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
323151812
label
Exeter Town Hall 1/15/92 [OA 6095]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
323151812
contentType
document
title
Exeter Town Hall 1/15/92 [OA 6095]
citationUrl
identifierLocal
13599-003
collections
Records of the White House Office of Speechwriting (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Speech Draft Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
323151812
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
dd5bd7591bdf75ab
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
S
S
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential
Library Staff.
Record Group/Collection:
George H.W. Bush Presidential Records
Collection/Office of Origin:
Speechwriting, White House Office of
Series:
Speech File Draft Files
Subseries:
Chron File, 1989-1993
OA/ID Number:
13599
Folder ID Number:
13599-003
Folder Title:
Exeter Town Hall 1/15/92 [OA 6095]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
26
17
5
7
rge Bush, 1992
Administration of George Bush, 1992 / Jan. 15
99
of this. You look
Note: The President spoke at 8:52 a.m. at
These are leaders in the Congress. And they
y; it always has
Pease Air National Guard Base. In his
talk about pledges and all of this. Let me
emarks, he referred to J. Bonnie Newman,
tell you something. I took a pledge when I
as I say, just
member of the Governor's Council, and Ruth
was sworn in, the oath of office, and what
is that in place
L. Griffin, former Assistant to the President
I need a pledge about is to get more Con-
that we haven't
for Management and Administration. The
gressmen and Senators like Senator Smith
y ought to the
text of these excerpted remarks follows the
and Gordon Humphrey, who was in the Sen-
ntally. What are
release as issued by the Office of the Press
ate and is supporting me, and your Con-
es are down. In-
Secretary.
gressman here, Bill Zeliff, and Warren Rud-
is down. Unfor-
man. And then we would be able to control
on is economic
this Federal spending better, and then we
ertheless, that is
would be able to see that we get these tax
ir shape. And
Remarks and a Question-and-Answer
improvements that I've been asking for.
erstand that We
Session at a Town Hall Meeting in
So that's the pledge I want, is the pledge
ccess to foreign
Exeter, New Hampshire
from the people to give us more. And you're
rant.
January 15, 1992
going to have to use your influence out of
ad news, and we
the State because you've done pretty darn
employment and
The President. I am very, very pleased
well in the State in the United States Con-
on it, confidence.
to be back. Mike, how are you? This guy
gress.
ean, we had na-
meets me at Pease every time I come in
So, that was one point I wanted to make.
10.7 percent in
there. [Laughter] Exeter rose-grower.
The other one is that people say, "Well,
confidence was
Let me just say how really pleased I am
you're in trouble in New Hampshire." Well,
People were say-
to be here and to thank you for turning out.
that may be. But I'm here to listen. I'm here
ng to be better
I want to make a couple of comments, and
to take the questions. I'm here to say, "Hey,
cheerleader say-
Den it's mainly questions. Isn't it, Judd?
there's a lot to do in partnership, the Federal
better. I do think
irst, I want to thank the Governor for being
Government, the State government where
ome out of it. But
at my side. You know my and Barbara's affec-
you've got superb leadership, and the people
tion for Governor Judd Gregg and for Hugh
themselves."
hinking people to
otection, to resist
and Kay, old longtime friends who stay in
And of course, we care. And somebody
ical appeal taxing
touch and who have kept me informed of
gave me the analogy of a country-western
a vote or two, but
this State-both of them, both Greggs-of
song about a train, hoping they'd see the light
jobs, investment.
the problems that we face in this State. And
at the end of the tunnel is not a train coming
I'm not talking political; I'm talking about
through. And I trumped it with saying, well,
0 ask for support
hardship for people that are hurting.
remember the Nitty Gritty Dirt Band one,
as well as to listen
And one of the things I'm pleased to be
if you've got any country music people here,
tate that I do feel
able to do here is to at least let the people
"If you're going to see a rainbow, you've got
of this State know that even though I am
to stand a little rain."
Somebody men
President and do have two or three other
Well, New Hampshire has stood more
proud of what she
she knows how to
responsibilities, that when people are hurt-
than its share of rain, job-hurting and the
n he throws up
ing, we care. We get the message there. We
families wondering how they're going to
read the mail; we can understand. And I just
make their ends meet. But there is going to
pressing something
wanted to get that out loud and clear because
be a rainbow out there. There's some fun-
f New Hampshire
we're in a political year, and you hear a lot
damentals that are pretty darn good. And yet,
ve of family, faith,
of people that have discovered New Hamp-
we've got to do better.
is-taking an AIDS
shire for the first time running around trying
And the last point I want to make is I hope
her arms and say,
to say something different. Of course, we
that you will listen to the State of the Union
passion and under-
are.
Message. I have proposed, 3 straight years,
I have a very com-
Secondly, I am very grateful not only to
growth agenda programs. Not some fancy
ole here know that
the Governor but to Senator Bob Smith, Sen-
quick fix that's going to have broad appeal
ate.
ator Rudman, who couldn't be with us-Bob
in an election time, but things that would
at I'd say in conclu
Smith here today-who are doing a superb
stimulate this economy. And now, we're put-
ery, very much. I've
job, and then your Congressman, another
ting this all together again with new additions
dear friend, a man I respect, Bill Zeliff.
to it to take these proposals to the American
100
Jan. 15 / Administration of George Bush, 1992
Administration of G.
people. And then what I hope we can do
ernment in deficit, most every State in than
people are out of
is rally the American people and get the
Union in deficit, and most every municipalias
TA
re, pass this packa
economy moving by sound investment-ori-
in the country in deficit, never mind the
back into politics
ented treatment of the Tax Code.
households, what do we have to do? And I'm
of this political year.
And that is what's needed, and still hold
glad you brought a few, to get the Con-
that's going to get
the line on spending. One of the few benefits
gressmen and the Senators in this country
and of this country 1
of that budget agreement was that we have
to realize when we have millions of people
approach I'm going
caps on the excesses of Federal spending,
without jobs, homeless, without health care,
Now, we had one
those things that can be controlled. And I
and these fellows have the gall to vote them-
over there.
want to keep them there. I do not want to
selves a raise, what can we do other than
AIDS
bust the one restraint that is on the spenders
vote out every incumbent? I hate to see that,
in the United States Congress.
but I mean, what do we have to do to get
Q. We had a WOI
who led us in health
So having said that, I hope you'll ask the
the message across to these people in Wash-
questions. We'll have a good health program
ington?
Chick Koop.
that I think will have appeal to the voters
The President. Well, I think this kind of
The President. Y
here because it's family; it keeps things close
meeting helps. Fortunately, you have con-
Q. Can he help u:
to the people themselves rather than having
gressional delegations, the ones I mentioned
problems in the futu
a lot of mandated benefits out of Washing-
from this State, that understand that. They
The President. 1
ton.
fight against the excesses of Congress.
man. I think he war
And this is the last point. I'm just back
One of the things that I proposed or sec-
other day. And one
onded the motion on were these proposals
Koop, who came int
from a rather spectacular trip to Asia. I say
that are there, and they're bipartisan, I might
"Well, this guy's a 1
spectacular-you try getting the flu at a din-
ner. [Laughter] I have a feeling the people
add, for Congress to reform itself in terms
national agenda." H
in New England, and certainly having been
of proliferation of committees and needing
my. One of the thi
a neighbor of this State for so long, under-
reforms, Congress to adhere to the same laviy
d this is a sensitive
stand that even Presidents get the flu. I said
that the American people have to adhere to:1
gain because yeste
over there, even Democrats get it from time
One of the comments that I've made after
"Magic" Johnson-i:
to time. [Laughter] But you've got to admit
the Clarence Thomas hearings was that that
treating AIDS is a he
I did it in a dramatic way.
needed to be done. They ought not to ex-
We are concerned
empt themselves from the laws you and I
it. When Barbara hc
Having said that, exports account for a tre-
mendous amount of the growth in this coun-
have to honor. And this congressional delega-
arms, she's trying to
try. A lot of the jobs, I think it's estimated—
tion understands that; these people here do.
that both of us feel.
I was talking to Bob and Bill coming over
So, you've got to spill over and use your influ-
and meet with those
ence across the border, two ways I might add,
with it-we have to
here-35,000 to 40,000 jobs in New Hamp-
Maine and Massachusetts, good places to
lem: Prevention, res
shire related to exports. So please don't buy
this protection legislation that the Democrats
start. So, try that one.
caring, making peo]
and some others are putting out, this idea
But no, you've got a good point. Look, I'm
is a national health P.
that we can shrink back inside. I want to put
not up here to assign blame. I'll take my
And Magic, who's
America first in the sense of the values, in
share of the blame. I don't take it for not
lowing in the footste
the sense of getting this economy to be first
caring or not understanding. I do. Barbara
Chick Koop has pu
but not in the sense of some kind of protec-
does. I hope we have projected the family
ning, is saying, "Loc
tion legislation that is going to shrink markets
concerns that we feel. We've tried to do that
He said, "I've made
and throw the working people of New
in this job. But I'm not here to blame.
did. He made some
Hampshire further out of work. Let's expand
But I am here to remind the voters up
to help, get this thi,
these markets.
here that in two previous State of the Unions
compassionate treat
Now, fire away. Shoot. Any questions, even
I have proposed growth initiatives that would-
ee what we can do.
the tough ones. I know we've got a few fans
have stimulated the economy. Now I'm goinn-
e bully pulpit of
in here for someone else. Bring them up.
to do it again, and this time I'm going to
Chick Koop and of
look the American people in the eye, as I
General, to educat
The Economy
did in the past, and say, "All right, people
treat with the health
Q. Mr. President, first let me say the con-
are hurting more now. I've just came back
tion and research. I f
ditions
in
the
George
Bush,
1992
Administration of George Bush, 1992 / Jan. 15
101
State
in
th
people are out of work. And if you really
Health Care
every
municipalit
re, pass this package. And then we can put
Q. On the national health plan, what do
never
mind
the
back into politics and debate it for the rest
you have planned as a help for the 35 million
to do? And I'm
of this political year. But get something done
people who don't have health insurance?
to
get
the
Con-
that's going to get the people of this State
in
this
country
and of this country back to work." That's the
The President. The question in the back
millions
of
people
approach I'm going to take.
is a very important question. What are you
thout
health
going to do about the 35 million who don't
care
Now, we had one here, and then I'll come
gall
have health insurance? What we've done so
to
vote
them-
over there.
do
other
than
far is emphasizing prevention, emphasizing
I
hate
to
see
that
AIDS
inoculations and this kind of thing. Now at
have to do to get
the State of the Union, I will have what I
Q. We had a wonderful Surgeon General
people in Wash-
who led us in health care in the man of Dr.
think is the proper, if you'll permit me to
hold back some of the details, but a com-
Chick Koop.
think
prehensive health care program that does not
this
kind
of
The President. Yes.
increase the Federal mandates but does
you
have
con-
Q. Can he help us with some of our health
bring protection to the numbers of people
ones
I
mentioned
problems in the future?
rstand
that are uninsured. Therein lies the big prob-
that.
They
The President. Yes, he can. He's a good
lem.
Congress.
man. I think he wants to, too. I saw him the
So, we will have a comprehensive-it's
proposed
or
sec
other day. And one of the things that Dr.
only 2 weeks away, so stay tuned, and I think
these proposals
Koop, who came into office and people said,
it will be done with the values I think of as
bipartisan,
I
might
"Well, this guy's a little conservative for the
New Hampshire values in mind, without
itself
in
terms
national agenda." He wasn't; very sensitive
busting the budget. I ask you, when you hear
and
needing
my. One of the things that he has done-
all these people who have just discovered
to
the
same
law.
d this is a sensitive subject; it's on my mind
New Hampshire on the road map coming up
have
to
adhere
to:5
gain because yesterday I met with Earvin
here with these health plans, ask them what
I've
made
after
"Magic" Johnson-is to project the idea that
that is going to do to the people that pay
was that that
treating AIDS is a health problem.
the taxes, as well as those who need the
ought not to ex-
We are concerned about it. We care about
health care.
laws you and
I
it. When Barbara holds an AIDS baby in her
So, I think we've got a good program, and
gressional
delega
arms, she's trying to express the compassion
I hope we can get the support from every-
people
here
do
that both of us feel. When I go out to NIH
body in this room.
nd
use
your
influ
and meet with those people that are afflicted
Yes, in the back in the middle.
ways I might add
with it-we have to do it on a health prob-
Q. If I can just comment, I think we have
good
places
to
lem: Prevention, research and development,
time for about two more questions. We'd like
caring, making people understand this now
to have everybody come up and have a
point.
Look,
I'm
is a national health problem.
chance to shake hands with the President.
I'll
take
my
And Magic, who's on that Commission, fol-
The President. Anybody got a real con-
take
it
for
not
lowing in the footsteps of the education that
troversial one or want to make a statement?
I do. Barbara
Chick Koop has put forward to the begin-
I want some guy that really wants to be
jected the family
ning, is saying, "Look, lifestyle's important."
tough, some tough guy. Who is it? This guy
tried
to
do
that
He said, "I've made some mistakes." And he
in the middle? Yes. Who are you for, first,
to
blame.
did. He made some big ones. But now I want
and then let's hear the question. [Laughter]
the
voters
up
to help, get this thing out for open debate,
Q. I don't think you want to know.
ate
of
the
Unions
compassionate treatment as a disease, and
The President. No, but really, they
iatives
that
would
ee what we can do. And then use our office,
shouldn't be softballs. Call it as you see it,
Now I'm going
e bully pulpit of the White House and
and you'll get it back.
I'm
going
to
Chick Koop and others, our new Surgeon
Q. I'm a registered Democrat.
in
the
eye,
as
General, to educate people. We've got to
The President. All right, sir.
'All right, people
treat with the health aspect through preven-
just came back
tion and research. I think he will have-we'd
Education
upshire,
and
a.lot
love to have him involved.
Q. I haven't made up my mind yet.
102
Jan. 15 / Administration of George Bush, 1992
Administration
Four years ago you proclaimed yourself
And so, one of the concepts of this is
ful interdiction
"the education President."
choice. Another one is doing better in may
ational drug
The President. Yes.
and science. Another is to continue the in
there's anothe:
Q. Well, I'm a student at the University
creases that we've already started on Head
vate partnersh
of New Hampshire, and to the best of my
Start, ready to learn. Another one is, you're
guy named Jii
knowledge New Hampshire is 51st out of 50
never too old to learn. Even I, and it's not
million-they
States. We're behind Puerto Rico as well, as
just show business, have a little computer
lion a day. I dc
far as State funding for education. And I just
there, and I'm trying to learn it. And I'm
them, with adv
haven't seen very much evidence of your
doing something, and I hope it's an example
tisements tryin
being the education President.
that you're never too old to learn, although
parents that d'
The President. The man asked a very im-
I'm having a few difficulties with the cursor.
of drugs.
portant and very fair question. In the first
[Laughter]
We are mak
place, Federal spending, and I can under-
The thing that troubles me is I don't think
progress in ma
stand why you might not sense this, is up
that we've gotten that across. It is a good,
cocaine use. A
significantly in the Department of Education.
sensible program. It's really just starting, but
way to go. So,
As you know, Federal spending is 6 or 7 per-
it holds the answer, because we are not going
lem, but I just
cent of the total education budget for the
to be as competitive in this world if we don't
there that these
country. Educational spending, leave out
do better in math or science.
in terms of th
Federal, is also up substantially.
Another part of it is voluntary testing at
about.
Here's the good news: We do have a good
the 4th, 8th, and high school level. And it's
Last pitch is
program. I went to the 50 Governors. We
voluntary. But there's nothing wrong with
the people of
put politics aside on this one, believe me.
testing. There's nothing wrong with stand-
the economic
We've got the national education goals, six
ards so a school knows whether it's keeping
work, still reall
goals now. They were agreed by Democrats
up with other schools. We've gotten away
rest of the cour
and Republicans alike. They are now encom-
from that sense of discipline. Then I ward
bout as family
passed in a program called America 2000,
the schools to be drug-free so a kid can
mation of the
which is a national education strategy. It lit-
and learn in a safe environment.
we do, like child
erally calls for revolutionizing the schools.
So, those are some of the ingredients of
the family has
Yes, it requires some more Federal spend-
our program called America 2000.
the family does.
ing, but we're budgeting that. It requires
Barbara is ot
much more participation of parents and of
War on Drugs
So, I do think th
communities. I addressed a national chamber
Q. Mr. President, it seems that as the
to the success. T
meeting yesterday on it. Democrats, Repub-
economy gets worse and worse, that more
not get this drug
licans, liberals, conservatives coming to-
and more people are turning to the sales of
got a program. V'
gether to say we've got to do it differently.
drugs and more and more people are using
together and the
And please take a look at that program.
drugs as they see the economy toughen and
this. That isn't
It is sensible. I'm determined to keep it out
their families suffering. What do you propose
going to outpror
of the political cross-currents. I don't care
to do about this problem because it seems
across the State
about my personal label; I am committed to
to keep getting worse?
very, very stron,
education. This program, under the able
The President. Let me repeat the ques-
to try to help t.
leadership of Lamar Alexander, is one of the
tion because I want to argue with the premise
stand.
things that is beginning to get to the Amer-
a little bit, not totally. The premise is, it
You've got to 1
ican consciousness. You and I might differ
seems to be getting worse on narcotics,
on this one; I still like the idea of parents
drugs, amongst young people, and what do
to hug them. Yc
dust them off a
being able to choose.
you propose to do about it?
When I came out of the military to the
game. And if y
We have a national drug strategy. We are
off into some of
G.I. bill a thousand years ago nobody said,
making significant if not dramatic progres
"Hey, you've got to go to school A or school
hey need help or
amongst young people, for example, in the
B, university A or B, or high school extension
use of cocaine, down by 10 percent. Where
(At this poin
program A, B, or C." The person could
we're hurting as a society is the 35 and older,
Maureen Barrou
choose. And choice in the State of Min-
kind of the addicted crowd is not shaking it.
with a book.
nesota, formerly run by a Democratic Gov-
Education is a part of it. Treatment is a
The
ernor, has resulted in educational excellence.
Administration of George Bush, 1992 / Jan. 15
103
ful interdiction effort, is a part of it. But the
is not show business. I mean, when a guy
of ational drug strategy is working. And then
asked a very good question on education it
there's another ingredient to this. It's the pri-
gave me a chance to say what I think, but
vate partnership under the leadership of a
also it shows what concerns people. So I hope
guy named Jim Burke. We're spending $1
you don't feel this-even the guy at the end
million-they are, not Government-$1 mil-
of the table here feels it's just some kind of
lion a day. I don't know whether you've seen
a useless exercise.
them, with advertisements, pro bono adver-
But the message: I care. We're trying. We
tisements trying to help educate children and
need help. We have had and will continue
parents that drugs are-you know, turn off
to have, I think, sound and sensible pro-
of drugs.
grams.
We are making progress. We've made big
And let's not forget this: It was one year
progress in marijuana, made big progress in
ago that I had to make a very fateful decision
cocaine use. And yet, we've still got a long
that affected the lives of a lot of Americans.
way to go. So, we'll keep fighting the prob-
And we saw instantly the return of American
lem, but I just want to give a little hope out
pride. It doesn't matter about how you feel
there that these figures are fairly encouraging
about when we should have gone to war, the
in terms of the age group that you asked
country came together. I want to use that
about.
same kind of leadership to bring the country
Last pitch is this on it: I still think that
together now on the social problems that af-
the people of New Hampshire, in spite of
fect us and on getting this economy going
the economic problems and being out of
and getting New Hampshire back to work.
work, still really epitomize for a lot of the
And I need your help.
rest of the country what Barbara and I talk
Thank you very, very much.
bout as family values. I worry about the dec-
mation of the American family. Everything
Note: The President spoke at 10:50 a.m. at
we do, like child care, we try to make it that
the Exeter Town Hall. In his remarks, he re-
the family has a choice, or education, that
ferred to Michael Dagostino, a retired rose-
the family does.
grower in Exeter, and Hugh and Kay Gregg,
Barbara is out there, "Read to the kids."
parents of Governor Judd Gregg.
So, I do think that family involvement is vital
to the success. The Federal Government can-
not get this drug thing done by itself. We've
got a program. We've got to keep the families
Remarks to Davidson Interior Trim
together and the families involved in solving
Employees in Dover, New
this. That isn't a vote-getter, and that isn't
Hampshire
going to outpromise some Democrat halfway
January 15, 1992
across the State. But it is something I feel
very, very strongly about and will continue
First, let me just say thanks for the warmth
to try to help the American people under-
of this reception. And your chairman is just
stand.
back from a trip with me abroad, and the
You've got to read to your kids. You've got
thing got a little caught up in some of the
to hug them. You've got to lift them up and
politics of the moment which is hard to avoid.
dust them off and put them back into the
But the concept was: Look, this isn't any time
game. And if you don't do that, they drift
to pull back; this is a time to try to expand
off into some of this mire. In the inner city
American markets. I am not in favor of pro-
hey need help on it, too.
tection in the sense of pulling away from our
export markets.
(At this point, County Commissioner
So, we went over there and tried to ham-
Maureen Barrows presented the President
mer away in getting our export market ex-
with a book.]
tended. And one of the things that saved us
The President. Listen, I apologize, but
in the extraordinarily difficult times that,
we're really almost just getting started. This
well, this State faces and the neighboring
CLOSE HOLD
Document No.
WHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM
92 JAN 14 P4: 11
DATE: 1/14/92
ACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY:
---
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: EXETER TOWN HALL
SUBJECT:
WEDNESDAY, 1/15/92
ACTION FYI
ACTION FYI
VICE PRESIDENT
HORNER
1
SKINNER
MCCLURE
-
SCOWCROFT
1
PETERSMEYER
1
DARMAN
1
PORTER
1
BRADY
ROGICH
BROMLEY
SMITH
KAUFMAN
CARD
SNOW
DEMAREST
FITZWATER
GRAY
HOLIDAY
REMARKS:
The attached has been forwarded to the President.
RESPONSE:
SENSITIVE
CLOSE HOLD
PHILLIP D. BRADY
Assistant to the President
and Staff Secretary
Ext. 2702
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
January 14, 1992 02 JAN P2: 26
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
THROUGH:
DAVID DEMAREST
TONY SNOW TS
FROM:
CURT SMITH
I
SUBJECT:
EXETER TOWN HALL
On Wednesday, January 15th, at 10:30 a.m., you will deliver
remarks, (approximately 9 minutes/cards) to a group of 350 New
Hampshirites (including a large representation of Republicans) in
Exeter's Town Hall. Governor Gregg introduces you; also
acknowledged is County Commissioner Maureen Barrows, Senator
Smith, and Congressman Zeliff.
Your speech acknowledges the political realities of campaign
season, and suggests skepticism towards campaign promises of
economic cure-alls. You also unveil a set of standards by which
economic proposals, including those to be released in the State
of the Union, may be judged.
(Smith/Grossman)
January 14, 1992
Draft Two EXETER
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS:
EXETER TOWN HALL
EXETER, NEW HAMPSHIRE
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 15, 1991
Thank you, Governor, for that kind introduction. Senator
Bob Smith. Congressman Bill Zeliff. County Commissioner Maureen
Barrows. I know there's been some concern about my illness at
the Japanese State Dinner, and some questions about the cause of
my sickness. \ I know Barbara joked about how my tennis game was
to blame -- but I want to set the record straight. 11 I told
Barbara that I didn't want to eat any broccoli for lunch. 11 Any
broccoli farmers here?
Well, you all know that I don't like broccoli. And I know
that you all don't like baloney. Almost everyone in New
Hampshire has met a future president at one time or another, and
they can see right through the smoke screens of pipe dream
promises. I know we're swinging into a campaign cycle. And
already I see contenders scrambling all over each other to
promise bigger, better, and bolder than the next guy. That's
perfectly acceptable -- that's democracy. But it is not
acceptable to exploit economic hardship for political profit
((some of these political ambulance chasers give new meaning to
the phrase, "no pain, no gain.")) And it is not acceptable to
sacrifice good, prudent policy in the battle for a better
bumpersticker.
2
of course, this state never had much of a market for snake
oil salesmen. Daniel Webster once said, "There is nothing so
powerful as truth
"
New Hampshirites know there's a difference
between soundbites and sound policy; and they don't cater much to
sweet talking over bitter truths.
I've had to look at a few bitter truths myself. There are
many parts in this country where the economy is lagging and
Americans are hurting. I've been talking to people all over the
country and making some tough decisions. Everyone knows that we
need policies that spark growth. Some seem to have stumbled upon
this truth only recently, ((some others have stumbled upon it,
picked themselves up, and pretended it never happened) )
Ever since coming to the White House, first as Vice
President, then as President, I've fought long and hard for lower
taxes, less spending, fewer regulations and reduced capital gains
taxes. I'm afraid that the Democratic Congress has been more
interested in defeating my growth initiatives than getting the
economy back on its feet. Well, their victory is your disaster.
Now, you're going to hear lots of proposals for growth in
the next six weeks -- some prudent and pragmatic, some
irresponsible and irrelevant. Too often, election time generates
so much baloney, that Americans are left asking, "Where's the
beef?" So I've devised a few simple tests I'd suggest in
figuring out whether growth proposals are beef or bull:
First: Does it make economic sense? In a healthy economy,
investors invest in business; entrepreneurs take risks; workers
3
produce; consumers buy. It doesn't take an economics degree to
figure this out. A prescription for economic health does not
deter investment. It does not punish risk. It does not regulate
business out of business. And it does not tax away a hard earned
income.
Second: Does it make us more competitive? Does it prepare
us for the markets of tomorrow? Does it prepare our students for
the challenges of the next century? Think about it -- yesterday
the smokestack; today, the microchip; tomorrow -- who knows?
Wayne Gretzky used to say, " skate where the puck is going to
be, not where it has been. " As global trade continues to grow by
leaps and bounds, we need to make sure American exports stay
ahead of the curve. Our merchandise exports support 7.2 million
American jobs -- a 42% rise in five years. It's simple -- a more
competitive America means more American exports. More American
exports mean more American jobs.
Third: Does it address your basic concerns: Does it protect
what you want protected, and promote what you want promoted? For
many American families, a home is more than their castle, it's
their capital. And while government mismanagement chipped away
at home values, Americans watched their main assets grow smaller
and smaller. Other families, confronted with tragic accidents or
chronic illnesses, watch as unbridled health care costs drain
away the lifeblood of lifetime savings. Taxpayers have a right
to ask whether economic proposals are going to help them preserve
4
the value of the things they have worked so hard to secure --
their homes, their incomes, their pensions, their futures.
Fourth: Does it get Washington's house in order? What does
it do to the federal budget -- does it minimize it, or does it
politicize it? Does it cap spending and does it give the
American people their money's worth? Anyone who's ever managed
household finances can tell you that the deeper you crawl into
debt, the harder it is to climb out. Maybe some people up on
Capitol Hill can get away with bouncing checks -- American
competitiveness cannot.
Apply these tests each plan you hear this year -- and see
whether they back it up or shoot it down. Too many of these
notions still operate on the old paradigm of tax it, spend it,
and promise it. Well, I don't think many people are going to buy
it. ((Mother Nature's the only one around here who can give New
Hampshire a snow job)
I didn't come up here with miracles or magic tricks. I'm
not going to promise to outlaw icy roads or black fly season. I
won't play to any fear of foreigners, to hidden hatreds, or to
class conflict. That's not me -- never has been, never will be.
But I will continue to fight Capitol Hill for fewer taxes
and lower spending. I will continue to fight abroad, like I did
in Asia, for more free trade and more fair trade -- leveling the
playing field for the power of "Made in America." I will fight
against protectionism -- policies that would have our industry
stagnate in the stale air of government shelters rather than
5
brave the bracing winds of international competition. I will
fight against isolationism -- protecting American interests and
preserving American principles. I will fight against those who
preach a politics of division, who want to turn the world into a
land of us versus them, rather than as a place of unlimited
opportunity. And I will continue to fight at home -- for better
schools, for a cleaner environment, for safer streets, and for a
brighter future.
So listen to what my competition says -- then hear me out.
I'm counting on the people of New Hampshire -- and I'm confident
that when you sort out the beef from the bull, you'll know who's
got the best plan to get this economy moving again.
You know, the Republican party was founded about 100 yards
away from here. It set its sights on becoming the party of
freedom, of union, and of the future. The GOP's founders
declared war on the very kind of Know Nothing Nativism that seems
to be rising up in some parts of our country today. Well, I
intend to remain true to the the principles, optimism and
determination that made this party and this nation great.
With New Hampshire's help, we will rise to heights our
forefathers would have found unimaginable. And we will rise on
the basis of our hard work, our belief in freedom, and our faith
in ourselves. Thank you. God bless New Hampshire, and God bless
the United States of America.
#
#
#
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
January 14, 1992
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
THROUGH:
DAVID DEMAREST
TONY SNOW 13
FROM:
CURT SMITH
I
SUBJECT:
EXETER TOWN HALL
On Wednesday, January 15th, at 10:30 a.m., you will deliver
remarks, (approximately 9 minutes/cards) to a group of 350 New
Hampshirites (including a large representation of Republicans) in
Exeter's Town Hall. Governor Gregg introduces you; also
acknowledged is County Commissioner Maureen Barrows, Senator
Smith, and Congressman Zeliff.
Your speech acknowledges the political realities of campaign
season, and suggests skepticism towards campaign promises of
economic cure-alls. You also unveil a set of standards by which
economic proposals, including those to be released in the State
of the Union, may be judged.
(Smith/Grossman)
January 14, 1992
Draft Two EXETER
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS:
EXETER TOWN HALL
EXETER, NEW HAMPSHIRE
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 15, 1991
Thank you, Governor, for that kind introduction. Senator
Bob Smith. Congressman Bill Zeliff. County Commissioner Maureen
Barrows. I know there's been some concern about my illness at
the Japanese State Dinner, and some questions about the cause of
my sickness. \ I know Barbara joked about how my tennis game was
to blame -- but I want to set the record straight. 11 I told
Barbara that I didn't want to eat any broccoli for lunch. Any
broccoli farmers here?
Well, you all know that I don't like broccoli. And I know
that you all don't like baloney. Almost everyone in New
Hampshire has met a future president at one time or another, and
they can see right through the smoke screens of pipe dream
promises. I know we're swinging into a campaign cycle. And
already I see contenders scrambling all over each other to
promise bigger, better, and bolder than the next guy. That's
perfectly acceptable -- that's democracy. But it is not
acceptable to exploit economic hardship for political profit
((some of these political ambulance chasers give new meaning to
the phrase, "no pain, no gain.")) And it is not acceptable to
sacrifice good, prudent policy in the battle for a better
bumpersticker.
2
of course, this state never had much of a market for snake
oil salesmen. Daniel Webster once said, "There is nothing so
powerful as truth
"
New Hampshirites know there's a difference
between soundbites and sound policy; and they don't cater much to
sweet talking over bitter truths.
I've had to look at a few bitter truths myself. There are
many parts in this country where the economy is lagging and
Americans are hurting. I've been talking to people all over the
country and making some tough decisions. Everyone knows that we
need policies that spark growth. Some seem to have stumbled upon
this truth only recently, ( (some others have stumbled upon it,
picked themselves up, and pretended it never happened) )
Ever since coming to the White House, first as Vice
President, then as President, I've fought long and hard for lower
taxes, less spending, fewer regulations and reduced capital gains
taxes. I'm afraid that the Democratic Congress has been more
interested in defeating my growth initiatives than getting the
economy back on its feet. Well, their victory is your disaster.
Now, you're going to hear lots of proposals for growth in
the next six weeks -- some prudent and pragmatic, some
irresponsible and irrelevant. Too often, election time generates
so much baloney, that Americans are left asking, "Where's the
beef?" So I've devised a few simple tests I'd suggest in
figuring out whether growth proposals are beef or bull:
First: Does it make economic sense? In a healthy economy,
investors invest in business; entrepreneurs take risks; workers
3
produce; consumers buy. It doesn't take an economics degree to
figure this out. A prescription for economic health does not
deter investment. It does not punish risk. It does not regulate
business out of business. And it does not tax away a hard earned
income.
Second: Does it make us more competitive? Does it prepare
us for the markets of tomorrow? Does it prepare our students for
the challenges of the next century? Think about it -- yesterday
the smokestack; today, the microchip; tomorrow -- who knows?
Wayne Gretzky used to say, " skate where the puck is going to
be, not where it has been." As global trade continues to grow by
leaps and bounds, we need to make sure American exports stay
ahead of the curve. Our merchandise exports support 7.2 million
American jobs -- a 42% rise in five years. It's simple -- a more
competitive America means more American exports. More American
exports mean more American jobs.
Third: Does it address your basic concerns: Does it protect
what you want protected, and promote what you want promoted? For
many American families, a home is more than their castle, it's
their capital. And while government mismanagement chipped away
at home values, Americans watched their main assets grow smaller
and smaller. Other families, confronted with tragic accidents or
chronic illnesses, watch as unbridled health care costs drain
away the lifeblood of lifetime savings. Taxpayers have a right
to ask whether economic proposals are going to help them preserve
4
the value of the things they have worked so hard to secure --
their homes, their incomes, their pensions, their futures.
Fourth: Does it get Washington's house in order? What does
it do to the federal budget -- does it minimize it, or does it
politicize it? Does it cap spending and does it give the
American people their money's worth? Anyone who's ever managed
household finances can tell you that the deeper you crawl into
debt, the harder it is to climb out. Maybe some people up on
Capitol Hill can get away with bouncing checks -- American
competitiveness cannot.
Apply these tests each plan you hear this year -- and see
whether they back it up or shoot it down. Too many of these
notions still operate on the old paradigm of tax it, spend it,
and promise it. Well, I don't think many people are going to buy
it. ((Mother Nature's the only one around here who can give New
Hampshire a snow job)).
I didn't come up here with miracles or magic tricks. I'm
not going to promise to outlaw icy roads or black fly season. I
won't play to any fear of foreigners, to hidden hatreds, or to
class conflict. That's not me -- never has been, never will be.
But I will continue to fight Capitol Hill for fewer taxes
and lower spending. I will continue to fight abroad, like I did
in Asia, for more free trade and more fair trade -- leveling the
playing field for the power of "Made in America." I will fight
against protectionism -- policies that would have our industry
stagnate in the stale air of government shelters rather than
5
brave the bracing winds of international competition. I will
fight against isolationism -- protecting American interests and
preserving American principles. I will fight against those who
preach a politics of division, who want to turn the world into a
land of us versus them, rather than as a place of unlimited
opportunity. And I will continue to fight at home -- for better
schools, for a cleaner environment, for safer streets, and for a
brighter future. 11
So listen to what my competition says -- then hear me out.
I'm counting on the people of New Hampshire -- and I'm confident
that when you sort out the beef from the bull, you'll know who's
got the best plan to get this economy moving again.
You know, the Republican party was founded about 100 yards
away from here. It set its sights on becoming the party of
freedom, of union, and of the future. The GOP's founders
declared war on the very kind of Know Nothing Nativism that seems
to be rising up in some parts of our country today. Well, I
intend to remain true to the the principles, optimism and
determination that made this party and this nation great.
With New Hampshire's help, we will rise to heights our
forefathers would have found unimaginable. And we will rise on
the basis of our hard work, our belief in freedom, and our faith
in ourselves. Thank you. God bless New Hampshire, and God bless
the United States of America.
#
#
#
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
92 JAN 14 P I : 55
January 14, 1992
MEMORANDUM FOR TONY SNOW
FROM:
ROGER B. PORTER
RBP
SUBJECT:
Presidential Remarks: Exeter Town Hall
Exeter, New Hampshire
We have reviewed the attached Presidential remarks and
have noted a few suggested changes on the draft.
If you have any questions or we can be of further
assistance, please let us know.
CC: Phillip D. Brady
CLOSE HOLD
Document No. 298772ss
WHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM
DATE:
1/13/92
ACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY TUESDAY, 1/14/92 NOON
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: EXETER TOWN HALL
SUBJECT:
EXTER, NEW HAMPSHIRE - WED. 1/15/92
ACTION FYI
ACTION FYI
VICE PRESIDENT
HORNER
SKINNER
MCCLURE
SCOWCROFT
PETERSMEYER
DARMAN
PORTER
BRADY
ROGICH
BROMLEY
SMITH
KAUFMAN
CARD
SNOW
DEMAREST
FITZWATER
GRAY
HOLIDAY
REMARKS:
Please forward your comments directly to Tony Snow, Rm. 122, x2930,
no later than NOON, TUESDAY, JANUARY 14, with a copy to this office.
Thank you.
SENSITIVE
PHILLIP D. BRADY
CLOSE HOLD
Assistant to the President
and Staff Secretary
Ext. 2702
(Smith/Grossman)
January 10, 1992
Draft One EXETER
92 JAN 13 P5: 30
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS:
EXETER TOWN HALL
EXETER, NEW HAMPSHIRE
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 15, 1991
Thank you for that kind introduction. I know there's been
some concern about my illness at the Japanese State Dinner, and
some questions about the cause of my sickness. \ I know Barbara
joked about how my tennis game was to blame -- but I want to set
the record straight. 11 I told Barbara that I didn't want to eat
any broccoli for lunch. Any broccoli farmers here?
Well, you all know that I don't like broccoli. And I know
that you all don't like baloney. Almost everyone in New
Hampshire has met a future president at one time or another, and
they can see right through the smoke screens of pipe dream
promises. I know we're swinging into a campaign cycle. And
already I see contenders scrambling all over each other to
promise voters bigger, better, and bolder than the next guy.
That's perfectly acceptable -- that's democracy. But it is not
acceptable to exploit economic hardship for political profit
((some of these ambulance chasers give new meaning to the phrase,
"no pain, no gain.")) And it is not acceptable to sacrifice
good, prudent policy in the battle for a better bumpersticker.
Of course, this state never had much of a market for snake
oil salesmen. Daniel Webster once said, "There is nothing so
powerful as truth
If
New Hampshirites know there's a difference
between soundbites and sound policy; and they don't cater much to
sweet talking over bitter truths. \\
AT
I've had to look a few bitter truths myself. There are many
parts in this country where the economy is lagging and Americans
are hurting. I've been looking at the data and making some tough
decisions. Everyone knows we need I policies that spark growth.
Some seem to have stumbled upon this truth only recently, ( (some
others have stumbled upon it, picked themselves up, and pretended
it never happened))
Ever since coming to the White House, first as Vice
President, then as President, I've fought long and hard for lower
taxes, less spending, fewer regulations and reduced cap ital gains.
I'm afraid that the Democratic Congress has been more interested
DEFEATING my GROWTH INITIATIVES
in wrestling me to the floor than in getting the economy back on
SUGGESTS
its feet. Sure they got me to give in on taxes But while they
THIS SAKNESS.
were celebrating victory over the President, the country was
losing the battle for growth.
In less than two weeks, I'll be proposing my package for
growth. Others will be proposing different solutions. There are
a lot of voices out there -- some prudent and pragmatic, some
irresponsible and irrelevant. Too often, election time generates
so much baloney, that Americans are left asking, "Where's the
beef?" So I've devised a few simple tests I'd suggest in
figuring out whether growth proposals are beef or bull:
STIMULATE THE INVESTMENT NECESSARY TO CREATE JOBS?
First: Does it make sense? In a healthy economy, investors
invest in business; entrepreneurs take risks; workers produce;
consumers buy. It doesn't take an economics degree to figure
this out. A prescription for economic health does not deter
investment. It does not punish risk. It does not regulate
business out of business. And it does not tax away a hard earned
income.
INCREASE AMERICA'S CAPACITY TO COMPETE IN A GLOBAL ECONOMY?
Second: Does it make us more competitive? Does it prepare
us for the markets of tomorrow? Think about it -- yesterday the
smokestack; today, the microchip; tomorrow -- who knows? Wayne
Gretsky used to say, skate where the puck is going to be, not
where it has been. " As global trade continues to grow by leaps
and bounds, we need to make sure American exports stay ahead of
the curve. Our merchandise exports support 7.2 million American
jobs -- a 42% rise in five years. It's simple -- a more
competitive America means more American exports. More American
exports mean more American jobs.
STOP THE SLIDE IN REAL ESTATE VAWES AND INCREASE HOME SALES?
Third: Does it help you keep your house in order -- starting
with home values. For many American families, a home is more
than their castle, it's their capital. And while government
mismanagement chipped away at home values, Americans watched
their main assets grow smaller and smaller. Other families,
confronted with tragic accidents or chronic illnesses, watch as
unbridled health care costs drain away the lifeblood of lifetime
savings. Taxpayers have a right to ask whether economic
proposals are going to help them preserve the value of the things
they have worked so hard to secure -- their homes, their health,
their investments, their children's future.
CONTROL WASTEFUL GOVERNMENT SPENDING AND BRING R/E DEPICIT
Fourth: Does it get Washington's house in order? What does
it do to the federal budget -- does it minimize it, or does it
politicize it? Does it cap spending and does it give the
UNDER CONTROL ?
American people their money's worth? Anyone who's ever managed
household finances can tell you that the deeper you crawl into
debt, the harder it is to climb out. Maybe some people up on
Capitol Hill can get away with bouncing checks -- American
competitiveness cannot.
When I deliver my State of the Union this month, take these
tests, and see if my proposals measure up, measures up. Apply
these tests to any other package floating out there -- and see
whether they back it up or shoot it down. Too many of these
proposals still operate on the old paradigm of tax it, spend it,
and promise it. Well, I don't think many people are going to buy
it. ( (Mother Nature's the only one around here who can give New
Hampshire a snow job) )
I didn't come up here with miracles or magic tricks. I'm
not going to promise to outlaw icy roads or black fly season. I
won't play to any fear of foreigners, to hidden hatreds, or to
class conflict. That's not my style -- never has been, never
will be.
But I will continue to fight Capitol Hill for fewer taxes
and lower spending. I will continue to fight abroad, like I did
in Asia, for more free trade and more fair trade -- leveling the
playing field for the power of "Made in America." I will fight
against protectionism -- policies that would have our industry
stagnate in the stale air of government shelters rather than
brave the bracing winds of international competition. I will
fight against isolationism -- protecting American interests and
preserving American principles. And I will continue to fight at
home -- for better schools, for a cleaner environment, for safer
streets, and for a brighter future. Thank you. God bless New
Hampshire, and God bless the United States of America.
#
#
#
CLOSE HOLD
Document No. 298772ss 247
92 JAN14 WHITE 25 HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM
DATE. 1/13/92
ACTION/CONCURRENCE-COMMENT DUE BY: TUESDAY, 1/14/92 NOON
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: EXETER TOWN HALL
EXTER, NEW HAMPSHIRE - WED. 1/15/92
SUBJECT:
ACTION FYI
ACTION FYI
VICE PRESIDENT
HORNER
-
SKINNER
MCCLURE
1
SCOWCROPT
PETERSMEYER
DARMAN
PORTER
BRADY
ROGICH
BROMLEY
SMITH
KAUFMAN
CARD
SNOW
DEMAREST
FITZWATER
GRAY
HOLIDAY
REMARKS:
Please forward your comments directly to Tony Snow, Rm. 122, x2930,
no later than NOON, TUESDAY, JANUARY 14, with a copy to this office.
Thank you.
RESPONSE:
January 14, 1992
MEMORANDUM FOR TONY SNOW
The NSC staff concurs with the draft presidential remarks.
CC: Phillip D. :Berady
from Brent Scowcroft
PHILLIP D. BRADY
Assistant to the President
and Staff Secretary
Ext. 2702
(Smith/Grossman)
January 10, 1992
Draft One EXETER
92 JAN 13 P5:33
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS:
EXETER TOWN HALL
EXETER, NEW HAMPSHIRE
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 15, 1991
Thank you for that kind introduction. I know there's been
some concern about my illness at the Japanese State Dinner, and
some questions about the cause of my sickness. \ I know Barbara
joked about how my tennis game was to blame -- but I want to set
the record straight. \\ I told Barbara that I didn't want to eat
any broccoli for lunch. 11 Any broccoli farmers here?
Well, you all know that I don't like broccoli. And I know
that you all don't like baloney. Almost everyone in New
Hampshire has met a future president at one time or another, and
they can see right through the smoke screens of pipe dream
promises. I know we're swinging into a campaign cycle. And
already I see contenders scrambling all over each other to
promise voters bigger, better, and bolder than the next guy.
That's perfectly acceptable -- that's democracy. But it is not
acceptable to exploit economic hardship for political profit
((some of these ambulance chasers give new meaning to the phrase,
"no pain, no gain.")) And it is not acceptable to sacrifice
good, prudent policy in the battle for a better bumpersticker.
of course, this state never had much of a market for snake
oil salesmen. Daniel Webster once said, "There is nothing so
powerful as truth " New Hampshirites know there's a difference
between soundbites and sound policy; and they don't cater much to
sweet talking over bitter truths. 11
I've had to look a few bitter truths myself. There are many
parts in this country where the economy is lagging and Americans
are hurting. I've been looking at the data and making some tough
decisions. Everyone knows we need is policies that spark growth.
Some seem to have stumbled upon this truth only recently, ((some
others have stumbled upon it, picked themselves up, and pretended
it never happened) )
Ever since coming to the White House, first as Vice
President, then as President, I've fought long and hard for lower
taxes, less spending, fewer regulations and reduced cap gains.
I'm afraid that the Democratic Congress has been more interested
in wrestling me to the floor than in getting the economy back on
its feet. Sure they got me to give in on taxes. But while they
were celebrating victory over the President, the country was
losing the battle for growth.
In less than two weeks, I'll be proposing my package for
growth. Others will be proposing different solutions. There are
a lot of voices out there -- some prudent and pragmatic, some
irresponsible and irrelevant. Too often, election time generates
so much baloney, that Americans are left asking, "Where's the
beef?" So I've devised a few simple tests I'd suggest in
figuring out whether growth proposals are beef or bull:
First: Does it make sense? In a healthy economy, investors
invest in business; entrepreneurs take risks; workers produce;
consumers buy. It doesn't take an economics degree to figure
this out. A prescription for economic health does not deter
investment. It does not punish risk. It does not regulate
business out of business. And it does not tax away a hard earned
income.
Second: Does it make us more competitive? Does it prepare
us for the markets of tomorrow? Think about it -- yesterday the
smokestack; today, the microchip; tomorrow -- who knows? Wayne
Gretsky used to say, " skate where the puck is going to be, not
where it has been. " As global trade continues to grow by leaps
and bounds, we need to make sure American exports stay ahead of
the curve. Our merchandise exports support 7.2 million American
jobs -- a 42% rise in five years. It's simple -- a more
competitive America means more American exports. More American
exports mean more American jobs.
Third: Does it help you keep your house in order -- starting
with home values. For many American families, a home is more
than their castle, it's their capital. And while government
mismanagement chipped away at home values, Americans watched
their main assets grow smaller and smaller. Other families,
confronted with tragic accidents or chronic illnesses, watch as
unbridled health care costs drain away the lifeblood of lifetime
savings. Taxpayers have a right to ask whether economic
proposals are going to help them preserve the value of the things
they have worked so hard to secure -- their homes, their health,
their investments, their children's future.
Fourth: Does it get Washington's house in order? What does
it do to the federal budget -- does it minimize it, or does it
politicize it? Does it cap spending and does it give the
American people their money's worth? Anyone who's ever managed
household finances can tell you that the deeper you crawl into
debt, the harder it is to climb out. Maybe some people up on
Capitol Hill can get away with bouncing checks -- American
competitiveness cannot.
When I deliver my State of the Union this month, take these
tests, and see if my proposals measure up measures up. Apply
these tests to any other package floating out there -- and see
whether they back it up or shoot it down. Too many of these
proposals still operate on the old paradigm of tax it, spend it,
and promise it. Well, I don't think many people are going to buy
it. ( (Mother Nature's the only one around here who can give New
Hampshire a snow job) )
I didn't come up here with miracles or magic tricks. I'm
not going to promise to outlaw icy roads or black fly season. I
won't play to any fear of foreigners, to hidden hatreds, or to
class conflict. That's not my style -- never has been, never
will be.
But I will continue to fight Capitol Hill for fewer taxes
and lower spending. I will continue to fight abroad, like I did
in Asia, for more free trade and more fair trade -- leveling the
playing field for the power of "Made in America." I will fight
against protectionism -- policies that would have our industry
stagnate in the stale air of government shelters rather than
brave the bracing winds of international competition. I will
fight against isolationism -- protecting American interests and
preserving American principles. And I will continue to fight at
home -- for better schools, for a cleaner environment, for safer
streets, and for a brighter future. Thank you. God bless New
Hampshire, and God bless the United States of America.
#
#
#
CLOSE HOLD
Document No. 298772ss
WHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM
DATE.
1/13/92
ACTION/CONCURRENCE-COMMENT DUE BY: TUESDAY, 1/14/92 NOON
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: EXETER TOWN HALL
EXTER, NEW HAMPSHIRE - WED. 1/15/92
SUBJECT:
ACTION FYI
ACTION FYI
VICE PRESIDENT
HORNER
SKINNER
MCCLURE
SCOWCROFT
PETERSMEYER
DARMAN
PORTER
BRADY
ROGICH
BROMLEY
SMITH
KAUFMAN
CARD
SNOW
DEMAREST
FITZWATER
GRAY
HOLIDAY
REMARKS:
Please forward your comments directly to Tony Snow, Rm. 122, x2930,
no later than NOON, TUESDAY, JANUARY 14, with a copy to this office.
Thank you.
SENSITIVE
See additional Comments
from Boo Grady
PHILLIP D. BRADY
CLOSE HOLD
Assistant to the President
and Staff Secretary
Ext. 2702
10.15m
(Smith/Grossman)
January 10, 1992
Draft One EXETER
02 JAN 13 P5: 30
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS:
EXETER TOWN HALL
EXETER, NEW HAMPSHIRE
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 15, 1991
Thank you for that kind introduction. I know there's been
some concern about my illness at the Japanese State Dinner, and
some questions about the cause of my sickness. \ I know Barbara
joked about how my tennis game was to blame -- but I want to set
the record straight. \\ I told Barbara that I didn't want to eat
any broccoli for lunch. Any broccoli farmers here?
Well, you all know that I don't like broccoli. And I know
that you all don't like baloney. Almost everyone in New
Hampshire has met a future president at one time or another, and
they can see right through the smoke screens of pipe dream
promises. I know we re swinging into a campaign cycle. And
already I see contenders scrambling all over each other to
promise voters bigger, better, and bolder than the next guy.
That's perfectly acceptable -- that's democracy. But it is not
acceptable to exploit economic hardship for political profit
(some of these ambulance chasers give new meaning to the phrase,
"no pain, no gain.")) And it is not acceptable to sacrifice
good, prudent policy in the battle for a better bumpersticker.
of course, this state never had much of a market for snake
oil salesmen. Daniel Webster once said, "There is nothing so
powerful as truth...' " New Hampshirites know there's a difference
between soundbites and sound policy; and they don't cater much to
sweet talking over bitter truths.
NOTE: This from the 54 who took "the pledge"
then vaised taxes?}
product
I've had to look a few bitter truths myself. There are many
parts in this country where the economy is lagging and Americans
are hurting. I've been looking at the data and making some tough
decisions. Everyone knows we need is policies that spark growth.
Some seem to have stumbled upon this truth only recently, ( (some
others have stumbled upon it, picked themselves up, and pretended
it never happened)).
Ever since coming to the White House, first as Vice
President, then as President, I've fought long and hard for lower
taxes, less spending, fewer regulations and reduced cap gains.
I'm afraid that the Democratic Congress has been more interested
in wrestling me to the floor than in getting the economy back on
its feet. Sure they got me to give in on taxes. But while they
were celebrating victory over the President, the country was
losing the battle for growth.
In less than two weeks, I'll be proposing my package for
growth. Others will be proposing different solutions. There are
a lot of voices out there -- some prudent and pragmatic, some
irresponsible and irrelevant. Too often, election time generates
so much baloney, that Americans are left asking, "Where's the
beef?" So I've devised a few simple tests I'd suggest in
figuring out whether growth proposals are beef or bull:
will
First: Does it make sense? In a healthy economy, investors
invest in business; entrepreneurs take risks; workers produce;
consumers buy. It doesn't take an economics degree to figure
this out. A prescription for economic health does not deter
investment. It does not punish risk. It does not regulate
the
du tisty in neededto wate
jrbs?
Grady +4844
business out of business. And it does not tax away a hard earned
income.
2
the
economy?
Second: Does it make us more competitive? Does it prepare
us for the markets of tomorrow? Think about it -- yesterday the
smokestack; today, the microchip; tomorrow -- who knows? Wayne
Gretsky used to say, " skate where the puck is going to be, not
where it has been. " As global trade continues to grow by leaps
and bounds, we need to make sure American exports stay ahead of
the curve. Our merchandise exports support 7.2 million American
jobs -- a 42% rise in five years. It's simple -- a more
competitive America means more American exports. More American
exports mean more American jobs. addess the decline in real estate values
Third: Does it help you keep your house in order -- starting
with home values. For many American families, a home is more
than their castle, it's their capital. And while government
mismanagement chipped away at home values, Americans watched
their main assets grow smaller and smaller. Other families,
confronted with tragic accidents or chronic illnesses, watch as
unbridled health care costs drain away the lifeblood of lifetime
savings. Taxpayers have a right to ask whether economic
proposals are going to help them preserve the value of the things
they have worked so hard to secure -- their homes, their health,
their investments, their children's future.
Electrolly Federal spending
Fourth: Does it get Washington's house in order? What does
it do to the federal budget does it minimize it, or does it
politicize it? Does it cap spending and does it give the
American people their money's worth? Anyone who's ever managed
Gracy
44844
household finances can tell you that the deeper you crawl into
debt, the harder it is to climb out. Maybe some people up on
Capitol Hill can get away with bouncing checks -- American
competitiveness cannot.
When I deliver my State of the Union this month, take these
tests, and see if my proposals measure up measures up. Apply
these tests to any other package floating out there -- and see
whether they back it up or shoot it down. Too many of these
proposals still operate on the old paradigm of tax it, spend it,
and promise it. Well, I don't think many people are going to buy
it. ((Mother Nature's the only one around here who can give New
Hampshire a snow job)).
I didn't come up here with miracles or magic tricks. I'm
not going to promise to outlaw icy roads or black fly season. I
won't play to any fear of foreigners, to hidden hatreds, or to
class conflict. That's not my style -- never has been, never
will be.
But I will continue to fight Capitol Hill for fewer taxes
and lower spending. I will continue to fight abroad, like I did
in Asia, for more free trade and more fair trade -- leveling the
playing field for the power of "Made in America." I will fight
against protectionism 7 policies that would have our industry
stagnate in the stale air of government shelters rather than
brave the bracing winds of international competition. I will
fight against isolationism -- protecting American interests and
preserving American principles. And I will continue to fight at
home -- for better schools, for a cleaner environment, for safer
streets, and for a brighter future. Thank you. God bless New
Hampshire, and God bless the United States of America.
#
#
#
(Smith/Grossman)
January 10, 1992
Draft One EXETER
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS:
EXETER TOWN HALL
EXETER, NEW HAMPSHIRE
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 15, 1991
Thank you for that kind introduction. I know there's been
some concern about my illness at the Japanese State Dinner, and
some questions about the cause of my sickness. \ I know Barbara
joked about how my tennis game was to blame -- but I want to set
the record straight. 11 I told Barbara that I didn't want to eat
any broccoli for lunch. 11 Any broccoli farmers here?
Well, you all know that I don't like broccoli. And I know
that you all don't like baloney. Almost everyone in New
Hampshire has met a future president at one time or another, and
they can see right through the smoke screens of pipe dream
promises. I know we're swinging into a campaign cycle. And
already I see contenders scrambling all over each other to
promise voters bigger, better, and bolder than the next guy.
That's perfectly acceptable -- that's democracy. But it is not
acceptable to exploit economic hardship for political profit
((some of these ambulance chasers give new meaning to the phrase,
"no pain, no gain.")) And it is not acceptable to sacrifice
good, prudent policy in the battle for a better bumpersticker.
Of course, this state never had much of a market for snake
oil salesmen. Daniel Webster once said, "There is nothing so
powerful as truth " New Hampshirites know there's a difference
2
between soundbites and sound policy; and they don't cater much to
sweet talking over bitter truths.
I've had to look a few bitter truths myself. There are many
parts in this country where the economy is lagging and Americans
are hurting. I've been looking at the data and making some tough
decisions. Everyone knows we need is policies that spark growth.
Some seem to have stumbled upon this truth only recently, ((some
others have stumbled upon it, picked themselves up, and pretended
it never happened))
Ever since coming to the White House, first as Vice
President, then as President, I've fought long and hard for lower
taxes, less spending, fewer regulations and reduced cap gains.
I'm afraid that the Democratic Congress has been more interested
in wrestling me to the floor than in getting the economy back on
its feet. Sure they got me to give in on taxes. But while they
were celebrating victory over the President, the country was
losing the battle for growth.
In less than two weeks, I'll be proposing my package for
growth. Others will be proposing different solutions. There are
a lot of voices out there -- some prudent and pragmatic, some
irresponsible and irrelevant. Too often, election time generates
so much baloney, that Americans are left asking, "Where's the
beef?" So I've devised a few simple tests I'd suggest in
figuring out whether growth proposals are beef or bull:
First: Does it make sense? In a healthy economy, investors
invest in business; entrepreneurs take risks; workers produce;
3
consumers buy. It doesn't take an economics degree to figure
this out. A prescription for economic health does not deter
investment. It does not punish risk. It does not regulate
business out of business. And it does not tax away a hard earned
income.
Second: Does it make us more competitive? Does it prepare
us for the markets of tomorrow? Think about it --- yesterday the
smokestack; today, the microchip; tomorrow -- who knows? Wayne
Gretsky used to say, " skate where the puck is going to be, not
where it has been." As global trade continues to grow by leaps
and bounds, we need to make sure American exports stay ahead of
the curve. Our merchandise exports support 7.2 million American
jobs -- a 42% rise in five years. It's simple -- a more
competitive America means more American exports. More American
exports mean more American jobs.
Third: Does it help you keep your house in order -- starting
with home values. For many American families, a home is more
than their castle, it's their capital. And while government
mismanagement chipped away at home values, Americans watched
their main assets grow smaller and smaller. Other families,
confronted with tragic accidents or chronic illnesses, watch as
unbridled health care costs drain away the lifeblood of lifetime
savings. Taxpayers have a right to ask whether economic
proposals are going to help them preserve the value of the things
they have worked so hard to secure -- their homes, their health,
their investments, their children's future.
4
Fourth: Does it get Washington's house in order? What does
it do to the federal budget -- does it minimize it, or does it
politicize it? Does it cap spending and does it give the
American people their money's worth? Anyone who's ever managed
household finances can tell you that the deeper you crawl into
debt, the harder it is to climb out. Maybe some people up on
Capitol Hill can get away with bouncing checks -- American
competitiveness cannot.
When I deliver my State of the Union this month, take these
tests, and see if my proposals measure up measures up. Apply
these tests to any other package floating out there -- and see
whether they back it up or shoot it down. Too many of these
proposals still operate on the old paradigm of tax it, spend it,
and promise it. Well, I don't think many people are going to buy
it. ((Mother Nature's the only one around here who can give New
Hampshire a snow job))
I didn't come up here with miracles or magic tricks. I'm
not going to promise to outlaw icy roads or black fly season. I
won't play to any fear of foreigners, to hidden hatreds, or to
class conflict. That's not my style -- never has been, never
will be.
But I will continue to fight Capitol Hill for fewer taxes
and lower spending. I will continue to fight abroad, like I did
in Asia, for more free trade and more fair trade -- leveling the
playing field for the power of "Made in America." I will fight
against protectionism -- policies that would have our industry
5
stagnate in the stale air of government shelters rather than
brave the bracing winds of international competition. I will
fight against isolationism -- protecting American interests and
preserving American principles. And I will continue to fight at
home -- for better schools, for a cleaner environment, for safer
streets, and for a brighter future. Thank you. God bless New
Hampshire, and God bless the United States of America.
#
#
#
CLOSE HOLD
Document No. 298772ss
WHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM
92 JAN14 Pl:11
DATE:
1/13/92
ACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY: TUESDAY, 1/14/92 NOON
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: EXETER TOWN HALL
EXTER, NEW HAMPSHIRE - WED. 1/15/92
SUBJECT:
ACTION FYI
ACTION FYI
-
VICE PRESIDENT
HORNER
SKINNER
MCCLURE
SCOWCROFT
PETERSMEYER
DARMAN
PORTER
BRADY
ROGICH
BROMLEY
SMITH
KAUFMAN
CARD
SNOW
DEMAREST
FITZWATER
GRAY
HOLIDAY
REMARKS:
Please forward your comments directly to Tony Snow, Rm. 122, x2930,
no later than NOON, TUESDAY, JANUARY 14, with a copy to this office.
Thank you.
SENSITIVE
See comment
PHILLIP D. BRADY
CLOSE HOLD
Assistant to the President
and Staff Secretary
Ext. 2702
(Smith/Grossman)
January 10, 1992
Draft One EXETER
92 JAN P5: 35
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS:
EXETER TOWN HALL
EXETER, NEW HAMPSHIRE
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 15, 1991
Thank you for that kind introduction. I know there's been
some concern about my illness at the Japanese State Dinner, and
some questions about the cause of my sickness. \ I know Barbara
joked about how my tennis game was to blame -- but I want to set
the record straight. \\ I told Barbara that I didn't want to eat
any broccoli for lunch. \\ Any broccoli farmers here?
Well, you all know that I don't like broccoli. And I know
that you all don't like baloney. Almost everyone in New
Hampshire has met a future president at one time or another, and
they can see right through the smoke screens of pipe dream
promises. I know we're swinging into a campaign cycle. And
already I see contenders scrambling all over each other to
promise voters bigger, better, and bolder than the next guy.
That's perfectly acceptable -- that's democracy. But it is not
acceptable to exploit economic hardship for political profit
((some of these ambulance chasers give new meaning to the phrase,
"no pain, no gain. ")) And it is not acceptable to sacrifice
good, prudent policy in the battle for a better bumpersticker.
Of course, this state never had much of a market for snake
oil salesmen. Daniel Webster once said, "There is nothing so
powerful as truth " New Hampshirites know there's a difference
between soundbites and sound policy; and they don't cater much to
sweet talking over bitter truths.
I've had to look a few bitter truths myself. There are many
parts in this country where the economy is lagging and Americans
are hurting. I've been looking at the data and making some tough
decisions. Everyone knows we need is policies that spark growth.
Some seem to have stumbled upon this truth only recently, ( (some
others have stumbled upon it, picked themselves up, and pretended
it never happened))
Ever since coming to the White House, first as Vice
President, then as President, I've fought long and hard for lower
taxes, less spending, fewer regulations and reduced cap gains.
I'm afraid that the Democratic Congress has been more interested
in wrestling me to the floor than in getting the economy back on
its feet. Sure they got me to give in on taxes. But while they
were celebrating victory over the President, the country was
losing the battle for growth.
In less than two weeks, I'll be proposing my package for
growth. Others will be proposing different solutions. There are
a lot of voices out there -- some prudent and pragmatic, some
irresponsible and irrelevant. Too often, election time generates
so much baloney, that Americans are left asking, "Where's the
beef?" So I've devised a few simple tests I'd suggest in
figuring out whether growth proposals are beef or bull:
First: Does it make sense? In a healthy economy, investors
invest in business; entrepreneurs take risks; workers produce;
consumers buy. It doesn't take an economics degree to figure
this out. A prescription for economic health does not deter
investment. It does not punish risk. It does not regulate
business out of business. And it does not tax away a hard earned
income.
Second: Does it make us more competitive? Does it prepare
us for the markets of tomorrow? Think about it -- yesterday the
smokestack; today, the microchip; tomorrow -- who knows? Wayne
Gretsky used to say, " skate where the puck is going to be, not
where it has been. " As global trade continues to grow by leaps
and bounds, we need to make sure American exports stay ahead of
the curve. Our merchandise exports support 7.2 million American
jobs -- a 42% rise in five years. It's simple -- a more
checking
competitive America means more American exports. More American
exports mean more American jobs.
Third: Does it help you keep your house in order -- starting
with home values. For many American families, a home is more
than their castle, it's their capital. And while government
mismanagement chipped away at home values, Americans watched
their main assets grow smaller and smaller. Other families,
confronted with tragic accidents or chronic illnesses, watch as
unbridled health care costs drain away the lifeblood of lifetime
savings. Taxpayers have a right to ask whether economic
proposals are going to help them preserve the value of the things
they have worked so hard to secure -- their homes, their health,
their investments, their children's future.
Fourth: Does it get Washington's house in order? What does
it do to the federal budget -- does it minimize it, or does it
politicize it? Does it cap spending and does it give the
American people their money's worth? Anyone who's ever managed
household finances can tell you that the deeper you crawl into
debt, the harder it is to climb out. Maybe some people up on
Capitol Hill can get away with bouncing checks -- American
competitiveness cannot.
When I deliver my State of the Union this month, take these
tests, and see if my proposals measure up measures up. Apply
these tests to any other package floating out there -- and see
whether they back it up or shoot it down. Too many of these
proposals still operate on the old paradigm of tax it, spend it,
and promise it. Well, I don't think many people are going to buy
it. ( (Mother Nature's the only one around here who can give New
Hampshire a snow job))
I didn't come up here with miracles or magic tricks. I'm
not going to promise to outlaw icy roads or black fly season. I
won't play to any fear of foreigners, to hidden hatreds, or to
class conflict. That's not my style -- never has been, never
will be.
But I will continue to fight Capitol Hill for fewer taxes
and lower spending. I will continue to fight abroad, like I did
in Asia, for more free trade and more fair trade -- leveling the
playing field for the power of "Made in America." I will fight
against protectionism -- policies that would have our industry
stagnate in the stale air of government shelters rather than
brave the bracing winds of international competition. I will
fight against isolationism -- protecting American interests and
preserving American principles. And I will continue to fight at
home -- for better schools, for a cleaner environment, for safer
streets, and for a brighter future. Thank you. God bless New
Hampshire, and God bless the United States of America.
#
#
#
MASTER
J.G.
Gardner DD- add reterement, beef. /penson (Smith/Grossman) sentence.
January 10, 1992
Draft One EXETER
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS:
EXETER TOWN HALL
EXETER, NEW HAMPSHIRE
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 15, 1991
DAG
Governor,
County Commissioner Maureen Banows
Thank you for that kind introduction./ I know there's been
some concern about my illness at the Japanese State Dinner, and
some questions about the cause of my sickness. \ I know Barbara
joked about how my tennis game was to blame -- but I want to set
the record straight. I told Barbara that I didn't want to eat
any broccoli for lunch. Any broccoli farmers here?
Well, you all know that I don't like broccoli. And I know
that you all don't like baloney. Almost everyone in New
Hampshire has met a future president at one time or another, and
they can see right through the smoke screens of pipe dream
promises. I know we're swinging into a campaign cycle. And
already I see contenders scrambling all over each other to
(DD)
promise voters bigger, better, and bolder than the next guy.
That's perfectly acceptable -- that's democracy. But it is not
acceptable to exploit economic hardship for political profit
political
skinner)
((some of these\ambulance chasers give new meaning to the phrase,
"no pain, no gain. ")) And it is not acceptable to sacrifice
good, prudent policy in the battle for a better bumpersticker.
of course, this state never had much of a market for snake
oil salesmen. Daniel Webster once said, "There is nothing so
powerful as truth " New Hampshirites know there's a difference
between soundbites and sound policy; and they don't cater much to
sweet talking over bitter truths.
I've had to look a few bitter truths myself. There are many
parts in this country where the economy is lagging and Americans
LDD
talking w/people all over the country
are hurting. I've been looking at the data and making some tough
that what one
(skinner) decisions. Everyone knows need x policies that spark growth.
Some seem to have stumbled upon this truth only recently, ((some
others have stumbled upon it, picked themselves up, and pretended
it never happened)).
Ever since coming to the White House, first as Vice
President, then as President, I've fought long and hard for lower
(counsel)
taxes
taxes, less spending, fewer regulations and reduced cap gains.
I'm afraid that the Democratic Congress has been more interested
in wrestling me to the floor than in getting the concession economy cl back on
a
not
make
(skinner)
its feet. Sure they got me to give in on taxes. But while they again.
sumeil:
were celebrating victory over the President, the country was
elets
losing the battle for growth.
lest 2
sentences
In less than two weeks, I'll be proposing my package for
or
growth. Others will be proposing different solutions. There are
explain
a lot of voices out there -- some prudent and pragmatic, some
in ging
irresponsible and irrelevant. Too often, election time generates
to slap
this because
so much baloney, that Americans are left asking, "Where's the
Skinne's
beef?" So I've devised a few simple tests I'd suggest in
already
signed
figuring out whether growth proposals are beef or bull:
M ul
First: Does it make sense? In a healthy economy, investors
one careat
above,
invest in business; entrepreneurs take risks; workers produce;
consumers buy. It doesn't take an economics degree to figure
this out. A prescription for economic health does not deter
investment. It does not punish risk. It does not regulate
business out of business. And it does not tax away a hard earned
income.
Second: Does it make us more competitive? Does it prepare
(DD)
Doesit prepare our students for the challenges of
us for the markets of tomorrow? n Think about it --- yesterday thethe next
century?
smokestack; today, the microchip; tomorrow -- who knows? Wayne
Gretsky used to say, " skate where the puck is going to be, not
where it has been. " As global trade continues to grow by leaps
and bounds, we need to make sure American exports stay ahead of
the curve. Our merchandise exports support 7.2 million American
jobs -- a 42% rise in five years. It's simple -- a more
competitive America means more American exports. More American
exports mean more American jobs.
Third: Does it help you keep your house in order -- starting
with home values. For many American families, a home is more
than their castle, it's their capital. And while government
mismanagement chipped away at home values, Americans watched
their main assets grow smaller and smaller. Other families,
confronted with tragic accidents or chronic illnesses, watch as
unbridled health care costs drain away the lifeblood of lifetime
DD says
savings. Taxpayers have a right to ask whether economic
"aeld
pension"
proposals are going to help them preserve the value of the things
chat does
wages Counsel
that
they have worked so hard to secure -- their homes, their health,
mean t
(Then own returnent?
their investments, their children's future.
is it
necessary?
Fourth: Does it get Washington's house in order? What does
it do to the federal budget -- does it minimize it, or does it
politicize it? Does it cap spending and does it give the
American people their money's worth? Anyone who's ever managed
household finances can tell you that the deeper you crawl into
debt, the harder it is to climb out. Maybe some people up on
Capitol Hill can get away with bouncing checks -- American
competitiveness cannot.
When I deliver my State of the Union this month, take these
(DD)
plan
tests, and see if my proposals measureSup measures up. Apply
these tests to any other package floating out there -- and see
whether they back it up or shoot it down. Too many of these
(OD)
notions
proposals still operate on the old paradigm of tax it, spend it,
and promise it. Well, I don't think many people are going to buy
it. ((Mother Nature's the only one around here who can give New
Hampshire a snow job)).
I didn't come up here with miracles or magic tricks. I'm
not going to promise to outlaw icy roads or black fly season. I
won't play to any fear of foreigners, to hidden hatreds, or to
ME
(DD) class conflict. That's not my style -- never has been, never
will be.
But I will continue to fight Capitol Hill for fewer taxes
and lower spending. I will continue to fight abroad, like I did
in Asia, for more free trade and more fair trade -- leveling the
playing field for the power of "Made in America." I will fight
against protectionism -- policies that would have our industry
stagnate in the stale air of government shelters rather than
brave the bracing winds of international competition. I will
fight against isolationism -- protecting American interests and
preserving American principles. And I will continue to fight at
home -- for better schools, for a cleaner environment, for safer
d know New Humpshire shares These goals.
Carney
nd ask New Hampshire thisfight. to join
streets, and for a brighter future. Thank you. God bless New
Hampshire, and God bless the United States of America.
#
#
#
6
So listen to what my competition says -- then hear me out.
I'm counting on the people of New Hampshire -- and I'm confident
that when you sort out fact from fiction, you'll see that we've
got the best plan to get this economy growing again. //
JAN-11-1992 11:03 FROM STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
TO
91202456238002
P.04
RE Potus Visit
Tony
Snow,
GORHAM HALL
100 you'ds
EXETER, NEW HAMPSHIRE
from
THE SQUAMSCOTT HOTEL. Gorham Hall was originally the site of the
Squamscott Hotel, built in 1838 by the enterprising sisters, Martha Gilman
and Mrs. Hannah Ladd. Shortly thereafter, "Major" Blake and his son-in-
D
law, Oliver Prall, purchased the Squamscott and conducted a successful
business here for many years.
THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. Then, according to Dr. James D. Squires, on October
12, 1853, an auspicious historical event visited the Squamscott Hotel in
the guise of the Hon. Amos Tuck. In February of that year Congressman Tuck
came home to Exeter after the close of his third, two-year term in Congress
The Hon. Amos Tuck was among those who opposed the extension of slavery and
in order to work towards this end he hoped to unify all N.H. elements
having any reason to oppose the Democrats into a new opposition party.
"On October 12, 1853, Tuck met with thirteen other men in the Squamscott
Hotel
All seeking to form an organization that would work harmoniously
together. Tuck suggested that they abandon all old names and call
themselves Republicans."
"There deliberations were, of course, secret, and no newspaper accounts
appeared at the time to tell what happened in Exeter. But before the year
was ended, Dr. Batchelder told the whole story to the eminent New York
editor, Horace Greeley, who was visiting his native town of Amherst."
"Through Greeley's efforts the facts of the October meeting in New
Hampshire and of the new name that had been proposed for the party appeared
in print. Thus, months before either the Ripon meeting or the assembly at
Jackson, New Hampshire men pioneered in the formation of a new political
group to oppose the Democrats
This event is recorded on a bronze tablet located on the right side of the
main entrance to Gorham Hall and reads: On This Site The Republican Party
Was First Names By Hon. Amos Tuck Oct. 12, 1853. Dartmouth College holds
the original plaque for its commemoration significance. A new tablet has
replaced the original.
ABRAHAM LINCOLN. During Todd Lincoln's tenure at Phillips Exeter Academy,
President Abraham Lincoln visited Exeter on a number of occasions. It is
widely accepted that he stayed at the Squamscott Hotel.
PHILLIPS EXETER ACADEMY. In 1872 Phillips Exeter Academy bought the Hotel
and renamed it Gorham Hall in honor of one of their trustees, Dr. David W.
Gorham. The building was subsequently sold and renovated a number of
times. In 1955 concern was voiced by many that the proposed new buyers of
Gorham Hall were only interested in the land and not the building.
Fortunately, NICHOLS POULTRY FARM was able to purchase the property, saving
Gorham Hall and utilize it for office space, until in 1960, the Academy
repurchased Gorham Hall for their administrative offices.
GORHAM HALL TODAY is one of the largest office buildings in downtown
Exeter. Phillips Exeter Academy sold Gorham Hall in 1983. Since this time
its primary tenant has been Exeter Holdings, Ltd., e private capital firm
specializing in the acquisition of small to medium sized businesses. More
recently they have shared this beautiful old building with the Exeter
School District for their administrative offices and Bottomline Tech-
nologies, a thriving and innovative high-tech computer company.
TOTAL P.04
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 1-14-92 :11:26AM ;
4562983-
6218;# 1
CLOSE HOLD
Document No. 29877288
WHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM
DATE:
1/13/92
ACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY: TUESDAY, 1/14/92 NOON
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: EXETER TOWN HALL
EXTER, NEW HAMPSHIRE - WED. 1/15/92
SUBJECT:
ACTION FYI
ACTION FYI
VICE PRESIDENT
HORNER
SKINNER
MCCLURE
SCOWCROFT
PETERSMEYER
DARMAN
PORTER
BRADY
ROGICH
BROMLEY
SMITH
KAUFMAN
CARD
SNOW
DEMARES
FITZWATER
GR
HOLIDAY
REMARKS:
Please forward your comments directly to Tony Snow, Rm. 122, x2930,
no later than NOON, TUESDAY, JANUARY 14, with a copy to this office.
Thank you.
SENSITIVE
see comments
PHILLIP D. BRADY
CLOSE HOLD
Assistant to the President
and Staff Secretary
Ext. 2702
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 1-14-92 :11:26AM ;
4562983-
6218;# 2
(Smith/Grossman)
January 10, 1992
Draft One EXETER
02 JAN 13 P5: 39
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS:
EXETER TOWN HALL
EXETER, NEW HAMPSHIRE
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 15, 1991
Thank you for that kind introduction. I know there's been
some concern about my illness at the Japanese State Dinner, and
some questions about the cause of my sickness. \ I know Barbara
joked about how my tennis game was to blame -- but I want to set
the record straight. 11 I told Barbara that I didn't want to eat
any broccoli for lunch. Any broccoli farmers here?
Well, you all know that I don't like broccoli. And I know
that you all don't like baloney. Almost everyone in New
Hampshire has met a future president at one time or another, and
they can see right through the smoke screens of pipe dream
promises. I know we're swinging into a campaign cycle. And
already I see contenders scrambling all over each other to
promise
bigger, better, and bolder than the next guy.
That's perfectly acceptable -- that's democracy. But it is not
acceptable to exploit economic hardship for political profit
((some of these ambulance chasers give new meaning to the phrase,
"no pain, no gain.")) And it is not acceptable to sacrifice
good, prudent policy in the battle for a better bumpersticker.
of course, this state never had much of a market for snake
oil salesmen. Daniel Webster once said, "There is nothing so
powerful as truth..." New Hampshirites know there's a difference
between soundbites and sound policy; and they don't cater much to
sweet talking over bitter truths.
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 1-14-92 11:27AM ;
4562983-
6218;# 3
I've had to look a few bitter truths myself. There are many
parts in this country where the economy is lagging and Americans
talking with people altover this country
are hurting. I've been looking at the data and making some tough
decisions. Everyone knows we need is policies that spark growth.
Some seem to have stumbled upon this truth only recently, (some
others have stumbled upon it, picked themselves up, and pretended
it never happened))
Ever since coming to the White House, first as Vice
President, then as President, I've fought long and hard for lower
taxes, less spending, fewer regulations and reduced cap gains.
I'm afraid that the Democratic Congress has been more interested
in wrestling me to the floor than in getting the economy back on
its feet. Sure they got me to give in on taxes. But while they
were celebrating victory over the President, the country was
losing the battle for growth.
In less than two weeks, I'll be proposing my package for
growth. Others will be proposing different solutions. There are
a lot of voices out there -- some prudent and pragmatic, some
irresponsible and irrelevant. Too often, election time generates
so much baloney, that Americans are left asking, "Where's the
beef?" So I've devised a few simple tests I'd suggest in
figuring out whether growth proposals are beef or bull:
First: Does it make sense? In a healthy economy, investors
invest in business; entrepreneurs take risks; workers produce;
consumers buy. It doesn't take an economics degree to figure
this out. A prescription for economic health does not deter
investment. It does not punish risk. It does not regulate
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 1-14-92 :11:27AM ;
4562983-
6218;# 4
business out of business. And it does not tax away a hard earned
income.
address
Second: Does it make us more competitive? Does it prepare
us for the markets of tomorrow? Think about it -- yesterday the
smokestack; today, the microchip; tomorrow - who knows? Wayne
Gretsky used to say, II skate where the puck is going to be, not
where it has been. As global trade continues to grow by leaps
and bounds, we need to make sure American exports stay ahead of
the curve. Our merchandise exports support 7.2 million American
jobs -- a 42% rise in five years. It's simple -- a more
competitive America means more American exports. More American
exports mean more American jobs.
Third: Does it help you keep your house in order -- starting
with home values. For many American families, a home is more
than their castle, it's their capital. And while government
mismanagement chipped away at home values, Americans watched
their main assets grow smaller and smaller. Other families,
(?)
confronted with tragic accidents or chronic illnesses, watch as
add
unbridled health care costs drain away the lifeblood of lifetime
savings. Taxpayers have a right to ask whether economic
proposals are going to help them preserve the value of the things
they have worked so hard to secure -- their homes, their health,
their investments, their children's future.
Fourth: Does it get Washington's house in order? What does
it do to the federal budget -- does it minimize it, or does it
politicize it? Does it cap spending and does it give the
American people their money's worth? Anyone who's ever managed
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 1-14-92 :11:28AM ;
4562983-
6218;# 5
household finances can tell you that the desper you crawl into
debt, the harder it is to climb out. Maybe some people up on
Capitol Hill can get away with bouncing checks -- American
competitiveness cannot.
When I deliver my State of the Union this month, take these
tests, and see if my propesals plan measure/up measures up. Apply
these tests to any other package floating out there -- and see
whether notions they back it up or shoot it down. Too many of these
proposals still operate on the old paradigm of tax it, spend it,
and promise it Well, I don't think many people are going to buy
it. ((Mother Nature's the only one around here who can give New
Hampshire a snow job)).
I didn't come up here with miracles or magic tricks. I'm
not going to promise to outlaw icy roads or black fly season. I
won't play to any fear of foreigners, to hidden hatreds, or to
class conflict. That's not my style -- never has been, never
will be.
But I will continue to fight Capitol Hill for fewer taxes
and lower spending. I will continue to fight abroad, like I did
in Asia, for more free trade and more fair trade -- leveling the
playing field for the power of "Made in America." I will fight
against protectionism -- policies that would have our industry
stagnate in the stale air of government shelters rather than
brave the bracing winds of international competition. I will
fight against isolationism -- protecting American interests and
preserving American principles. And I will continue to fight at
home -- for better schools, for a cleaner environment, for safer
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 1-14-92 :11:28AM ;
4562983-
6218;# 6
streets, and for a brighter future. Thank you. God bless New
Hampshire, and God bless the United States of America.
#
#
#
CLOSE HOLD
Document No. 298772ss
WHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM
92 JAN 14 A9: 30
DATE:
1/13/92
ACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY: TUESDAY, 1/14/92 NOON
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: EXETER TOWN HALL
SUBJECT:
EXTER, NEW HAMPSHIRE - WED. 1/15/92
ACTION FYI
ACTION FYI
VICE PRESIDENT
HORNER
SKINNER
MCCLURE
SCOWCROFT
PETERSMEYER
DARMAN
PORTER
BRADY
ROGICH
BROMLEY
SMITH
KAUFMAN
CARD
SNOW
DEMAREST
FITZWATER
GRAY
HOLIDAY
REMARKS:
Please forward your comments directly to Tony Snow, Rm. 122, x2930,
no later than NOON, TUESDAY, JANUARY 14, with a copy to this office.
Thank you.
SENSITIVE
PHILLIP D. BRADY
CLOSE HOLD
Assistant to the President
and Staff Secretary
Ext. 2702
(Smith/Grossman)
January 10, 1992
Draft One EXETER
92 JAN P5: 30
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS:
EXETER TOWN HALL
EXETER, NEW HAMPSHIRE
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 15, 1991
Thank you for that kind introduction. I know there's been
some concern about my illness at the Japanese State Dinner, and
some questions about the cause of my sickness. \ I know Barbara
joked about how my tennis game was to blame -- but I want to set
the record straight. \\ I told Barbara that I didn't want to eat
any broccoli for lunch. \\ Any broccoli farmers here?
Well, you all know that I don't like broccoli. And I know
that you all don't like baloney. Almost everyone in New
Hampshire has met a future president at one time or another, and
they can see right through the smoke screens of pipe dream
promises. I know we're swinging into a campaign cycle. And
already I see contenders scrambling all over each other to
promise voters bigger, better, and bolder than the next guy.
That's perfectly acceptable -- that's democracy. But it is not
acceptable to exploit political economic hardship for political profit
((some of these ambulance chasers give new meaning to the phrase,
"no pain, no gain. ")) And it is not acceptable to sacrifice
good, prudent policy in the battle for a better bumpersticker.
Of course, this state never had much of a market for snake
oil salesmen. Daniel Webster once said, "There is nothing so
powerful as truth " New Hampshirites know there's a difference
between soundbites and sound policy; and they don't cater much to
sweet talking over bitter truths.
I've had to look a few bitter truths myself. There are many
parts in this country where the economy is lagging and Americans
are hurting. I've been looking at the data and making some tough
that what are
decisions. Everyone knows we need is policies that spark growth.
Some seem to have stumbled upon this truth only recently, ((some
others have stumbled upon it, picked themselves up, and pretended
it never happened)).
Ever since coming to the White House, first as Vice
President, then as President, I've fought long and hard for lower
taxes, less spending, fewer regulations and reduced cap gains.
I'm afraid that the Democratic Congress has been more interested
in wrestling me to the floor than in getting the economy back on
its feet. Sure they got me to give in on taxes. But while
they
That
were celebrating victory over the President, the country was
concessid.
losing the battle for growth.
In less than two weeks, I'll be proposing my package for
cymake
growth. Others will be proposing different solutions. There are
a lot of voices out there -- some prudent and pragmatic, some
irresponsible and irrelevant. Too often, election time generates
so much baloney, that Americans are left asking, "Where's the
beef?" So I've devised a few simple tests I'd suggest in
figuring out whether growth proposals are beef or bull:
First: Does it make sense? In a healthy economy, investors
invest in business; entrepreneurs take risks; workers produce;
consumers buy. It doesn't take an economics degree to figure
this out. A prescription for economic health does not deter
investment. It does not punish risk. It does not regulate
business out of business. And it does not tax away a hard earned
income.
Second: Does it make us more competitive? Does it prepare
us for the markets of tomorrow? Think about it -- yesterday the
smokestack; today, the microchip; tomorrow -- who knows? Wayne
Z
Gretsky used to say, = skate where the puck is going to be, not
where it has been. " As global trade continues to grow by leaps
and bounds, we need to make sure American exports stay ahead of
the curve. Our merchandise exports support 7.2 million American
jobs -- a 42% rise in five years. It's simple -- a more
competitive America means more American exports. More American
exports mean more American jobs.
Third: Does it help you keep your house in order -- starting
with home values. For many American families, a home is more
than their castle, it's their capital. And while government
mismanagement chipped away at home values, Americans watched
their main assets grow smaller and smaller. Other families,
confronted with tragic accidents or chronic illnesses, watch as
unbridled health care costs drain away the lifeblood of lifetime
savings. Taxpayers have a right to ask whether economic
proposals are going to help them preserve the value of the things
they have worked so hard to secure -- their homes, their health,
their investments, their children's future.
Fourth: Does it get Washington's house in order? What does
it do to the federal budget -- does it minimize it, or does it
politicize it? Does it cap spending and does it give the
American people their money's worth? Anyone who's ever managed
household finances can tell you that the deeper you crawl into
debt, the harder it is to climb out. Maybe some people up on
Capitol Hill can get away with bouncing checks -- American
competitiveness cannot.
When I deliver my State of the Union this month, take these
tests, and see if my proposals measure up measures up. Apply
these tests to any other package floating out there -- and see
whether they back it up or shoot it down. Too many of these
proposals still operate on the old paradigm of tax it, spend it,
and promise it. Well, I don't think many people are going to buy
it. ((Mother Nature's the only one around here who can give New
Hampshire a snow job) )
I didn't come up here with miracles or magic tricks. I'm
not going to promise to outlaw icy roads or black fly season. I
won't play to any fear of foreigners, to hidden hatreds, or to
class conflict. That's not my style -- never has been, never
will be.
But I will continue to fight Capitol Hill for fewer taxes
and lower spending. I will continue to fight abroad, like I did
in Asia, for more free trade and more fair trade -- leveling the
playing field for the power of "Made in America." I will fight
against protectionism -- policies that would have our industry
stagnate in the stale air of government shelters rather than
brave the bracing winds of international competition. I will
fight against isolationism -- protecting American interests and
preserving American principles. And I will continue to fight at
home -- for better schools, for a cleaner environment, for safer
streets, and for a brighter future. Thank you. God bless New
Hampshire, and God bless the United States of America.
#
#
#
THE WHITE HOUSE
32 JAN Id
WASHINGTON
All:
January 14, 1992
3j
MEMORANDUM FOR TONY SNOW
FROM:
John S. Gardner Jr.
SUBJECT:
Exeter Town Hall Remarks
Phil and I just had one comment on this:
1. P. 2, first paragraph: Couldn't these other descriptions be
interpreted as applying equally well to the President?
2. P. 2, third para. : To use "beef" will remind the press corps
of Gary Hart in 1984!
(Smith/Grossman)
January 10, 1992
92 JAN13 P5: 35
Draft One EXETER
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS:
EXETER TOWN HALL
EXETER, NEW HAMPSHIRE
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 15, 1991
Thank you for that kind introduction. I know there's been
some concern about my illness at the Japanese State Dinner, and
some questions about the cause of my sickness. \ I know Barbara
joked about how my tennis game was to blame -- but I want to set
the record straight. I told Barbara that I didn't want to eat
any broccoli for lunch. Any broccoli farmers here?
Well, you all know that I don't like broccoli. And I know
that you all don't like baloney. Almost everyone in New
Hampshire has met a future president at one time or another, and
they can see right through the smoke screens of pipe dream
promises. I know we're swinging into a campaign cycle. And
already I see contenders scrambling all over each other to
promise voters bigger, better, and bolder than the next guy.
That's perfectly acceptable -- that's democracy. But it is not
acceptable to exploit economic hardship for political profit
((some of these ambulance chasers give new meaning to the phrase,
"no pain, no gain. ")) And it is not acceptable to sacrifice
good, prudent policy in the battle for a better bumpersticker.
of course, this state never had much of a market for snake
oil salesmen. Daniel Webster once said, "There is nothing so
powerful as truth " New Hampshirites know there's a difference
between soundbites and sound policy; and they don't cater much to
sweet talking over bitter truths.
Want this be interpreted us applying equally well
to the President?
I've had to look a few bitter truths myself. There are many
parts in this country where the economy is lagging and Americans
are hurting. I've been looking at the data and making some tough
decisions. Everyone knows we need is policies that spark growth.
Some seem to have stumbled upon this truth only recently, ((some
others have stumbled upon it, picked themselves up, and pretended
it never happened)).
Ever since coming to the White House, first as Vice
President, then as President, I've fought long and hard for lower
taxes, less spending, fewer regulations and reduced cap gains.
I'm afraid that the Democratic Congress has been more interested
in wrestling me to the floor than in getting the economy back on
its feet. Sure they got me to give in on taxes. But while they
were celebrating victory over the President, the country was
losing the battle for growth.
In less than two weeks, I'll be proposing my package for
growth. Others will be proposing different solutions. There are
a lot of voices out there -- some prudent and pragmatic, some
irresponsible and irrelevant. Too often, election time generates
so much baloney, that Americans are left asking, "Where's the
beef?" So I've devised a few simple tests I'd suggest in
figuring out whether growth proposals are beef or bull:
First: Does it make sense? In a healthy economy, investors
invest in business; entrepreneurs take risks; workers produce;
consumers buy. It doesn't take an economics degree to figure
this out. A prescription for economic health does not deter
investment. It does not punish risk. It does not regulate
dands 1984!! like Dary that
business out of business. And it does not tax away a hard earned
income.
Second: Does it make us more competitive? Does it prepare
us for the markets of tomorrow? Think about it -- yesterday the
smokestack; today, the microchip; tomorrow -- who knows? Wayne
Gretsky used to say, " skate where the puck is going to be, not
where it has been. " As global trade continues to grow by leaps
and bounds, we need to make sure American exports stay ahead of
the curve. Our merchandise exports support 7.2 million American
jobs -- a 42% rise in five years. It's simple -- a more
competitive America means more American exports. More American
exports mean more American jobs.
Third: Does it help you keep your house in order -- starting
with home values. For many American families, a home is more
than their castle, it's their capital. And while government
mismanagement chipped away at home values, Americans watched
their main assets grow smaller and smaller. Other families,
confronted with tragic accidents or chronic illnesses, watch as
unbridled health care costs drain away the lifeblood of lifetime
savings. Taxpayers have a right to ask whether economic
proposals are going to help them preserve the value of the things
they have worked so hard to secure ---- their homes, their health,
their investments, their children's future.
Fourth: Does it get Washington's house in order? What does
it do to the federal budget -- does it minimize it, or does it
politicize it? Does it cap spending and does it give the
American people their money's worth? Anyone who's ever managed
household finances can tell you that the deeper you crawl into
debt, the harder it is to climb out. Maybe some people up on
Capitol Hill can get away with bouncing checks -- American
competitiveness cannot.
When I deliver my State of the Union this month, take these
tests, and see if my proposals measure up measures up. Apply
these tests to any other package floating out there -- and see
whether they back it up or shoot it down. Too many of these
proposals still operate on the old paradigm of tax it, spend it,
and promise it. Well, I don't think many people are going to buy
it. ( (Mother Nature's the only one around here who can give New
Hampshire a snow job) )
I didn't come up here with miracles or magic tricks. I'm
not going to promise to outlaw icy roads or black fly season. I
won't play to any fear of foreigners, to hidden hatreds, or to
class conflict. That's not my style -- never has been, never
will be.
But I will continue to fight Capitol Hill for fewer taxes
and lower spending. I will continue to fight abroad, like I did
in Asia, for more free trade and more fair trade -- leveling the
playing field for the power of "Made in America." I will fight
against protectionism -- policies that would have our industry
stagnate in the stale air of government shelters rather than
brave the bracing winds of international competition. I will
fight against isolationism -- protecting American interests and
preserving American principles. And I will continue to fight at
home -- for better schools, for a cleaner environment, for safer
streets, and for a brighter future. Thank you. God bless New
Hampshire, and God bless the United States of America.
#
#
#
CARNEY
to- uno. coters
(Smith/Grossman)
January 10, 1992
Draft One EXETER
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS:
EXETER TOWN HALL
EXETER, NEW HAMPSHIRE
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 15, 1991
Thank you for that kind introduction. I know there's been
some concern about my illness at the Japanese State Dinner, and
some questions about the cause of my sickness. I know Barbara
Ash yor Support AT END
joked about how my tennis game was to blame -- but I want to set
the record straight. I told Barbara that I didn't want to eat
any broccoli for lunch. Any broccoli farmers here?
Well, you all know that I don't like broccoli. And I know
that you all don't like baloney. Almost everyone in New
Hampshire has met a future president at one time or another, and
they can see right through the smoke screens of pipe dream
promises. I know we're swinging into a campaign cycle. And
already I see contenders scrambling all over each other to
promise voters bigger, better, and bolder than the next guy.
That's perfectly acceptable -- that's democracy. But it is not
acceptable to exploit economic hardship for political profit
( (some of these ambulance chasers give new meaning to the phrase,
"no pain, no gain. ")) And it is not acceptable to sacrifice
good, prudent policy in the battle for a better bumpersticker.
of course, this state never had much of a market for snake
oil salesmen. Daniel Webster once said, "There is nothing so
powerful as truth " New Hampshirites know there's a difference
between soundbites and sound policy; and they don't cater much to
sweet talking over bitter truths.
CARNey: CROWD is 1/3
Bush backets 2/3 undreided
Republicans. bach Might want Git.
notch
a
I've had to look a few bitter truths myself. There are many
parts in this country where the economy is lagging and Americans
are hurting. I've been looking at the data and making some tough
decisions. Everyone knows we need is policies that spark growth.
Some seem to have stumbled upon this truth only recently, ( (some
others have stumbled upon it, picked themselves up, and pretended
it never happened))
Ever since coming to the White House, first as Vice
President, then as President, I've fought long and hard for lower
taxes, less spending, fewer regulations and reduced cap gains.
I'm afraid that the Democratic Congress has been more interested
in wrestling me to the floor than in getting the economy back on
its feet. Sure they got me to give in on taxes. But while they
were celebrating victory over the President, the country was
losing the battle for growth.
In less than two weeks, I'll be proposing my package for
growth. Others will be proposing different solutions. There are
a lot of voices out there -- some prudent and pragmatic, some
irresponsible and irrelevant. Too often, election time generates
so much baloney, that Americans are left asking, "Where's the
beef?" So I've devised a few simple tests I'd suggest in
figuring out whether growth proposals are beef or bull:
First: Does it make sense? In a healthy economy, investors
invest in business; entrepreneurs take risks; workers produce;
consumers buy. It doesn't take an economics degree to figure
this out. A prescription for economic health does not deter
investment. It does not punish risk. It does not regulate
business out of business. And it does not tax away a hard earned
income.
Second: Does it make us more competitive? Does it prepare
us for the markets of tomorrow? Think about it -- yesterday the
smokestack; today, the microchip; tomorrow -- who knows? Wayne
Gretsky used to say, " skate where the puck is going to be, not
where it has been. " As global trade continues to grow by leaps
and bounds, we need to make sure American exports stay ahead of
the curve. Our merchandise exports support 7.2 million American
jobs -- a 42% rise in five years. It's simple -- a more
competitive America means more American exports. More American
exports mean more American jobs.
Third: Does it help you keep your house in order -- starting
with home values. For many American families, a home is more
than their castle, it's their capital. And while government
mismanagement chipped away at home values, Americans watched
their main assets grow smaller and smaller. Other families,
confronted with tragic accidents or chronic illnesses, watch as
unbridled health care costs drain away the lifeblood of lifetime
savings. Taxpayers have a right to ask whether economic
proposals are going to help them preserve the value of the things
they have worked so hard to secure -- their homes, their health,
their investments, their children's future.
Fourth: Does it get Washington's house in order? What does
it do to the federal budget -- does it minimize it, or does it
politicize it? Does it cap spending and does it give the
American people their money's worth? Anyone who's ever managed
household finances can tell you that the deeper you crawl into
debt, the harder it is to climb out. Maybe some people up on
Capitol Hill can get away with bouncing checks -- American
competitiveness cannot.
When I deliver my State of the Union this month, take these
tests, and see if my proposals measure up measures up. Apply
these tests to any other package floating out there -- and see
whether they back it up or shoot it down. Too many of these
proposals still operate on the old paradigm of tax it, spend it,
and promise it. Well, I don't think many people are going to buy
it. ( (Mother Nature's the only one around here who can give New
Hampshire a snow job))
I didn't come up here with miracles or magic tricks. I'm
not going to promise to outlaw icy roads or black fly season. I
won't play to any fear of foreigners, to hidden hatreds, or to
class conflict. That's not my style -- never has been, never
will be.
But I will continue to fight Capitol Hill for fewer taxes
and lower spending. I will continue to fight abroad, like I did
in Asia, for more free trade and more fair trade -- leveling the
playing field for the power of "Made in America." I will fight
against protectionism -- policies that would have our industry
stagnate in the stale air of government shelters rather than
brave the bracing winds of international competition. I will
fight against isolationism -- protecting American interests and
preserving American principles. And I will continue to fight at
home -- for better schools, for a cleaner environment, for safer
streets, and for a brighter future. Thank you. God bless New
Hampshire, and God bless the United States of America.
#
#
#
CLOSE HOLD
Document No. 298772ss
WHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM
92 JAN 13 P7:19
DATE:
1/13/92
ACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY: TUESDAY, 1/14/92 NOON
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: EXETER TOWN HALL
SUBJECT:
EXTER, NEW HAMPSHIRE - WED. 1/15/92
ACTION FYI
ACTION FYI
VICE PRESIDENT
HORNER
SKINNER
MCCLURE
SCOWCROFT
PETERSMEYER
DARMAN
PORTER
BRADY
ROGICH
BROMLEY
SMITH
KAUFMAN
CARD
SNOW
DEMAREST
FITZWATER
GRAY
HOLIDAY
REMARKS:
Please forward your comments directly to Tony Snow, Rm. 122, x2930,
no later than NOON, TUESDAY, JANUARY 14, with a copy to this office.
Thank you.
SENSITIVE
PHILLIP D. BRADY
CLOSE HOLD
Assistant to the President
and Staff Secretary
Ext. 2702
(Smith/Grossman)
January 10, 1992
Draft One EXETER
92 JAN 13 P5: 30
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS:
EXETER TOWN HALL
EXETER, NEW HAMPSHIRE
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 15, 1991
Thank you for that kind introduction. I know there's been
some concern about my illness at the Japanese State Dinner, and
some questions about the cause of my sickness. \ I know Barbara
joked about how my tennis game was to blame -- but I want to set
the record straight. 11 I told Barbara that I didn't want to eat
any broccoli for lunch. Any broccoli farmers here?
Well, you all know that I don't like broccoli. And I know
that you all don't like baloney. Almost everyone in New
Hampshire has met a future president at one time or another, and
they can see right through the smoke screens of pipe dream
promises. I know we're swinging into a campaign cycle. And
already I see contenders scrambling all over each other to
promise voters bigger, better, and bolder than the next guy.
That's perfectly acceptable -- that's democracy. But it is not
acceptable to exploit economic hardship for political profit
((some of these ambulance chasers give new meaning to the phrase,
"no pain, no gain. ")) And it is not acceptable to sacrifice
good, prudent policy in the battle for a better bumpersticker.
of course, this state never had much of a market for snake
oil salesmen. Daniel Webster once said, "There is nothing so
powerful as truth " New Hampshirites know there's a difference
between soundbites and sound policy; and they don't cater much to
sweet talking over bitter truths.
I've had to look a few bitter truths myself. There are many
parts in this country where the economy is lagging and Americans
are hurting. I've been looking at the data and making some tough
decisions. Everyone knows we need is policies that spark growth.
Some seem to have stumbled upon this truth only recently, ((some
others have stumbled upon it, picked themselves up, and pretended
it never happened))
Ever since coming to the White House, first as Vice
President, then as President, I've fought long and hard for lower
taxes, less spending, fewer regulations and reduced cap gains.
I'm afraid that the Democratic Congress has been more interested
in wrestling me to the floor than in getting the economy back on
its feet. Sure they got me to give in on taxes. But while they
were celebrating victory over the President, the country was
losing the battle for growth.
In less than two weeks, I'll be proposing my package for
growth. Others will be proposing different solutions. There are
a lot of voices out there -- some prudent and pragmatic, some
irresponsible and irrelevant. Too often, election time generates
so much baloney, that Americans are left asking, "Where's the
beef?" So I've devised a few simple tests I'd suggest in
figuring out whether growth proposals are beef or bull:
First: Does it make sense? In a healthy economy, investors
invest in business; entrepreneurs take risks; workers produce;
consumers buy. It doesn't take an economics degree to figure
this out. A prescription for economic health does not deter
investment. It does not punish risk. It does not regulate
business out of business. And it does not tax away a hard earned
income.
Second: Does it make us more competitive? Does it prepare
us for the markets of tomorrow? Think about it -- yesterday the
smokestack; today, the microchip; tomorrow -- who knows? Wayne
Gretsky used to say, If skate where the puck is going to be, not
where it has been. " As global trade continues to grow by leaps
and bounds, we need to make sure American exports stay ahead of
the curve. Our merchandise exports support 7.2 million American
jobs -- a 42% rise in five years. It's simple -- a more
competitive America means more American exports. More American
exports mean more American jobs.
Third: Does it help you keep your house in order -- starting
with home values. For many American families, a home is more
than their castle, it's their capital. And while government
mismanagement chipped away at home values, Americans watched
their main assets grow smaller and smaller. Other families,
confronted with tragic accidents or chronic illnesses, watch as
unbridled health care costs drain away the lifeblood of lifetime
savings. Taxpayers have a right to ask whether economic
proposals are going to help them preserve the value of the things
they have worked so hard to secure -- their homes, their health,
their investments, their children's future.
Fourth: Does it get Washington's house in order? What does
it do to the federal budget -- does it minimize it, or does it
politicize it? Does it cap spending and does it give the
American people their money's worth? Anyone who's ever managed
household finances can tell you that the deeper you crawl into
debt, the harder it is to climb out. Maybe some people up on
Capitol Hill can get away with bouncing checks -- American
competitiveness cannot.
When I deliver my State of the Union this month, take these
tests, and see if my proposals measure up measures up. Apply
these tests to any other package floating out there -- and see
whether they back it up or shoot it down. Too many of these
proposals still operate on the old paradigm of tax it, spend it,
and promise it. Well, I don't think many people are going to buy
it. ( (Mother Nature's the only one around here who can give New
Hampshire a snow job) )
I didn't come up here with miracles or magic tricks. I'm
not going to promise to outlaw icy roads or black fly season. I
won't play to any fear of foreigners, to hidden hatreds, or to
class conflict. That's not my style -- never has been, never
will be.
But I will continue to fight Capitol Hill for fewer taxes
and lower spending. I will continue to fight abroad, like I did
in Asia, for more free trade and more fair trade -- leveling the
playing field for the power of "Made in America." I will fight
against protectionism -- policies that would have our industry
stagnate in the stale air of government shelters rather than
brave the bracing winds of international competition. I will
fight against isolationism -- protecting American interests and
preserving American principles. And I will continue to fight at
home -- for better schools, for a cleaner environment, for safer
streets, and for a brighter future. Thank you. God bless New
Hampshire, and God bless the United States of America.
#
#
#
(Smith/Grossman)
January 10, 1992
Draft One EXETER
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS:
EXETER TOWN HALL
EXETER, NEW HAMPSHIRE
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 15, 1991
Thank you for that kind introduction. I know there's been
some concern about my illness at the Japanese State Dinner, and
some questions about the cause of my sickness. \ I know Barbara
joked about how my tennis game was to blame -- but I want to set
the record straight. I told Barbara that I didn't want to eat
any broccoli for lunch. Any broccoli farmers here?
Well, you all know that I don't like broccoli. And I know
that you all don't like baloney. Almost everyone in New
Hampshire has met a future president at one time or another, and
they can see right through the smoke screens of pipe dream
promises. I know we're swinging into a campaign cycle. And
already I see contenders scrambling all over each other to
promise voters bigger, better, and bolder than the next guy.
That's perfectly acceptable -- that's democracy. But it is not
acceptable to exploit economic hardship for political profit
((some of these ambulance chasers give new meaning to the phrase,
"no pain, no gain.")) And it is not acceptable to sacrifice
good, prudent policy in the battle for a better bumpersticker.
of course, this state never had much of a market for snake
oil salesmen. Daniel Webster once said, "There is nothing so
powerful as truth
" New Hampshirites know there's a difference
between soundbites and sound policy; and they don't cater much to
sweet talking over bitter truths.
I've had to look a few bitter truths myself. There are many
parts in this country where the economy is lagging and Americans
are hurting. I've been looking at the data and making some tough
decisions. Everyone knows we need is policies that spark growth.
Some seem to have stumbled upon this truth only recently, ( (some
others have stumbled upon it, picked themselves up, and pretended
it never happened))
Ever since coming to the White House, first as Vice
President, then as President, I've fought long and hard for lower
taxes, less spending, fewer regulations and reduced cap gains.
I'm afraid that the Democratic Congress has been more interested
in wrestling me to the floor than in getting the economy back on
its feet. Sure they got me to give in on taxes. But while they
were celebrating victory over the President, the country was
losing the battle for growth.
In less than two weeks, I'll be proposing my package for
growth. Others will be proposing different solutions. There are
a lot of voices out there -- some prudent and pragmatic, some
irresponsible and irrelevant. Too often, election time generates
so much baloney, that Americans are left asking, "Where's the
beef?" So I've devised a few simple tests I'd suggest in
figuring out whether growth proposals are beef or bull:
First: Does it make sense? In a healthy economy, investors
invest in business; entrepreneurs take risks; workers produce;
consumers buy. It doesn't take an economics degree to figure
this out. A prescription for economic health does not deter
investment. It does not punish risk. It does not regulate
business out of business. And it does not tax away a hard earned
income.
Second: Does it make us more competitive? Does it prepare
us for the markets of tomorrow? Think about it -- yesterday the
smokestack; today, the microchip; tomorrow -- who knows? Wayne
Gretsky used to say, " skate where the puck is going to be, not
where it has been. II As global trade continues to grow by leaps
and bounds, we need to make sure American exports stay ahead of
the curve. Our merchandise exports support 7.2 million American
jobs -- a 42% rise in five years. It's simple -- a more
competitive America means more American exports. More American
exports mean more American jobs.
Third: Does it help you keep your house in order -- starting
with home values. For many American families, a home is more
than their castle, it's their capital. And while government
mismanagement chipped away at home values, Americans watched
their main assets grow smaller and smaller. Other families,
confronted with tragic accidents or chronic illnesses, watch as
unbridled health care costs drain away the lifeblood of lifetime
savings. Taxpayers have a right to ask whether economic
proposals are going to help them preserve the value of the things
they have worked so hard to secure --- their homes, their health,
their investments, their children's future.
Fourth: Does it get Washington's house in order? What does
it do to the federal budget -- does it minimize it, or does it
politicize it? Does it cap spending and does it give the
American people their money's worth? Anyone who's ever managed
household finances can tell you that the deeper you crawl into
debt, the harder it is to climb out. Maybe some people up on
Capitol Hill can get away with bouncing checks -- American
competitiveness cannot.
When I deliver my State of the Union this month, take these
tests, and see if my proposals measure up measures up. Apply
these tests to any other package floating out there -- and see
whether they back it up or shoot it down. Too many of these
proposals still operate on the old paradigm of tax it, spend it,
and promise it. Well, I don't think many people are going to buy
it. ((Mother Nature's the only one around here who can give New
Hampshire a snow job) )
I didn't come up here with miracles or magic tricks. I'm
not going to promise to outlaw icy roads or black fly season. I
won't play to any fear of foreigners, to hidden hatreds, or to
class conflict. That's not my style -- never has been, never
will be.
But I will continue to fight Capitol Hill for fewer taxes
and lower spending. I will continue to fight abroad, like I did
in Asia, for more free trade and more fair trade -- leveling the
playing field for the power of "Made in America." I will fight
against protectionism -- policies that would have our industry
stagnate in the stale air of government shelters rather than
brave the bracing winds of international competition. I will
fight against isolationism -- protecting American interests and
preserving American principles. And I will continue to fight at
home -- for better schools, for a cleaner environment, for safer
streets, and for a brighter future. Thank you. God bless New
Hampshire, and God bless the United States of America.
#
#
#
EXETER TOWN HALL \ EXETER, NEW HAMPSHIRE
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 15, 1992
o
THANK YOU, GOVERNOR, FOR THAT KIND INTRODUCTION.
SENATOR BoB SMITH. CONGRESSMAN BILL ZELIFF.
COUNTY COMMISSIONER MAUREEN BARROWS.
o
BARBARA AND I ARE THRILLED TO BE HERE. WE KNOW NEW
HAMPSHIRE AS FRIENDS, AND NEIGHBORS. WE'VE LIVED
NEXT DOOR VIRTUALLY ALL OUR LIVES. I'VE CAMPAIGNED
HERE AS VICE-PRESIDENT, PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE, AND
PRESIDENT. UNLIKE SOME, I HAVEN'T JUST DISCOVERED
THIS STATE.
- 2 -
o
TODAY, I'VE BEEN TO NEWINGTON -- NOW EXETER --
LATER DOVER, ROCHESTER, AND PORTSMOUTH. I KNOW
TIMES ARE TOUGH. THAT'S WHY I'M HERE TO TALK TO
PEOPLE -- TO LISTEN, AND LEARN. YOU'VE HEARD THE
TALK OF MY OPPONENTS. IT'S CAMPAIGN SEASON -- A
TIME WHEN SOME CONFUSE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
SOUNDBITES AND SOUND POLICY. NEW HAMPSHIRE KNOWS
THE DIFFERENCE. You REALIZE WE NEED SOLUTIONS, NOT
SLOGANS.
- 3 -
0
THE SOLUTION IS POLICIES THAT SPARK AMERICAN GROWTH
AND SPUR AMERICAN COMPETITIVENESS. WE DON'T NEED
TO BUILD A FENCE AROUND AMERICA -- WE NEED TO
CONVINCE OTHER COUNTRIES TO TEAR THEIR FENCES DOWN.
THAT'S WHY I WENT TO ASIA -- BECAUSE EXPORTS ARE
CRUCIAL. NEW HAMPSHIRE SENDS $1.2 BILLION IN
EXPORTS TO MORE THAN 100 COUNTRIES -- INCLUDING
$176 MILLION TO THE FOUR COUNTRIES I VISITED IN
ASIA. EXPORTS SUPPORT NEARLY 35,000 NEW HAMPSHIRE
JOBS.
- 4 -
0
I WILL LEAVE NO STONE UNTURNED TO OPEN TRADE AND
OPPORTUNITY. I AM CONFIDENT WE WILL SUCCEED. MY
CONFIDENCE RESTS ON THE VALUES OF THE AMERICAN
PEOPLE: FOR PROOF, LOOK AROUND YOU. NEW
HAMPSHIRITES HAVE ROCK-SOLID REALISM AND CLEAR-
EYED IDEALISM. You BELIEVE IN LIBERTY AND SELF-
RELIANCE / DEMOCRACY AND ENTERPRISE / HARD WORK /
FAITH IN FAMILY AND COMMUNITY / ABOVE ALL, FAITH IN
GOD. So DO I.
# # #