
The President. Well, you can't help but be conscious, because the security
measures are all 50 evident to you. But if you mean do I go around fearful and
looking over my shoulder, no. I have confidence in the security people. I had
one taste of -
Q. Yes, and a touch of another.
The President. And I never second guess the security people. When they tell
me they're going to do something or change some way of doing things that we're
doing, I accept that that's -------------------------
Q. Is this something that you talk about, for instance, to Mrs. Reagan or
your children?
LEXIS NEXIS LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
8
19 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1708
The President. No.
Q. Or is it something you just - it's better left unsaid?
The President. Yes, very much so, because I think it was harder for them when
it did happen than it was for me, and much more difficult for her, especially to
get over.
It's a lot easier to worry about someone else than it is to worry about
yourself, and so I know what must go through her mind when I set out on some
expedition or some public appearance or something. And I wish it didn't have to
be.
Q. Does your bullet-proof shirt or jacket or coat or whatever hang in the
family quarters? Or do they keep it someplace else?
The President. No, no. They keep it. And they come, having it in hand, and
they kind of come in flinching, because they know that I - [laughing].
Q. What do you say?
The President. I do not accept it with good grace.
Q. What do you say, though, when they put it on you?
The President. oh, even an occasional unprintable word. [Laughter]
But I also know that they would not be bringing it in unless they felt there
was a reason for it. But it isn't a pleasant - it's uncomfortable. [Laughter]
That's the main -
Q. Is it bulky, or is it heavy, or what?
The President. Well, it's bulky. And I work so hard in that gym up there.
And they say everybody out there in the audience will think I'm getting fat.
[Laughter]
Q. Mr. President, away from Armageddon and all this talk of dying, and back
to 1984. Did you cringe when you had to sign the order to have your own aides
take a lie detector test? And I'm curious: Have you ever taken one? And how
did you feel?
The President. No, I never have. But I didn't sign an order for them to take
it. This has been misconstrued, and I bless you for giving me a chance to
explain it.
We had a meeting that came up on national security **** rules and regulations
of the security of the information there. And there was a leak. And it was a
leak which could have cost some Americans their lives. And this is a criminal
act when there's a violation of national security. And I called the Justice
Department on this - I thought it was serious enough - and I said I want an
investigation of how this happened, to guard against it in the future.
Now, such an investigation, without my designating it as such - if it is a
violation of national security, it is a criminal investigation. If it is a
LEXIS NEXIS LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
9
19 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1708
criminal investigation, the FBI has the right to ask for lie detector tests.
But, being a criminal investigation, the individual has the right to refuse
them, and that's all. But that's been distorted - that I suddenly -
Q. Well, have you ever taken one?
The President. No.
Q. No. Okay. Did your aides [inaudible]? I mean did they take them --
The President. I don't know. I don't even know whether the FBI even asked
them or not. They determine that, and that is within the law. And then if
somebody says no, they report that also in their investigating report that they
asked and it was refused. But I don't know whether any had been given or any
had been asked for.
Q. Mr. President, who do you think the easiest Democrat would be to beat in
1984?
The President. If I answered that question I might be helping them to choose
out of that octet they've got out there, and I'm not going to help them in their
choice.
Q. But there's not one you'd rather - you're relishing running against?
The President. [Laughing] Oh, there may be, but I haven't said yet that I'm
running.
Q. I have two questions that I would - not till Christmas. I'd like to ask
two questions. What I was thinking, in this year of living dangerously, I
wondered how in the world can you maintain the very obvious romance you have
with Mrs. Reagan? I mean romance takes time, and it takes mood, and it special
things do you do to maintain this togetherness in these tough times?
The President. Well, I don't know. We've always been very close, and there
developed, as there would in 30-odd years, little things that kind of -
traditional, or that have a meaning to us from times back.
Q. Can you cite any of them that - I mean, I think especially in your
article in Parade, you showed how much you loved her and how much the romance
continues and whatever. I just wondered if there's sort of small things you do
to keep this touchingness together?
The President. Well, there are certain occasions when we leave notes for each
other and things of that kind that we still do.
Q. Is there a special place you leave them, or -
The President. Oh, no, it just depends on where -- well, things like on the
breakfast tray and, on certain occasions, cards -- I always remember.
Q. Could I ask one more question for my mother, who you gave a story to last
year, and we kept hearing from our readers about the peg-legged pig. Do you
remember the story you told about the pig with the wooden leg?
NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
10
19 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1708
The President. Oh -
Q. We thought that this has become a tradition for the magazine, and we
wondered, do you have a good story to tell the readers and, indeed, my mother,
who is now 84 this year - a very good story?
The President. Well, I can't repeat that because I've done that story. Yes,
I have one that I've told in a couple of speeches lately that I kind of enjoy,
and that is a young fellow from a small town, and he would make a very good
living selling fish to the local restaurants. But the Fish and Game people got
a little curious as to where he was coming up with all these fish. And his
uncle happened to be the sheriff, so he said, "Why don't you ask your nephew if
you can go fishing with him some day, and I'd like to know where he's getting
these fish?" So the uncle did. And they were out in the middle of the lake, and
the uncle started to put his line in the water. The nephew reached in the
tackle box, pulled out a strick of dynamite, lit it, threw it in - the
explosion, and belly up came all the fish. And he started pulling them in. And
his uncle said, "Nephew Elmer, do you realize you've just created a felony?"
Elmer reached in the tackle box and came up with another stick of dynamite and
lit the fuse and handed it to the sheriff and says, "Did you come out here to
fish or the talk?" [Laughter]
Q. Very good, Mr. President.
Q. Mr. President, thank you very, very much, once again. I hope you and the
First Lady have a merry Christmas.
The President. Well, thank you. The same to you.
Q. We certainly appreciate it.
Note: The interview was conducted on December 6 in the Oval Office at the
White House. The transcript of the interview was released by the Office of the
Press Secretary on December 19.
LEXIS NEXIS LEXIS NEXIS
Mar. 11 / Administration of Ronald Reagan, 1983
simply create further job loss and more un-
in 1964-1969. He is married, has four children,
employment.
and resides in New York. He was born Febru-
ary 13, 1923, in New York, N.Y.
Summary
Susan L. Davis was designated by the Speaker of
The Employment Act of 1983 is a bal-
the House. She is president of Susan Davis
anced and realistic approach to addressing
Public Relations in New York City. She was
our economy's structural unemployment
director of public relations for Girls Clubs of
problem. It provides appropriate incentives
America in 1978-1981. She was a public rela-
for employers to hire the long-term unem-
tions consultant in Washington, D.C., in 1976-
ployed. It provides needed financial assist-
1977. She graduated from Finch College (B.A.,
ance to men and women suffering from the
1969) and George Washington University
hardship of prolonged joblessness, and pro-
(M.A., 1979). She was born November 29 1947,
vides Federal funds for a cooperative effort
in New York, N.Y.
by industry, labor, and local officials in as-
sisting displaced workers. It gives States the
flexibility needed to further assist these
United States Naval Academy
workers, and supplements the major effort
already underway to provide meaningful
Appointment of Emil Zseleczky as a
training to our disadvantaged youth by es-
tablishing a youth employment opportunity
Member of the Board of Visitors.
wage which will give all our youth a chance
March 11, 1983
to get the work experience they need. Our
enterprise zone legislation will stimulate
The President today announced his mten-
new jobs in economically distressed areas.
tion to appoint Emil Zseleczky to be a
Together these proposals will provide the
member of the Board of Visitors to the
foundation for expanding job opportunities
United States Naval Academy for a term
for our unemployed. I urge the Congress to
expiring December 30, 1985. He will suc-
enact this legislation promptly.
ceed Anthony J. Celebrezze, Jr.
Ronald Reagan
Since 1980 he has been with the Republi-
can National Heritage Groups Council He
The White House,
was a technical writer for G.P. Technology
March 11, 1983.
in 1979-1980 and was with Pinkerton Secu-
rity in 1977-1978. He was deputy intelli-
gence officer for the Commander-in-Cnief
U.S. Naval Forces, Europe, in 1972-197 In
President's Committee on the Arts and
1967-1971, he served as executive assimant
the Humanities
to the Chief of Staff of the Defense Intelli-
gence Agency.
Appointment of Two Members.
He graduated from the U.S. Naval Acade-
March 11, 1983
my (B.S., 1955), the U.S. Naval War College
(1972), and George Washington University
The President today announced his inten-
(M.S., 1972). He is married, has three chil-
tion to appoint the following individuals to
dren, and resides in Temple Hills, Md. He
be members of the President's Committee
was born November 14, 1931, in Staten
on the Arts and the Humanities. These are
Island, N.Y.
new positions.
Schuyler G. Chapin is serving as dean of the
School of the Arts at Columbia University in
Domestic and Foreign Issues
New York City, He was acting general man-
ager of the Metropolitan Opera in New York
City in 1972-1973 and general manager in
Remarks and a Question-and-Answer
1973-1975. He was executive producer, Am-
Session With Reporters. March 11, 1983
berson Enterprises, in New York (1969-1971)
and served as vice president for programing
The President. As you well know, I've
for the Lincoln Center for the Performing Arts
long been urging that Republicans and
390
Administration of Ronald Reagan, 1983 / Mar. 11
Democrats work together in a spirit of bi-
The President. Well, all I can say is that
partisanship to tackle the many great chal-
this intensive lobbying they've done has led
lenges that are facing the country. I'm
to a great distortion of the situation. Now,
pleased to note this morning that on two
they've led many people to believe, or to
fronts we are making great progress-social
ignore the fact of how many millions of
security and jobs.
people would be exempt from any with-
Members of Congress have been working
holding, that this would not-as a matter of
very responsibly in the past few weeks to
fact, virtually all senior citizens would be
reach agreement on a major social security
exempt. And I think that the banking indus-
bill, and I'm hopeful that I'll have a bill on
try would do a lot better to spend its time
my desk before Easter.
thinking about lowering interest rates than
A bipartisan coalition is also working very
lobbying the way they are with regard to
hard to produce a responsible jobs bill that
this legislation.
will help to put Americans back to work. I
Helen [Helen Thomas, United Press In-
strongly support those efforts, but I'm
ternational].
deeply disturbed by the possibility that the
Jobs Legislation
jobs bill will suddenly become a Christmas
Q. Mr. President, will you veto any legis-
tree for special interest legislation. We must
lation where a Kasten-type amendment is
firmly oppose that effort.
attached?-to the jobs bill, for example?
In the meantime, there are mar other
The President. You know, Helen, that I've
areas where we must also achieve Diparti-
always said that I resist saying in advance
sanship-on issues ranging from the budget
whether I will veto or not. There are always
to providing critical assistance for Central
exceptions to rules, and this is an exception.
America and the Caribbean. And today, I'm
Yes, I would veto such legislation.
sending to the Congress legislation that is
Central America and El Salvador
very special to me and certainly deserves
strong bipartisan support in the Congress.
Q. Mr. President, you talk of bipartisan-
This is a measure to address the problems
ship, but you seem to be a long way from
of the hard-core unemployed. I know that
any kind of bipartisan agreement when it
Congress faces a long and imposing agenda
comes to the question of aid for Central
this year, but we should take heart that
America. The Speaker called your version
America is finally climbing out of one of our
of the situation down there "greatly over-
most difficult recessions.
blown." Democrat Mr. Tsongas talked about
Because we worked so hard over the past
blackmail in the idea that you had to get
2 years to lay a foundation for economic
the money or there would have to be more
advisers down there. What about that? And
recovery, we are definitely on the mend.
what about the idea that we could just keep
Now, in order to assure a lasting recovery
and a lasting peace, we owe it to the Ameri-
on sending money down there, as the other
side escalated, until we have ourselves an-
can people to make 1983 another year of
great accomplishment in the Congress.
other situation where we're in too deep to
get out?
And I'll bet that you have a few ques-
The President. Well, you know, with
tions.
regard to the Speaker, us Irish are given to
oratory-sometimes flamboyant.
Banking Industry
No, I think if you look at this situation
Q. Mr. President, on the jobs bill, on the
honestly, here is a government that has
threat of adding Christmas trees to it, the
been democratically elected in a country
banking industry is trying to put in a provi-
that has had a history back over the dec-
sion to exempt themselves from that with-
ades of military rule and no democracy. It is
holding tax. And your administration has
a government that has embarked on a land
also accused the banking industry of having
reform program, that has moved up an
interest rates that are too high. What's
election for the President-to have it this
going on? Is the banking industry threaten-
year instead of next year-that had in the
ing the economic recovery?
last election a greater turnout than this
391
Mar. 11 / Administration of Ronald Reagan, 1983
country has ever been able to muster, in
Resignation of EPA Administrator
spite of the fact that the voters were threat-
Q. Mr. President, you said that Anne Bur-
ened with death by the guerrillas if they
ford did nothing wrong. that she can leave
attempted to vote.
EPA with her head held high. But there are
They are improving their justice system
allegations that she talked about-admitted
with regard to arresting people that are
holding up the clean-up of one dump site
continuing the violence that once was a pat-
because it might help California Governor
tern in that country. And I think that it is
Jerry Brown. There are also allegations that
an obligation here to try and help, as we
one of her top aides, James Burford-rather
have.
James Sanderson, was involved in EPA deci-
Now, our economic help to that country
sions involving his legal clients. When you
has been 2-to-1 over military help. And the
say that she did nothing wrong while the
military help has been limited to spare
investigation of those charges is still out-
parts and supplies and so forth and individ-
standing, aren't you in effect saying that
ual trainers. We have had a couple of their
those practices are all right with you?
battalions come to our country and train,
The President. No, I'm not saying any-
and they are the best of the military down
thing of the kind. And I heard her last night
there now. There's a great need for train-
on television make that statement about the
ing.
site. And she said that possibly she made
There's no blackmail of any kind intend-
some remark to that effect. But it had noth-
ed. But I would like to call attention, also,
ing to do with the decision that was made.
that in our international aid in many other
The decision was made on entirely different
trouble spots in the world, it does seem
and practical grounds. And she also pointed
peculiar that this is the only one where
out that with the election over, she still,
they seem to be raising objections. And yet,
due to those other reasons, still has not
here is one that is a threat to the Western
made the decision on that particular site in
Hemisphere, to our own security, in fact.
California.
Q. If 1 can just follow up, sir. People are
Now, I'm glad that you brought that sub-
asking, where does it end?
ject up, because I think that what she did in
The President. Where it ends with is rec-
resigning-I did regret very much. And I
ognition that the people of El Salvador,
never would have asked for her resignation.
given a chance at the ballot box, have made
She was doing a job. And we, this adminis-
it plain that they want order and peace and
tration, can be very proud of our record in
democracy. And this government there is
environmental protection. And believe me,
making every effort to persuade the guerril-
it tops what we found when we came here.
And the fact that she was able to do it with
las-to offer amnesty-to persuade them to
a reduced budget-well, I've asked every-
come in and participate in the democratic
one in our government to do things with a
process and not try to shoot their way into a
ruling position in government.
reduced budget and with fewer employees,
if possible. That was what we came in here
And where I think it ends is with a politi-
to do-to make government more efficient,
cal and an economic solution. We're trying
to eliminate waste and extravagance. And
to help them economically. The economy is
she has revealed that she is far more con-
being destroyed by the guerrillas. Every
cerned with the national welfare and is a
time we read a little note about a power
far bigger person than those people who
failure because they'd bombed some power-
have been sniping at her and who've been
plant or facility; every time they do away
going public with unfounded allegations, ac-
with bridges and highways and transporta-
cusations, and charges.
tion and so forth in their guerrilla attacks-
And she, from the very first, was willing
these leave people unemployed and indus-
to make every document available to them.
try stopped and so forth. And there has to
It was myself, based on what I believe is-
be an end to that and a political solution to
well, I've always described this as, you
this problem. And that's what we're aiming
aren't President; you are temporarily custo-
at.
dian of an institution, the Presidency. And
392
Administration of Ronald Reagan, 1983 / Mar 11
The President. That's all they've heard.
but no one has given any evidence that that
is true. I'd like to call your attention to the
fact that in 8 years as Governor, California
not only led every State in the Union, we
And, at the same, we were willing to
led the Federal Government in environ-
make available almost 800,000 docu-
mental protection. We were the forerun-
ments to them and, more recently, to give
ners of the whole movement. And how this
them access in a kind of controlled way to
idea has come, I sometimes suspect that the
protect, because of possible litigation, those
lobbyists for the environmental interests
that were confidential and sensitive. But
feel they have to keep their constituents
she was willing to give them all, which
stirred up or they might not have jobs any-
shows, in my book, she had nothing to hide.
more.
But I don't think that the people who were
Q. Well, you think the slowness in getting
attacking her were concerned about the en-
the Superfund into action at a number of
vironment. I don't think they were con-
sites has contributed to that perception and
cerned about any possible wrongdoing. As a
the fact that you have been quoted in the
matter of fact, I think this administration
past as talking about environmental extrem-
and its policies were their target. And,
ism?
frankly, I wonder how they manage to look
The President. Well there is environmen-
at themselves in the mirror in the morning.
tal extremism. I don't think they'll be
Q. Mr. President, much of the sniping,
happy until the White House looks like a
though, came from inside the White
bird's nest. [Laughter]
House-from your staff; other people out-
Ms. Thomas. Thank you, Mr. President.
side were orchestrated to do it. Governor
The President. Helen, once, may I di-
Kean of New Jersey was not discouraged
gress? There was a young lady here who I
from coming down here and asking her to
missed.
resign. How do you react to that? I mean,
Ms. Thomas. Of course.
you didn't put a stop to that.
Central America and El Salvador
The President. I don't know of anything
of that kind. I know that you were all citing
Q. Thank you, Mr. President. Back to El
these unnamed White House sources that
Salvador for a minute-the civil war there
thought that she would resign. And I will
has been going on for 3 years. With the aid
admit, there must be people-I still would
that you're now proposing, do you feel that
like to find them out and identify them-
you have any idea when the conflict will
there must have been people or they're
stop, when it will be under control? Or is
probably the same people that said that
the United States prepared to make an
about everyone else who was attacked in
open-ended commitment?
some way in our administration, and all of
The President. I can't give you a date
whom have been cleared completely. And
when a thing of this kind will end. Every
yet, the same charges were made: Oh, it
effort is being made, as I say, to persuade
might be a political embarrassment. Well,
them to come in and join in a peaceful
I'm not that easily politically embarrassed.
solution to the problems.
When I know and have faith in the individ-
This is also a regional problem. And the
ual, I am not going to yield to the first
other countries, their neighbors-Costa
attack and run for cover and throw some-
Rica, Honduras, Guatemala, Panama, and
body off the sleigh.
others-are holding meetings to see what
Q. But the Republican polls now show
they, regionally, can do about this. Now,
that your policies are perceived by the
we're not participating in those. We would
public, your environmental policies, as
be an interested observer. We certainly en-
being more favorable to polluters than to
courage that kind of thing.
the public. Are you going to change any of
But these are other countries that have
your environmental policies now that Mrs.
adopted democracy. Costa Rica. I don't
Burford has gone?
know of any country-they don't even have
393
Mar. 11 / Administration of Ronald Reagan, 1983
an army. They are the most democratic
Digest of Other
country that you can imagine. Honduras has
White House Announcements
ended a long tradition of military rule and
has a democratic form of government. And
they all want to help because they recog-
The following list includes the President's
public schedule and other items of general
nize that this is an outside threat, really, to
interest announced by the Office of the
the security of the Western Hemisphere.
Press Secretary and not included elsewhere
And I hope that it'll be a short time. I
in this issue.
hope that these appeals and offers of am-
nesty will bring some of those people down
from the hills. But I also have to recog-
March 1
nize-not be naive-that these people up
The President transmitted a report to the
there in the hills are not just discontented
Speaker of the House of Representatives
peasants who have managed to get their
and the chairman of the Senate Foreign Re-
hands on a military weapon. The are
lations Committee concerning the late
trained and highly equipped military
transmittals of certain international agree-
forces-trained and equipped and backed
ments.
by outsiders by way, mainly, of Cuba,
through Nicaragua.
March 2
And SO I think that we have to sta with
The White House announced that the
this. And I don't see why there is so much
President has invited King Birenda of Nepal
opposition to it. We have no intention of
to pay a state visit to the United States. His
sending combat forces, nor have we ever
Majesty has accepted the invitation and will
been asked for combat forces. And there's
meet with the President in Washington
no intention of us sending the adviser teams
during the fall.
to be with combat units or anything We're
talking about simply giving their military
March 4
some of the fundamental training to enable
In the afternoon. the President met in his
them to do the job.
suite at the St. Francis Hotel in San Francis-
CO with Secretary of State George P. Shultz.
Soviet Expulsion of U.S. Diplomat
Secretary of Defense Caspar W. Wein-
berger, and Secretary of the Treasury
Q. Mr. President, the Soviets have ex-
Donald T. Regan for a wide-ranging over-
pelled a spy
view of foreign policy, including defense
The President. Helen said, "thank you."
policy and international economics.
I've got to
In the evening, the President and Mrs.
Q. Can't you just tell us about the Soviets
Reagan left the St. Francis Hotel and went
expelling the spy
to Pier 50, where the royal yacht, Britan-
Mr. Speakes. Lesley [Lesley Stahl, CBS
nia, was moored in San Francisco Harbor.
News], no questions. Sorry.
They boarded the yacht for a dinner hosted
Q.
and was he spying, and what is
by Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip
your reaction?
and a small party commemorating the
The President. I don't know anything fur-
Reagan's 31st wedding anniversary which
ther than any of you know about that.
followed the dinner. The President and Mrs.
Reporters. Thank you very much, Mr.
Reagan remained overnight on the
President.
Britannia as guests of the Queen.
The President. All right. Thank you all.
March 7
The President met at the White House
Note: The President spoke at 11:02 a.m. in
with:
the Briefing Room at the White House.
-members of the White House staff;
Larry Speakes is the Principal Deputy
-representatives of the National Coali-
Press Secretary to the President.
tion for Peace Through Strength;
394
Associa-
director and director of the California
tion's Section of Corporation, Banking
ciation, a director of the Pennsylvania
the request of a government in one of
Department of Social Welfare.
and Business Law, the ABA's largest pro-
State Chamber of Commerce. and a mem-
our neighboring countries, offering some
Mr. Svahn received a B.A. degree in
fessional group, and has served as chair-
ber of the Society of Experimental Test
help against the import or the export into
political science from the University of
man of the ABA's Committee on Com-
Pilots Association. He was elected to the
the Western Hemisphere of terrorism, of
Washington in 1966. He is married with
modities Regulation since its creation in
Pioneers Club for being the first aviator to
disruption. And it isn't just El Salvador.
two children and resides in Severna Park,
1976.
exceed 1,000 mph in combat aircraft. Mr.
That happens to be the target at the
Md. Mr. Svahn was born in New London,
Mr. Johnson has authored many arti-
Helms is a regular guest lecturer at the
moment. Our problem is this whole hemi-
Conn., on May 13, 1943.
cles on the Commodity Exchange Act. He
University of Michigan Graduate Business
sphere and keeping this sort of thing out.
serves as a member of the board of direc-
School and the Industrial College in
Now, we have sent briefing teams to
tors of the commodity industry's national
Washington, D.C. He was selected for the
Europe, down to our Latin American
trade association, the Futures Industry
General James H. Doolittle award and
neighbors with what we've learned of the
Commodity Futures Trading
Association.
trophy in September 1980.
actual involvement of the Soviet Union,
Commission
Mr. Johnson was graduated from In-
Mr. Helms has logged well over 10,000
of Cuba, of the PLO, of, even, Qadhafi
diana University (A.B., 1959) and Yale
hours of flight time and holds an active
in Libya, and others in the Communist
Nomination of Philip F. Johnson To Be a
Commissioner, and Designation as Chairman.
Law School (LL.B., 1962). He resides in
commercial certificate. He continues to
bloc nations to bring about this terrorism
March 3, 1981
Chicago, III., and is 42 years old.
log nearly 350 hours annually.
down there.
Born in DeQueen, Ark., on March 1,
Now, you use the term "military ad-
The President today announced his in-
1925. Mr. Helms attended Oklahoma
visers." You know, there's a sort of a tech-
tention to nominate Philip F. Johnson to
University. During World War II, he
nicality there. You could say they are ad-
be Commissioner of the Commodity Fu-
Federal Aviation Administration
completed U.S. Navy flight training and
visers in that they're training, but when
tures Trading Commission. Upon confir-
Nomination of J. Lynn Helms To Be
entered the U.S. Marine Corps. He re-
it's used as "adviser," that means military
mation the President intends to designate
Administrator. March 3, 1981
sides in Westport, Conn.
men who go in and accompany the forces
Mr. Johnson as Chairman for the term
into combat, advise on strategy and tac-
expiring April 13, 1984.
The President today announced his in-
tics. We have no one of that kind. We're
Mr. Johnson is a partner with the firm
tention to nominate J. Lynn Helms to be
sending and have sent teams down there
of Kirkland & Ellis of Chicago, III.,
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Ad-
Interview With the President
to train. They do not accompany them
where he has specialized in the Commod-
ministration.
Question-and-Answer Session With Walter
into combat. They train recruits in the
ity Exchange Act and its regulations for
Mr. Helms retired in 1980 as chairman
Cronkite of CBS News. March 3, 1981
garrison area. And as a matter of fact, we
15 years. Mr. Johnson has been a speaker
of the board of Piper Aircraft Corp., hav-
have such training teams in more than 30
and a panelist at seminars and confer-
ing been elected to that post in September
EL SALVADOR
countries today, and we've always done
1978. He served as president of Piper from
that-the officers of the military in
ences on the Commodity Exhange Act
sponsored by the Federal Bar Association,
July 1974 through September 1978 and as
MR. CRONKITE. Mr. President, with your
friendly countries and in our neighboring
the Bureau of National Affairs, American
chief executive officer from July 1974
administration barely 6 weeks old, you're
countries; have come to our service
Law Institute, the Futures Industry As-
through September 1979.
involved now in, perhaps, the first foreign
schools-West Point, Annapolis, and so
sociation, the Chicago Board of Trade,
Previously, Mr. Helms was group vice
policy crisis-if it can be called a crisis
forth. So, I don't see any parallel at all.
the American Bar Association, and other
president of the Bendix Corp. and presi-
yet; probably cannot be, but it is being
And I think it is significant that the ter-
groups. He has served as a member of the
dent of the Norden Division of United
much discussed, of course-much concern
rorists, the guerrilla activity in El Salva-
about El Salvador and our commitment
Commodity Futures Trading Commis-
Technologies.
dor was supposed to cause an uprising
there. Do you see any parallel in our com-
In 1980 he served as chairman of the
that the government would fall because
sion's Advisory Committee on the Defini-
board of the General Aviation Manufac-
mitting advisers and military assistance to
the people would join this aggressive force
tion and Regulation of Market Instru-
El Salvador and the early stages of our
and support them. The people are totally
ments and is a member of the CFTC Ad-
turers Association. Mr. Helms is active in
involvement in Vietnam?
against that and have not reacted in that
visory Committee on State Jurisdiction
many other aviation-related organizations.
He is a member of the State of Arkansas
THE PRESIDENT. No, Walter, I don't. I
way.
and Responsibilities.
National Advisory Board, a fellow in the
know that that parallel is being drawn by
MR. CRONKITE. Well, that's one of the
Mr. Johnson is a member of the govern-
American Institute of Aeronautics Asso-
many people. But the difference is so pro-
questions that's brought up about the wis-
found. What we're actually doing is, at
dom of our policy right at the moment.
228
229
Mar. 3
Administration of Ronald Reagan, 1981
Administration of Ronald Reagan, 1981
Mar. 3
Some Latin Americans feel that President
THE PRESIDENT. Well, I don't think
arms, the training of the guerrillas as
forces begin to lose with whatever military
Duarte has control of the situation. The
there can be a parallel there, because I
they've done there. And I don't think in
materiel assistance we give them, what-
people have not risen. This last offensive
was in Iran in '78 when the first coup
any way that he was suggesting an assault
ever training advisers we give them, are
of the guerrillas did not work, and there-
came about, and it was the Soviet Union
on Cuba.
you pledging that we will not go in with
fore aren't we likely to exacerbate the sit-
that put their man as President of Af-
MR. CRONKITE. That intercepting and
fighting forces?
uation by American presence there now,
ghanistan. And then their man didn't
stopping means blockade. And isn't that
THE PRESIDENT. I certainly don't see
therefore sort of promoting a self-fulfilling
work out to their satisfaction, so, they
an act of war?
any likelihood of us going in with fighting
prophecy by coming down there and get-
came in and got rid of him and brought
THE PRESIDENT. Well, this depends. If
forces. I do see our continued work in the
ting the guerrillas and the people them-
another man that they'd been training in
you intercept them when they're landing
field of diplomacy with neighboring
selves upset about "big brother" interven-
Moscow and put him in as their President.
at the other end or find them where
countries that are interested in Central
tion, and therefore losing the game instead
And then, with their armed forces, they
they're in the locale such as, for example,
America and South America to bring this
of winning it.
are trying to subdue the people of Afghan-
Nicaragua, and informing Nicaragua that
violence to a halt and to make sure that
THE PRESIDENT. Well, no, and we real-
istan who do not want this pro-Soviet
we're aware of the part that they have
we do not just sit passively by and let this
ize that our southern friends down there
government that has been installed by an
played in this, using diplomacy to see that
hemisphere be invaded by outside forces.
do have memories of the great colossus of
outside force.
a country decides they're not going to al-
the North and SO forth-but no, his gov-
The parallel would be that without ac-
low themselves to be used anymore-
U.S.-Soviet RELATIONS
ernment has asked for this because of the
tually using Soviet troops, in effect, the
there's been a great slowdown. We're
need for training against terrorist and
Soviets are, you might say, trying to do
watching it very carefully-Nicaragua-
MR. CRONKITE. Moving on. Your hard
guerrilla activities, has asked for materiel
the same thing in El Salvador that they
of the transfer of arms to El Salvador.
line toward the Soviet Union is in keeping
such as helicopters and so forth that can
and in Afghanistan, but by using proxy
This doesn't mean that they're not coming
with your campaign statements, your
be better at interdicting the supply lines
troops through Cuba and guerrillas. And
in from other guerrilla bases in other
promises. But there are some who, while
where these illicit weapons are being
they had hoped for, as 1 said, an uprising
countries there.
applauding that stance, feel that you
brought in to the guerrillas, and this is
of the people that would then give them
MR. CRONKITE. You've said that we
might have overdone the rhetoric a little
what we've provided. And some of these
some legitimacy in the government that
could extricate ourselves easily from El
bit in laying into the Soviet leadership as
teams that have been provided are also to
would be installed-the Communist gov-
Salvador if that were required at any
being liars and thieves, et cetera.
help keep those machines in the air and
ernment-but the people didn't rise up.
given point in this proceeding. I assume
THE PRESIDENT. Well, now, let's recap.
on the water-patrol boats and SO forth—
The people have evidenced their desire
you mean at any given point. How could
I am aware that what I said received a
to try to interdict the supply by water of
to have the government they have and not
we possibly extricate ourselves? Even now,
great deal of news attention, and I can't
weapons and ammunition. They need
be ruled by these guerrillas.
from this initial stage, how could we ex-
criticize the news media for that. I said it.
help in repair. They get laid up for re-
MR. CRONKITE. Secretary of State Haig
tricate ourselves without a severe loss of
But the thing that seems to have been
pairs, and they don't have the qualified
has said that we'll not have a Vietnam in
face?
ignored-well, two things-one, I did not
technicians.
El Salvador, because the United States
THE PRESIDENT. Well, I don't think
volunteer that statement. This was not a
MR. CRONKITE. What really philosoph-
will direct its action toward Cuba, which
we're planning on having to extricate
statement that I went in and called a press
ically is different from our going down to
is the main source of the intervention, in
ourselves from there. But the only thing
conference and said, "Here, I want to say
help a democratic government sustain it-
his words. But Cuba is a client state of
that I could see that could have brought
the following." I was asked a question.
self against guerrilla activity promoted
the Soviet Union. It's not likely to stand
that about is if the guerrillas had been
And the question was, what did I think
from the outside-Soviet and Cuban aid,
by and let us take direct action against
correct in their assessment and there had
were Soviet aims? Where did I think the
as we believe it to be; your administration
Cuba, is it?
been the internal disturbance. Well, then
says it is-and Afghanistan? El Salvador
Soviet Union was going? And I had made
THE PRESIDENT. Well, that term "di-
it would be a case of we're there at the
is in our sort of geopolitical sphere of influ-
rect action," there are a lot of things
it clear to them, I said, "I don't have to
behest of the present government. If that
ence. Alghanistan, on the border of the
open-diplomacy, trade, a number of
government is no longer there, we're not
offer my opinion. They have told us where
Soviet Union, is certainly in their geo-
things-and Secretary Haig has explained
going there without an invitation. We're
they're going over and over again. They
political sphere of influence. They went in
his use of the tenn, the source with regard
not forcing ourselves upon them, and
have told us that their goal is the Marxian
with troops to support a Marxist govern-
to Cuba means the intercepting and stop-
you'd simply leave-and there aren't that
philosophy of world revolution and a sin-
ment friendly to them. Why isn't that a
ping of the supplies coming into these
many people to be extricated.
gle, one-world Communist state and that
parallel situation?
countries-the export from Cuba of those
MR. CRONKITE. Even if the Duarte
they're dedicated to that."
230
Mar
3
Administration of Ronald Reagan, 1981
Administration of Ronald Reagan, 1981
Mar. 3
And then I said we're naive if we don't
didn't know anything about it until I read
predecessor, tried to bring negotiations to
that World War II would have taken
recognize in their performance of that,
it in the paper, saw it on television myself.
the point of actual reduction, and the So-
place if we had done what he wanted us
that they also have said that the only
I don't know actually how that came
viet Union refused. They refused to dis-
to do back in 1938? I think there's a very
morality-remember their ideology is
about or what the decision was, whether
cuss that. I think that we would have to
good chance it wouldn't have taken place.
without God, without our idea of moral-
it was just one of those bureaucratic
know that they're willing to do that.
But again, as I say, some evidence from
ity in the religious sense-their statement
things in the
I think it would help bring about such
the Soviet Union, I think, would be very
about morality is that nothing is immoral
MR. CRONKITE. You didn't ask Secre-
a meeting if the Soviet Union revealed
helpful in bringing about a meeting.
if it furthers their cause, which means
tary Haig about it?
that it is willing to moderate its imperial-
MR. CRONKITE. It sounds as if, sir,
they can resort to lying or stealing or
THE PRESIDENT. No, and I just don't
ism, its aggression-Afghanistan would be
you're saying that there isn't going to be
cheating or even murder if it furthers
know
an example. We could talk a lot better if
any summit meeting with Brezhnev.
their cause, and that is not immoral. Now,
MR. CRONKITE. Don't you think the
there was some indication that they truly
THE PRESIDENT. No, I haven't put that
if we're going to deal with them, then we
Russians kind of think we're childish when
wanted to be a member of the peace-
as a hard and fast condition. I'm just say-
have to keep that in mind when we deal
we pull one like that?
loving nations of the world, the free world.
ing that in discussing with our allies, it
with them. And I've noticed that with
THE PRESIDENT. I don't know. I don't
MR. CRONKITE. Isn't that really what
would make it a lot easier if we were able
their own statements about me and their
know, or maybe they got a message.
you have to negotiate? I mean, is it really
to say, "Well now, look, they've shown
attacks on me since I answered that ques-
MR. CRONKITE. What conditions do
conceivable that you're going to get such a
some signs of moderating their real im-
tion that way-it is the only statement
have to be satisfied before you would agree
change of heart, a change of statement
perialistic course." You know, when we
I've made-they have never denied the
to a summit meeting with Brezhnev?
that you could believe on the part of the
look at where they are and with their sur-
truth of what I said.
THE PRESIDENT. Well, I think it isn't
Soviet Union before you ever sit down to
rogates, Qadhafi in Chad, Cuba in An-
MR. CRONKITE. You don't think that
a case of-well, there are some things that
talk with President Brezhnev?
gola, Cuba and East Germans in Ethiopia,
name-calling, if you could call it that,
I think would help bring that about. The
THE PRESIDENT. Well, is that subject a
in South Yemen, and of course, now the
makes it more difficult when you do fi-
main thing is you don't just call up and
negotiation? If you sit at a table and say,
attempt here in our own Western Hemi-
mally, whenever that is, sit down across the
say, "Yeah, let's get together and have
"We want you to get out of Afghanistan,"
sphere.
table from Mr. Brezhnev and his cohorts?
lunch." A summit meeting of that kind
and they're going to say, "No," what do
MR. CRONKITE. Well, I hate to belabor
THE PRESIDENT. No, I've been inter-
takes a lot of preparation. And the first
you do? Let them go in someplace else
this, but since the whole world is looking
ested to see that he has suggested having
preparation from our standpoint is the
if they'll get out of there?
forward, I think, to eventually some nego-
a summit meeting since I said that.
pledge that we've made to our allies, that
I remember when Hitler was arming
tiations to stop the arms race, to get off of
MR. CRONKITE. Let me ask another
we won't take unilateral steps. We'll only
and had built himself up-no one's cre-
this danger point, it is an important thing,
question about being tough with the Rus-
do things after full consultation with them,
ated quite the military power that the
and I gather that the Soviet Union has to
sians. When Ambassador Dobrynin of the
because they're involved also. And I've
Soviet Union has, but comparatively he
make a unilateral move-to their point, it
Soviet Union drove over to the State De-
had an opportunity to talk a little bit
was in that way-Franklin Delano Roose-
would be backwards, that they'd let's say,
partment for the first time after the ad-
about it just-it only came to light, his
velt made a speech in Chicago at the dedi-
get out of Afghanistan. Do they have to
ministration came in, his car was turned
statement, a short time ago-with Prime
cation of a bridge over the Chicago River.
get out of Afghanistan before you'd meet?
away at the entrance to the basement
Minister Thatcher when she was here. So,
And in that speech he called on the free
THE PRESIDENT. No, I haven't said that.
garage, which he had been using, told
we haven't had the opportunity for the
world to quarantine Nazi Germany, to
And, Walter, I can't really say a specific
that he had to use the street door like all
consultations about that that would be
stop all communication, all trade, all rela-
answer to any of these things unless and
the other diplomats had been doing. It
necessary.
tions with them until they gave up that
until I have met with and discussed this
was obviously tipped to the press that this
I have said that I will sit and negotiate
militaristic course and agreed to join with
whole problem with allies who, you know,
was going to happen.
with them for a reduction in strategic nu-
the free nations of the world in a search
are only a bus ride from Russia.
What advantage is there in embarrass-
clear weapons to lower the threshold of
for peace.
MR. CRONKITE. They seem to be saying,
ing the Soviet Ambassador like that? A
danger that exists in the world today.
MR. CRONKITE. That did a whale of
as near as we can tell, in their press and
phone call would have said, "Hey, you
Well, one of the things-you say "condi-
a lot of good.
elsewhere, that they're saying they're
can't use that door any longer." Was that
tions"-I think one of them would be
THE PRESIDENT. Oh, but the funny
anxious for you to meet on arms control.
just a macho thing for domestic consump-
some evidence on the part of the Soviet
thing was he was attacked SO here in our
They're anxious to get arms control dis-
tion or
Union that they are willing to discuss that.
own country for having said such a thing.
cussions going. They're terribly concerned
THE PRESIDENT. I have to tell you, I
So far, previous Presidents, including my
Can we honestly look back now and say
about that. They're fearful that you're not
929
Administration of Ronald Reagan, 1981
Mar. 3
Mar. 3
Administration of Ronald Reagan, 1981
THE PRESIDENT. I think human rights
turned out to be they lose all human
going to want to negotiate until such time
tempted to take over that market and
is very much a part of our American ideal-
rights because there's a totalitarian take-
as you get your defense program and
many of them did, started supplying the
ism. I think they do play an important
over.
your economic program through Congress
grain that we weren't supplying. So, the
part. My criticism of them, in the last few
MR. CRONKITE. Your appointment to
and feel that you're negotiating from
question was: Were we hurting ourselves
years, was that we were selective with
the head of the human rights section over
strength, and that they're fearful that
worse than we were hurting them? Cer-
regard to human rights.
at the State Department is Mr. Ernest
that's going to be some time-and too
tainly it didn't stop the invasion of Af-
We took countries that were pro-West-
Lefever, of course. He testified to the
late.
ghanistan. And I criticized this.
ern, that were maybe authoritarian in gov-
House Subcommittee in '79, "In my view,
THE PRESIDENT. Well, too late for what
At the same time-and we have made
ernment, but not totalitarian, more au-
the United States should remove from the
is the question. No, I don't know, but I do
no decision now on it-I would like to lift
thoritarian than we would like, did not
statute books all clauses that establish a
believe this: that it is rather foolish to
the embargo. I think all of us would. But
meet all of our principles of what con-
human rights standard or condition that
have unilaterally disarmed, you might
at the same time, now and with Poland
stitutes human rights, and we punished
must be met by another sovereign nation."
say, as we did by letting our defensive, our
added, the situation in Poland to Afghan-
them at the same time that we were claim-
Do you agree with that flat statement?
margin of safety deteriorate, and then you
istan and all, we have to think very hard
ing détente with countries where there are
THE PRESIDENT. Well, I've never had
sit with the fellow who's got all the arms.
as to whether we can just go forward uni-
no human rights. The Soviet Union is the
a chance to discuss with him just how he
What do you have to negotiate with?
laterally and do this.
greatest violator today of human rights
views that or what he believes the course
You're asking him to come down to where
MR. CRONKITE. Because in effect it has
in all the world. Cuba goes along with it,
would take. I do, however, believe that
you are or you to build up to, where he is,
been effective. They are having problems
and yet, previously, while we were en-
contrary to some of the attacks against
but you don't have anything to trade.
with grain supply there, are they not?
forcing human rights with others, we were
him, that he's as concerned about human
So, maybe realistic negotiations could
THE PRESIDENT. Well, I think they'll
talking about bettering relations with Cas-
rights as the rest of us. But I think what
take place. When? We can say, "Well, all
always have problems with supply, be-
tro's Cuba.
he means is that basic human rights and
right, this thing that we're building we'll
cause they insist on that collective farm
I think that we ought to be more sin-
the violation of them are being ignored by
stop if you'll stop doing whatever it is
business, which never has worked and
cere about our position on human rights.
us where they take place in the Commu-
you're really doing."
isn't going to work in the future.
MR. CRONKITE. Do you believe that our
nist bloc nations.
MR. CRONKITE. You campaigned on
You know, this is something that I've
requirements for military allies and bases
MR. CRONKITE. He says also that we
lifting the grain embargo-the Soviet
never been able to understand about the
should take precedence over human rights
should not be concerned with South Af-
Union. You delayed doing that SO far,
Russian leaders. Wouldn't you think
considerations?
rica's racial policies, but should make the
because you, I gather, feel it would send
sometime they would take a look at their
THE PRESIDENT. No, I think what I'm
country a full-fledged partner of the
the Russians the wrong message, perhaps,
system and say, "We can't provide enough
saying is that where we have an alliance
United States in the struggle against Com-
if you did. Senator Helms has suggested
food to feed our people," to say nothing
with a country that, as I say, does not meet
munist expansion. Should we drop all of
perhaps that the grain embargo should be
of other consumer items that are still ra-
all of ours, we should look at it that we're
our concerns about human rights in South
extended to a general boycott of all U.S.
tioned and scarce in supply under that
in a better position remaining friends, to
Africa?
trade with the Soviet Union. Is that an
system? And yet, we can look at these
persuade them of the rightness of our
THE PRESIDENT. No, no, and I think,
option that you're studying?
other countries in the world, all the coun-
view on human rights than to suddenly,
though, that there's been a failure, maybe
THE PRESIDENT. Well, I don't think
tries that chose this way-not only the
as we have done in some places, pull the
for political reasons in this country, to
you rule out anything. Actually, my cam-
United States but South Korea, Taiwan,
rug out from under them and then let a
recognize how many people, black and
paigning was more on my criticism that
all the countries that choose the free mar-
completely totalitarian takeover that de-
white, in South Africa are trying to re-
the embargo shouldn't have taken place
ketplace-their standard of living goes up
nies what human rights the people had
move apartheid and the steps that they've
the way it did in the first place, that if
and up. Our problem isn't one of not
had.
taken and the gains that they've made.
we were going to go that route, then it
raising enough food; it's not finding
MR. CRONKITE. Doesn't that put us in
As long as there's a sincere and honest ef-
should have been a general embargo. We
enough places to sell it.
the position rather of abetting the suppres-
fort being made, based on our own expe-
shouldn't have asked just one segment of
sion of human rights for our own selfish
rience in our own land, it would seem to
our society-and not even agriculture,
HUMAN RIGHTS
ends, at least temporarily, until such time
me that we should be trying to be helpful.
just the grain farmers-to bear the bur-
MR. CRONKITE. What place do you
as we can make those persuasive changes?
And can we, again, take that other
den of this, when at the same time we
think human rights should have in our
THE PRESIDENT. Well, what has the
course? Can we abandon a country that
knew we could not enforce or persuade
choice turned out to be? The choice has
has stood beside us in every war we've
friendly nations to us who would be
foreign policy?
Mar 3
Administration of Ronald Reagan, 1981
Administration of Ronald Reagan, 1981
Mar. 3
ever fought, a country that strategically is
opposition. And one of the reasons I'm
essential to the free world in its produc-
optimistic is because we've received 100,-
our program. And this is why we're
I think we might have the same prob-
tion of minerals we all must have and SO
000 letters and telegrams since I made
presenting it literally in a package.
lems, but we still have the infrastructure.
forth?
the speech on the 18th. We SO far have
As a matter of fact, Prime Minister
We still have this great industrial capacity
I just feel that, myself, that here, if
only been able to open and read and
Thatcher told me that she regretted in
of ours here. And if people would only
we're going to sit down at a table and
catalog about 5,339, I think the figure is.
her own attempts that she has been un-
look at it, what we're trying to correct
negotiate with the Russians, surely we can
And of that first 5,000-plus messages, 92-
able to cut government spending as she
that's gone wrong is: Some years ago
keep the door open and continue to nego-
and-a-fraction percent are totally in sup-
knew she would have to to cure their ills.
when things were going better, govern-
tiate with a friendly nation like South
port of our program of what we want to
And she said one of the reasons was that
ment was only taking 19 percent of the
Africa.
do. I know that polls have been taken,
she tried piecemeal, tried piece by piece to
gross national product; it's now taking 23
MR. CRONKITE. The Argentinian Gov-
and a national poll recently has shown
get this reduced, that reduced, and one by
percent, and it's been increasing, it's on an
ernment has just arrested internationally
an even higher percentage of people in
one, they just knocked it off and turned it
upward line if we don't head it off. And
respected heads of the principal human
support of the program. I know from my
down.
so that cost of government plus the fact
rights organization there, seized their list
own experience in the few times that I
MR. CRONKITE. I'm just curious. Did
that the only way we can maintain that is
of 6,000 persons who've disappeared un-
get out of here and can meet the citizenry,
she volunteer that, or did you ask her
by continued borrowing to the point that
der this government. Is the United States
I find the same thing. It just is true, you
what went wrong with her program?
we're close to having a trillion dollar
going to protest that?
feel it, you sense it, you hear it among the
THE PRESIDENT. No, she volunteered
debt-a trillion.
THE PRESIDENT. I have not had an op-
people out there.
that, yes.
MR. CRONKITE. I understand you're
portunity-that just happened, as you
It's, I'm afraid, a little bit like Senator
MR. CRONKITE. Well, do you see a
still trying to visualize a trillion dollars.
Long said, that when you start to cut in
parallel there? There is a conservative
know, and I haven't had an opportunity
THE PRESIDENT. Yes.
to meet with Secretary Haig on this, In
the budget the slogan in Washington has
government, came in with much the same
been for too many years, "Don't cut you
sort of a plan you did to turn back the
MR. CRONKITE. Mr. President, let me
fact, the only information that SO far has
and don't cut me, cut that fellow behind
clock on socialistic advances, a revolu-
ask you about Congress again though.
been presented to me is that it did
This is the whole core of the thing right
happen.
the tree." And I think these various
tionary approach to change, and it has
failed miserably there, Unemployment is
now, of course, is getting that program
groups are representing a lot of people
PROGRAM FOR ECONOMIC RECOVERY
behind the trees.
higher than any time since the Great De-
through. Now, you say you need 100 per-
pression. Thousands of small businesses
cent of it. Of course you do. That's what
MR. CRONKITE. Your targeted ceiling
MR. CRONKITE. Let's move to some do-
have folded.
you're after. But realistically-and you're
on Federal spending is $6951/2 billion with
mestic affairs, which I think you're rather
a $45 billion deficit. How much higher
THE PRESIDENT. Yes.
a realistic man-you can't really expect to
get all of it through. I mean, there's got
interested in these days-and the whole
than that in that budget can Congress go
MR. CRONKITE. Industrial production
to be some failure somewhere along the
country is of course. Now that they face
without seriously endangering your
is low. Why isn't that a parallel to your
line of getting it all through there. Are
the stone-hard reality of it all, 150 liberal
program?
problem?
organizations have gotten together to
you going to be in the position, politically
THE PRESIDENT. Well, I have to say
THE PRESIDENT. Well, you see, I think
at any rate, of saying all those thousands
campaign against your budget cuts in so-
that I believe our package has been so
in her case, we have to recognize how
cial welfare programs. Middle Western
out there who are for you to get the cuts
carefully worked out that they endanger
much farther down the road England had
made that if Congress cuts this one cent
and Eastern, Northeastern States are con-
it if they start picking off any parts of it.
gone. She has great industries now that
cerned that the programs favor the Sun-
or adds one cent to it, that it's not your
Our program is aimed not only at reduc-
are government-owned monopolies and
belt. Some farm organizations are con-
responsibility any longer. Congress has
cerned that the subsidies are being cut, of
ing a budget but, with the tax feature of
losing their shirts as a result, because gov-
failed you and failed the people.
ernment doesn't run businesses very well.
course, all across-the-board. Now these
it, at stimulating the economy, increasing
THE PRESIDENT. Well, Walter, I vir-
She was up against-well, we've now seen
people who are beginning to see that
productivity, which means more jobs for
tually have to say that because if I said
the Labor Party split in its own conven-
anything else-I played in the line when
they're going to get hurt a little bit on
our people, and which will reduce infla-
tion, and the left wing take over-she was
I played football-it's like giving the play
these cuts. Are you still optimistic in the
tion. And I believe in our program. Yes,
up against that powerful left wing ele-
away and indicating to your opponent
face of all of this opposition that it can be
there'll be a $45 billion deficit, but just
ment that was sabotaging. I don't think
where the play's going.
done?
think what that means. That means that
her experiment is over. I have confidence
that deficit would be double that without
in her, and I admire her greatly and her
No, I can't-I have to stay with it. I
THE PRESIDENT. Yes, I expected that
think our package is designed-and the
courage, and she's still going at it.
thing that is significant to me about all
236
Mar. 3
Administration of Ronald Reagan, 1981
Administration of Ronald Reagan, 1981
Mar. 3
those people that you mentioned a mo-
to happen to my tax situation in the years
poverty groups in the country, is the
I would do in the first 24 hours is put a
ment ago that are opposed to the plan, as
ahead." Business will know that they can
safety net beyond where it is today?
freeze on the hiring of replacements-
well as some of those on the Hill who are
invest in plant and that they're going to
THE PRESIDENT. Well, the safety net is
Federal employees. And, indeed, in the
opposed: No one has brought up an al-
be allowed a better break in writing off
where it should be. But it isn't so much of
first hour, when after I took the oath and
ternative. Those are the people who have
the depreciation and so forth.
lowering or raising it, it is a case of find-
walked back into the Capitol building, I
been dictating the policies of this country
MR. CRONKITE. The cuts to be an-
ing that around the edge of that safety
signed that executive order, and suddenly
for the last three or four decades, that
nounced March 10th-we've seen some
net, we had acquired a group of people
we find thousands of people who were re-
have put the country in the economic po-
advance information on it. Whether it's
who were benefiting from it who didn't
cruited, beginning November 5th, and yet
sition it is in. Unless they can come up
entirely correct or not, we have no way of
need to be there.
for some reason had not yet been put in
and say, "We are now recommending a
knowing, but the agricultural cuts to be
MR. CRONKITE. Well, they say in New
their jobs by January 20th. And then the
change in this direction or that direction
announced, we understand, will cut back
York, now-of course, these figures are
uproar that this was retroactive to No-
to cure what has happened," how can
Agriculture Department's Supplemen-
suspect too in a way because nobody
vember 5th-we didn't say anything about
they stand and oppose a program that is
tal Food Programs, which include milk
knows precisely-but they're talking
November 5th, but we also didn't realize
designed to cure the economic chaos that
to children and pregnant women and that
about a cut of 20,000 children off the Aid
that they could actually hold people for
they created?
sort of thing, dairy products, fruit, to low-
to Dependent Children; there's 30,000
that long, leaving them to think they had
MR. CRONKITE. The supply-siders feel
income families. Is that in there? Is that
old people off the help to the elderly. Is it
jobs, and yet had not processed them and
that their program, your program, should
the cut?
your intention that that many people are
put them in the jobs. I have to be sus-
get its first results through psychology,
THE PRESIDENT. I can't tell you. We're
on this fringe area? And even if they are,
picious of this.
that the mere approach to these problems
still going at this, and the program is
isn't it going to create a considerable
Now, the truth is, many of those people
being made in a frontal assault by your
going to be presented. But, no, what we're
hardship for them? They're not that
were victims, not of us, they were victims
administration will encourage people to
talking about, though, in programs of that
much above poverty level
of what I think was a bureaucratic trick
get out and do the things necessary
kind-and this has to do with food stamps
THE PRESIDENT. Walter, I hadn't seen
And where we are finding real of
invest and save and do the things neces-
too-is not taking those things away from
those figures of people doing that. But let
distress because of that, we are making ex-
sary. They'll have faith in this. Do you
the people who would have no other
me just tell you an experience from Cali-
ceptions, because it wasn't their fault.
see any early results of that yet?
means of getting them. But programs
fornia, again which is one that we're
They didn't know they were being vic-
THE PRESIDENT. Well, one of the things
have a way to expand. Bureaucracy has to
going to ride herd on very closely The
timized.
that the mail we get and one of the things
justify its existence. So, they spread and
permanent structure of government, what
Now, I think, when I hear figures like
that I hear from pollsters and so forth is
they accumulate barnacles, and what
we commonly call the bureaucracy, has a
this about who will have to be cut, this
to the effect that there is a different atti-
we're doing is taking a look at some of
great ability of self-defense, to preserve
again, is the bureaucracy saying, "Okay,
tude, that there is a kind of glow out there
those barnacles. And you suddenly find
itself. And we found sometimes in our
where can we make it?" It's like the old
among the people and a confidence that
and say, "Well, why are we, at taxpayers'
own welfare reforms there that in an ef-
Washington story that if you cut the Park
things are going to be all right, where, a
expense, providing milk for this particular
fort to focus attention and try to build a
Service's budget, the first thing they fire
short time ago, polls were revealing that
segment, who are perfectly able to pro-
case against what we were trying to do,
is the elevator man at the Washington
the people didn't think things were going
vide it for themselves and other people of
they would deliberately pick out the peo-
Monument and tell the people they've got
to get better. Now, maybe that's what
no better circumstances are providing
ple who could be harmed the most and
to walk up 600 feet instead of ride. We're
they meant.
it for themselves." The same true of food
interpret what you were trying to do as
going to be on guard for that.
But also there is this in our package
stamps. These are where we're trying to
denying aid to that particular person.
MR. CRONKITE. On your tax cuts, you
that isn't just psychology. Maybe by a
make the cuts.
Now, we've had a little example of
cite the experience of the 1961 Kennedy
stretch you could call it that. But our
that: the so-called retroactive freeze on
program gives a stability down the road
1 believe that in oui seven programs
tax cut to prove that it will hype up the
ahead. A person can say, "I know what's
that we call the safety net, below which
employment and suddenly the terrible
economy. But that cut was specifically to
stories-and I'm sure many of them
no one should be allowed to fall, we have
stimulate buying, whereas your objective
going to happen for the next few years,"
true-about people who sold their homes,
is to stimulate savings and investment.
even in the 3-year implementing of the
not. We have preserved that safety net.
gave up their jobs, and came to Washing-
Now, how do you justify that?
tax program. Someone can say, "I have
We have not cut that
ton to get a job. But I can't deny the fact
THE PRESIDENT. Well, whether he said
confidence to do this, because I have been
MR. CRONKITE. How far below the
or overlook the fact that before November
to stimulate buying or not, remember he
told and I know that this is what's going
present standard of living, even for the
4th I was saying that one of the first things
brought down the top bracket from 91
000
Mar. 3
Administration of Ronald Reagan, 1981
Administration of Ronald Reagan, 1981
Mar. 3
percent to 70 percent in that-it was over
it's got to go into making up for the infla-
to be talking to people who will be able
One of its recommendations, besides put-
a 2-year period. Actually, he didn't im-
tion among most of the population. Only
to save, invest, buy insurance, things that
ting responsibility on employers not to hire
plement the tax cuts, they followed his
the very rich can afford to save and invest
they're perhaps not able, and then that
illegal aliens, is to provide some means of
tragic death and were implemented, but
under these circumstances.
money becomes capital in the hands of the
identification for the aliens so that the
they had been passed.
THE PRESIDENT. Well, no. Some polls
financial institutions for reinvestment.
employer will know who he's hiring.
There is a page from a June issue of
have been taken on that, and they find at
MR. CRONKITE. Are you in favor of the
Would you support some form of national
U.S. News and World Report, 1966, that
the very bottom of the ladder, yes, people
Federal Reserve's tight money policy and
identification that could help attack this
I recommend as must reading, because
say there are things that they will use it
high interest rates?
problem?
the whole article on that page is about
for in buying. But from there on up, the
THE PRESIDENT. I have to say that
THE PRESIDENT. Well, now, I'm very
the strange paradox that the 2-year period
overwhelming majority in those polls re-
those high interest rates, I'm afraid, are
intrigued by a program that's been sug-
of phased-in tax cuts, which is somewhat
veal that they will use it for savings and
1
the result of inflation, because it's as sim-
gested by several border State Governors
similar to what we're trying to do over
investment.
ple as this if you really look at it, although
and their counterparts in the Mexican
3 years, did not result, as the economists
MR. CRONKITE. Secretary of Treasury
they're going to cooperate in a monetary
States on the other side of the border.
said they would, in an $83 billion loss of
Regan argues that this is not so, because
policy that is geared to what we're trying
They have met together on this problem.
revenue to Government. They couldn't
the tax cut will benefit the upper bracket,
to do. But if you're asking someone to lend
We have to remember we have a neighbor
explain the paradox that ever since the
and the rich will be saving and investing.
money, when you look down the road and
and a friendly nation on an almost 2,000-
cuts went into effect the Government itself
And yet, the propaganda has been, oh,
see nothing being done to curb inflation
mile border down there. And they have an
was getting more revenue, because the
now, it's going to benefit the lower brack-
and inflation is running in double digits,
unemployment rate that is far beyond any-
economy, the economic base, had been
ets more than the upper. So, isn't there a
as it has back-to-back now for 2 years, the
thing-a safety valve has to be some of
broadened and stimulated so each indi-
dichotomy there?
person that's lending the money has to
that that we're calling "illegal immigra-
vidual had the benefit of the cuts. But
THE PRESIDENT. Well, it's across-the-
get an interest rate that will show that
tion" right now. What these Governors
there were more individuals involved, SO
board. And there's no question about it.
when he gets his money back he's getting
have come up with-and I'm very in-
the government even profited. And as I
If it's 10 percent, it's a reduction of the
back as much or more than he loaned. So,
trigued with it-is a proposal that we and
say, that's 1966, in this 2-year program.
rates, the tax rates, 10 percent right from
it is inflation that dictates that high inter-
the Mexican Government get together
We can come up to 1978. The Steiger-
the basic rate of 14 percent now right on
est rate. The interest rate has to be higher
and legalize this and grant visas, because
Hansen bill that cut the capital gains tax,
up to the top rate and then 10 percent
than the inflation rate or no one can afford
it is to our interest also that that safety
and the very first year, the Government
the following, 10 percent the next. And a
to lend the money.
valve is not shut off and that we might
got more revenue from the capital gains
cut in the tax rates does not follow that
MR. CRONKITE. But if we cut the high
have a breaking of the stability south of
tax at the lower rate than it had gotten at
dollar-for-dollar there will be a reduction
interest rate then that would dainpen in-
the border.
the higher. Why? Because suddenly capi-
in Government's revenues as these other
flation-if you could do it that way, but
At the same time, that would then make
tal gains, we'd removed some of the pen-
things that I've given illustrate. But, it's
we can't do it.
these people in our country-an employer
alty, and capital gains, for those people
where you define the rich.
THE PRESIDENT. No, I think the other
could not take advantage of them and
who could invest and use capital gains for
came first.
The simple truth is that in the income
work them at sweatshop wages and so
revenue, had become attractive again.
bracket between $10,000 and $60,000-
MR. CRONKITE. If I may, we are run-
forth under the threat of turning them in.
And they did more of it.
now, I think you have to say, in today's
ning kind of out of time. I've got a few
They at the same time, then, would be
MR. CRONKITE. But also, if I may pur-
inflated world, we're talking about the
that if we can keep it real short-
paying taxes in this country for whatever
sue that issue, a 2-percent inflation, 1.2
great middle class of America, the people
THE PRESIDENT. All right.
they earned. They would be able to go
percent, less than 2-percent inflation was
who really make this country go-that
MR.
CRONKITE
maybe
we
legally back across the border if they
the case in the sixties, mid-sixties. Now
bracket from ten to sixty thousand is pay-
can still get a few more in.
wanted to, and come back across. But the
it's over 10 percent, it's double-digit. Cer-
ing today 72 percent of the income tax.
border would become a two-way border
tainly, with a 10-percent of the tax rate,
They are going to get 73 percent, which
ILLEGAL ALIENS
for all our people.
which isn't a full 10-percent cut, as we
know, 10 percent of 50 percent, 10 percent
I guess is about as close as you could get
MR. GRONKITE. Illegal immigration is
And I'm very intrigued with that TM
of 20 percent, whatever, 2-percent cut
it, of the benefits of our tax bill. Now, I
one of the major problems we have in the
like to talk about it and intend to, 111 April
perhaps-but all of that certainly when
would say that in there, maybe when you
country today, and the congressional task
when I meet with President López
you've got a 10-percent inflation or more,
get to 15, and from there up, you're going
force has just come in with a study on it.
Portillo.
240
Mar. 3
Administration of Ronald Reagan, 1981
Administration of Ronald Reagan, 1981
Mar. 4
VIEWS ON THE PRESIDENCY
a long time now. I was counting back. It's
omy. A reciprocal spirit of world coopera-
Rochester city councilman in 1966-73.
eight Presidents. It's been a remarkable
tion, permitting fair trade and investment
Mr. May was executive assistant to Rep-
MR. CRONKITE. Final question. What's
period in our history.
between our country and the rest of the
resentative, and later, Senator Kenneth
the greatest surprise that you've experi-
THE PRESIDENT. Well, may I express
world, is indispensable to all of us.
B. Keating in 1955-64.
enced in the Presidency?
appreciation. You've always been a pro.
Now, THEREFORE, I, RONALD REAGAN,
Mr. May has been vice president, New
THE PRESIDENT. Walter, that's a-I
MR. CRONKITE. I only regret that I'm
President of the United States of America,
York State Conference of Mayors; chair-
know you're running out of time, and here
stepping down from the evening news at
do hereby proclaim the week beginning
man of the Committee on Housing, White
I am hemming and hawing. I guess it's
the time when you are bringing such
May 17, 1981, as World Trade Week, and
House Conference on Aging; and chair-
every once in a while realizing that you
drama to our Government again in your
I urge the people of the United States to
man of the board, Empire State Report
are-you know, it isn't as if suddenly
efforts to turn it around.
cooperate in observing that week with
(the journal of government and politics in
something happens to you. I don't feel any
Thank you, sir.
activities that promote the importance of
New York State).
different than I did before, and then now
THE PRESIDENT. Thank you.
trade to our national well-being at home
Mr. May is a graduate of Wesleyan
and then something happens, and you're
NOTE: The interview began at 1:22 p.m. in
and abroad.
University and Georgetown University.
caught by surprise. You say, "Well, why
the Oval Office at the White House. It was
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have here-
He is a veteran of the U.S. Army. Mr.
are they doing that?" And maybe that's it.
taped for later broadcast on the CBS television
unto set my hand this third day of March
May was born on July 30, 1931, in
I'm not surprised by the amount of
network.
in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred
Rochester, N.Y.
work. As I've often said, I'm not surprised
and eighty-one, and of the Independence
about the confinement of living in the
of the United States of America the two
White House. I lived above the store when
hundred and fifth.
I was a kid, and it's much like that. So, I
World Trade Week, 1981
RONALD REAGAN
Urban Mass Transportation
guess I can't find anything other than that.
Proclamation 4823. March 3, 1981
[Filed with the Office of the Federal Register,
Administration
Maybe it all started due to some of you
2:35 p.m., March 4, 1981]
gentlemen on the air on Election Day.
By the President of the United States
Nomination of Arthur E. Teele, Jr., To Be
NOTE: The text of the proclamation was re-
You'd think that that'd be a very dramatic
of America
Administrator. March 4, 1981
leased on March 4.
moinent, and I was worrying that it was
going to be a moment that would last all
A Proclamation
The President today announced his in-
night, waiting for the returns to come in.
tention to nominate Arthur E. Teele, Jr.,
International trade is an important
I was in the shower and was called out of
means of furthering America's friendly
Department of Housing and
to be Urban Mass Transportation
Administrator.
the shower, just getting ready to go out,
international relations and of bettering
Urban Development
late afternoon, when the President was on
Mr. Teele was team leader of the De-
the lives of all Americans.
the other end of the phone. I was wrapped
Nomination of Stephen May To Be an
partment of Transportation Transition
Trade stimulates competition, stirs our
Assistant Secretary (Legislation).
in a towel and dripping wet, and he told
creative energies, rewards individual ini-
March 4, 1981
Group. He was national director of the
me that he was conceding. And that
tiative and increases national produc-
voter groups division of the Reagan-Bush
wasn't the way I'd pictured it.
tivity. Among nations, it speeds the ex-
The President today announced his in-
Committee in August-November, 1980.
MR. CRONKITE. That was the biggest
change of new ideas and technology.
tention to nominate Stephen May to be
Mr. Teele practiced law in Tallahassee,
surprise?
As products made in this country com-
an Assistant Secretary of Housing and
Fla., from 1976 to 1980. He is an expert
THE PRESIDENT. Yes.
pete successfully in world markets, we
Urban Development (Legislation)
on tax, regulatory, and labor-management
MR. CRONKITE. Thank you very much,
contribute to the strength and stability
Mr. May was with the firm of Branch,
relations. He served as a congressional
Mr. President.
of our dollar, the expansion of our indus-
Turner and Wise of Rochester, N.Y., for
intern in the U.S. House of Representa-
THE PRESIDENT. Well, thank you,
try and fuller employment of our labor
the past 12 years. He served as mayor of
tives, and developed legislative and taxa-
Walter. It's good to be here again. And I
force.
Rochester in 1970-73. He was commis-
tion proposals for the Florida State
know you must be having a little nostalgia,
For these reasons, the United States
sioner and chairman of the New York
Legislature.
the many Presidents that you've covered
remains firmly committed to an active
State Board of Elections in 1975-79, and
He is a member of the Florida and
in this very room.
world trade role in the context of an in-
a member of the Republican State Plat-
American Bar Associations. Mr. Teele was
MR. CRONKITE. Indeed so, sir. It's been
creasingly interrelated international econ-
form Committee in 1978. He was a
an officer in the U.S. Army in 1967-76.
7196-331-0
>$29.95
AMERICA
The Constitution and the
"Liberalism has
been too ready to associate itself
with the promise in the Constitution of the right to
Declaration of Independence
property, instead of with the promise in the Declara-
tion of Independence of the right to the pursuit of
"America is the only nation in the world that is
happiness. The balance between these is today upset,
founded on a creed. That creed is set forth with
and it needs to be restored by an imaginative display
dogmatic and even theological lucidity in the Decla-
of political energy."
ration of Independence; perhaps the only piece of
Henry Fairlie
tl
practical politics that is also theoretical politics and
The Spoiled Child of the Western World
also great literature."
1976
G.K. Chesterton
*
What I Saw in America
"
there are only two 'sides' in American history,
1927
those who are for the Declaration and those who are
hi
***
for the Constitution. Of course the two cannot be
"The British race have always abhorred arbitrary and
completely separated; they are twins, but they are not
is
absolute government in every form. The great men
identical twins. Eleven years after the proclamation
who founded the American Constitution expressed
of the Declaration of Independence that men have a
this same separation of authority in the strongest and
right to the 'pursuit of happiness,' the Constitution
most durable form. Not only did they divide execu-
substituted for that pursuit the right to "property."
tive, legislative and judicial functions, but also by
From that moment, the meaning of the American
instituting a federal system they preserved immense
idea was in dispute; the materialist was set against
and sovereign rights to local communities and by all
the idealist."
it
these means they have maintained-often at some
Henry Fairlie
inconvenience-a system of law and liberty under
The Spoiled Child of the Western World
which they thrived and reached the physical and, at
1976
this moment, the moral leadership of the world."
***
Winston Churchill
"I doubt, too, whether any convention we can obtain
Speech in Woodford, England
may be able to make a better Constitution; for when
Jan. 28, 1950
you assemble a number of men, to have the advan-
tage of their joint wisdom, you inevitably assemble
***
with those men all their prejudices, their passions,
"The Constitution of the United States was made not
their errors of opinion, their local interests, their
merely for the generation that then existed, but for
selfish views. From such an assembly can a perfect
posterity-unlimited, undefined, endless, perpetual
production be expected?"
posterity."
Benjamin Franklin
Henry Clay, U.S. senator
Speech to Constitutional Convention, Philadelphia
Speech in Senate
1787
1850
***
2
"The Antifederalists of the American Revolution.
"When we look down upon 100 years and see the
preferring the Articles of Confederation to the
origin of our Constitution, when we contemplate all
nation-binding Constitution, also had obviously
its trials and triumphs, when we realize how com-
dreamed of a land which might never be a great and
pletely the principles upon which it is based have met
powerful nation but which could be a sweet and free
every national need and national peril, how devoutly
country of towns and villages and farms."
should we say with Franklin, 'God governs in the
Karl Hess
affairs of men, And how solemn should be the
Dear America
1975
thought that to us is delivered this ark of the people's
covenant, and to us is given the duty to shield it from
*
impious hands."
"From [the Bill of Rights comes] the fullest flower-
President Grover Cleveland
ing of individual human personality."
Speech at Constitutional Centennial celebration,
Herbert Hoover
Philadelphia
Speech in San Diego, Calif
September, 1887
1935
*
62
Trenman "Tle fint prin in the world."
Falling: "let and - remember the revolution to not
dways establish breedom."
Cooldre. "Ite and be - asimal it" asked what
a depson much on in had and
bwen Clauled centern't : God givens
433- "dar the act his on adim
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
April 6, 1984
REMARKS OF THE PRESIDENT
TO THE GEORGETOWN CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL AND STRATEGIC STUDIES
International Club, Washington, D.C.
9:57 A.M.
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. Thank you very much, Ann
Armstrong. Thank you, Co-chairman Sam Nunn. I am honored to have
this opportunity to take part in your National Leadership Forum.
The CSIS reputation for distinguished scholarly research is well-
deserved, and your organization rightly enjoys that great respect.
I'd like to address your theme of bipartisanship with
a view toward America's foreign policy -- the challenges for the eightie
All Americans share two great goals for foreign policy:
a safer world, and a world in which individual rights can be respected
and precious values may flourish. These goals are at the heart of
America's traditional idealism, and our aspirations for world peace.
Yet, while cherished by us, they do not belong exclusively to us. They'
not made in America. They're shared by people everywhere.
Tragically, the world in which these fundamental goals
are so widely shared is a very troubled world. While we and our allies
may enjoy peace and prosperity, many citizens of the industrial world
continue to live in fear of conflict and the threat of nuclear war.
All around the globe terrorists threaten innocent people and civilized
values. And in developing countries, the dreams of human progress have
too often been lost to violent revolution and dictatorship.
Quite obviously the widespread desire for a safer and
more humane world is, by itself, not enough to create such a world.
In pursuing our worthy goals, we must go beyong honorable intentions
and good will to practical means. We must be guided by these key
principles: Realism -- the world is not as we wish it would be.
Reality is often harsh. We will not make it less so, if we do not first
see it for what it is. Stength -- we know that strength alone is not
enough, but without it there can be no effective diplomacy and
negotiations, no secure democracy and peace. Conversely, weakness
or hopeful pacifity are only self-defeating. They invite the very
aggression and instability that they would seek to avoid.
MORE
- 2 -
Now, economic growth this is the underlying base that
ensures our strength and permits human potential to flourish. Neither
strength nor creativity can be achieved or sustained without economic
growth, both at home and abroad.
Intelligence -- our policies cannot be effective unless
the information on which they're based is accurate, timely, and complete.
Shared responsibility with allies -- our friends and
allies share the heavy responsibility for the protection of freedom. We
seek and need their partnership, sharing burdens in pursuit of our common
goals.
Non-aggression -- we have no territorial ambitions. We
occupy no foreign lands. We build our strength only to ensure deterrence
and to secure our interests if deterrence fails.
Dialogue with adversaries - though we must be honest in
recognizing fundamental differences with our adversaries, we must always
be willing to resolve these differences by peaceful means.
Bipartisanship at home -- in our two-party democracy, an
effective foreign policy must begin with bipartisanship and the sharing
of responsibility for a safer and more humane world must begin at home.
During the past three years, we've been steadily rebuilding
America's capacity to advance our foreign policy goals through renewed
attention to these vital principles. Many threats remain. And peace
may still seem precarious. But America is safer and more secure today
because the people of this great nation have restored the foundation of
its strength. We began with renewed realism, a clear eye to understanding
of the world we live in and of our inescapable global responsibilities.
Our industries depend on the importation of energy and
minerals from distant lands. Our prosperity requires a sound interna-
tional financial system and free and open trading markets. And our
security is inseparable from the security of our friends and neighbors.
I believe Americans today see the world with realism and
maturity. The great majority of our people do not believe the stark
differences between democracy and totalitarianism can be wished away.
They understand that keeping America secure begins with keeping America
strong and free.
When we took office in 1981, the Soviet Union had been
engaged for twenty years in the most massive military buildup in history.
Clearly, their goal was not to catch us, but to surpass us. Yet the
United States remained a virtual spectator in the 1970s, a decade of
neglect that took a severe toll on our defense capabilities. With
bipartisan support, we, embarked immediately on a major defense rebuilding
program. We made good progress in restoring the morale in our men and
women in uniform, restocking spare parts and ammunition,
- 3 -
replacing obsolescent equipment and facilities, improving basic
training and readiness and pushing forward with long-overdue weapons
programs.
The simple fact is that in the last half of the 1970's,
we were not deterring, as events from Angola to Afghanistan made
clear. Today we are. And that fact has fundamentally altered the
future for millions of human beings. Gone are the days when the
United States was perceived as a rudderless super power, a helpless
hostage to world events. American leadership is back. Peace through
strength is not a slogan. It's a fact of life. And we will not
return to the days of hand-wringing, defeatism, decline and despair.
We have also upgraded significantly our intelligence
capabilities, restoring morale in the intelligence agencies and in-
creasing our capability to detect, analyze and counter hostile in-
telligence threats.
Economic strength, the underlying base of support for
our defense buildup, has received a dramatic new boost. We've trans-
formed a no-growth economy, crippled by disincentives, double-digit
inflation, 21 1/21 percent interest rates, plunging productivity and a
weak dollar, into a dynamic growth economy bolstered by new incentives,
stable prices, lower interest rates, a rebirth of productivity and
restored our confidence in our currency.
Renewed strength at home has been accompanied by closer
partnership with America's friends and allies. Far from buckling
under Soviet intimidation, the unity of the NATO Alliance has held
firm and we're moving forward to modernize our strategic deterrent.
The leader of America's oldest ally, French President
Francois Mitterrand, recently reminded us that peace, like liberty,
is never given. The pursuit of both is a continual one. In the
turbulent times we live in, solidarity among friends is essential.
Our principles don't involve just rebuilding our
strength. They also tell us how to use it. We remain true to the
principle of non-aggression. On an occasion when the0United States
at the request of its neighbors, did use force in Greneda, we acted
decisively, but only after it was clear a blood-thirsty regime had
put American and Grenadian lives in danger, and the security of neigh-
boring islands in danger. As soon as stability and freedom were
restored in the island, we left. The Soviet Union had no such
legitimate justification for its massive invasion of Afghanistan
four years ago. And today, over 100,000 occupation troops remain
there. The United States, by stark contrast, occupies no foreign
nation, nor do we seek to.
Though we and the Soviet Union differ markedly, living
in this nuclear age makes it imperative that we talk with each other.
MORE
- 4
If the new Soviet leadership truly is devoted to building a safer and
more humane world, rather than expanding armed conquest, it will find
a sympathetic partner in the West.
In pursuing these practical principles, we have throughout
sought to revive the spirit that was once the hallmark of our postwar
foreign policy: bipartisan cooperation between the Executive and
Legislative branches of our government. Much has been accomplished,
but much remains to be done. If Republicans and Democrats will join
together to confront four great challenges to American foreign policy
in the eighties, then we can and will make great strides toward a safer
and more humane world.
Challenge number one is to reduce the risk of nuclear war,
and to reduce the levels of nuclear armaments in a way that also
reduces the risk they will ever be used. We have no higher challenge,
for a nuclear war cannot be won, and must never be fought. But merely
to be against a nuclear war is not enough to prevent it. For thirty-
five years the defense policy of the United States and her NATO allies
has been based on one simple premise: we do not start wars, we maintain
our conventional and strategic strength to deter aggression by
convincing any potential aggressor that war could bring no benefit,
only disaster. Deterrence has been, and will remain, the cornerstone
of our national security policy to defend freedom and preserve peace.
But, as I mentioned, the 1970s were marked by neglect of
our defenses. And nuclear safety was no exception. Too many forgot
John Kennedy's warning that only when our arms are certain beyond doubt
can we be certain beyond doubt they will never be used.
By the beginning of this decade, we face three growing
problems: the Soviet SS-20 monopoly in Europe and Asia; the vulnerability
of our land-based ICBM, the entire force; and the failure of the arms
control agreements to slow the overall growth in strategic weapons.
The Carter administration acknowledged these problems. In fact, almost
everyone did.
There is a widespread, but mistaken impression, that
arms agreements automatically produce arms control. In 1969, when
SALT I negotiations began, the Soviet Union had about 1,500 strategic
nuclear weapons. Today, the Soviet nuclear arsenal can grow to over
15,000 nuclear weapons and still stay within all past arms control
agreements, including the SALT I and SALT II guidelines.
The practical means for reducing the risks for nuclear
war must, therefore, follow two parallel paths -- credible deterrence
and real arms reduction with effective verification. It is on this
basis that we've responded to the problems I just described.
MORE
- 5 -
This is why we've moved forward to implement NATO's duel-track decision
of 1979. While actually reducing the number of nuclear weapons in
Europe, it is also why we have sought bipartisan support for the
recommendations of the Scowcroft Commission and the build-down con-
cept and why we've proposed deep reductions in strategic forces at
the strategic arms reduction talks.
Without exception, every arms control proposal that
we have offered would reverse the arms buildup and help bring a more
stable balance at lower force levels.
At the START talks, we seek to reduce substantially
the number of ballistic missile warheads, reduce the destructive
capacity of nuclear missiles and establish limits on bombers and
cruise missiles, below the levels of SALT II.
At the talks on intermediate-range nuclear forces,
our negotiators have tabled four initiatives to address Soviet con-
cerns and improve prospects for a fair and equitable agreement that
would reduce or eliminate an entire class of such nuclear weapons.
Our flexibility in the START and INF negotiations has
been demonstrated by numerous modifications to our positions. But
they have been met only by the silence of Soviet walkouts.
At the Mutual and Balanced Force Reduction Talks in
Vienna, we and our NATO partners presented a treaty that would re-
duce conventional forces to parity at lower levels.
To reduce the risks of war in time of crisis, we have
proposed to the Soviet Union important measures to improve direct
communications and increase mutual confidence.
And just recently, I directed Vice President Bush to
go to the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva to present a new Ameri-
can initiative, a worldwide ban on the production, possession and
use of chemical weapons.
Our strategic policy represents a careful response
to a nuclear agenda upon which even our critics agreed. Many who
would break the bonds of partisanship, claiming they know how to
bring greater security, seem to ignore the likely consequences of
their own proposals. Those who wanted a last-minute moratorium on
INF deployment would have betrayed our allies and reduced the chances
for a safer Europe. Those who would try to implement a unilateral
freeze would find it unverifiable and destabilizing because it would
prevent restoration of a stable balance that keeps the peace. And
those who would advocate unilateral cancellation of the Peacekeeper
Missile would ignore a central recommendation of the bipartisan
Scowcroft report and leave the Soviets with little incentive to
negotiate meaningful reductions. Indeed, the Soviets would be re-
warded for leaving the bargaining table.
These simplistic solutions and others put forward
hv our critics would take meaningful agreements and increased
- 6 -
best help us move closer to the goals that we share, by accepting
practical means to achieve. them. Granted, it's easy to support a
strong defense. It's much harder to support a strong defense budget.
And granted, it's easy to call for arms agreements. It's more diffi-
cult to support patient, firm, fair negotiations with those who want
to see how much we will compromise with ourselves first.
Bipartisanship can only work if both forces, boths sides,
face up to real world problems and meet them with real world solutions.
Our safety and security depend on more than credible deterrence and
nuclear arms reductions. Constructive regional development is also
essential. Therefore, one -- or a second great challenge is strengthening
the basis for stability in troubled and strategically sensitive regions.
Regional tensions often begin in long-standing social,
political, and economic inequities and in ethnic and religious disputes.
But throughout the 1970s, increased Soviet support for terrorism, in-
surgency, and aggression coupled with the perception of weakening U.S.
power and resolve greatly exacerbated these tensions.
The results were not surprising. The massacres at Kampuchia
followed by the Vietnamese invasion, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan,
the rise of Iranian extremism, the holding of Americans hostage, Libyan
coercion in Africa, Soviet and Cuban military involvement in Angola and
Ethiopia, their subversion in Central America and the rise of state-
supported terrorism -- taken together, these events defined a pattern
of mounting instability and violence that the U.S. could not ignore.
And we have not.
As with defense, by the beginning of the '80s, there was
an emerging concensus in this country that we had to go do better in
dealing with problems that effect our vital interest. Obviously, no
single abstract policy could deal successfully with all problems or
all regions. But as a general matter, effective, regional stabilization
requires a balanced approach, a mix of economic aid, security assistance,
and diplomatic mediation tailored to the needs of each region.
It's also obvious that we alone cannot save embattled gov-
ernments or control terrorism. But doing nothing only ensures far great-
er problems down the road. So we strive to expand cooperation with
states who support our common interests -- to help friendly nations in
danger and to seize major opportunities for peacekeeping.
Perhaps the best example for this comprehensive approach
is the report and recommendations of the National Bipartisan Commission
on Central America. It is from this report that we drew our proposals
for bringing peaceful development to Central America. They are now
before the Congress and will be debated at
MORE
- 7 -
length. I welcome a debate; but, if it's to be productive, we must
put aside mythology and uninformed rhetoric. Some, for example, insist
that the root of regional violence is poverty but not Communism.
Well, three-fourths of our requests, and of our current program is
economic and humanitarian assistance. America is a good and generous
nation. But, economic aid alone cannot stop Cuban and Soviet-inspired
guerrillas determined to terrorize, burn, bomb, and destroy everything
from bridges and industries to electric power and transportation.
And neither individual rights nor economic health can be advanced if
stability is not secured.
Other critics say that we shouldn't see the problems of
this or any other region as an East-West struggle. Our policies in
Central America and elsewhere are, in fact, designed precisely to keep
East-West tensions from spreading -- from intruding into the lives of
nations that are struggling with great problems of their own.
Events in Southern Africa are showing what persistent
mediation and an ability to talk to all sides can accomplish. The
states of this region have been poised for war for decades. But there
is new hope for peace. South Africa, Angola, and Mozambique are
implementing agreements to break the cycle of violence.
Our administration has been active in this process and
we'll stay involved -- trying to bring an independent Namibia into
being, end foreign military interference, and keep the region free from
East-West conflict. I have hoped that peace and democratic reform can
be enjoyed by all the peoples of Southern Africa.
In Central America we've also seen progress. El Salvador's
presidential election expresses that nation's desire to govern itself
in peace. Yet the future of the region remains open. We have a choice.
Either we help America's friends defend themselves and give democracy
a chance, or we abandon our responsibilities and let the Soviet Union
and Cuba shape the destiny of our hemisphere. If this happens, the
East-West conflict will only become broader and much more dangerous.
In dealing with regional instability, we have to understand
how it is related to other problems. Insecurity and regional violence
are among the driving forces of nuclear proliferation. Peacekeeping in
troubled regions and strengthening barriers to nuclear proliferation
are two sides of the same coin -- stability and safeguards go together.
No, no one says this approach is cheap, quick or easy. But the cost?
of this commitment is bargain-basement compared to the tremendous
sacrifices we will have to make if we do nothing, or do too little.
The Kissinger Commission warned that an outbreak of
Cuban-type regimes in Central America will bring subversion closer to
our own borders, and the spectre of millions of uprooted refugees
fleeing in desperation to the north.
- 8 -
In the Middle East, which has so rarely known peace,
we seek a similar mix of economic aid, diplomatic mediation and
military assistance and cooperation. These will, we believe, make
the use of U.S. forces unnecessary, and make the risk of East-West
conflict less.
But, given the importance of the region, we must also be
ready to act when the presence of American power and that of our
friends can help stop the spread of violence. I have said, for
example, that we'll keep open the Straits of Hormuz, the vital lifeline
through which so much oil flows to the United States and other
industrial democracies. Making this clear beforehand, and making it
credible, makes a crisis much less likely.
We must work with quiet persistence and without illusions.
We may suffer setbacks, but we musn't jump to the conclusion that we
can defend our interest without ever commiting ourselves. Nor should
other nations believe that mere setbacks will turn America inward
again. We know our responsibilities and we must live up to them.
Because effective regional problem solving requires a balanced and
sustained approach, it is essential that the Congress give full, not
piecemeal, support. Indeed, where we have foundered in regional
stabilization, it has been because the Congress has failed to provide
such support. Half-way measures, refusing to take responsibility for
means, produce the worst possible results.
I'll return to this point when I discuss the fourth
challenge in just a few minutes.
Expanding opportunities for economic development and
personal freedom is our third great challenge. The American concept
of peace is more than absence of war. We favor the flowering of
economic growth and individual liberty in a world of peace. And this,
too, is a goal to which most Americans subscribe.
Our political leaders must be judged by whether the means
they offer will help us to reach it. Our belief in individual freedom
and opportunity is rooted in practical experience. Free people build
free markets that ignite dynamic development for everyone. And in
America, incentives, risk-taking and entrepreneurship are reawakening
the spirit of capitalism and strengthening economic expansion and
human progress throughout the world.
Our goal has always been to restore and sustain non-
inflationary worldwide growth, thereby ending for good the stagflation
of the 1970s which saw drastic weakening of the fabric of the world
economy. We take our leadership responsibilities seriously, but we
alone cannot put the world's economic house in order.
At Williamsburg, the industrial countries
- 9 -
consolidated their views on economic policy. The proof is not in the
communique; it's in the results. France is reducing inflation and
seeking greater flexibility in its economy. Japan is slowly to be
sure but steadily, we will insist, liberalizing its trade and capital
markets. Germany and the United Kingdom are moving forward on
a steady course of low inflation and moderate sustained growth.
Just as we believe that incentives are key to greater
growth in America and throughout the world, so, too, must we
resist the sugar-coated poison of protectionism everywhere it
exists. Here at home we're opposing inflationary, self-defeating
bills like Domestic Content. At the London Economic Summit in
June, I hope that we can lay the groundwork for a new round of
negotiations that will open markets for our exports of goods and
services and stimulate greater growth, efficiency and jobs for all.
And we're advancing key initiatives to promote more
powerful worldwide growth by expanding trade and investment relationshi
The dynamic growth of Pacific Basin nations has made them the fastest
growing markets for our goods, services and capital. Last year
I visited Japan and Korea -- two of America's most important allies --
to forge closer partnerships. And this month I will visit the People's
Republic of China, another of the increasing significant relationships
that we hold in the Pacific.
I see America and our Pacific neighbors as nations of
the future going forward together in a mighty enterprise to build
dynamic growth economies and a safer world.
We're helping developing countries grow by presenting
a fresh view of development -- the magic of the marketplace -- to
spark greater growth and participation in the international economy.
Developing nations earn twice as much from exports to the United States
as they received in aid from all the other nations combined.
And practical proposals like the Caribbean Basin Initiativ
will strengthen the private sectors of some 20 sectors -- or I should
say 20 Caribbean neighbors -- while guaranteeing fairer treatment for
U.S. companies and nationals and increasing demand for American
exports.
We've recently sent to the Congress a new economic
policy initiative for Africa. And it, too, is designed to support
the growth of private enterprise in African countries by encouraging
structural economic change in international trade. We've also
asked the Congress to increase humanitarian assistance to Africa
to combat the devastating effects of extreme drought.
In building a strong global recovery, of course, nothing
is more important than to keep the wheels of world commerce turning
- 10 -
With bipartisan support, we implemented a major increase in IMF resources.
In cooperation with the IMF, we're working to prevent the problems of
individual debtor nations from disrupting the stability and strength
of the entire international financial system. It was this goal that
brought nations of North and South together to help resolve the debt
difficulties of the new democratic government of Argentina.
Because we know that democratic governments are the best
guarantors of human rights, and that economic growth will always flour-
ish when men and women are free, we seek to promote not just material
products, but the values of faith and human dignity for which America
and all democratic nations stand. Values which embody the culmination
of five thousand years of Western civilization.
When I addressed the British Parliament in June of 1982,
I called for a bold and lasting effort to assist people struggling for
human rights. We've established the National Endowment for Democracy,
a partnership of people from all walks of life dedicated to spreading
the positive message of democracy. To succeed we must oppose the double-
speak of totalitarian propaganda. And so we're modernizing the Voice
of America and our other broadcasting facilities and we're working to
start up Radio Marti, a voice of truth to the imprisoned people of
Cuba.
Americans have always wanted to see the spread of democratic
institutions, and that goal is coming closer. In our own hemisphere,
twenty-six countries of Latin America and the Caribbean are either
democracies or formally embarked on a democratic transition. This
represents ninety percent of the region's population, up from under
fifty percent a decade ago.
Trust the people. This is the crucial lesson of history,
and America's message to the world. We must be staunch in our convic-
tion that freedom is not the sole possession of a chosen few but the
universal right of men and women everywhere.
President Truman said, "If we should pay merely lip service
to inspiring ideals, and later, do violence to simple justice, we would
draw down upon us the bitter wrath of generations yet unborn." Well,
let us go forward together, faithful friends of democracy and democratic
values, confident in our conviction that the tide of the future is a
freedom tide. But let us go forward with practical means.
This brings me to our fourth great challenge. We must
restore bipartisan concensus in support of U.S. foreign policy. We
must restore America's honorable tradition of partisan politics stopping
at the water's edge. Republicans and Democrats standing united in
patriotism and speaking with one voice as responsible trustees for peace,
democracy, individual liberty, and the rule of law.
In the 1970s, we saw a rash of Congressional initiatives
- 11 -
in the areas of trade, human rights, arms sales, foreign assistance,
intelligence operations, and the dispatch of troops in time of crisis.
Over 100 separate prohibitions and restrictions on
Executive Branch authority to formulate and implement foreign policy
were enacted. The most far-reaching consequence of the past
decade's Congressional activism is this: bipartisan consensus-building
has become a central responsibility of Congressional leadership as
well as of Executive leadership. If we're to have a sustainable
foreign policy, the Congress must support the practical details of
policy, not just the general goals.
We have demonstrated the capacity for such jointly
responsible leadership in certain areas; but we've seen setbacks for
bipartisanship, too. I believe that once we established bipartisan
agreement on our course in Lebanon, the subsequent second-guessing
about whether we ought to keep our men there severely undermined our
policy. It hindered the ability of our diplomats to negotiate,
encouraged more intransigence from the Syrians, and prolonged the
violence.
Similarly, Congressional wavering on support for the
Jackson Plan, which reflects the recommendations of the National
Bipartisan Commission on Central America, can only encourage the
enemies of democracy who are determined to wear us down: To understand
and solve this problem -- this problem of joint responsibility -- we
have to go beyond the familiar questions of who should be stronger,
the President or the Congress. The more basic problem is, in this
post-Vietnam era, Congress has not yet developed capacities for
coherent, responsible action needed to carry out the new foreign
policy powers it has taken for itself.
To meet the challenges of this decade, we need a strong
President and a strong Congress. Unfortunately, many in the Congress
seem to believe they are still in the troubled Vietnam era, with their
only task to be vocal critics, and not responsible partners in
developing positive, practical programs to solve real problems.
Much was learned from Vietnam -- lessons ranging from increased
appreciation of the need for careful discrimination in the use of
U.S. force or military assistance, to increased appreciation of the
need for domestic support for any such military element or policy.
Military force, either direct or indirect, must remain
an available part of America's foreign policy. But clearly the
Congress is less than wholly comfortable with both the need for
a military element in foreign policy, and its own responsibility to
deal with that element. Presidents must recognize Congress as a more
significant partner in foreign policymaking, and, as we've tried to
do, seek new means to reach bipartisan Executive, Legislative consensus
But legislators must realize that they, too, are partners.
- 12 -
They have a responsibility to go beyond mere criticism to consensus-
building that will produce positive, practical and effective action.
Bipartisan consensus is not an end in itself. Sound
and experienced U.S. foreign policy leadership must always reflect
a deep understanding of fundamental American interests, values and
principles. Consensus on the broad goals of a safer and more humane
world is easy to achieve. The harder part is making progress and
developing concrete, realistic means to reach these goals.
We've made some progress, but there is still a
Congressional reluctance to assume responsibility for positive
bipartisan action to go with their newly claimed powers. We've
set excellent examples with the bipartisan Scowcroft Commission,
bipartisan support for IMF funding and the bipartisan work of the
Kissinger Commission. But it's time to lift our efforts to a higher
level of cooperation, time to meet together with realism and
idealism, America's great challenges for the '80s.
Distinguished ladies and gentlemen, we have the right
to dream great dreams, the opportunity to strive for a world
at peace enriched by human dignity and the responsibility to work
as partners so that we might leave these blessed gifts to our
children and to our children's children.
We might remember the example of a legislator who
lived in a particularly turbulent era, Henry Clay. Abraham Lincoln
called him "my beau ideal of a statesman." He knew Clay's loftiness
of spirit and vision, never lost sight of his country's interest;
and election year or not, Clay would set love of country above
all political considerations.
The stakes for America for peace and for freedom demand
every bit as much from us in 1984 and beyond. This is our challenge.
I can't leave without a little lighter note that
maybe points to some of the intricacies of diplomacy and how
seemingly small they can be. I just in leaving want to give you
a little experience that occurred and could have been a diplomatic
crisis at the recent state dinner for President Mitterand.
Nancy and the President started toward their table
in the Dining Room with everyone standing around their tables
waiting for us. Mrs. Mitterand and I started through the tables,
butler leading us through the people. And suddenly Mrs. Mitterand
stopped and she calmly turned her head and said something to
me in French, which, unfortunately, I did not understand. (Laughter.)
And the butler was motioning for us to come on, and I motioned
to her that we should go forward, that we were to go to the other
side of the room. And, again, very calmly she made her statement
to me.
- ADMINISTRATION:
X RESPONSIBILITY
x AUTHORITY (APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE)
- commander - IN- KHIEF
RESPONSIBILITY
AUTHORITY
- FOREIGN AFFAIRS
RESPONSIBILITY (CONG. UNABLE)
AUTHORITY (TREATY, ETC.)
- LEGISLATOR
RESPONSIBILITY (INTERESTS OF ALL)
AUTHORITY (VETO) (INTRODUCE LEGIS)
CORRECTIVE (LINE ITEM)
-MISC: PARDONS
- LIMITS
A+C
BUDGET, EST OFFICES, (CONG)
JUDICIAL REVIEW- ACQUIESCE (DIST. JACKSON)
JEFFUMAN - ROSS GOR
- PREZ QUOTES SHOW BURDER, RESP.
1
438: personal
1
433: comment, seve, but have to act
GROVER CLOVELAND: live Providere (CEPTENNIAL)
(QUATABLE AM).
lite
\
N
Constitution and Brientennal (garmer from
WEBSTER
Lan Day remarks + Court. Day Problamation).
Success: genius of Framers + of Free People;
rise restruite that make an free.
N2. Separation of powers theme. Unawended
DILEMMA:
Constitution is itself a bill of rights.
STRONG,
SUBJECT YET
bimited government, dewing power from consent
PEOPLE
of the governed; rather the people being
rights from the government. Why refeguard
AS DEC, IN
Devide quit
progotines of Princing. Federalism
power from the
- EMERGY KEY 15 EXEC
meet ground of
3. at II, § 1, L. / : only Hind elected
by all the people (+ Veap, Electral college)
4. Bowers
5. Limits: bubjet; judicial review
6. Reflections on office ( Foreword)
2. WHR / Holmas on founders X vision