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
563878110
label
Counsel's Office Materials [2]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
563878110
contentType
document
title
Counsel's Office Materials [2]
citationUrl
identifierLocal
08373-009b
collections
Records of the White House Office of the Chief of Staff to the President (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Andrew Card's Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
563878110
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
8589fc99f48ec9ff
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
2025-0373-S
2025-0373-S
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential
Library Staff.
Record Group/Collection:
George H.W. Bush Presidential Records
Collection/Office of Origin:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Series:
Card, Andrew, Files
Subseries:
OA/ID Number:
08373
Folder ID Number:
08373-009b
Folder Title:
Counsel's Office Materials [2]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
15
22
2
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Doc. No. / Type
Subject/Title
Date
Restriction
Classification
01. Letter
Consul of the United States of America to The Transportation
04/30/87
(b)(6)
Company, Re: Lopez Rodriguez, Reinaldo Juan; contains
Personally Identifiable Information. (1 pp.)
02. Cable
Cable Number: 282332Z, Re: Lopez-Lima Rodriguez, Reinaldo
04/29/87
(b)(6)
Parole Authorization; contains Personally Identifiable
Information. (1 pp.)
Page 1 of 1
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Series:
Card, Andrew H., Jr., Files
Subseries:
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Counsel's Office Materials [2]
Pinksheet Number:
RML16186
OA/ID Number:
08373-009b
Date Closed:
5/30/2025
FOIA/Sys Case #:
2025-0373-S
Re-review Case #:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
fr
AC HAS SEEN 1/20
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
January 18, 1990
TO:
Andy Card
FROM:
Sig Rogich
RE:
Ted Williams Film
XX FYI
1 Appropriate Action
Let's Discuss
-
- Per Our Conversation
- Per Your Request
- Please Return
COMMENTS:
Per our conversation Wednesday, January 18, 1990.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
January 17, 1990
MEMORANDUM FOR BRUCE J. ZANCA
OFFICE OF PUBLIC EVENTS AND INITIATIVES
FROM:
JAY S. BYBEE
job
ASSOCIATE COUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT
SUBJECT:
Request that the President Give Personal Support
To A Film Based on the Life of Ted Williams
You have requested our advice on a request that the President
show his personal support for a new film based on the life of Ted
Williams. As we understand the facts, backers of the film would
like the President to invite officers from the film company that
would produce and distribute the film to the White House in an
effort to demonstrate the President's support for the project.
This, it is hoped, would help persuade the officers to consummate
the deal.
As you may know, under long-standing White House policy, the
President declines to permit his name or office to be used in
connection with commercial activities. Based on the information
provided to us, it is our view that this request clearly comes
within that policy. Accordingly, we would recommend that the
request be declined.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this matter.
01/08/90 16:18
R 14017899727 R.I. SEAFOOD
01
AC HAS SEEN 1/9/90
MEMO
Date:
January 8, 1990
To:
Andrew H. Card, Jr.
From:
Skip Chernov
Sent By:
Fax (202) 456-2397
Subject: Ted Williams Film
Message: I understand that you have spoken with Jim Vinick regarding the
motion picture that Jeffrey Entertainment LP #1 intends to produce based on the life of
Ted Williams.
We know of President Bush's close friendship with Ted Williams and of Ted's
effort on behalf of the President during the New Hampshire Presidential Primary.
Ted Williams is an American hero as well as a sports legend and the film is an
extremely positive story focusing on the 1941 season when Ted, barely out of his
teens, hit 4061
Our hope is that the President may in some way show his personal support for
the project. We know that an invitation to the White House for the Chairmen of the
Board and Chief Operating Officer of the film company which comes on board to
produce and distribute the film would go on a long way in solidifying the actual
production. A letter from President Bush extending an invitation once the project is in
production would be most helpful.
If you wish a script or have any questions on our request, contact Jim Vinick at
1-800-332-8896. Any letter sent by the President should be addressed to:
James E. Vinick
Senior Vice President Dean Witter Reynolds
Bay Bank Tower, 17th Floor
1500 Main Street
Springfield, MA 01115
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Date:
1-16-90
FOR:
SIG ROGICH
FROM:
ANDY CARD
Action
Your Comment
Let's Talk
FYI
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 19, 1990
Dear Mark,
Thank you for your recent letter. I am glad to
hear things are going well for you.
Please know that I will be happy to contact the
appropriate people here at The White House
regarding John Shadegg's interest in the U. S.
Attorney's slot. Your recommendation is
appreciated.
Keep in touch.
Sincerely,
Andrew H. Card, Jr.
Assistant to the President
and Deputy to the Chief of Staff
Mr. Mark G. Mazzie
City Clerk
Scottsdale City Council
3939 Civic Center Boulevard
Scottsdale, Arizona 85251-4468
Scottsdale City Council
Herbert R. Drinkwater, Mayor
Susan Bitter Smith
Sam Kathryn Campana
Myron R. Deibel
x ARIZON THE WEST'S OF MOST SCOTT TOWN X X
Mark Mazzie
City Clerk
Ross Dean
Bill Soderquist
Bill Walton
City Clerk's Office
"Your Source For Voter Information and Public Records"
March 15, 1990
Mr. Andrew H. Card, Jr.
Deputy to the Chief of Staff
First Floor, West Wing
The White House
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Andy:
Thank you for your nice note and I hope everything is going well.
I enjoyed seeing you on the Brokaw special as well as occasionally
reading about your duties in the National Journal.
Regarding my visit to the RNCC, Congressman Dave Martin has
expressed an interest in introducing me to the appropriate staff
members and, as I will be in Washington from August 14th - 18th
for a national election conference, I will ask him to set up
meetings that week. I'll let you know who I am scheduled to meet
with as I get closer to that date. George Wortley tells me he is
laying the groundwork with PAC officials and will help with my
Washington fund raising when the time is right. I am currently
running for State Chairman of the Arizona Young Republican League
which is a post Jon Kyl held before his election to the House.
Things are going well here as there are incredible opportunities
for young Republican activists in the state. It is a bit
different from Massachusetts as thankfully our gubernatorial
candidates haven't yet lined up in mass to profess past drug use.
Additionally, I wanted to send you a note about John Shadegg a
colleague of mine in the Arizona Attorney General's office who is
being considered for the post of U. S. Attorney. I believe he has
been recommended by Senator McCain and is awaiting word from
Washington. Shadegg is an excellent attorney and his experience
would serve Arizona well. His appointment would also send a
message to young Republicans that hard work within the party
combined with an outstanding academic and professional background
can result in finding a place in the administration many of us
worked hard to elect. I have enclosed some background information
about him.
3939 CIVIC CENTER BOULEVARD, SCOTTSDALE, ARIZONA 85251-4468
PHONE (602) 994-2412
Thank you for your time as well as your offer to help with Ed
Rollins office. I'll be in touch.
Sincerely,
Mark
Mark G. Mazzie
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 8, 1990
Dear Spike,
Thank you for your letter of March 7th and for your kind
words. I enjoyed the chance to visit with you, Steve
Tocco, and Bob Rodophele.
Please know that I am happy to pass on your
recommendation of Greg Mize for a D.C. Superior Court
Judgeship to the appropriate people here in the White
House.
We appreciate you taking the time to share your input.
Sincerely
fundy Card
Andrew H. Card, Jr.
Assistant to the President
and Deputy to the Chief of Staff
Mr. S. Steven Karalekas
Karalekas & McCahill
1250 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
Suite 318
Washington, D.C. 20036
KARALEKAS & McCAHILL
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1250 CONNECTICUT AVENUE. N.W., SUITE 318
S. STEVEN KARALEKAS **
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20036
TELECOPIER / FACSIMILE
JOHN A. McCAHILL
(202) 466-7330
(202) 955-5879
JAMES A. NOONE
**
ALSO ADMITTED IN MASSACHUSETTS
March 7, 1990
1 ALSO ADMITTED IN PENNSYLVANIA
PERSONAL/CONFIDENTIAL
Determined NOT to be
The Honorable Andrew H. Card
National Security Classified Marking
Assistant to the President and
By Pube (NLGB) on 05/28/25
Deputy to the Chief of Staff
The White House
Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear Andy:
It was great getting together with you several weeks ago with
our mutual friends, Steve Tocco and Bob Rodophele. The more one
learns of the Massachusetts governor's race the more everyone
realizes how badly the party needs Andy Card. Hopefully, lighten-
ing will strike and we'll find ourselves with a Republican
governor notwithstanding the quality of the campaign.
Andy, I'm writing to give a plug to a colleague and close
friend of mind, Greg Mize, who is a candidate for one of the eight
D.C. Superior Court judgeships the White House is about to fill.
Greg is currently general counsel to the D.C. City Council. His
name was among the 24 proposed to the White House by the D.C.
Judicial Nomination Commission.
I have known Greg for close to 18 years and give him the
highest marks for integrity, levelheadedness, compassion for the
weak and firmness in enforcing the law. He is also a great tennis
player! Greg is precisely the type of person who would improve
the quality of jurisprudence on the D.C. court.
Please consider this a strong endorsement for Greg's candi-
dacy from a loyal Republican. I understand Boyden Gray and his
assistant, Lee Leiberman, will be making the final recommendations
to the President. It would be great if Greg were among those
selected.
Thanks for your consideration, Andy. Hope to see you soon.
Respectfully,
Spike
S. Steven Karalekas
SSK/bam
GREGORY EDMUND MIZE
4301 Argyle Terrace, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20011
(202) 882-0233 (Home)
(202) 724-8026 (Office)
Summary
As the chief legal officer, draftsman, policy adviser, and parliamentarian for
the District of Columbia legislature, Mr. Mize has been a central participant
in the formation of public law and policy in Washington, affecting areas such
as banking, housing & economic development, land use, healthcare, taxation,
government procurement, labor relations, public safety, and business
regulation.
Professional Experience
General Counsel, Council of the District of Columbia, January 1983 - date
* Counselor and draftsman for hundreds of provisions of new law;
certifying legal and technical sufficiency of all legislation prior to
full Council consideration and vote.
* Chief of litigation in matters involving legislative independence.
See, e.g. Gross V. Winter, 876 F.2d 165 (D.C. Cir. 1989).
*
Principal and manager of eleven-member law office, accustomed to
accomplishing tasks in a pressured, highly visible environment;
bridging Washington's business, political, and social communities.
* Parliamentarian and ethics counselor for full legislature and standing
committees; guided prompt and fair decisionmaking in intensely
competitive cabletelevision franchising in 1984.
*
Represented Council in matters pending in U.S. Congress such as
successful effort to remove negative impact on intergovernmental
relations caused by U.S. Supreme Court nullification of federal
legislative veto.
* Legal adviser for internal management of Council's $8 million annual
budget, with special attention to personnel and contracting.
Staff Director & Counsel, Committee on the Judiciary, Council of D.C., 1975 -
1982
* Architect of legislation governing administrative procedure, fiduciary
relations, criminal law, and public safety.
* Managed budgetary oversight of the District's public safety and court
operations, comprising $400+ million in annual appropriations.
* Designer and implementer of process by which D.C. statutes are prepared
and published; making D.C. Code nation's first, fully computerized code
available to regional users.
Associate, Law Firm of Karr & Graves, Washington, D.C., 1974 - 1975
* General Practice: Civil and Criminal Litigation, Administrative
Practice, Constitutional Law.
GREGORY EDMUND MIZE
Supplemental
Adjunct Professor of Law, Georgetown University Law Center, 1985 - date
(administrative law); and Antioch School of Law, 1982 - 1985 (legislation,
municipal corporations)
Judicial Conference of the District of Columbia, 1977 - date
(Civil Legal Services Standing Committee)
D.C. Bar Foundation, Advisory Committee, 1985 - 1989
President, Lt. Joseph P. Kennedy Institute, Inc., 1985 - 1986
Leading multi-year private development campaign to assist the $3.8+
million annual program to serve those with developmental disabilities in
the Washington metropolitan area
Board Member, Council For Court Excellence, Inc., 1982 - date
Executive Committee Member; Chair, Committee on Public Services
D.C. Bar Committee To Consider Interest On Lawyer Trust Accounts (IOLTA)
Program, 1982 - 1985
Steering Committee, D.C. Bar Division VI (D.C. Affairs), 1977 - 1979
Chairperson, 1978 - 1979
Criminal Justice Coordinating Board, Office of Criminal Justice Plans &
Analysis, 1976 - 1978
Clinical Pastoral Intern, San Mateo County General Hospital
San Mateo, California, 1969
Memberships
Bar of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1974
Bar of the United States Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit, 1974
Bar of the United States Supreme Court, 1980
Military District of Washington Officers' Club, 1975
National Association of Parliamentarians, 1985
The John Carroll Society, 1986
Education
Legal: Georgetown University Law Center - J.D. 1973
Postgraduate: St. Mary of the Lake Seminary, Mundelein, Illinois - - S.T.B. 1970
Recipient, Full Archdiocesan Scholarship for Theological
Studies, North American College (Rome)
College: Loyola University (Chicago), Niles Campus - A.B. 1968
(Philosophy)
Publications
A Guide to Deciphering the Laws of a Unique City-State Legislature -- The
Council of the District of Columbia, 2 POTOMAC L. REV. 1 (1979)
D.C. Bar continuing legal education (CLE) lectures, 1977 - 1987 (home rule
government, probate reform, healthcare occupations licensure,
administrative procedure, D.C. antitrust statute)
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 5, 1990
Dear Dave,
Thank you for your recent letter. It is a tough
issue.
My recommendation would be that if you want to
talk to somebody at the White House about this
matter, you talk to C. Boyden Gray, the White
House Counsel.
With best wishes,
Sincerely,
Andrew fundy H. Card, Jr.
Assistant to the President
and Deputy to the Chief of Staff
Mr. Dave Frohnmayer
Attorney General of Oregon
Justice Building
Salem, Oregon 97310
DAVE FROHNMAYER
JAMES E. MOUNTAIN, JR.
ATTORNEY GENERAL
N S NO NO STA OF
DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL
STATE OF OREGON
AC HAS SEEN
1859
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Justice Building
Salem, Oregon 97310
Telephone: (503) 378-4400
February 26, 1990
Andrew H. Card, Jr.
Assistant to the President and Deputy
to the Chief of Staff
The White House
Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear Andy:
The enclosed letter deals with a matter of great concern
to us. I would be pleased to confer with you about it.
Sincerely,
Wave
DAVE FROHNMAYER
Attorney General
DF:cm
Enclosure
8332a
DAVE FROHNMAYER
JAMES E. MOUNTAIN, JR.
ATTORNEY GENERAL
OF OR
DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL
STATE OF OREGON
1859
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Justice Building
Salem, Oregon 97310
Telephone: (503) 378-4400
February 26, 1990
The Honorable Richard L. Thornburgh
Attorney General of the United States
United States Department of Justice
Room 5111
10th and Constitution, NW
Washington, D.C. 20530
Dear Attorney General Thornburgh:
I write to express my deep concern over a proposed
criminal plea agreement between the United States and Exxon
Corporation, arising out of the Exxon Valdez oil spill in
Alaskan waters. I am particularly concerned with the process
by which the agreement was developed.
It is my understanding, based upon press reports and
information obtained from the Attorney General of Alaska, that
Alaska received a very general description of the proposed
agreement only two weeks ago. Alaska saw the actual language
of the agreement only last week. Alaska officials report that
the latest language differed in significant respects from the
general description of the agreement received earlier.
Moreover, that draft omitted a key provision describing the
role of the state under the agreement. We are told that Alaska
received a complete draft of the agreement just 24 hours before
its decision on whether to participate in the agreement was
demanded by the United States Department of Justice. I am
informed that Alaska has yet to be provided information
concerning the nature of the criminal plea which Exxon would
enter, the charge to which it would plead, or the extent of any
criminal fine which would be imposed. Particularly disturbing
is a report that the United States conditioned further its
cooperation with Alaska on the Exxon Valdez spill upon the
state signing the agreement.
The Honorable Richard L. Thornburgh
February 26, 1990
Page 2
The Exxon Valdez oil spill is one of the greatest
environmental disasters of our time. HOW government deals with
an environmental disaster of this magnitude is a matter of
critical importance to the citizens of Alaska and to all
citizens of the United States. Those of us who are residents
of coastal states and therefore are uniquely vulnerable to this
type of damage to our ocean and seacoast resources share a
particularly strong concern. As government officials charged
with protection and restoration of our ocean environment, we
would expect to be full partners with the federal government in
legal efforts to redress damage.
It is beyond belief that the government of the state in
which the disaster occurs should be excluded from full
participation in developing a major agreement intended to
ameliorate the damage to the environment caused by the Alaska
spill. Any such agreement will send a message to other
potential environmental polluters about how government will
respond to future environmental disasters. The appropriate
message is that government at all levels will cooperate to
assure that the environmental polluter is held fully
responsible for its actions. The reported actions of the
United States in its dealings with the State of Alaska do not
convey that message.
While I personally have not seen the terms of the
agreement, several of the terms reported in the press cause me
grave concern. Of particular concern is the provision imposing
a four year moratorium on the initiation of civil litigation by
the United States against Exxon. While I certainly can
understand why Exxon would prefer to have such a provision in a
criminal plea agreement, I can think of no reason why the
United States would agree to that provision. Many of the most
effective tools available to the United States to ensure the
effective cleanup of the spill by Exxon require at least the
threat of civil litigation. The federal government's
partnership in sharing litigation resources with the affected
state is also obviously critical to the likely success of state
litigation. For the United States to renounce the possibility
of civil litigation in these circumstances is beyond my
understanding.
I urge your personal review of this proposed plea
agreement, and of the process of which it was negotiated. I
hope you will agree that with environmental pollution of this
The Honorable Richard L. Thornburgh
February 26, 1990
Page 3
magnitude, it is not only right but necessary that the affected
state be a full participant in arriving at any agreement with
the polluter.
Sincerely,
Dave
DAVE FROHNMAYER
Attorney General
DF:cm
CC: John Sununu, Chief of Staff
The White House
Washington, D.C. 20500
8327a
AC HAS SEEN 2/9/90
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
February 8, 1990
Dear Mr. Feldman:
Your recent letter to Mr. Jeb Bush regarding the federal
prosecution of Reinaldo Lopez-Lima for aircraft piracy was
forwarded by Mr. Bush to our office for response.
As you know, the Department of Justice has responsibility for
matters of criminal justice such as your client's case. Their
records show that on or about February 18, 1964, Reinaldo Lopez-
Lima and Enrique Castillo Hernandez hijacked a privately owned
Piper aircraft and forced the pilot at gunpoint to fly to Cuba.
Both individuals were subsequently indicted for aircraft piracy
by a federal grand jury for the Southern District of Florida.
Mr. Hernandez returned to the United States during the Mariel
Cuban boatlift and was arrested at Fort Chaffee, Arkansas on May
20, 1980. His first trial on aircraft piracy charges ended in a
mistrial. He subsequently entered a "no contest" plea. The
sentence, however, was suspended and he was placed on probation
for two years.
Mr. Lopez-Lima, however, did not return to the United States
until 1987. Mr. Lopez-Lima was arrested on or about May 5, 1989,
in Washington D.C. His trial will be held in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of Florida.
Upon realization that a fugitive aircraft hijacker is present in
the United States, the Federal Bureau of Investigation arrests
him. The parole of Mr. Lopez-Lima into the United States under
the immigration laws only granted him freedom from persecution by
Cuban authorities. It in no way pardoned him for prior criminal
conduct in the United States. It has been the experience of the
Justice Department in similar situations that upon conviction the
federal courts may take into consideration the circumstances
surrounding any jail time served in Cuban prisons.
As you know, several of the issues that you have raised
concerning Mr. Lopez-Lima's parole in this country are currently
the subject of litigation. As such, we cannot comment on them
here. We can state, however, that armed hijacking of aircraft is
a serious offense and such activity is not taken lightly.
Moreover, the prosecution of Mr. Lopez-Lima is consistent with
the treatment that American citizens who have hijacked aircraft
to Cuba have received upon their return to the United States
after having served, in some cases, significant jail sentences in
Cuba.
- 2 -
Again, as the case against Mr. Lopez-Lima is presently pending in
federal court, it would be inappropriate for the Administration
to comment on the specifics of the prosecution. Please be
assured, however, that the Department of Justice has assured us
that the prosecution is consistent with the interests of justice.
Sincerely,
Brent O. Hatch
Associate Counsel to the President
Mr. Jeffrey D. Feldman
Fine Jacobson Schwartz Nash Block & England
One CenTrust Financial Center
100 Southeast 2nd Street
Miami, Florida 33131
CC: Jeb Bush
Andrew H. Card, Jr.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
February 9, 1990
Dear Bob and Frank,
Thank you for your letter of February 2nd in
which you enclose a copy of your correspondence
to the President requesting a pardon for former
Metropolitan Police Lieutenant Richard A.
Nazzaro.
Please know that I have forwarded your
materials to appropriate Administration
officials for their review and direct response
to you.
Hope all is well in the Bay State!
Sincerely,
Andrew Andy H. Card, Jr.
Assistant to the President
and Deputy to the Chief of Staff
Mr. Robert T. Guiney
Mr. Frank J. McGee
Boston Police Patrolmen's Association, Inc.
765 E. 3rd Street
South Boston, Massachusetts 02127
INCORP ASSCIATION MASSACHUSETTS FOUNDED 1965 RTROLMEND:
BOSTON POLICE
AC HAS SEEN 2/7
"Unity and Strength"
B
P P
A
BOSTON POLICE PATROLMEN'S ASSOCIATION, INC.
765 E. 3rd ST., SO. BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 02127
TEL: 268-7722
®
GOULA
109
ROBERT T. GUINEY, President
DONALD L. MURRAY, Vice President
JOSEPH L. BRADY, Treasurer
February 2, 1990
JAMES CARNELL, Secretary
Andrew Card, Assistant to the President
and Deputy Chief of Staff
The White House
1700 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Andy:
Enclosed please find a copy of a letter which we have
this day sent to the President. As you can see, this letter
is being written in support of a request that the President
pardon former Metropolitan Police Lieutenant Richard A.
Nazzaro. Also enclosed is a package of materials which we
would ask that you review in support of the request made to
the President.
Andy, we have personally read all of the enclosed
materials and we have spoken with a number of attorneys
affiliated with the trial of the Nazzaro case. Without
exception all believe that Nazzaro should not have been
convicted. However, as the matter stands now, is it
appropriate, in our opinion, for us to personally support
the request for a pardon.
I would ask you to take particular note of the
outstanding military career of Richard Nazzaro. I would also
ask you to take particular note of his fine police career.
If ever there was one deserving of a pardon, it is Richard
Nazzaro.
As we indicated in our letter to the President, the true
measure of a man can be found by an examination of his past
life. Using this standard as a measure, Dick Nazzaro clearly
has lead an exemplary personal and professional life. He
built a reputation as a devoted husband and father, an
outstanding police officer and a dedicated military man.
BOSTON POLICE PATROLMEN'S ASSOCIATION, INC
C-558
Page 2
We hope this letter finds you in good health. Needless
to say, we would genuinely appreciate any consideration you
give to this request.
Please extend our best personal regards to the
President.
Best regards,
Bobit ROBERT T. GUINEY, T. President Lumiy
Boston Police Patrolmen's
Association, Inc.
FRANK J. MCGEE, Legal Counsel
Boston Police Patrolmen's
Association, Inc.
Bcc: Andy Card
9.5
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
AC HAS SEEN 2/7
February 5, 1990
Dear Mr. Hooley:
I am writing in response to your letter to Andrew H. Card
requesting two seats in the Presidential Box at the Kennedy
Center, which would be auctioned for the benefit of the Big
Sisters of the Washington D.C. area.
Current Standards of Conduct prohibit White House employees from
using public office for private gain and from giving preferential
treatment to any particular organization. In view of these rules
and in view of the difficulty in avoiding favoritism among
deserving charities, it would not be appropriate for a staff
member to provide tickets to seats in the Presidential box to be
auctioned for the benefit of a particular charity, however
worthy. Accordingly, Mr. Card cannot provide the tickets you
have requested.
I hope you will appreciate the basis for this policy and
understand that this decision in no way reflects on the merits of
the Big Sisters program.
Sincerely,
AnyL.Schuranty
Amy L. Schwartz
Associate Counsel to the President
Mr. James L. Hooley
Senior Vice President
Sales and Marketing
Reese Communications Companies
2111 Wilson Blvd.
Suite 900
Arlington, VA 22201
REESECommunicationsComponies
AC HAS SEEN 1/29
January 25, 1990
Dear Andy:
From what I hear from our mutual friends, life is as rewarding--and
challenging--as ever for you in the White House. Both your bosses, the
President and the former Governor, are doing a fabulous job, as reflected
in the latest polls. I'm only sorry that you decided not to offer yourself
to the voters of Massachusettes, who finally are beginning to see the
light. However, from a personal perspective your decision is an
understandable and wise one. I guess all of your friends should look at
the bright side: no campaign contributions for us to come up with for you
(at least not this year).
I'm writing at this time to ask a small favor; one which, I hasten to add,
is for a very worthy cause. In fact, I think you'll agree that it's not
really a favor, but an opportunity.
As you probably know, Big Sisters is a non-profit organization that helps
girls and young women develop into mature and responsible members of
society by matching them with women who serve as positive role models.
Many recent studies indicate that having such a role model can make a
tremendous difference in the choices a young woman makes regarding her
life.
In March, the Big Sisters in the Washington Area will be hosting a Monte
Carlo night. One highlight of the evening will be an auction, proceeds
from which will directly support the services of the organization (not pay
for the fundraiser). I have become involved, through a co-worker, in the
effort to develop items for auction, including historical items and
mementos, tours, trips, meals, etc.
I was wondering if you would be willing to
d
Unless things have changed, you
would not be required to attend the performance, just to ask for the box
in your name. Arrangements to pick up the tickets for the particular
night and performance could be worked out later.
Andy, I know that your contribution would go a long way toward making
the event a success, and everyone associated with Big Sisters would be
very grateful for your involvement.
2111 Wilson Boulevard
Suite 900
Arlington, Virginia 22201
(703) 528-4400
I am aware of your hectic schedule, and yet it is critical that we know as
soon as possible. Therefore, I will call the person in your office who
handles your personal schedule next week in hopes of confirming your
availability. In the meantime, if there are any questions I can be reached
at 528-4400.
Thanks very much for your consideration on this, and I look forward to
an opportunity to get together (maybe you, Rick and I for lunch?)
sometime soon.
Warmest regards,
Jim
James L. Hooley
Senior Vice President
Sales and Marketing
many thanks, andy!
Honorable Andrew H. Card, Jr.
Assistant to the President
Deputy to the Chief of Staff
The White House
Washington, D.C. 20500
REESECommunicationsComponies
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
January 19, 1990
Dear Mr. Lacy:
Thank you for your recent letter in which you
share your assessment of the candidates for
appointment to the U. S. District Court,
Western District of North Carolina.
I appreciate your input and will make sure the
appropriate Administration officials have the
benefit of your comments.
My son, Drew, is doing well at Fork Union, and
we are pleased with the Academy overall. If
you are ever in the area, please give me a
call.
With best wishes,
Sincerely,
Andrew Jr.
AndyCard
Assistant to the President
and Deputy to the Chief of Staff
Mr. Hunter B. Lacy
Fire Investigator
1215 South Boulevard
Charlotte, North Carolina 28203
Determined NOT to be
National Security Classified Marking
ByRn (NLGB) on 05/28/25
CONFIDENTIAL
PROBLEMATIC JUDICIAL VACANCIES
3rd Circuit - Pennsylvania and Delaware Senators claiming
recently vacated seat belongs to each of them (respectively)
6th Circuit - "Kentucky" seat; Senator opposing any candidate
except the one he proposed
8th Circuit - "Minnesota" seat; Senators opposing candidate
selected by White House and DOJ and any candidate other than the
one they proposed
California District Courts - 5 vacancies; total of two names
submitted, one for each of two vacancies
Delaware District Court - only one name submitted
Florida District Courts - 2 vacancies; no names received to date;
recommendations anticipated in near future
Texas District Court (Southern) - no name received to date;
recommendations anticipated in near future
New York District Courts - 4 vacancies for which no names have
been received
Vermont District Court
TOTAL AFFECTED VACANCIES: 17
AC HAS SEEN 1/19
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
January 12, 1990
MEMORANDUM FOR GOVERNOR JOHN H. SUNUNU
CHIEF OF STAFF
FROM:
C. BOYDEN GRAY
COUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT
SUBJECT:
White House Gift Policy
This responds to Public Liaison's December memorandum concerning
White House gift policy.
As background, it may be useful to summarize current policy. In
general, unless an exception applies, a White House staff member
may not accept a gift from a person or entity that has or is
seeking contracts or other business with any part of the
Executive Branch or has interests that may be substantially
affected by the staff member's performance or nonperformance of
official duties.
The most common exceptions are that absent an appearance of
impropriety, staff members may nevertheless accept: (1) gifts
from friends and relatives in circumstances that make clear that
the motivation for the gift is personal; and (2) unsolicited
promotional items of nominal intrinsic value (e.g., inexpensive
desk calendars, pens, pocket diaries, and the like). The Office
of Government Ethics requires that gifts in the latter category
have a "promotional" aspect, i.e. that they in some manner
advertise the donor. There is no de minimis rule, per se.
Current guidance, like White House Counsel gift memoranda back to
1981, states that when a staff member receives a gift that he or
she is not permitted to accept, the gift must be returned to the
sender, except in unusual cases. We have also recently arranged
an alternative whereby perishable gifts that cannot be accepted
or easily returned may be turned over to the Mess. (This is
possible because the Navy, unlike the White House Office, has the
authority as an agency to accept gifts.) Procedures call for the
donor to be notified that the gift was not personally retained.
In response to Public Liaison, I should first point out that
pursuant to the President's Executive Order last April, the
Office of Government Ethics will soon be issuing new gift rules
applicable across the Executive Branch. I expect these rules to
include a de minimis exception in the neighborhood of $35 for
gifts at one time from one source and allowing an aggregation of
up to $100 from one source during a one year period. (The limits
would not apply to gifts from personal friends and relatives.)
Once these new regulations are issued, the problem identified by
Public Liaison -- i.e. the awkwardness of returning impermissible
gifts -- will arise much less frequently.
There are a number of problems with the Public Liaison approach,
under which White House staff members who receive gifts that they
are prohibited from accepting would nevertheless thank the
donors, and turn the gifts over to the Gift Unit for disposal.
First, by thanking the donor for an impermissible gift and then
turning the gift over to the Gift Unit, the Public Liaison
approach creates the appearance, at least to the donor, that the
staff member accepted an impermissible gift in violation of the
Standards of Conduct. As you know, current ethics standards call
for avoidance of the appearance of impropriety as well as
avoidance of impropriety itself. (Moreover, the Office of
Government Ethics is almost certain to object to this approach.)
Second, the White House as an agency does not have the authority
to accept gifts. It is therefore difficult to construe routinely
an employee's receipt of an impermissible gift as acceptance on
behalf of the White House. (I should note, though, that certain
agencies affiliated with the White House do have gift authority,
and some gifts can be construed to fit within these authorities.
E.g., the Office of Administration has the authority to accept
gifts relating to the restoration and furnishing of the OEOB, and
the Park Service has the authority to accept gifts for Park
Service purposes, including maintenance of the Executive
Residence.)
Although I certainly agree that current gift rules are unduly
strict, I do not believe that the current situation is so
unmanageable that it warrants revision in advance of the
forthcoming regulatory changes. If a gift is returned
graciously, the return need not cause offense. As far as the
workload involved in returning gifts, I have no objection to
Public Liaison's proposal that the Gift Unit be responsible for
doing so (assuming that the Gift Unit agrees).
Please let me know if you have any questions.
CC: Andy Card
David Demerest
Bobbie Kilberg
Sichan Siv
JAN 11_'90. 17:41 CODINALTY
P.1
Bush Klein Realty. Inc
Yas di Tax
150 it Flagior Street, Sinte 1:150
Miami, Florida 33130
(305)538-3722
FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION
DATE: 1/11/90
TO:
Lenda of andy Cardiaffer
OF:
FAX NO:
202.456.2397
FROM:
apr Bush
NUMBER OF PAGES TO FOLLOW: 13
TIME:
4:41p.m 4:41
MESSAGE
1/11/96 Called 1 Boyden's office to Accit
-Brent Hatch working w/Dog
They had This in then system
needed more info. / fast track (7453)
Criminal Divisim drafted
1/12/90 Called Hatch's Office togive heads up
Called Jeff Feldman's office to uper to Hatch.
If you have any questions or did not receive all pages, please call the
sender at (305) 536-3722.
Our FAX number is (305) 536-3742.
JAN 11 '90 17:41 CODINA
P.2
BUSH KLEIN REALTY
Bush Klein Realty Inc.
Museum Tower
150 W. Flagier Street. Suite 1500
Miami, Florida 33130
(305) 536-3722
December 14, 1989
Mr. Andy Card
Deputy Chief of Staff
to the President
The White House
Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear Andy:
Enclosed is a letter written to me by the lawyer of Reinaldo Lopez-
Lima.
Mr. Lopez-Lima is accused of hijacking a plane from Florida to Cuba.
He spent 23 years in jail in Cuba for that crime and for "counter-
revolutionary activities". After being released from jail, he was
parolled into the U.S. Two years later, the Department of Justice
decided to prosecute him for the hijacking case.
Andy, I do not know Mr. Lopez-Lima but it appears unfair that he
would be parolled into the country and then tried for the crime that
made him stay in Castro's jail for 23 years. If it was a problem,
he shouldn't have been allowed into the country to begin with.
If you can look into this matter it would be greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
Jet Jeb Bush Bue
JB/ad
P.S. I hope you have a joyous holiday season, my friend.
Enclosed in into Fir Jeff Feldon,
lawge
JAN 11 '90 17:42 CODINA
P.3
Fine Jacobson Schwartz Nash Block & England
One CenTrust Financial Center
ECEIVE
100 Southeast and Street
Miami, Florida 33131
R
(305) 577-4000
Fax (305) 577-4088
DEC
December 30, 1989
Mr. Jeb Bush
Bush Klein Realty, Inc.
Museum Tower - Suite 1500
150 West Flagler Street
Miami, Florida 33130
RE: United States of America vs. Reinaldo Lopez-Lima
Case No.: 69-096-JE (KLR)
Dear Jeb:
Thank you for taking an interest in Mr. Lopez-Lima's
case. As you have requested, I have prepared for your
consideration a short factual summary of this matter. Mr.
Lopez-Lima is accused of hijacking a small plane from Key West to
Cuba in 1964. The Cuban government accused my client of this
same offense as well as anti-revolutionary activities and
incarcerated him for twenty-three years. Mr. Lopez-Lima was
released from jail in March, 1987. In April, 1987, the U.S.
Interests Section in Havana advised Mr. Lopez-Lima that the INS
had authorized his immediate parole into the United States. Mr.
Lopez-Lima returned to the United States on July 23, 1987.
I have enclosed for your consideration the State
Department's correspondence pertaining to Mr. Lopez-Lima's entry
into our country. Please note that the INS authorized Mr.
Lopez-Lima's entry into the United States under Section 212 (d) (5)
of the Immigration and Nationality Act. I have enclosed a copy
of this section of the Act for your consideration. Under this
section of the Act, an alien may not enter the United States
unless the Attorney General initially finds that the alien's
admission is justifiable either for emergent reasons or for
reasons deemed to be in the public interest. Since my client was
admitted to the United States under this statute, T must presume
that the Attorney General made such a finding in Mr. Lopez-Lima's
case.
Between July 1987 and May 1989, my client sought to
nurture a life that had been interrupted by twenty-three years of
imprisonment. Clearly, he never expected to be arrested in the
United States for the very aircraft hijacking that he had been
prosecuted for in Cuba. He is bewildered by the Justice
Barnett Bank Plaza Suite 1100
Barnett Bank Building Suite 348
One East Broward Boulevard
315 South Calhoun Street
Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33301
Tallahames, Florida 32301
(305) 462-2800
(904) 681-9500
Fax (305) 527-8747
Fax (904) 681-6651
JAN 11 '90 17:42 CODINA
P.4
Mr. Jeb Bush
November 30, 1989
Page Two
Department's decision to to prosecute and his bewilderment is
justified. If the government wanted to prosecute Mr. Lopez-Lima,
why did they parole him back into the United States? Why did
they wait two years after he returned to the United States to
arrest him? I find it incredulous that the government was
unaware of the hijacking charges prior to Lopez-Lima's return to
the United States in 1987. The indictment in this case was
issued in 1969. Surely, the government must have conducted a
background check on Lopez-Lima before granting him parole.
Additionally, the government is not seeking to incarcerate Mr.
Lopez-Lima. The government has already stated in correspondence
to Mr. Lopez-Lima's former counsel that they would recommend
probation if Lopez-Lima pleads guilty to the indictment. I have
attached this correspondence for your consideration. By not
requesting jail time, the government is in essence admitting that
Lopez-Lima is not a threat to society. If Mr. Lopez-Lima is not
a threat to society, why prosecute him at this juncture?
My immediate goal is to get the charges against Mr.
Lopez-Lima dismissed. I believe that if enough individuals are
made aware of this case, they will see the injustice that is
being committed against my client and will use whatever influence
they have to persuade the Department of Justice to terminate this
prosecution. In this regard, my client and I would greatly
appreciate whatever assistance and guidance that you can give us.
I will gladly meet with you at your convenience to discuss this
matter further. In the meantime, if you need additional
information regarding Mr. Lopez-Lima's case, please feel free to
call me or Mr. Morton Blackwell. Mr. Blackwell, the chairman of
Mr. Lopez-Lima's defense fund, can be reached at (703) 321-8580.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely
HoR JEFFREY D. FELDMAN
JDF:jh
WPLT: 1LT1128JDF
99997.0117
Fine Jacobson Schwartz Nash Block & England
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
01. Letter
Consul of the United States of America to The Transportation
04/30/87
(b)(6)
Company, Re: Lopez Rodriguez, Reinaldo Juan; contains
Personally Identifiable Information. (1 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Series:
Card, Andrew H., Jr., Files
Subseries:
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Counsel's Office Materials [2]
Date Closed:
5/30/2025
OA/ID Number:
08373-009b
FOIA/SYS Case #:
2025-0373-S
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
Deed of Gift Restrictions
(b)(1) National security classified information
C(1) Closed by Executive Order 13526, governing access to national
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
security information
agency
C(2) Closed by statute or by the agency which originated the information
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute
C(3) Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
gift [formerly listed as only C]
information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion
of personal privacy
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
purposes
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
financial institutions
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President and
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
his advisors, or between such advisors [(a)(5) of the PRA]
concerning wells
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
02. Cable
Cable Number: 282332Z, Re: Lopez-Lima Rodriguez,
04/29/87
(b)(6)
Reinaldo Parole Authorization; contains Personally
Identifiable Information. (1 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Series:
Card, Andrew H., Jr., Files
Subseries:
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Counsel's Office Materials [2]
Date Closed:
5/30/2025
OA/ID Number:
08373-009b
FOIA/SYS Case #:
2025-0373-S
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
Deed of Gift Restrictions
(b)(1) National security classified information
C(1) Closed by Executive Order 13526, governing access to national
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
security information
agency
C(2) Closed by statute or by the agency which originated the information
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute
C(3) Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
gift [formerly listed as only C]
information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion
of personal privacy
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
purposes
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
financial institutions
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President and
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
his advisors, or between such advisors [(a)(5) of the PRA]
concerning wells
JAN 11 90 17:44 CODINA
P.7
ALIENS AND NATIONALITY
122
123
ALIENS AND NATIONALITY
8 § 1182
en convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude (other
nse), or aliens who admit having committed such a crime,
(31) Any alien who at any time shall have, knowingly and for gain, encouraged,
itting acts which constitute the essential elements of such
induced, assisted, abetted. or aided any other alien to enter or to try to enter the
United States in violation of law;
who have committed only one such crime while under the
ay be granted a visa and admitted if the crime was
(32) Aliens who are graduates of a medical school not accredited by a body or
years prior to the date of the application for a visa or
bodies approved for the purpose by the Secretary of Education (regardless of
more than five years prior to date of application for
whether such school of medicine is in the United States) and are coming to the
tates, unless the crime resulted in confinement in a prison
United States principally to perform services as members of the medical profession,
in which case such alien must have been released from
except such aliens who have passed parts I and II of the National Board of Medical
an five years prior to the date of the application for a visa
Examiners Examination (or an equivalent examination as determined by the Secre-
and for admission, to the United States. An alien who
tary of Health and Human Services) and who are competent in oral and written
use of the conviction of an offense for which the sentence
English. The exclusion of aliens under this paragraph shall apply to preference
xceed a term of imprisonment in excess of six months, or
immigrant allens described in section 1153(a)(3) and (6) of this title and to non-prefer-
as one who admite the commission of an offense for which
ence immigrant aliens described in section 1153(a)(7) of this title. For the purposes
ne year's imprisonment might have been imposed on him,
of this paragraph, an alien who is & graduate of # medical school shall be considered
id admitted to the United States if otherwise admissible:
to have passed parts I and II of the National Board of Medical Examiners examina-
has committed only one such offense, or admits the
tion if the alien was fully and permanently licensed to practice medicine in a State on
constitute the essential elements of only one such offense.
January 9, 1978, and was practicing medicine in a State on that date;
nain volume for text of (10) to (13)]
(33) Any alien who during the period beginning on March 23, 1938, and ending on
May 8, 1945, under the direction of, or in association with-
enter the United States, for the purpose of performing
(A) the Nazi government in Germany,
unless the Secretary of Labor has determined and certified
(B) any government in any area occupied by the military forces of the Nazi
and the Attorney General that (A) there are not sufficient
government of Germany,
lling. qualified (or equally qualified in the case of aliens
eaching profession or who have exceptional ability in the
(C) any government established with the assistance or cooperation of the
Nazi government of Germany, or
vailable at the time of application for a visa and admission
at the place where the alien is to perform such skilled or
(D) any government which was an ally of the Nazi government of Germany.
e employment of such aliens will not adversely affect the
ordered, incited, assisted, or otherwise participated in the persecution of any person
itions of the workers in the United States similarly em-
because of race, religion, national origin, or political opinion.
( aliens under this paragraph shall apply to preference
J in section 1153(a)(3) and (6) of this title, and to non-pref-
(See main volume for text of (b) and (c)]
'escribed in section 1153(a)(7) of this title;
(d) Nonapplicability of subsection (aX11), (25). and (25); temporary admission of nonimmi-
ain volume for text of (15) and (16)]
grants; waiver of subsection (aX26) requirements parole: bond and conditions for
temporary admissions: applicability to aliens leaving territories reciprocal admission
een arrested and deported, or who have fallen into distress
of officials of foreign governments, etc.
ursuant to this chapter or any prior act, or who have been
[See main volume for text of (1) and (2)]
or who have been removed at Government expense in Heu
to section 1252(b) of this title, and who seek admission
(3) Except as provided in this subsection, an alien (A) who is applying for a
thin ten years in the case of an alien convicted of an
nonimmigrant visa and is known or believed by the consular officer to be ineligible
date of such deportation or removal, unless prior to their
for such visa under one or more of the paragraphs enumerated in subsection (a) of
ation at a place outside the United States or their attempt
this section (other than paragraphs (27), (29), and (33)), may, after approval by the
F contiguous territory the Attorney General has consented
Attorney General of a recommendation by the Secretary of State or by the consular
lying for admission;
officer that the allen be admitted temporarily despite his inadmissibility, be granted
such & visa and may be admitted into the United States temporarily as a nonimmi-
ise main volume for text of (18)]
grant in the discretion of the Attorney General, or (B) who is inadmissible under one
fraud or willfully misrepresenting a material fact, seeks to
or more of the paragraphs enumerated in subsection (a) of this section (other than
procure or has procured. a visa, other documentation, or
paragraphs (27), (29), and (38) but who in in possession of appropriate documents or
Les or other benefit provided under this chapter:
is granted a waiver thereof and is seeking admission, may be admitted into the
General. United States temporarily as a nonimmigrant in the discretion of the Attorney
main volume for text of (20) to (22)]
(4) Either or both of the requirements of paragraph (26) of subsection (a) of this
cted of a violation of, or a conspiracy to violate, any law or
section may be waived by the Attorney General and the Secretary of State acting
1, the United States. or a foreign country relating to &
jointly (A) on the basis of unforeseen emergency in individual cases, or (B) on the
(as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act
basis of reciprocity with respect to nationals of foreign contiguous territory or of
adjacent islands and residents thereof having a common nationality with such
nationals, or (C) in the case of aliens proceeding in immediate and continuous transit
officers or Immigration officers know or have reason to
through the United States under contracts authorized in section 1228(c) of this title.
n an Ulicit trafficker in any such controlled substance or is
18 assistor, abettor, conspirator, or colluder with others in
(5XA) The Attorney General may, except as provided in subparagraph (B), in his
in any such controlled substance;
discretion parole into the United States temporarily under such conditions as he may
prescribe for emergent reasons or for reasons deemed strictly in the public interest
99-653, $ 7(a). Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3657.
any alien applying for admission to the United States, but such parole of such alien
main volume for text of (25) to (30)]
shall not be regarded as an admission of the alien and when the purposes of such
parole shall, in the opinion of the Attorney General, have been served the alien shall
U.S.C.A.
1989 P.P.
8 § 1182
ALIENS AND NATIONALITY
124
forthwith return or be returned to the custody from which he was paroled and
thereafter his case shall continue to be dealt with in the same manner as that of any
other applicant for admission to the United States.
(B) The Attorney General may not parole into the United States an alien who is a
refugee unless the Attorney General determines that compelling reasons in the
public interest with respect to that particular alien require that the alien be paroled
into the United States rather than be admitted as a refugee under section 1157 of
this title.
(6) The Attorney General shall prescribe conditions, including exaction of such
bonds as may be necessary, to control and regulate the admission and return of
excludable aliens applying for temporary admission under this subsection.
[See main volume for text of (7) and (8)]
(9) Omitted.
(10) The provisions of paragraph (15) of subsection (a) of this section shall not be
applicable to any alien who is seeking to enter the United States as a special
immigrant under subparagraph (E), (F), or (G) of section 1101(a)(27) of this title and
who applies for admission as such a special immigrant not later than March 31, 1982
(e) Educational visitor status: foreign residence requirements waiver
No person admitted under section 1101(a)(15)(J) of this title or acquiring such
status after admission (i) whose participation in the program for which he came to
the United States was financed in whole or in part, directly or indirectly, by an
agency of the Government of the United States or by the government of the country
of his nationality or his last residence, (ii) who at the time of admission or acquisition
of status under section 1101(a)(15)(J) of this title was a national or resident of a
country which the Director of the United States Information Agency, pursuant to
regulations prescribed by him, had designated as clearly requiring the services of
persons engaged in the field of specialized knowledge or skill in which the alien was
engaged, or (iii) who came to the United States or acquired such status in order to
receive graduate medical education or training, shall be eligible to apply for an
immigrant visa, or for permanent residence, or for & nonimmigrant visa under
section 1101(a)(15)(H) or section 1101(a)(15)(L) of this title until It is established that
such person has resided and been physically present in the country of his nationality
or his last residence for an aggregate of at least two years following departure from
the United States: Provided, That upon the favorable recommendation of the
Director of the United States Information Agency, pursuant to the request of an
interested United States Government agency, or of the Commissioner of Immigration
and Naturalization after he has determined that departure from the United States
would impose exceptional hardship upon the alien's spouse or child (if such spouse or
child is a citizen of the United States or a lawfully resident alien), or that the alien
cannot return to the country of his nationality or last residence because he would be
subject to persecution on account of race, religion, or political opinion, the Attorney
General may waive the requirement of such two-year foreign residence abroad in the
case of any alien whose admission to the United States is found by the Attorney
General to be in the public interest: And provided further, That, except in the case
of an alien described in clause (iii), the Attorney General may, upon the favorable
recommendation of the Director, waive such two-year foreign residence requirement
in any case in which the foreign country of the alien's nationality or last residence
has furnished the Director a statement in writing that it has no objection to such
waiver in the case of such alien.
[See main volume for text of $ /
(g) Bond and conditions for admission for permanent residence of mentally relarded.
tubercular, and mentally III but cured allene
Any alien who is excludable from the United States under paragraph (1) of
subsection (a) of this section, or any alien afflicted with tuberculosis in any form who
(A) is the spouse or the unmarried son or daughter, or the minor unmarried lawfully
adopted child, of a United States citizen, or of an alien lawfully admitted for
permanent residence, or of an alien who has been issued an immigrant visa, or (B)
has a son or daughter who is & United States citizen, or an alien lawfully admitted
for permanent residence, or an alien who has been issued an immigrant visa, shall, if
endured years Cuba
since
hegireturing
P.9
Mr. Lopez-Lima was the last politica)
Looking at Reinaldo J.
prisoner to be released from Boniato prison
nearly impossible to tell be was a politicali
in March, Boniato was an infamous Cubsie
prisoner in Cuber for 23 years;
prison located. 600 miles east, of Havina
THis skid is smooth, his eyes are friend)
where many of the "planthdog" political
and his spirit is strong. No where in his
prisoners who refused to be indoctrinated
physical appearance are there signs of the
into Fidel Castro's communist Cqba- were
multitude of bunger strikes and beatings bsk
kept. Mr. Lopez-Lima said the remaining
said he endured in Cuban jails,
plantados have since been transferred to
"When I was released (last March], peo-
other prisons and the prison has closed.
ple said I looked like I just got back front
Mr. Lopez-Lima spent the last eight years,
the French Riviera," be said with a checkle:
of his sentence at Boniato. He remembers
"But no women, drinking and almost iso.
to the day how much time be spent in Cuban
god can be a very wholesome life."
prisons: "Twenty-three years, one month
Mr. Lopez-Lima, 46, has been living on
and eight days," be said:
and off with his parents in Silver Spring
When be arrived in Miami four months
after his release, a throng of family, friend
and media were at the airport to greet him.
"I had never lost hope that I would see
him again," said Ofelia Lopez-Lima, Mr.
Oge Mastington Times
mother of the ex-prisoner. "But each year.
that went by, it became more difficult. He
was our only child. We received a letter
once in a while but never any pictures."
The senior Mr. Lopez-Lima said he and
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1988
his wife, who have lived in the Washington
area for about 20 years after fleeing Cuba
in 1959, a year after Mr. Castro came to
power, wrote countless letters to U.S. sen-
ators, ambassadors, and organizations such
as Amnesty International, pleading with
them to look into their son's case. But be
Reinaldo Lopez-Lin
CUBAN
it by violent means. "It's the same thing
During those three ID
they charged everybody with who was sus-
WORKIN who would becom
From page BI
pected of being against Castro," he said.
A fellow prisoner arrang
JAN 11 '90 17:46 CODINA
A revolutionary tribunal sentenced him
tween them because she
said they had little lock.
to three years in prison. But three years
mitter which could be
"Sometimes they [Caban officials] would
stretched into 23 years as he was bounced
say was going to be released, but it would
from prison to prison.
friends in Miami in order
never happen," he said.
After serving nearly four years, Mr.
Mr. Lopez-Lima said th
Lopez-Lima escaped from Fajardo, his
a map on a Cuban beach
Mr. Lopez-Lima's ordeal began in 1964
the United States about il
fourth prison. After his escape, be hid out
when he and a group of anti-Castro insur-
with an underground group of escapees. "It
up a meeting place. But
gents flew to Havana from Miami Mr.
were ruined by the infil
was my first Christmas put in four years,"
Lopez-Lima said "the plan was to create
he recalled.
Lima said be was arrest
conditions of instability for a coup."
before his fiancee was.
But his freedom was short-lived. An in-
The two were sent to $
When Mr. Lopez-Lima's plane landed, it
formant infiltrated the group and after
was surrounded by Cuban soldiers and the
three months of freedom, he was re-
were allowed to marry. So
group was arrested.
arrested.
was born. "They would
"I spent most of the time [after the es-
hours together every two
Mr. Lopez-Lima said he was charged with
During the Lopez-Lima
infiltrating the country in order to destroy
cape] trying to get out of the country," he
said.
the child was raised by an
Mr. Lopez-Lim protested
The Washington Times
TUESDAY, APRIL 5, 1988 / PAGE A3
Ex-political prisoner crusades
against pro-Castro propaganda
By Peter LaBarbera
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Renaldo Lopez-Lima says he just
wants to set the record straight.
For the second time in a month,
the former Cuban political prisoner
of 23 years has challenged speakers
at a public forum to counter the
views they expressed about his
country and vows he will continue to
do so.
The object of Mr. Lopez-Lima's
scrutiny yesterday was a lecture at
the Johns Hopkins University
School for Advanced International
Studies by Karen Wald, a writer,
free-lance journalist and teacher
who has lived in Cuba since 1982.
Last month, he held his own im-
promptu news conference at the
leftist Institute for Policy Studies to
Photo by Kevin T Gifbert The Washington Times
Karen Wald, a journalist, told a forum at the Johns Hopkins School of
take issue with a presentation there
on Cuba's prison system.
International Studies yesterday that Cuba "is not a dictatorship."
Mrs. Wald, who attended the re-
cent United Nations Human Rights
tional Public Radio.
tion to a system that doesn't let you
Commission session in Geneva, said
The free-lance journalist also
express your opinion?"
that dospite assertions to the con-
called Ricardo Bofill, the founder
Mr. Lopez-Lima cited recent re-
trary. the decision to send a U.N.
and president of the independent
ports that Mr. Bofill has been forced
team to Investigate human rights in
Cuban Committee for Human
to remain inside his house in Havana
Cubs was a setback for the United
Rights, a "pathological liar" and said
and has been stoned when trying to
States and a triumph over U.S.
the Cuban system is not a "dictator-
leave. "This is happening today -
"bullying" of the Third World.
ship."
not in 1960," he said, adding that kill-
She said the commission's pas-
"I believe that the Cuban govern-
ings within Cuba's prison system
sage of a Latin American compro-
ment is committed to human rights,"
"cannot be denied."
mise proposal to "accept" Cuba's in-
Mrs. Wald said.
Mrs. Ward said it may be true that
vitation to investigate its human
Mrs. Wald argued that the U.S.
Mr. Befill was stoned but speculated
rights situation rather than adopting
policy of "confrontation" with Cuba
that It could be because the Cuban
the U.S. proposn! to "order" an inves-
is counterproductive in securing po.
people "have gotten riled up" by his
tigation was like "the difference be-
litical reforms, a position echood by
press conferences alleging human
tween night and day."
Wayne Smith, chief of the U.S. inter.
rights abuses.
The U.S. proposal "presumed
ests section in Cuba from 1979 to
In an interview after the presen-
there were massive violations" in
1982. who spoke after her yesterday.
tation, Mr. Lopez-Lima said Mrs.
Cuba, said Mrs. Wald, who. working
Mr. Lopez-Lima listened intently
Wald's personal attacks on Mr. Bofill
out of Havana, has written articles
to the presentations and then raised
paralleled those of the Marxist Cas-
for, among other publications, the
some objections.
tro regime. Cuba recently launched
Guardian and the San Francisco
"Certain facts that have been pre-
a major press and television cam-
Chronicle and given broadcast re.
sented here are not true" he said.
paign against Mr. Bofill and his hu-
ports for Pacifice Radio and Nn.
"How do you express your opposi-
min rights committee.
JAN 11 '90 17:47 CODINA
P.11
PAGE F2/ TUESDAY, MARCH 22, 1988
The Washington Times
Letters
What happens to those who say 'no' to Castro
In The Washington Times' March
certainly have taken place but not in
Boniato, including a group of the
11 news article, "Leftist IPS cor-
the time frame mentioned. Perhaps
first ones to be returned to the pun-
roborates Cuba Prison horror tales,"
when I said "last years" it was
Ishment cells. After the Geneva Con-
I was incorrectly quoted as saying
misunderstood as "last year."
vention of March 1987 the plantados
that I knew of a dozen inmates ex-
Aryeh Neier points out that the
were transferred to Combinado del
ecuted "early last year" before my
prisoners he saw in the punishment
Este. This is further proof that inter-
release. What I said is that I know of
cells were non-political. I assure you
national condemnation is very effec-
dozens of prisoners who have been
these hellholes have been endured
tive and the only way to help other
killed by firng squads or by guards
by many political prisoners. I spent
politcal prisoners In communist
over the last years.
over seven years continously in pun-
Cuba.
My 23 years in prison are a story
ishment cells in Boniato until March
I am very thankful that The Wash-
of killings, beatings, biological ex-
26, 1987. In the early 70's the plan-
ington Times makes the American
periments on poitcal prisoners, lack
tado political prisoners in Boniato
public aware of the horrors endured
were islolated in punishment cells
by political prisoners and the Cuban
of food and medical attention.
for over seven years. Then they were
people who want freedom and de-
Everything was done by Fidel Cas-
taken to Combinado del Este in 1977.
mocracy under God for Cuba.
tro's communist regime to destroy
those who said "no" to his totalitar-
In 1979, a hundred plantados, my-
REINALDO LOPEZ-LIMA
lan tyranny in Cuba. These things
self among them, were taken back to
Silver Spring. Md.
JAN 11 '90 17:48 CODINA
P.12
FRIDAY. MARCH 11, 1988
The tollet in each of these tiny
Leftist IPS
CUBA
cells was just a hole in the ground.
he said. Prisoners are confined for
From page AI
extended periods. sometimes naked,
corroborates
for resisting re-education or violat-
United Nations will undertake a full
ing prison discipline, including pas-
investigation of human rights in
sive violations such as hunger
Cuba prison
Cuba.
strikes. Other prisoners considered
The new agreement will result in
to be problems are kept in "isolation
formation of an official working
cells" for years. with only slightly
horror tales
group to conduct R wide-ranging in-
better facilities.
vestigation of Cuban human rights
In two prisons visited, Boniato
and then report back to the Human
and Combinado del Este, prisoners
By Richard Beeston
Rights Commission, according to
complained of being beaten with
and Peter LaBarbera
Mario Portuondo. He spoke with Ar-
rubber hoses and sticks. In one case,
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
mando Valladares, head of the U.S.
a prisoner was allegedly kicked to
delegation in Geneva, after the "con-
death by guards.
An account of the horrifying con-
sensus" was reached last night.
The IPS report said, however,
ditions in Cuban prisons from the
Mr. Portuondo is director of pub-
there were "humane and con-
left-wing Institute for Policy Studies
lic affairs for the Cuban American
structive features" of the Cuban
bears out some of worst charges lev-
National Foundation in Washington.
prison system, including paid work
eled against Cuba by the United
He said that under the agreement,
opportunities and training in basic
States at the U.N. Human Rights
a five-nation team representing
skills for most prisoners. But there
Commission in Geneva.
"evenly distributed" geographic re-
were also "harsh and cruel features"
The institute's findings were re-
gions will be allowed unlimited
that were "directly attributable to
leased here yesterday as the com-
access to not only Cuban prisons but
the determination to re-educate pris-
mission, meeting in Geneva, Swit-
the Cuban population as a whole.
oners."
zerland, agreed to send a working
The Cuban government had orig-
The six delegation members vis-
group to Havana this summer to in-
inally proposed that a U.N. investi-
ited six prisons from Feb. 26 to
vestigate Cuban human rights and
gating team meet with Cuban offi-
March 5 and said they had more than
prison conditions.
cials only, as well as only selected
120 "confidential interviews" with
Under a compromise that will re-
prison facilities, he said.
prisoners, including at least 50 held
place a U.S.-sponsored proposal. the
"Valladares is ecstatic. He's
claiming complete victory," said Mr.
for politically motivated offenses.
see CUBA, page A10
Portuondo.
They described regular prison fa-
He said the fact that the working
cilities as clean and hygenic and said
group will report next year to the
they heard no complaints of "instru-
U.N. Human Rights Commission
ments of torture."
means that "now, for the first time,
A Cuban exile, Reinaldo Lopez-
Cuba is officially on the agenda of
Lima, told Mr. Neier at the IPS press
the commission."
briefing that he had spent 23 years
WORLD
The United States calls Cuba "one
as a political prisoner in Cuba and
of the world's darkest dungeons."
eight of those years without a family
In a speech to the Human Rights
visit. He said he knew of a dozen
PAGE A2
Commission in Geneva on Tuesday,
Inmates who were executed early
the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., Ver-
last year before his release.
non Walters, said Cuba has more
In exchange for the visit, the IPS
than 200 prisons and labor camps
has agreed to try to seek access to
and as many as 10,000 to 15,000 po-
U.S. prisons for a Cuban delegation
Dismal Cuban prison
litical prisoners. He said that torture
from the National Union of Cuban
and executions continue to occur
Jurists.
conditions confirmed
and demanded that Fidel Castro's
Mr. Neier said about 3 percent to
The description of prison condi-
government "let the international
10 percent of inmates in the prisons
tions was like something out of the
community determine the truth
his group visited appeared to be suf-
Dark Ages. The left-leaning Insti-
about Cuba."
fering severe punishment. But he
tute for Policy Studies took the un-
An IPS official said under close
said common criminals rather than
people jailed for political reasons ap-
likely role yesterday of bearing wit-
questioning here yesterday that in
ness to the administration's worst
some Cuban prisons, three prison-
peared to be treated worst.
fears about prisons in Cuba. The
ers are kept in punishment cells
The group saw prisoners held for
conditions have been described by
measuring five feet by seven feet for
offenses deemed political such AS
24 hours & day. They lie on bare cpn-
burning sugar cane fields, trying to
the United States as "one of the
world's darkest dungeons." An IPS
crete slabs without bedding and the
leave Cuba illegally and seeking ref-
uge in foreign embassies, Mr. Neier
official said that, in some prisons,
said.
three inmates are kept in punish-
only glimmer of light comes through
He estimated the number of po-
ment cells measuring five feet by
cracks in the walls, Aryeh Neier
litical prisoners in Cuba at slightly
seven feet for 24 hours a day. They
said.
more than 600. Cuban authorities
lie on concrete slabs without bed-
Mr. Neier was one of a group of
ding. The only light comes through
Americans on the board of the IPS
put their total prison population at
32,000. excluding those in reform
cracks in the walls.
who returned to Washington this
Page A1
week from a visit to Cuban Jails.
schools and military jails, he added.
The compromise worked out in
The prisoners he saw In the pun-
ishment cells, Mr. Neier said. were
Geneva drew praise in Washington,
non-political.
even though consideration of any
U.S. resolution condemning Cuba
will be delayed at least a year.
P.13
JAN 11 '90 17:49 CODINA
AME OF NEWSPAPER
The
MiamiNear
DATE
Feb.5,1988
Pg.
9a
Cat. Editorial
Play hardball on Cuban human
rights case
. Reinaldo J. Lopez-Lime arrived in the United
American labor leaders could likewise use their
States less summer. after having served 23 years
Influence on their Latin American counterparts.
as . Cuban political prisener following this convic-
Congress should be unanimous In adopting
tion on charges of spying for the United States in
resolutions pending In both Houses to condemn Cuba
Cuba. Now a resident of the Washington, D.C.,
and ask the United Nations to do the name.
area, Lopez-Lime wrote shis article for The Miami
Presidential candidates should take & position In
News.
favor of condemning human rights violations in Cube.
A stand calling for the deletion from the Cuban
REINALDO J. LOPEZ-LIMA
Constitution of the article allowing discrimination
- to I
against dissidents would also help.
The United States must be even better prepared
A pastoral letter denouncing the Cuban
this time in urging the 43-member U.N. Commission
government could be read in Catholic churches before
on Human Rights to con-
the Human Rights Commission takes up the case of
demn Cuba during the -
Cuba. And the proposed papal visit to Cube should
sion that was convened this
not Impede United Nations action against Cuba.
week in Geneva.
The role of the Cuban exiles in Mismi and other
Although the case of
places is paramount. We know better than anyone
human rights violations In
else the horrors of this dictatorship.
Cube is expected to be
Cuban media should get in touch with their
brought within the next
counterparts in Latin America and organize broad-
few weeks, the United
casts to better Inform the people in those countries.
States must step up its
Also, key newspaper, TV and radio representatives
efforts now on a variety of
should be Invited to Miami for more Informative
fronts to avoid another
meetings with the Cuban media is Miami.
negative vote.
The local Miami press - American and Cuban -
Last March, Argentina,
Lopez-Lime
should work together toward the same goal: advance
Colombia, Mexico, Peru and
democracy and human rights in Cuba and the world.
Venesuela switched their positions and joined the
We cannot forget that Castro and the Russians
Saviet bioc members of the commission to stymie the
control the future of pottical prisoners. The group of
U.S. proposal by a one-vote margin on . procedural
political prisoners known as plantudos for their
matter. Costa Rica was the only Latin country to vote
rejection of government efforts to Indoctrinate them.
with the United States, while Brazil abrialned.
number sbout 65, and they should have been released
n cannot be allowed to happen again. Communist
#
months age. But R has been delayed by the regime.
Cuba violates every article is the U.N. International
Why? Maybe to gain time and then, just before the
Declaration of Human Rights. Today's Cubs is a
The - -
case of Cube goes before the U.N. commission later
totalitarian state ruled by the tron fiet of a dictator -
not a rementic Idealist as many people believe.
Fidel Castro: Stay tuned for propaganda
this month or In early March, to free some of the
prisoners and start a great propaganda campaign
While the constant violation of human rights
The following Steps could greatly enhance the
showing how good the system Is and how It complies
against political prisoners is the most flagrant and
possibilities of International condemnation of Cuba
with the U.N. human rights declaration. So this delay
well known of Fidel Cestro's atrocties, It is by no
for human Mghts violations this Ume:
could be a trap.
thean's the only one.
The State Department obviously should impress
We should not forget two things.
When Cubans are born. they are destined to serve
the importance of the proposal on all U.S. allies that
The first Is that In Cube there are untold thousands
the state, They will, not be able. to create or
belong to the U.N. Human Rights Commission.
of political prisoners, many of whom are young
participate In any potitical party except the
Also, the department should be ready to use
people, who refused to right against the people of
Communist Party. They will not be allowed to form
foreign aid and other economic laverage sgainst
Angola, or religious dissidents. who are sent to
as Independent trade unfon, publish 'a newspaper or
countries that vote against the United States,
prisons as sommon oriminals. And the violations of
express their own convictions If they are is
particularly Latte American national
human rights will continue in Cubs, long after the
opposition to the official Une.
Private enterprise has a vital role to play and
last piantede le released.
If an Individual is not lucky enough to belong to
should show Interest to the triumph of democracy.
Secondly, the people of Cube are not communists,
the privileged "New Class" of rulleg bureaucrate and
Industry leaders should premire their colleagues
and their rights to freedom of association, speech,
party officials, he or she will become a second or
overseas whose countries belong Lo the burnen rights
press. religion. etc., are being violated institutionally
third class citizen.
commission. For example, the American oil Industry
- by Cubs's ewa constitution. The atipulation
Top Cuban officials who toured prisons In the
would be highly Influential over oil producing
allowing Soviet Intervention should be forcefully
1970s liked to tell the Inmates that more than 30
nations.
denounced. since " violates Cuban covereigaty.
percent of Cubs's population was hortile to the
American media must inform Americans. There
Above all, President Rangan should extend his
system and at some polat would serve time in prinon.
is much Information that bas yes to be revealed. Does
good will and lobby for the humsu rights cause.
During the 7½ years I served in Bonjate prison, 1
anybody know that in one day la 1042 450 men were
A Bew element has been added by the U.S.-Cube
learned through other Inimates of more then a dozen
executed at prisons throughout the Island?
immigration agreement. The Castro government will
young diasidents killed by firing equade in front of a
What about "wet beriberi". caused by a Lack of
try to make the most out of It to prove its good will.
mango tree on the princts grounds.
vitamina? The disease, which is similar to the one that
But this agreement is further proof of Cube's
They had burned food markets. sugar case fields
took the lives of thousands of Jews during World
violation of the most elemental rights.
and other economic targets 10 express their
War II. killed as least 103 prisoners is the span of a
Why do hundreds of thousands of Cubane want to
disinoval of the system. Diego Roche Periche, 21,
few months in Cube's primons during the late 1960s.
uscape from the Island? Are political prisosers state
acquired of pabotaging ,warehouse, was the last one
11 is very important that the press of. countries
bostages to be exchanged at the will of the distator?
executed before finished my sentence last March.
participating in the Human Rights Commission be
Political prisoners that have spent a quarter
The discrimination againm political Ideas is
Informed of the abuses in Cube an that the prople of
century incarrerated are being hargained away to
willing late Article $1 of the Cuties Constitution, to
those countries can pressure their representatives to
Sure cuncessions out of the American government.
which all rights are denied to Cubana who oppose or
vote with the United States.
Castro's propaganda cover-up will try to hide the
dissent from the communist system. And the Cubas
The AFL-CIO could do an Important job by
real cancer of Cuban society. No concessions should
Constitution gives the Soviet Union the right to
organizing lectures and eminars about what La really
be made: the goal of obtaining democracy for the
intervene In Cuba's Internal affairs.
happening 90 miles away from the United States.
Cubse people cannot be compromised.
JAN 11 '90 17:50 CODINA
P.14
WEST
Council for Inter
American Security
WATCH
A Report on the Americas and the World
Volume XI, Number 1
February 1988
Says Cuba isn't a lost cause
Cuban Political Prisoner, Released After 23 Years, Joins CIS
by Carol Stranahan
Reinaldo Lopez-Lime. an ex-political
prisoner with a fascinating story of twenty-
three years in a Cuban prison. has joined
CIS as a special consultant. and is working
on a number of autobiographical projects,
Including a book.
Although many Americans accept com-
munist Cuba almost as a lost cause, Lopez
Lima emphasizes that the people of Cuba
are not communist in belief-instead. they
are repressed by "the iron fist of a dictator"
whose rule is backed by a constitution
which openly denies all rights to Cubans
who oppose or dissent from the Com-
munist system. Dissenters are simply put
away, a relatively effective method of
silencing opposition.
A law student In Cuba In 1959. when
Castro came into power. Mr. Lopez left in
October of that same year to join Cuban
opposition groups In the U.S. who were
working to overthrow Castro. in 1961, he
was Involved in the Bay of Pigs Invesion
and. had the mission not been aborted by
lack of U.S. air cover. would have helped
to open a diversionary front in the Escam-
bray Mountains of central Cubs to distract
some of Castro's forces from the Bay.
Drawing by a Cuban prisoner of interior of Castro's natorious Boniato prison. It was smug-
During the 1962 Missle Crisis, he was
gled out by fellow inmate Reinaldo Lopez Lima last year.
trained in 4 special mission group as a
frogman to participate in the contem-
In prison. Mr. Lopez was what is called
plated U.S. military action against the Cas-
a "Plantado" prisoner. one who refuses
tro regime. When the mission was aban-
any form of political indoctrination in order
In This Issue
doned after the Kennedy-Khrushchev
to soften his prison existence, Plantados
accord that removed. the misslies, Löpek
serve the longest sentences and suffer the
toughest treatment during their time in
YAF leader seeks public office
2
left abruptly for Cuba and began working
against the government there. in 1964 he
prison.
A look at Mexico's next
was arrested and sentenced to a three-
With astonishing matter-of-factness,
year prison term. But in 1967. after serv:
Lopez Lima described to me the frequent
president
3
ing that term. he was denied release, and
beatings he and other prisoners received.
consequently escaped in 1968. managing
Prison officials would herd large groups of
Contra foes in Congress ald
tó stay in hiding for three months. The
prisoners Into a single common area and
El Salvador guerrillas
4
escape naturally marked him as an even
routinely beat them with bayonets. Iron
greater threat to the State, resulting in an
bars and machine gun butts. in order to
Publications available from CIS
7
18-year sentence upon his recapture.
force them into a submission that simple
imprisonment was unable to accomplish.
Sandinistas kill civilians with
Russian cluster bombs
8
Carol Stranahan is executive assistant to the pres.
ident of the Council for inter-American Security
LOPEZ, continued on page six
JAN 11 '90 17:51 CODINA
P.15
Anti-Castro Combatant Joins CIS Team
LOPEZ. from page one
Cuba shouldn't be written off
Lopez seemed a bit surprised by the
What did he learn? "That they are not
appalled look on my face, and said, "you
communist and that we should continue
must understand-this was their criminal
our fight for a free Cuba." If Castro has
way of controlling us. We got used to It."
made Cuba such a better place to live. why
One of the few ways for prisoners to
do hundreds of thousands of Cubans want
protest was through hunger strikes. The
to escape from the Island?
Cuban government. under severe inter-
Mr. Lopez's suggestions Include greater
national condemnation for its violation of
U.S. Involvement in the fight for human
human rights. feared having too many
rights In Cuba. Of particular Importance is
prisoners die In custody. Therefore, small
the United Nations Commission on Human
concessions were sometimes made dur-
Rights vote when the U.S. takes Cuban
ing a prisoner's hunger strike before he
violations of human rights back to the
reached the point of death. But. as Mr.
commission In early 1988. Lopez explains,
Lopez explained. prison officials would
Cuba violates every article In the U.N.
usually let a prisoner starve himself to the
International Declaration of Human
point of real physical damage. often
Rights
When a Cuban is born he
depriving him of water. and delay medical
is marked to serve the State. He will
treatment so that the hunger strike was
not be able to create or participate in
not only particularly painful. but also capa-
any political party except the com-
bie of Inflicting severe damage on the pris-
Reinaldo Lopez Lima.
munist party-the only party permit-
oner's body. Lopez himself went on var-
ted. They will not be allowed to form
lous hunger strikes, the most noteworthy
an independent Trade Union nor pub-
one being an attempt to force the prison
lish a newspaper. nor express their
to let his three-year-old son. Alexis, out of
"When a Cuban is born
own convictions If they are in oppo-
Cuba.
he is marked to serve the
sition to the official line
More than
30% of the population is labeled as
state
more than
hostile to the system. This means no
Son was born In prison
thirty percent of the
University for the young, poor working
conditions and low salaries for the
Lopez had married a fellow prisoner and
population is labeled as
lucky ones who are able to get a job.
fathered a son. who was bom in prison
and long prison terms for the more
and raised by an ex-prisoner (and friend)
hostile to the system."
outspoken. When left Bonlato prison
in Havena. When the child was three years
a few months ago, young dissenters
old, Lopez. learing for the child's safety.
-Reinaldo Lopez Lima
had been killed by firing squads
went on a hunger strike demanding that
because they had burned a food mar-
his son be allowed to come to the U.S. to
ket and sugar cane field to express
be raised by blood relatives (his grandpar-
their disapproval.
ents). This strike lasted 20 days, until the
cell and which he listened to late at night.
prison officials promised to let the boy out
He was also President of an Informal Cath-
Calls for action against Castro
of Cuba. Alexis Lopez was raised in Miami.
olic community In Boniato.
not knowing the circumstances of his birth.
Upon his eventual release in March of
Lopez Lima calls upon the American
Mr. Lopez was as active as he could be
1987. he smuggled out a detailed drawing
government to persuade its allles to vote
during his 23 years in prison. From 1972
of the interior of Bonlato prison done by a
against Cuba in the U.N. and to use eco-
16 1978, he worked as "Chief of Gallery."
fellow Inmate on tissue paper. This is the
nomic leverage against countries that vote
representing his fellow prisoners in their
best drawing of the Interior of Boniato that
against the U.S. He also calls upon the
claims to the phson 'authorities and the
has been seen outside of Cuba (see plc-
media to Inform the public of the Issues
Ministry of the Interior. From 1979 to 1987.
ture). Along with this drawing were a num-
at stake in Cuba. and stresses the impor-
he was sentenced to solitary confinement.
ber of tiny scraps of paper. covered with
the of the role of Cuban exfles In Miami
living out the last eight years of his sen-
the most minute writing Imaginable. Lopez
THE eisewhere In spreading the word. The
tence th a "taplada" cell.
conceals the identities of the authors for
Cuban/American media, he stresses.
This stage of his term was served In the
fear of potential reprisals against those still
should get In touth with its counterparts
Infamous Bonisto prison: known for fle-
In prison. but he plans to use their testi-
in Latin America in order to better inform
grant abuses and deaths of Its prisoners.
monies in his book to show a broad base
the people there.
There. Lopez managed to fight for human
of protest and backing for the human rights
Most importantly. Mr. Lopez wants to
rights, sending letters signed by fellow
effort outside Cuba.
get the information out of Cuba In order
prisoners to the Pope, Presidents Carter
Lopez Lime also plans to widen the scope
to alert the public not only in the United
and Reagan. and many International orga-
of his book beyond his experiences In
States but also In Latin America to the
nizations. He smuggled these letters out
prison. He will discuss in detail the years
abuses so prevalent in Cuban society. His
through an underground system he
leading up to the Castro revolution. as well
book promises to be much more than the
designed himself.
as the sentiment of the people of Cuba
sad tale of a long prison sentence.
Also during his stay In Boniato, he cre-
today. After his release from prison. he
Mr. Lopez Lima is currently living in the
ated a daily newspaper named "Bonia.
remained In Cuba for four months In order
Washington, D.C. area. He recently trav-
tillo": its news was taken from a clandes-
to get a feel for the "real situation of our
efled to Miami to Introduce himself to his
tine radio he had hidden In his Isolation
people."
thirteen-year-old son.
6
sity
WEST WATCH
February 1988
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Date: January 10, 1990
FOR:
Boyden Gray
FROM: ANDY CARD
Action
Your Comment
Let's Talk
XXX
FYI
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
January 10, 1990
Dear Ray,
Thanks for your letter of January 4th. I have
a special interest in what happens in the
Virgin Islands. Please know that I will be
glad to make sure that Dick Knoepfel is
appropriately considered for a Federal
Judgeship.
Let's get together sometime soon. I hope all
is well with you. Happy New Year!
Sincerely,
Andrew Andre H. Card, Jr.
Assistant to the President
and Deputy to the Chief of Staff
Mr. C. Raymond Marvin
818 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
Suite 1020
Washington, D.C.
20006
AC HAS SEEN 1/9
C. RAYMOND MARVIN
ATTORNEY AT LAW
818 CONNECTICUT AVENUE, N.W.
SUITE 1020
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006
(202) 659-5311
January 4, 1990
The Hon. Andrew H. Card, Jr.
Assistant to the President &
Deputy to the Chief of Staff
The White House
West Wing - First Floor
Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear Andy:
Happy New Year and warmest good wishes to you and your
colleagues for a spectacularly successful 1990.
I am enclosing a copy of a recent article from the Virgin
Island Daily News concerning the death of the sole remaining
Federal Judge and a follow-up article of December 30 which
discusses the fact that Judge O'Brien's death underscores the need
for President Bush to appoint Federal Judges in the Virgin Islands.
As you know, I have previously sent you information concerning
a Republican attorney who has support for the position. Dick
Knoepfel is interested in it and, by all accounts, is an eminently
qualified and sound candidate. The Virgin Islands has essentially
been without a Federal District Judge for the better part of a
year. Although the judicial responsibilities are being "covered"
by visiting judges from the Third Circuit, certainly no one
believes that that is a solution to their judicial crisis.
Incidentally, I have no law or other business pending in the
Virgin Islands, its courts or government and do not anticipate any.
I take this action solely as a person interested in helping to
improve the quality of the federal judiciary.
Dick Knoepfel will be available for personal interviews there
in St. Thomas or here in D.C.
I look forward to seeing you soon.
Sincerely,
My
C. Raymond Marvin
file
AC HAS SEEN 12/29
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
December 22, 1989
MEMORANDUM FOR ANDREW H. CARD, JR.
ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT AND
DEPUTY TO THE CHIEF OF STAFF
FROM:
C. BOYDEN GRAYOMN
COUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT
SUBJECT:
December 8 Memorandum from Secretary Skinner to
the President re: "Status of Rail Labor
Negotiations"
At your request, I reviewed the captioned memorandum, which
appeared to be merely a status report giving the White House a
heads-up about events that may or may not lead to an action
forcing event next year. The NMB has been keeping Nelson Lund
informed about these same events, and there is no obvious reason
for the President's time to be taken up with this issue yet.
Accordingly, Nelson contacted the General Counsel's office at DOT
(Dean McGrath). Mr. McGrath inquired within the Department, and
reported back that this memorandum was intended solely to alert
relevant White House staff; he specifically confirmed that DOT
does not believe that the President needs to see this document at
this time.
As Secretary Skinner's memorandum indicates, DOT is taking action
to ensure that the Administration has available the facts that
will be needed to make an informed decision in case the NMB's
mediation efforts are unsuccessful. My office has informally
asked DOJ to begin examining the state of the law with respect to
secondary picketing, which appeared to be in a state of flux or
uncertainty during the Eastern Airlines crisis last March; this
issue, however, will probably be less important in this case than
it was with Eastern.
Nelson tells me that he believes the political and policy
questions raised by this labor dispute may prove more difficult
than those that were raised by the Eastern dispute. He also
believes that there may be steps we can take to improve the
situation before a crisis occurs. Accordingly, Roger Porter and
I should get together in early January to discuss the situation.
At least until then, however, I do not believe that the President
need be bothered with this.
CC: Roger Porter (with attachment)
OCT 19 1989
andy,
IHS wants this kept
where you . can returned it.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Date: 10/7
FOR: hov. S.
FROM: ANDY CARD ARDANDY
Action
Your Comment
Let's Talk
FYI - file
not
MEMORANDUM
file
Noti: per Ludge Bark
TO: MOH
FROM: JIM FITZ
he can notrecomment
DATE: SEPTEMBER 7, 1989
RE: MEETING WITH GOV. SUNUNU REGARDING JUDGE BOB JONES
Book jones.
AHC
10/4/89
This is a rushed memo because of your early meeting with
Sununu and the fact that I just 5 minutes ago received some
material from the Judge.
In a nutshell, the Department of Justice is quite concerned
about one opinion written by Jones, State of Oregon V. Henry.
The case deals with an adult bookstore in Bend and struck down a
state criminal statute on obscenity because it conflicted with
the Oregon constitution. The Department of Justice views this as
some indication that Jones is soft on pornography/obscenity and
has declined to forward his name to the White House.
Jones wrote the Henry decision on behalf of a unanimous
Oregon Supreme Court because he was assigned to write the
opinion. Amongst the Court, it was hardly controversial. The
decision affirmed the Oregon Court of Appeals, which had stuck
down the statute based on our state constitution. This was not a
federal case and neither the U.S. Constitution nor a federal
statute was involved.
Every lawyer in Oregon knows, and the Oregon Supreme Court
has long ago held, that the Oregon constitution's free speech
provision is much broader than the U.S. Constitution's First
Amendment. The Supreme Court strictly construes the state
constitution and will not depart from the precedent of earlier
cases except in extraordinary circumstances.
Bob Jones clearly had no choice but to follow the state
constitution and state law in this matter. Letters from State
Attorney General Frohnmayer and one of Oregon's most prominent
appellate lawyers (Jack Faust) supporting the Supreme Court's
opinion as in accordance with settled state law are forthcoming.
If the Administration wants someone who will follow the law
rather than make it, Bob Jones clearly fits that bill.
Apparently, Bob McGuigan from the Free Congress Foundation
has insinuated that Jones is under the influence of Hans Linde,
the Oregon Supreme Court's most liberal member. That's absolute
nonesense, Jones is a conservative jurist in the best sense of
the word and is an ideological opposite of Linde's judicial
activism.
As a state circuit court judge, Bob Jones was very tough on
criminals and has worked diligently to strengthen the state's
sentencing guidelines. In fact, Oregon's largest pro-law
enforcement group, Citizens for Justice & Crime Victims United,
wholeheartedly endorses the Jones nomination.
HATFIELD
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
October 20, 1989
MEMORANDUM FOR GOVERNOR JOHN H. SUNUNU
FYI
FROM:
ANDREW H. CARD, JR. Andy /hes
SUBJECT:
Judge Roth
I did a quick check on Judge Roth. Having talked with Counsel's
Office, I learned that the right-to-lifers were very down on
Judge Roth during her confirmation process to become a District
Judge and that there is still little rationalization for the
Circuit Seat to go to Delaware. The process has not proceeded
very far along. Justice has scheduled an interview (which may
have taken place this week), but no recommendation has been
forwarded to the White House.
MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
October 19, 1989
TO:
C. BOYDEN GRAY
FROM:
ANDREW H. CARD, JR. Andy/Ly
SUBJECT: International Trade Court
Senator Rudy Boschwitz called urging Dick Goldberg for the International
Trade Court. He knew of D'Amato's preference, but feels that this should
not be a "New York Court."
CC: Fred McClure
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
November 8, 1989
Dear Mr. Lambers:
I am responding to your kind offer to the President to build a
custom yacht for his use and donate it to the Federal government.
Although we very much appreciate your very generous offer, on
reflection, we have decided against acquiring a new Presidential
yacht at this time.
I hope you will understand our decision, and I wish you the best
of luck with your business plans for a new custom yacht company.
Sincerely,
Andrew H. Card, Jr.
Assistant to the President
and Deputy to the Chief of Staff
Mr. Tom Lambers
Lambers Yacht Design
Post Office Box 177
Macatawa, Michigan 49434
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
How
AAC
October 27, 1989
MEMORANDUM FOR ANDREW H. CARD, JR.
ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT AND DEPUTY TO THE CHIEF
OF STAFF
FROM:
C. BOYDEN GRAYCM
COUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT
SUBJECT:
Offer of a Lambers Yacht
In view of your inquiry about the proposed donation of a Chris
Craft American Classic Boat (to which I have responded
separately), I thought you would want to be consulted about an
offer that we received from a yacht builder who would like to
build the President a yacht. As a legal matter, the same gift
standards would apply as are described in my memo on the Chris
Craft.
I recommend against pursuing the offer of the yacht for several
reasons --
Because the donor is starting up a new custom
manufacturing company and wants to give the President
the first yacht built, there are even stronger than
usual concerns about commercial exploitation of the
offer.
Because this would be the first custom yacht built, it
is hard for us to judge the likely quality of the
product.
Acquisition of a yacht would probably be controversial
in view of the past controversy over the Sequoia.
If you agree, I recommend you sign the attached letter declining
the offer on behalf of the President.
Feel free to contact me (or Amy Schwartz on my staff) if you have
any questions.
Attachment
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Date: 11/22
FOR: Boydentyay
FROM: ANDY CAR And
Action -again
Your Comment
Let's Talk
FYI
THE WHITE HOUSE
11/22/19
Dear Mr. Lambus. -
Thank you for your letter responding
to my correspondence regarding your
offer d a Presidential custom yacht.
I will have your very kind offer agein
reviewed. Please keep in touch. Sincerely, AndyCard
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Mr. Tom Lanburs
Lamburs yacht Design
P.D. Box 177
Macatawa, MI 49434
AC HAS SEEN
Lambers Yacht Design
Send copy
to Boyden AHC.P. Gray.
P.O. Box 177
Macatawa, MI 49434
(616) 335-5980
November 17, 1989
Dear Mr. Card:
Thank you for your letter dated November 8, 1989, in response
to our offer to design, build, and donate, to The Presidency
of The United States, a custom yacht of approximately 200Ft.
length over all.
We cannot however understand why The President would
turn down a very useful gift of $15 to $20 million value.
Perhaps The President, and staff, do not realize the advantages
there would be to having a yacht such as we propose.
We fully realize The President rarely has the time to
"go cruising", but the yacht can be designed, built, and
used, as a portable White House. When ever the President
is expected to go on a trip; whether for pleasure, or business;
in The United States and it's territories, or world wide;
if the destination is near navigable waters (which most places
are), the yacht and crew, can be sent to the destination
in advance. Then when the President arrives by jet, he,
the first family, and staff, will have a place familiar,
comfortable, and safe, awaiting there arrival (home away
from home).
The yacht will be complete with a personal bedroom suite
for the President and First Lady, and family, along with
rooms for VIP guests. She will have accommodations for formal
entertaining, complete with gourmet kitchen, formal dining
room, and living room areas. She will have an "oval office"
suitable for meetings or other work required by the President
and staff. She will also have accommodations for all required
staff and ships crew. She will be designed, and built, with
very high security and safety capabilities, such as bullet
proof construction, high-tech communications and electronics,
relatively high speed capabilities, and long range. She
will also have a heliport allowing direct flight to, and
from, her. These are just the highlights and there will
be much more.
LAMBERS
Page 2
The security reasons alone would justify the yacht,
rather than the problems faced when the President must stay
in a hotel, or other such facility. In addition, a familiar
bed and surroundings, would help insure that the President,
First Family, and staff, rest well, no matter where in the
world they are, when they have the small amount of time
allotted them for rest.
Further more we will guarantee that the yacht will in
every way, be worthy of The President of The United States,
and we will not stop working on her until she is completely
acceptable to the President, staff, and security.
So in conclusion, we ask the President and staff to
please reconsider our offer.
Again, thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely
Tom Laulus
Tom Lambers
Mr. Andrew H. Card, Jr.
Assistant to the President
THE WHITE HOUSE
Washington D.C., 20020
AC HAS SEEN
Lambers Yacht Design
P.O. Box 177
Macatawa, MI 49434
(616) 335-5980
December 4, 1989
Dear Mr. Card:
Thank you for reconsidering our offer regarding a custom
yacht for the Presidency. We are sorry to hear it was again
declined, but understand.
Should the President, and/or staff, reconsider our offer,
or if a need arises similar to our expertise, we would very
much appreciate keeping us in mind.
Again, thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely
Tom Larkers
Tom Lambers
Mr. Andrew H. Card, Jr.
Assistant to the President
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
Washington, D.C. 20020
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
November 29, 1989
MEMORANDUM FOR ANDREW H. CARD, JR.
ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT AND DEPUTY TO THE CHIEF
OF STAFF
FROM:
C. BOYDEN GRAY one
COUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT
SUBJECT:
Attached Response to Mr. Lambers
Per your request, attached for your signature is a follow-up
response to Mr. Lambers, who wants to give the President a custom
built yacht.
Attachment
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
November 30, 1989
Dear Mr. Lambers:
Thank you for your follow-up letter of November 17 describing the
advantages of your proposed gift to the United States of a 200
foot custom-built yacht for the President's use.
Your letter certainly presents an impressive account of the
advantages of having a Presidential yacht. I fear, however, that
we are not likely to use a yacht to the degree your letter
suggests. As such, it seems inadvisable to acquire a luxury
craft of the sort you describe. For these among other reasons,
we must again decline your extremely thoughtful and generous
offer.
With best regards.
Sincerely,
Andrew Jr.
And Card
Assistant to the President and
Deputy to the Chief of Staff
Mr. Tom Lambers
Lambers Yacht Design
P.O. Box 117
Macatawa, MI 49434
Rec'd 11/22/23
ANC
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
November 21, 2009
MEMORANDUM FOR ANDREW H. CARD, JR.
ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT AND DEPUTY TO THE CHIEF
OF STAFF
FROM:
JOHN P. SCHMITZ ips
DEPUTY COUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT
SUBJECT:
Advice on ACYPL-funded South America Trip
In connection with our discussion about the proposed trip to
South America later this week by Ruth Kistler of
Intergovernmental Affairs, this is the analysis you requested
about the legal framework for considering whether a trip by a
White House staff member can be funded by an outside
organization.
In analyzing a proposed trip, the first question is whether an
activity is personal or official, that is, whether or not the
staff member would be participating as a representative of the
White House or whether the trip is a private activity. Because
of the nature of the activities organized by the American Council
of Young Political Leaders (ACYPL), the proposed South American
trip cannot be considered personal. ACYPL selects for its
delegations only elected or appointed officials, and Ms. Kistler,
like the other members of the delegation (and as with past
delegations) is listed by her official title and would interact
with foreign officials as a White House staff member. There is
simply no way this can be construed as a private activity.
To the extent that a trip cannot be undertaken as a private
activity, a determination needs to be made as to whether it is an
appropriate and worthwhile official activity. Assuming that to
be the case, there is only limited authority for White House
staff members to accept expenses for official travel from private
sources. One relevant law authorizes acceptance of expenses from
a 501 (c) (3) for attendance at conferences or meetings, assuming
there is no appearance of impropriety.
Assessing appearance of impropriety is a case-by-case thing, but
in general, an appearance of impropriety is most likely to exist
in circumstances in which an entity paying for a trip is seeking
a significant official action from the traveler. In addition,
the less clearly demonstrable the official White House purpose
behind a given trip, the more likely an appearance problem to
exist.
The bottom line is that Ms. Kistler may properly join the ACYPL
delegation if appropriate White House officials determine that
U.S. government interests will be served by her doing so and if
there is no consequent appearance of impropriety in her accepting
travel expenses from ACYPL. Ordinarily, this is a judgment made
by the individual traveller and his/her supervisor. In the case
of foreign trips, White House procedures require further
approvals.
Ms. Kistler appears to be a relatively lower level member of the
White House staff. As we understand it, her duties include
administrative/secretarial work as well as some substantive
liaison duties. (This contrasts with a previous participant in
an ACYPL-sponsored trip, Bill Canary, who is a Commissioned
Officer and Special Assistant to the President in
Intergovernmental Affairs.) Other participants on the trip --
elected State officials and the Counsel to U.S. Senator Kennedy
-- are much more senior.
On the other hand, I understand that both Bill Canary, Ruth's
supervisor, and Deb Anderson, her second-tier supervisor, believe
that it would be useful both to Ruth and to the White House for
her to participate in this two-week trip.
In view of all of the facts, we defer to you and others for the
substantive judgment whether there is sufficient official purpose
for Ms. Kistler's participation on the trip. From our
perspective, however, this falls in a gray area.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Bill Candary Reth be
spotter
&
my
&
Alland
the
not
with
net
havis
Staff
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
DATE: 11-13-29
TO: Boyden Gray
FROM:
ANDY CARD And
Onlando Broach has been
devied his writ 5\ Habeas
Corpus by the Southern
District of florida. I've
also heard that Orlando is
not likely to appeal.
We may be pressured
to have the President review
the situation if safe haven
cannot be found.
(attached case#99.)
andy Card
THE WHITE HOUSE
AC HAS SEEN
WASHINGTON
October 13, 1989
MEMORANDUM FOR ASSISTANTS TO THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
C. BOYDEN GRAY OMN
COUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT
SUBJECT:
Post-Employment Restrictions for Steve Studdert
As you know, Steve Studdert will no longer be on the White House
staff effective October 14, 1989. Because he is the first person
to depart the White House staff who will be covered by the
statutory one-year "cooling-off" period applicable to Senior
Employees under the Federal criminal code, I thought it would be
useful to provide a summary of the limitations to which he will
be subject during this period.
For one year after departing the government, a Senior Employee
may not communicate -- by phone, letter, in person, or in any
other manner -- with an intent to influence anyone at, his or her
former agency concerning any particular matter pending before
that agency or in which the agency has a direct and substantial
interest. This bar covers both matters involving specific
parties and general policy matters such as legislation. It does
not matter whether the employee previously participated in or was
responsible for the issue, or whether the issue was pending
before he or she left the agency. The statute does not prohibit
communication with Congress, other agencies, the public, or the
press.
The law recognizes that agencies may need to consult with former
Senior Employees and permits only a few other types of contacts.
Permissible communications include:
purely social conversation;
responses to the former agency's request for
information;
personal matters, such as government benefits or
interpretation of the post-employment restrictions; and
statements based on the individual's special knowledge,
provided that the individual is not being paid.
Communications that are or could be construed as advocacy on
behalf of a client are not allowed -- even in response to a
specific question from someone at the former agency. To help
ensure that permissible contacts with a former agency will not be
misperceived, most former Senior Employees keep some kind of a
log of their contacts with their former agencies.
In Steve's case, the legal bar of the one-year cooling-off period
covers his contacts with anyone in the White House Office and the
Office of Policy Development. In accord with the President's
ethics program, Steve will also be observing the same cooling-off
period as to the entire Executive Office of the President.
Although the cooling-off period is the key post-employment
restriction during the first year after the departure of a Senior
Employee, three additional restrictions remain in effect after
the one-year period ends. For your convenience, I have attached
the recently-updated memorandum for prospective Presidential
appointees that describes these additional restrictions.
Please feel free to share this memo with anyone on your staff who
would find it helpful and feel free to contact me or Amy Schwartz
of my staff if you have any questions.
Attachment
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
October 10, 1989
MEMORANDUM FOR PROSPECTIVE APPOINTEES
FROM:
C. BOYDEN GRAY cm
COUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT
SUBJECT:
Post-Government Service Employment Restrictions
Applicable to Former Senior Government Employees
Every prospective government officer or employee should
understand the legal restrictions that will apply following his
or her government service. Federal criminal law imposes several
specific limitations on such activities, and penalties for
violations can include fines of up to $10,000 and imprisonment of
up to two years. The law is designed to preclude former
officials from unfairly exploiting their prior government
employment and affiliations.
Although the law imposes stricter limitations on individuals who
occupy Senior Employee positions, certain prohibitions apply
(with specified exemptions) to all officials and employees of the
Executive Branch, the independent agencies, and the District of
Columbia, including most special government employees. In
addition, individuals who become "procurement officials" within
the meaning of the new Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act,
are subject to added post-employment restrictions. Some depart-
ments and agencies are also subject to more stringent post-
employment restrictions, which are not described in this
memorandum. Applicable codes of professional ethics may also
impose additional requirements.
I. THE GENERAL FEDERAL CRIMINAL LAW: 18 U.S.C. 207
A. Overview
Section 207 of Title 18 of the United States Code, as amended,
("the Act"), a copy of which is provided as Attachment A,
contains four basic prohibitions:
1. The Lifetime Bar: A lifetime bar against a former
government employee acting as a representative in
any particular matter involving specific parties
in which he or she personally and substantially
participated during government service.
2. Two-Year Official Responsibility Bar: A two-year
restriction on former government employees acting as a
representative in any particular matter involving
specific parties over which he or she had official
responsibility during his or her last year of
government service (or in certain cases, earlier).
3.
Two-Year Bar on Assisting Representation by
Personal Presence; Senior Employees Only: A two-
year restriction on a former Senior Employee
assisting, by personal presence, in a
representation before the United States in any
particular matter involving specific parties in
which he or she participated personally and
substantially during government service.
4.
One-Year Cooling-Off Period; Senior Employees
Only: A one-year cooling-off period on a former
Senior Employee, precluding any communications
with the intent to influence his or her former
department or agency on any particular matter,
regardless of prior involvement.
Given the law's complexity, the above summaries are necessarily
incomplete, and each restriction is described below in more
detail. I also recommend strongly that you become familiar with
the details of these restrictions, as set forth in Office of
Personnel Management regulations at 5 C.F.R. Part 737. Limited
excerpts from these regulations are set out in Attachment B and
referenced in the discussion that follows. Copies of the
complete regulations are available on request from my office.
B. The Four Restrictions
1. The Lifetime Bar
The Act creates a lifetime prohibition against a former employee
acting as a representative in particular matters involving
specific parties in which (a) he or she personally and
substantially participated as a government employee, and in which
(b) the government has a direct and substantial interest. When
this bar applies, the former employee may not, as to the specific
matter covered, act as agent for, or otherwise represent, anyone
in any appearance before a court, department, agency, or
government official or employee. In addition, he or she may not
communicate in any way with the U.S. government on such matters
if the communication is made with the intent to influence the
receiver. Communications to Congress are generally not limited.
This restriction does not bar involvement or assistance in any
matter; it simply limits the former employee's communications
with the U.S. government about the matter.
2
The lifetime bar only applies to particular matters involving
specific parties. (The regulation defining this term is reprint-
ed at Attachment B.) Such a matter is typically a specific
proceeding affecting the legal rights of parties or an isolatable
transaction or set of transactions between identifiable parties.
A former employee's prior participation in government rulemaking,
legislation, policy formulation, or other matters of general
applicability does not trigger this restriction.
The lifetime bar also applies only to matters in which the former
employee was personally and substantially involved. (The
regulatory definition of this term is reprinted at Attachment B.)
Personal involvement may be direct or through the participation
of a subordinate when directed by the employee. Substantial
involvement requires involvement that is significant to the
matter or appears so, and that is more than official responsib-
ility and more than perfunctory. Note that brief involvement at
a critical stage in a matter may be highly influential and hence
substantial, while lengthy peripheral involvement may be
insubstantial. Participation in mere ancillary matters would not
be substantial, unless the ancillary matter proved to be the
subject of the later proposed representation.
In short, if an employee participated personally and
substantially in a particular matter involving specific parties,
he or she is forever precluded from representing anyone in any
proceeding concerning the matter in which the U.S. government has
a direct and substantial interest.
2. The Two-Year Official Responsibility Bar
The Act also contains a two-year restriction on a former
employee's representative involvement in any particular matter
involving specific parties that was under his or her official
responsibility during the last year of government service (or in
some cases, earlier, as described below). During that two-year
period, the former employee may not act as attorney or other
representative in the matter or otherwise communicate with the
U.S. government with the intent to influence the recipient. As
is the case with the lifetime bar described above, this two-year
bar only applies to particular matters involving specific parties
and does not prohibit behind-the-scenes advice or contacts with
Congress.
Matters covered by this two-year bar are those over which the
former employee had official responsibility. (A definition of
this term is reprinted at Attachment B.) In general, official
responsibility encompasses matters for which an official had
3
direct administrative or operating authority to approve,
disapprove, or otherwise direct government actions. Ordinarily,
the scope of the former employee's responsibility will be
determined by his or her job description, regulation, or a
relevant statute.
It is irrelevant whether the former employee actually knows that
a matter was under his or her official responsibility. If an
employee suspects that a matter may have been under his or her
official responsibility, he or she must make further inquiries.
The two-year bar is measured from the end of an official's
responsibility for a given area. That is, as to matters within
his or her area of responsibility during the year immediately
prior to leaving Federal service, an official is barred from
representation, for two years from the end of his or her Federal
service. In addition, if a former official's responsibilities
changed some time before the end of his or her Federal service,
he or she is also subject to the bar as to matters within the
area of former responsibility, until two years after the former
responsibility ended. (For example, if an individual switched
jobs, spent six months in the new job, and then left the
government, the individual would have to wait a year and a half
before the bar expired as to the first job and six more months
before the bar expired as to the second job.)
3. Two-year Bar on Assisting in Representation by Personal
Presence; Senior Employees Only
A Senior Employee is also barred for two years after government
employment from assisting by personal presence in representation
of any person in a particular matter involving specific parties
in which the former Senior Employee participated personally and
substantially. By statute, a Senior Employee includes: (1) any
individual paid at the Executive Level; (2) certain high-level
military officials; and (3) individuals in positions that are
expressly designated as Senior Employees. (Designations may be
made from among positions in the Senior Executive Service, those
paid at the GS-17 level or higher, and those at certain military
pay grades.) Virtually all Presidential appointee positions are
Senior Employee positions.
Like the lifetime bar described above, this restriction covers
only particular matters involving specific parties and only those
in which the former Senior Employee was personally and
substantially involved. (See definitions of those terms above
and in Attachment B.)
The two-year bar on assisting by personal presence in
4
representation does not prevent Senior Employees from providing
assistance in particular matters in which they were previously
personally and substantially involved. They cannot, however,
make a personal appearance before the U.S. government in such a
matter. For example, if a former Senior Employee joined a law
firm, he or she could advise his or her partners privately about
a particular matter covered by this restriction, but he or she
could not be a part of a law firm delegation visiting a Federal
agency to discuss the issue. This would be true even if he or
she did not speak to the Federal officials at the meeting but
only provided silent assistance to another person from the firm.
4. The One-Year Cooling-Off Period: Senior Employees Only
Senior Employees (as defined above), are also covered by a one-
year "cooling-off" period following the termination of their
government employment. During that year, a Senior Employee may
not represent anyone before, nor communicate with an intent to
influence anyone at, his or her former department or agency
concerning any particular matter pending before that department
or agency or in which the agency has a direct and substantial
interest.
This bar applies regardless whether the employee previously
participated in or had responsibility for the matter, and
regardless whether the matter was pending when he or she was
employed at the agency. Unlike the three preceding bars, this
cooling-off period includes communications involving policy
matters such as legislation or rulemaking; it is not limited to
particular matters involving specific parties. As in the other
bars, however, behind-the-scenes advice to an outside party is
not prohibited.
Although the bar covers almost all Senior Employees and their
activities, there are certain exemptions. For example, it does
not apply to former employees who are subsequently elected to
state or local office, or become employees of state and local
government agencies or of certain institutions of higher
education, hospitals, or medical research foundations, as to
contacts on behalf of those new employers. The statute also does
not prohibit communication with or representation before
Congress, other agencies, the public, or the press. (It should
be recognized, however, that all of the units within the
Executive Office of the President will be considered to be a
single agency for the purpose of this restriction.) The law does
not preclude a former Senior Employee from contact with his or
her former agency if the contact is required by law. In
addition, the law sets forth methods by which the one-year bar
may apply to less than the entirety of a department or agency.
5
The law contains numerous miscellaneous provisions for obtaining
special exemptions, making certain exempt communications,
testifying in court, and barring partners of current employees
from certain activities.
Because the Act covers such a broad range of conduct and carries
such serious penalties for violation, it is imperative that a
former employee carefully consult the law and the implementing
regulations. Also attached for your reference is a more detailed
memorandum on the subject, which was prepared by the Office of
Government Ethics. (See Attachment C.)
II. OFFICE OF FEDERAL PROCUREMENT POLICY ACT
The Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act, which took effect
in July 1989, imposes a number of requirements, including new
restrictions on negotiations for employment and post-employment
activities of procurement officials (that is, those involved in
government contracting).
A procurement official is defined as any civilian or military
official or employee who has participated personally and
substantially in a particular agency procurement, including all
officials and employees responsible for reviewing or approving
the procurement. Contractors, subcontractors, consultants,
experts and advisers acting for or advising an agency can be
procurement officials.
The law requires that employees must certify their knowledge of
these requirements before acting as a procurement official.
Accordingly, if you would be acting as a procurement official in
your prospective position, your agency will provide you with
further information on these requirements at the appropriate
time. The restrictions that apply to negotiations for employment
and post-employment restrictions for procurement officials are
described in brief at Attachment D. A more detailed summary is
available on request, as are copies of the Act itself and the
applicable regulations.
*
*
*
Please feel free to call on my office for further information on
any of these requirements during the clearance process. Once you
are in office, you can consult the Designated Agency Ethics
Official at your agency for further information or assistance.
Attachments
6
ATTACHMENT A
§ 207. Disqualification of former officers and employees; disqualification of
partners of current officers and employees
(a) Whoever, having been an officer or employee of the executive branch of the
United States Government, of any independent agency of the United States, or of the
District of Columbia, including a special Government employee, after his employ-
ment has ceased, knowingly acts as agent or attorney for, or otherwise represents,
any other person (except the United States), in any formal or informal appearance
before, or, with the intent to influence, makes any oral or written communication on
behalf of any other person (except the United States) to
(1) any department, agency, court, court-martial, or any civil, military, or
naval commission of the United States or the District of Columbia, or any officer
or employee thereof, and
(2) in connection with any judicial or other proceeding, application, request
for a ruling or other determination, contract, claim, controversy, investigation,
charge, accusation, arrest, or other particular matter involving a specific party
or parties in which the United States or the District of Columbia is a party or
has a direct and substantial interest, and
(3) in which he participated personally and substantially as an officer or
employee through decision, approval, disapproval, recommendation, the render-
ing of advice, investigation or otherwise, while so employed; or
(b) Whoever, (i) having been so employed, within two years after his employment
has ceased, knowingly acts as agent or attorney for, or otherwise represents, any
other person (except the United States), in any formal or informal appearance
before, or, with the intent to influence, makes any oral or written communication on
behalf of any other person (except the United States) to, or (ii) having been so
employed and as specified in subsection (d) of this section, within two years after his
employment has ceased, knowingly represents or aids, counsels, advises, consults, or
assists in representing any other person (except the United States) by personal
presence at any formal or informal appearance before-
(1) any department, agency, court, court-martial, or any civil, military or
naval commission of the United States or the District of Columbia, or any officer
or employee thereof, and
(2) in connection with any judicial or other proceeding, application, request
for a ruling or other determination, contract, claim, controversy, investigation,
charge, accusation, arrest or other particular matter involving a specific party or
parties in which the United States or the District of Columbia is a party or has a
direct and substantial interest, and
(3) as to (i), which was actually pending under his official responsibility as an
officer or employee within a period of one year prior to the termination of such
responsibility, or, as to (ii), in which he participated personally and substantially
as an officer or employee; or
(c) Whoever, other than a special Government employee who serves for less than
sixty days in a given calendar year, having been so employed as specified in
subsection (d) of this section, within one year after such employment has ceased,
knowingly acts as agent or attorney for, or otherwise represents, anyone other than
the United States in any formal or informal appearance before, or, with the intent to
influence, makes any oral or written communication on behalf of anyone other than
the United States, to-
(1) the department or agency in which he served as an officer or employee, or
any officer or employee thereof, and
(2) in connection with any judicial, rulemaking, or other proceeding, applica-
tion, request for a ruling or other determination, contract, claim, controversy,
investigation, charge, accusation, arrest, or other particular matter, and
(3) which is pending before such department or agency or in which such
department or agency has a direct and substantial interest-
shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned for not more than two years, or
both.
(d) (1) Subsection (c) of this section shall apply to a person employed—
(A) at a rate of pay specified in or fixed according to subchapter П of chapter
53 of title 5, United States Code, or a comparable or greater rate of pay under
other authority;
(B) on active duty as a commissioned officer of a uniformed service assigned
to pay grade of 0-9 or above as described in section 201 of title 37, United
States Code; or
(C) in a position which involves significant decision-making or supervisory
responsibility, as designated under this subparagraph by the Director of the
Office of Government Ethics, in consultation with the department or agency
concerned. Only positions which are not covered by subparagraphs (A) and (B)
above, and for which the basic rate of pay is equal to or greater than the basic
rate of pay for GS-17 of the General Schedule prescribed by section 5332 of title
5, United States Code, or positions which are established within the Senior
Executive Service pursuant to the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, or positions
of active duty commissioned officers of the uniformed services assigned to pay
0-7 or 0-8, as described in section 201 of title 37, United States Code, may be
designated. As to persons in positions designated under this subparagraph, the
Director may limit the restrictions of subsection (c) to permit a former officer or
employee, who served in a separate agency or bureau within a department or
agency, to make appearances before or communications to persons in an
unrelated agency or bureau, within the same department or agency, having
separate and distinct subject matter jurisdiction, upon a determination by the
Director that there exists no potential for use of undue influence or unfair
advantage based on past government service. On an annual basis, the Director
of the Office of Government Ethics shall review the designations and determina-
tions made under this subparagraph and, in consultation with the department or
agency concerned, make such additions and deletions as are necessary. Depart-
ments and agencies shall cooperate to the fullest extent with the Director of the
Office of Government Ethics in the exercise of his responsibilities under this
paragraph.
(2) The prohibition of subsection (c) shall not apply to appearances, communica-
tions, or representation by a former officer or employee, who is
(A) an elected official of a State or local government, or
(B) whose principal occupation or employment is with (i) an agency or
instrumentality of a State or local government, (ii) an accredited, degree-grant-
ing institution of higher education, as defined in section 1201(a) of the Higher
Education Act of 1965, or (iii) a hospital or medical research organization,
exempted and defined under section 501(c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code of
1954, and the appearance, communication, or representation is on behalf of such
government, institution, hospital, or organization.
(e) For the purposes of subsection (c), whenever the Director of the Office of
Government Ethics determines that a separate statutory agency or bureau within a
department or agency exercises functions which are distinct and separate from the
remaining functions of the department or agency, the Director shall by rule
designate such agency or bureau as a separate department or agency; except that
such designation shall not apply to former heads of designated bureaus or agencies,
or former officers and employees of the department or agency whose official
responsibilities included supervision of said agency or bureau.
(f) The prohibitions of subsections (a), (b), and (c) shall not apply with respect to
the making of communications solely for the purpose of furnishing scientific or
technological information under procedures acceptable to the department or agency
concerned, or if the head of the department or agency concerned with the particular
matter, in consultation with the Director of the Office of Government Ethics, makes
a certification, published in the Federal Register, that the former officer or employee
has outstanding qualifications in a scientific, technological, or other technical disci-
pline, and is acting with respect to a particular matter which requires such qualifica-
tions, and that the national interest would be served by the participation of the
former officer or employee.
(g) Whoever, being a partner of an officer or employee of the executive branch of
the United States Government, of any independent agency of the United States, or of
the District of Columbia, including a special Government employee, acts as agent or
attorney for anyone other than the United States before any department, agency,
court, court-martial, or any civil, military, or naval commission of the United States
or the District of Columbia, or any officer or employee thereof, in connection with
any judicial or other proceeding, application, request for a ruling or other determina-
tion, contract, claim, controversy, investigation, charge, accusation, arrest, or other
particular matter in which the United States or the District of Columbia is a party or
has a direct and substantial interest, and in which such officer or employee or special
Government employee participates or has participated personally and substantially
as an officer or employee through decision, approval, disapproval, recommendation,
the rendering of advice, investigation, or otherwise, or which is the subject of his
official responsibility, shall be fined not more than $5,000, or imprisoned for not
more than one year, or both.
(h) Nothing in this section shall prevent a former officer or employee from giving
testimony under oath, or from making statements required to be made under penalty
of perjury.
(i) The prohibition contained in subsection (c) shall not apply to appearances or
communications by a former officer or employee concerning matters of a personal
and individual nature, such as personal income taxes or pension benefits; nor shall
the prohibition of that subsection prevent a former officer or employee from making
or providing a statement, which is based on the former officer's or employee's own
special knowledge in the particular area that is the subject of the statement,
provided that no compensation is thereby received, other than that regularly provid-
ed for by law or regulation for witnesses.
(j) If the head of the department or agency in which the former officer or
employee served finds, after notice and opportunity for a hearing, that such former
officer or employee violated subsection (a), (b), or (c) of this section, such department
or agency head may prohibit that person from making, on behalf of any other person
(except the United States), any informal or formal appearance before, or, with the
intent to influence, any oral or written communication to, such department or agency
on a pending matter of business for a period not to exceed five years, or may take
other appropriate disciplinary action. Such disciplinary action shall be subject to
review in an appropriate United States district court. No later than six months after
the effective date of this Act, departments and agencies shall, in consultation with
the Director of the Office of Government Ethics, establish procedures to carry out
this subsection.
(As amended Pub.L. 95-521, Title V, § 501(a), Oct. 26, 1978, 92 Stat. 1864; Pub.L. 96-28, §§ 1, 2,
June 22, 1979, 93 Stat. 76.)
ATTACHMENT B
EXCERPTS FROM REGULATIONS
PARTICULAR MATTER INVOLVING SPECIFIC PARTIES
Section 737.5
(c) "Particular matter involving a
specific party or parties" (1) Specific
Example 5. An agency attorney partici-
matters us. policy matters. The prohi-
pates in drafting a standard form contract
bitions of subsections (a) and (b) of 18
and certain "standard terms and clauses"
U.S.C. 207, are based on the former
for use in future contracts. He is not there-
Government employee's prior partici.
after barred from representing a person in a
pation in or responsibility for a "judi-
dispute involving the application of such a
cial or other proceeding. application,
"standard term or clause" in a particular
request for a ruling or other determi-
contract in which he did not participate as a
nation. contract. claim, controversy,
Government employee.
investigation, charge. accusation,
arrest, or other particular matter in-
volving a specific party or parties" in
which the United States is a party or
has a direct and substantial interest.
Such a matter typically involves a spe-
cific proceeding affecting the legal
rights of the parties or an insolatable
transaction or related set of transac-
tions between identifiable parties.
Rulemaking. legislation. the formula-
tion of general policy. standards or ob-
jectives, or other action of general ap-
plication is not such a matter. There-
fore, a former Government employee
may represent another person in con-
nection with a particular matter in-
volving a specific party even If rules or
policies which he or she had a role in
establishing are involved in the pro-
ceeding.
Example 1: A Government employee for.
mulated the policy objectives of an energy
conservation program. He is not restricted
from later representing a university which
seeks a grant or contract for work emerging
from such a program.
Example 2: A Government employee re-
views and approves a specific city's applica-
tion for Federal assistance for a renewal
project. After leaving Government service,
she may not represent the city in relation to
that project.
Example 3: An employee is regularly in-
volved in the formulation of policy. proce-
dures and regulations governing departmen-
tal procurement and acquisition functions.
Participation in such activities does not re-
strict the employee after leaving the Gov-
ernment as to particular cases involving the
application of such policies, procedures. or
regulations. Example 4: An employee of the Office of
Management and Budget participates sub-
stantially on the merits of a decision to
reduce the funding level of a program.
which has the effect of reducing the
amount of money which certain cities re-
ceive to conduct youth work programs.
After leaving the Government she may rep-
resent any of the cities in securing funds for
its youth program. since her participation
was in connection with a program. not a
particular matter involving specific parties.
EXCERPTS FROM REGULATIONS
PERSONAL AND SUBSTANTIAL PARTICIPATION
Section 737.5
(d) "Participate personally and sub-
stantially"-(1) Basic requirements.
The restrictions of section 207(a)
apply only to those matters in which a
former Government employee had
"personal and substantial participa.
tion.' exercised 'through decision, ap-
proval. disapproval. recommendation.
the rendering of advice, investigation
or otherwise." To participate "person-
ally" means directly, and Includes the
participation of a subordinate when
actually directed by the former Gov-
ernment employee in the matter.
"Substantially," means that the em-
ployee's involvement must be of sig-
nificance to the matter. or form a
basis for a reasonable appearance of
such significance. It requires more
than official responsibility. knowledge,
perfunctory involvement, or involve-
ment on an administrative or periph-
eral issue. A finding of substantiality
should be based not only on the effort
devoted to a matter. but on the impor-
tance of the effort. While a series of
peripheral involvements may be insub-
stantial. the single act of approving or
participation in a critical step may be
substantial. It is essential that the par-
ticipation be related to a "particular
matter involving a specific party."
(See paragraph (c) of this section.)
(See also I 737.9(f) of this part.)
Example 1: If an officer personally ap-
proves the departmental budget. he does
not participate substantially in the approval
of all items contained in the budget. His
participation is substantial only in those
cases where a budget item is actually put in
issue. Even then. the former Government
employee is not disqualified with respect to
an item If it is a general program rather
than a particular matter involving a specific
party. The former Government employee
may. however. have official responsibility
for such matters. (See I 737.7(b).)
Example 2: A Government lawyer is not in
charge of. nor has official responsibility for
a particular case. but is frequently consult-
ed as to filings. discovery. and strategy.
Such an individual has personally and sub-
stantially participated in the matter.
EXCERPTS FROM REGULATIONS
OFFICIAL RESPONSIBILITY
8737.7 Two-year restriction on any
former Government employee's acting
as representative as to a particular
matter for which the employee had of.
ficial responsibility.
(b) "Official responsibility"-(1) Def-
inition. "Official responsibility" is de-
fined in 18 U.S.C. 202 as, "the direct
administrative or operating authority,
whether intermediate or final. and
either exercisable alone or with
others. and either personally or
through subordinates, to approve, dis-
approve, or otherwise direct Govern-
ment actions."
(2) Determining official responsibil-
ity. Ordinarily, the scope of an em-
ployee's "official responsibility" is de-
termined by those areas assigned by
statute, regulation. Executive Order,
job description or delegation of au-
thority. All particular matters under
consideration in an agency are under
the "official responsibility" of the
agency head. and each is under that of
any intermediate supervisor having re-
sponsibility for an employee who actu-
ally participates in the matter within
the scope of his or her duties.
(3) Ancillary matters and official re-
sponsibility. "Administrative" author-
ity as used in the foregoing definition
means authority for planning. organiz-
ing and controlling matters rather
than authority to review or make deci-
sions on ancillary aspects of a matter
such as the regularity of budgeting
procedures. public or community rela-
tions aspects, or equal employment op-
portunity considerations. Responsibil-
ity for such an ancillary consideration
does not constitute responsibility for
the particular matter. except when
such a consideration is also the subject
of the employee's proposed represen-
tation.
Example 1: An agency's comptroller would
not have official responsibility for all pro-
grams in the agency. even though she must
review the budget. and all such programs
are contained in the budget.
Example 2: Within two years after termi-
nating employment. an agency's former
comptroller is asked to represent Q Compa-
ny in a dispute arising under a contract
which was in effect during the comptroller's
tenure. The dispute concerns an accounting
formula. under the contract. a matter as to
which a subordinate division of the comp.
troller's office was consulted. She may not
represent Q Company on this matter.
ATTACHMENT C
TITLE V - PART 737 - FINAL REGULATIONS CONCERNING
POST EMPLOYMENT CONFLICT OF INTEREST
1.
GENERAL
A.
The Ethics in Government Act (Pub. L. 95-521) (the Act) broadened and
added new restrictions to the existing provisions of 18 U.S.C. $207, which
generally prohibit 8 former Government employee from acting as another
person's representative to the Government in matters in which the employee
had been involved while in the Government.
1.
Post-Employment Generally. It is important to note that nothing
in the Act requires a former employee to decline employment with any
organization regardless of dealings with that organization while a
Government employee.
2.
Required Nexus. With the exception of the 207(c) bar, what is
prohibited depends upon the former employee's degree of involvement
in the matter while with the Government and whether he or she was
one of a specified group of high-renking employees ("Senior
Employees").
D.
GENERAL RESTRICTIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL FORMER EMPLOYEES
A.
Permanent Bar. (5 C.F.R. 737.5) After leaving Government
employment, a former employee may not serve as another person's
representative to the Government on a case, contractual matter or other
similar application or proceeding, formal or informal, in which he or she
participated personally and substantially while a Government employee.
1.
There are two important Limitations to this prohibition which
attacks "switching sides." First, the foriner employee is not restricted
unless the matter in which he or she previously participated v.as (i) a
"particular matter involving specific parties" and (ii) is the same
matter in which he or she now attempts to represent another before
the Government. Thus, where an employee's prior involvement was
limited to, say, the design of a program policy, general rulemaking. or
technical concepts, he or she is not restricted by this prohibition a to
any specific matters which may involve his or her prior work. Second,
this bar requires that the employees have been personally involved in
the matter in a substantial way.
2. The kind of representation that is restricted includes not only
acting as another's attorney or agent, but any other kind of
representation or communication made with the intent to influence
the United States. This includes promotional and contract
representatives.
B. Two-Year Bar. (5 C.F.R. 737.7) This is basically the same bar as
above, except that it applies for only two years and covers all particular
matters which were actually pending under the former employees "official
responsibility" in his or her last year of Government service. An employee's
official responsibility is usually defined by statute, regulation, written
delegation of authority or job description.
1.
There may be times when a former employee is in doubt as to
whether a matter was under his or her official responsibility, whether
it is the same "particular matter" as that with which he or she was
involved or whether the United States still has an interest in the
matter. His or her former agency has an obligation to advise promptly
on those questions as provided in the regulations issued by the Office
of Personnel Management (5 CFR 737).
ш. RESTRICTIONS APPLICABLE ONLY TO SENIOR EMPLOYEES
A. Two-Year Bar on As isting in Representing. (5 C.F.R. 737.9) For two
years after leaving Govern.nent employment, 8 former Senior Employee may
not assist in the representation of another person by personal presence at an
appearance before the Government on any particular matter in which he or
she could not act as the person's actual representative because of his or her
substantial personal participation in the matter while in Government.
1.
It is important to note that this restriction does not bar a Senior
Employee from assisting on a matter in which he or she participated
while in Government but only from assisting "in representing" while
personally present at a formal or informal appearance. Thus, such
employee could work on a contract with which he or she was involved
while in Government and could manage a company, institution or
university where such former employee's decisions determine the
manner in which his or her organization will perform under &
Government contract or grant.
B. One-Year Bar on Attempts to Influence Former Agency. (5 C.F.R.
737.11) For one year after leaving Government employment, a former Senior
Employee may not represent anyone in an attempt to influence his or her
former agency on a matter pending before, or of substantial interest to,
such agency.
1.
This "revolving door" provision is different from the previous
restrictions in the following ways:
a.
It does not require that the former employee have had any
prior involvement in the matter.
b. The matters covered are bronder; they need not involve
specific parties, so the former employee could not, for example,
attempt to influence rulemaking or policy formation.
C. It is limited to contact with his or her former agency; he or
she may appear before, or act to influence, any other part of the
Government in regard to a matter not otherwise covered.
d. The matter must be pending before, or of substantial
interest to, his or her former agency.
e. The restriction covers the former employee's self-
representation.
2.
There are a number of matters to which the restriction does not
apply-among these are:
a.
Purely social or informational communications.
b.
Transmission of filings which do not require Governmental
action.
c.
Personal matters.
d.
Representing oneself in any judicial or administrative
proceeding.
e. Any expression of personal views where the former
employee has no pecuniary interest.
f.
Response to the former agency's request for information.
8.
Participation as the principal researcher under Government
grants.
IV. WHAT IS A SENIOR EMPLOYEE? (5 C.F.R. 737.25)
A. There are four groups of Senior Employees, two are named
automatically by statute: (i) civilians paid at the Executive Level and (ii)
active duty uniformed service officers serving in grades 0-9 and above. Two
other groups, (iii) civilians at or equivalent to GS-17 or above and (iv)
1
uniformed service officers in grades 0-7 and 0-8, having significant decision-
making or supervisory responsibility, must first be designated by the
Director of the Office of Government Ethics before they are chargeable as
Senior Employees.
1.
Those automatically covered by the statute were made subject
to the Act's special restrictions on Senior Employees as of July 1, 1979.
2.
Those designated by the Director, OGE, were covered as of
February 28, 1980.
V.
LIMITATION ON RESTRICTIONS OF 18 U.S.C. S207(c) (5 C.F.R. 737.13)
A. Methods. Two methods exist for limiting the application of 207(c) to
less than the entirety of a department of agency.
1.
Designation of separate statutory agencies or bureaus under the
provisions of 18 U.S.C. 5207(e).
2.
Designation of non-statutory separate components under the
provisions of 18 U.S.C. $207(d)(1)(C).
B. Designation Procedure. Designation of separate statutory agencies
and bureaus as well as non-statutory components are to be made by the
Director, Office of Government Ethics in consultation with the head of the
agency concerned.
1.
Agencies may recommend such designations to the Director,
Office of Government Ethics.
2.
Designations are discretionary.
3.
Current designations are set forth in 45 Fed. Reg. 7407, 7419-
7420 (1980).
C. Section 207(e) Designations. If a statutory component is designated as
"separate," generally, Senior Employees of such component and Senior
Employees of the parent agency are not subject to the 207(c) bar as to each
others agency.
1.
Cavent. The 207(c) bar remains applicable to the former head of
a "separate" subordinate agency and to former "Senior Employees" of
the parent agency whose official responsibility included supervision of
the subordinate agency.
D.
Section 207(d)(1)(C) Designations. If a non-statutory component is
designated as "separate," then Senior Employees of such component are not
subject to the 207(c) bur as to other agencies, burenus or offices of the
parent agency which have separate and distinct subject matter jurisdiction
from the agency or burcau in which such Senior Employees served..
1.
Caveat. The 207(c) bar remains applicable (i) to former Senior
Employees designated by statute (207(d)(1)(A) and 207(d)(1)(B)), and (ii)
to former Senior F mployees of such component with respect to those
bureaus and offices within the parent agency responsible for the
supervision or control of such separate component.
2.
Note additional qualifications in the designations set forth in
$737.32.
3.
Unlike separate agencies designated pursuant to $207(e), the
limited application of S207(c) may be available for the hesd of &
separate non-statutory component, as determined by the Director,
Office of Government Ethics.
VI. EXEMPTIONS - GENERAL
A.
Communications made solely for the purpose of furnishing scientific
and technological information pursuant to agency procedures are exempt
from the prohibition of $207 of title 18 U.S.C.
1.
Agencies have the primary responsibility for developing
acceptable procedures for such exemptions.
B.
A former employee may personally be exempted from the restrictions
on post employment activity if the agency head, in consultation with the
(
Director, Office of Government Ethics, executes a certification, published
in the Federal Register, the: such former employee:
1.
Possesses outstanding qualifications in a scientific,
technological, or other technical discipline;
2. Is acting in respect to a particular matter requiring such
- qualifications; and
3. That the national interest would be served by such former
employees participation.
VII. EXEMPTIONS - SPECIFIC
A.
The one-year bar found in $207(c) shall not apply to representations on
new matters by a former Senior Employee who is:
1. An elected State or local government official, acting on behalf of
such government, or
2.
Regularly employed by (i) an agency or instrumentality of a
State or local government (ii) an accredited degree granting institution
of higher education, or (iii) a non-profit hospital or medical research
organization, acting on behalf of such organization(s).
VIII. OTHER IMPORTANT FEATURES
A. Fair Notice. There is a "fair notice" provision which ensures that
employees who continue in Government employment in reliance on the
regulations will not suddenly be made subject to any future changes.
Changes which create greater restrictions do not become applicable to an
employee unless he or she remains with the Government longer than 5
months after the new rule is first published in final form.
B. Effective Dates. The broadening of the provisions applicable to all
employees became effective July 1, 1979. The new provisions applicable to
Senior Employees took effect as to Executive level civilian employees and
uniformed service officers of the grade of 0-9 and above on July 1, 1979.
Those civilians at GS-17 or above, or in the Senior Executive Service and
uniformed service officers in grades 0-7 and 0-8 designated by the Director,
OGE, are subject to the Senior Employee restrictions effective February 28,
1980.
Authority: Title v, Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (Pub. L. 95-521)
5 C.F.R. Part 737
ATTACHMENT D
RESTRICTIONS ON NEGOTIATION FOR EMPLOYMENT AND
POST-EMPLOYMENT ACTIVITIES OF PROCUREMENT OFFICIALS
I. Limitations on Negotiations for Employment
Ordinarily, a Federal employee may not participate personally and
substantially in a particular matter (including a policy matter)
involving or having a direct and predictable effect on an entity
with which the employee is negotiating for employment. See 18
U.S.C. 208. This requirement is typically met by the employee's
recusing himself or herself from such matters -- i.e., refraining
from participation in such matters.
Under the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act, a procurement
official is outright prohibited, during the conduct of any
Federal agency procurement of property or services, from
knowingly soliciting, accepting, or discussing, directly or
indirectly, future employment or business with a competing
contractor. Recusal is not permitted (although this point is
currently under review in Congress).
II. Post-Employment Restrictions
No government officer or employee who participated personally and
substantially in the conduct of a Federal agency procurement or
personally reviewed an award, modification, or extension of any
contract for such procurement, may --
(1) participate personally and substantially on behalf of
the competing contractor in the performance of the contract;
or
(2) participate on behalf of a competing contractor in any
negotiations leading to the award, modification or extension
of a contract for such procurement
for two years after the last date of his or her personal and
substantial involvement.
III. Penalties
Penalties for violating these sections may include administrative
action, up to and including removal, civil penalties of up to
$100,000, and criminal penalties, including fines and
imprisonment of up to five years.