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
323153331
label
Princeton University 5/10/91 [OA 8322] [9]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
323153331
contentType
document
title
Princeton University 5/10/91 [OA 8322] [9]
citationUrl
identifierLocal
13755-012
collections
Records of the White House Office of Speechwriting (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Speech Backup Chronological Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
323153331
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
588d20f3bf8c8733
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 Backup Files
Subseries:
Chron File, 1989-1993
OA/ID Number:
13755
Folder ID Number:
13755-012
Folder Title:
Princeton University 5/10/91 [OA 8322] [9]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
26
21
4
1
Feb. 8 / Administration of George Bush, 1989
matters. And I don't think it's fair. I do not
Q. Are you thinking about sending U.S.
think that is fair.
troops to Latin America?
So, how you do your business, and to go
The President. Is that a dru question?
the extra mile get the facts out there,
Nobody's discussed that with me. And
you've got to sort that out. And how I con-
you're talking about one who is very wary
duct myself in even discussing this, I've got
of committing U.S. roops overseas. But I
to sort it out a little more clearly because I
said in the campaign, that there could be
may have contributed-even hough I think
times, workin cooperatively with leaders
I refused to answer this guy's question-by
in the hemi phere, that American assistance
even taking it, to this frenzied air of pecu-
would be sought and American assistance
lation that does not help anybody. It doesn't
would be granted in wiping out insidious
help the national security of our country.
factories that send poison in to poison our
doesn't help Senator Tower. It doesn't help
ds. And it has happened in the past. You
the standing of the United States Senate.
recall U.S. choppers were used in coopera-
tion think it was either Bolivia or Peru-
might not help the way this President is
viewed because I do not want to be out
Bolivia, think, and it was effective. So, you
there as less than fully supportive of my
don't rule something out.
nominee. And that's where I tand. And
But I think reply to your question-
thank you, and this
stems from some planning that supposedly
is going on that we make some big strike
Q. Are you mad?
somewhere. And I know nothing about that
The President. Not ad-I'm calm and
and would be very reluctant to prove
contained. I don't get mad easy anymore.
some-until I've given it a lot of thought.
Hey listen, ve got to get one drug
Thank you all very much.
question, please.
Q. Seo tary Bennett, have you given up
Note: The President spoke at 2:25 p.m. in
smoking!
the Oval Office at the White House. Wil
Bennett. I won't comment on that
liam J. Bennett was National Drug Control
egation. [Laughter]
Policy Director-designate.
Address on Administration Goals Before a Joint Session of Congress
February 9, 1989
Mr. Speaker, Mr. President, and distin-
tonight I feel as if I'm returning home to
guished Members of the House and Senate,
friends. And I intend, in the months and
honored guests, and fellow citizens: Less
years to come, to give you what friends
than 3 weeks ago, I joined you on the West
deserve: frankness, respect, and my best
Front of this very building and, looking
judgment about ways to improve America's
over the monuments to our proud past, of-
future. In return, I ask for an honest com-
fered you my hand in filling the next page
mitment to our common mission of
of American history with a story of ex-
progress. If we seize the opportunities on
tended prosperity and continued peace.
the road before us, there'll be praise
And tonight I'm back to offer you my plans
enough for all. The people didn't send us
as well. The hand remains extended; the
here to bicker, and it's time to govern.
sleeves are rolled up; America is waiting;
And many Presidents have come to this
and now we must produce. Together, we
Chamber in times of great crisis: war and
can build a better America.
depression, loss of national spirit. And 8
It is comforting to return to this historic
years ago, I sat in that very chair as Presi-
Chamber. Here, 22 years ago, I first raised
dent Reagan spoke of punishing inflation
my hand to be sworn into public life. So,
and devastatingly high interest rates and
74
12-2153
Administration of George Bush, 1989 / Feb. 9
J.S.
people out of work-American confidence
government by crisis, will not do. And I ask
on?
on the wane. And our challenge is different.
the Congress tonight to approve several
And
We're fortunate-a much changed land-
measures which will make budgeting more
scape lies before us tonight. So, I don't pro-
ary
sensible. We could save time and improve
I
pose to reverse direction. We're headed the
efficiency by enacting 2-year budgets.
be
right way, but we cannot rest. We're a
Forty-three Governors have the line-item
people whose energy and drive have fueled
'rs
veto. Presidents should have it, too. And at
our rise to greatness. And we're a forward-
the very least, when a President proposes to
looking nation-generous, yes, but ambi-
ce
rescind Federal spending, the Congress
tious, not for ourselves but for the world.
us
should be required to vote on that proposal
Complacency is not in our character-not
ur
instead of killing it by inaction. And I ask
before, not now, not ever.
u
the Congress to honor the public's wishes
And so, tonight we must take a strong
by passing a constitutional amendment to
America and make it even better. We must
require a balanced budget. Such an amend-
address some very real problems. We must
establish some very clear priorities. And we
ment, once phased in, will discipline both
the Congress and the executive branch.
must make a very substantial cut in the
Federal budget deficit. Some people find
Several principles describe the kind of
V
that agenda impossible, but I'm presenting
America I hope to build with your help in
to you tonight a realistic plan for tackling it.
the years ahead. We will not have the
My plan has four broad features: attention
luxury of taking the easy, spendthrift ap-
to urgent priorities, investment in the
proach to solving problems because higher
future, an attack on the deficit, and no new
spending and higher taxes put economic
taxes. This budget represents my best judg-
growth at risk. Economic growth provides
ment of how we can address our priorities.
jobs and hope. Economic growth enables us
There are many areas in which we would
to pay for social programs. Economic
all like to spend more than I propose; I
growth enhances the security of the Nation,
understand that. But we cannot until we
and low tax rates create economic growth.
get our fiscal house in order.
I believe in giving Americans greater
Next year alone, thanks to economic
freedom and greater choice. And I will
growth, without any change in the law, the
work for choice for American families,
Federal Government will take in over $80
whether in the housing in which they live,
billion more than it does this year. That's
the schools to which they send their chil-
right-over $80 billion in new revenues,
dren, or the child care they select for their
with no increases in taxes. And our job is to
young. You see, I believe that we have an
allocate those new resources wisely. We can
obligation to those in need, but that govern-
afford to increase spending by a modest
ment should not be the provider of first
amount, but enough to invest in key prior-
resort for things that the private sector can
ities and still cut the deficit by almost 40
produce better. I believe in a society that is
percent in 1 year. And that will allow us to
free from discrimination and bigotry of any
meet the targets set forth in the Gramm-
kind. And I will work to knock down the
Rudman-Hollings law. But to do that, we
barriers left by past discrimination and to
must recognize that growth above inflation
build a more tolerant society that will stop
in Federal programs is not preordained,
such barriers from ever being built again.
that not all spending initiatives were de-
I believe that family and faith represent
signed to be immortal.
the moral compass of the Nation. And I'll
I make this pledge tonight: My team and
work to make them strong, for as Benjamin
I are ready to work with the Congress, to
Franklin said: "If a sparrow cannot fall to
form a special leadership group, to negoti-
the ground without His notice, can a great
ate in good faith, to work day and night-if
nation rise without His aid?" And I believe
that's what it takes-to meet the budget
in giving people the power to make their
targets and to produce a budget on time.
own lives better through growth and oppor-
We cannot settle for business as usual.
tunity. And together, let's put power in the
Government by continuing resolution, or
hands of people.
75
Feb. 9 / Administration of George Bush, 1989
Three weeks ago, we celebrated the bi-
ble. In education, we cannot tolerate medi-
centennial inaugural, the 200th anniversary
ocrity. I want to cut that dropout rate and
of the first Presidency. And if you look
make America a more literate nation, be-
back, one thing is so striking about the way
cause what it really comes down to is this:
the Founding Fathers looked at America.
The longer our graduation lines are today,
They didn't talk about themselves. They
the shorter our unemployment lines will be
talked about posterity. They talked about
tomorrow.
the future. And we, too, must think in
So, tonight I'm proposing the following
terms bigger than ourselves. We must take
initiatives: the beginning of a $500 million
actions today that will ensure a better to-
program to reward America's best schools,
morrow. We must extend American leader-
merit schools; the creation of special Presi-
ship in technology, increase long-term in-
dential awards for the best teachers in
vestment, improve our educational system,
every State, because excellence should be
and boost productivity. These are the keys
rewarded; the establishment of a new pro-
to building a better future, and here are
gram of National Science Scholars, one each
some of my recommendations:
year for every Member of the House and
I propose almost $2.2 billion for the Na-
Senate, to give this generation of students a
tional Science Foundation to promote basic
special incentive to excel in science and
research and keep us on track to double its
budget by 1993.
mathematics; the expanded use of magnet
I propose to make permanent the tax
schools, which give families and students
credit for research and development.
greater choice; and a new program to en-
I've asked Vice President Quayle to chair
courage alternative certification, which will
a new Task Force on Competitiveness.
let talented people from all fields teach in
And I request funding for NASA [Nation-
our classrooms. I've said I'd like to be the
al Aeronautics and Space Administration]
"Education President." And tonight, I'd ask
and a strong space program, an increase of
you to join me by becoming the "Education
almost $2.4 billion over the current fiscal
Congress."
year. We must have a manned space sta-
Just last week, as I settled into this new
tion; a vigorous, safe space shuttle program;
office, I received a letter from a mother in
and more commercial development in
Pennsylvania who had been struck by my
space. The space program should always go
message in the Inaugural Address. "Not 12
"full throttle up." And that's not just our
hours before," she wrote, "my husband and
ambition; it's our destiny.
I received word that our son was addicted
I propose that we cut the maximum tax
to cocaine. He had the world at his feet.
rate on capital gains to increase long-term
Bright, gifted, personable-he could have
investment. History on this is clear-this
done anything with his life. And now he has
will increase revenues, help savings, and
chosen cocaine." "And please," she wrote,
create new jobs. We won't be competitive if
"find a way to curb the supply of cocaine.
we leave whole sectors of America behind.
Get tough with the pushers. Our son needs
This is the year we should finally enact
your help."
urban enterprise zones and bring hope to
My friends, that voice crying out for help
the inner cities.
could be the voice of your own neighbor,
But the most important competitiveness
your own friend, your own son. Over 23
program of all is one which improves edu-
million Americans used illegal drugs last
cation in America. When some of our stu-
year, at a staggering cost to our nation's
dents actually have trouble locating Amer-
well-being. Let this be recorded as the time
ica on a map of the world, it is time for us
when America rose up and said no to drugs.
to map a new approach to education. We
The scourge of drugs must be stopped. And
must reward excellence and cut through
I am asking tonight for an increase of
bureaucracy. We must help schools that
almost a billion dollars in budget outlays to
need help the most. We must give choice to
escalate the war against drugs. The war
parents, students, teachers, and principals;
must be waged on all fronts. Our new drug
and we must hold all concerned accounta-
czar, Bill Bennett, and I will be shoulder to
76
Administration of George Bush, 1989 / Feb. 9
shoulder in the executive branch leading
action is now. We must make use of clean
the charge.
coal. My budget contains full funding, on
Some money will be used to expand
schedule, for the clean coal technology
treatment to the poor and to young moth-
agreement that we've made with Canada.
ers. This will offer the helping hand to the
We've made that agreement with Canada,
many innocent victims of drugs, like the
and we intend to honor that agreement.
thousands of babies born addicted or with
We must not neglect our parks. So, I'm
AIDS because of the mother's addiction.
asking to fund new acquisitions under the
Some will be used to cut the waiting time
Land and Water Conservation Fund. We
for treatment. Some money will be devoted
must protect our oceans. And I support new
to those urban schools where the emergen-
penalties against those who would dump
cy is now the worst. And much of it will be
medical waste and other trash into our
used to protect our borders, with help from
oceans. The age of the needle on the beach-
the Coast Guard and the Customs Service,
es must end.
the Departments of State and Justice, and,
And in some cases, the gulfs and oceans
yes, the U.S. military.
off our shores hold the promise of oil and
I mean to get tough on the drug crimi-
gas reserves which can make our nation
nals. And let me be clear: This President
will back up those who put their lives on
more secure and less dependent on foreign
the line every single day-our local police
oil. And when those with the most promise
officers. My budget asks for beefed-up pros-
can be tapped safely, as with much of the
ecution, for a new attack on organized
Alaska National Wildlife Refuge, we should
crime, and for enforcement of tough sen-
proceed. But we must use caution; we must
tences-and for the worst kingpins, that
respect the environment. And so, tonight
means the death penalty. I also want to
I'm calling for the indefinite postponement
make sure that when a drug dealer is con-
of three lease sales which have raised trou-
victed there's a cell waiting for him. And he
bling questions, two off the coast of Califor-
should not go free because prisons are too
nia and one which could threaten the Ever-
full. And so, let the word go out: If you're
glades in Florida. Action on these three
caught and convicted, you will do time.
lease sales will await the conclusion of a
But for all we do in law enforcement, in
special task force set up to measure the
interdiction and treatment, we will never
potential for environmental damage.
win this war on drugs unless we stop the
I'm directing the Attorney General and
demand for drugs. So, some of this increase
the Administrator of the Environmental
will be used to educate the young about the
Protection Agency to use every tool at their
dangers of drugs. We must involve the par-
disposal to speed and toughen the enforce-
ents. We must involve the teachers. We
ment of our laws against toxic-waste dump-
must involve the communities. And, my
ers. I want faster cleanups and tougher en-
friends, we must involve ourselves, each
forcement of penalties against polluters.
and every one of us in this concern.
In addition to caring for our future, we
One problem related to drug use de-
must care for those around us. A decent
mands our urgent attention and our con-
society shows compassion for the young, the
tinuing compassion, and that is the terrible
elderly, the vulnerable, and the poor. Our
tragedy of AIDS. I'm asking for $1.6 billion
first obligation is to the most vulnerable-
for education to prevent the disease and for
infants, poor mothers, children living in
research to find a cure.
poverty-and my proposed budget recog-
If we're to protect our future, we need a
nizes this. I ask for full funding of Medicaid,
new attitude about the environment. We
an increase of over $3 billion, and an expan-
must protect the air we breathe. I will send
sion of the program to include coverage of
to you shortly legislation for a new, more
pregnant women who are near the poverty
effective Clean Air Act. It will include a
line. I believe we should help working fami-
plan to reduce by date certain the emissions
lies cope with the burden of child care. Our
which cause acid rain, because the time for
help should be aimed at those who need it
study alone has passed, and the time for
most: low-income families with young chil-
77
Feb. 9 / Administration of George Bush, 1989
dren. I support a new child care tax credit
Congress to enact our reform proposals
that will aim our efforts at exactly those
within 45 days. We must not let this situa-
families, without discriminating against
tion fester. We owe it to the savers in this
mothers who choose to stay at home.
country to solve this problem. Certainly,
Now, I know there are competing propos-
the savings of Americans must remain
als. But remember this: The overwhelming
secure. Let me be clear: Insured depositors
majority of all preschool child care is now
will continue to be fully protected, but any
provided by relatives and neighbors and
plan to refinance the system must be ac-
churches and community groups. Families
companied by major reform. Our proposals
who choose these options should remain eli-
will prevent such a crisis from recurring.
gible for help. Parents should have choice.
The best answer is to make sure that a mess
And for those children who are unwanted
like this will never happen again. The ma-
or abused or whose parents are deceased,
jority of thrifts in communities across the
we should encourage adoption. I propose to
Nation have been honest. They've played a
reenact the tax deduction for adoption ex-
major role in helping families achieve the
penses and to double it to $3,000. Let's
dream of home ownership. But make no
make it easier for these kids to have parents
mistake, those who are corrupt, those who
who love them.
break the law, must be kicked out of the
We have a moral contract with our senior
business; and they should go to jail.
citizens. And in this budget, Social Security
is fully funded, including a full cost-of-living
We face a massive task in cleaning up the
adjustment. We must honor our contract.
waste left from decades of environmental
We must care about those in the shadow
neglect at America's nuclear weapons
of life, and I, like many Americans, am
plants. Clearly, we must modernize these
deeply troubled by the plight of the home-
plants and operate them safely. That's not
less. The causes of homelessness are many;
at issue; our national security depends on it.
the history is long. But the moral impera-
But beyond that, we must clean up the old
tive to act is clear. Thanks to the deep well
mess that's been left behind. And I propose
of generosity in this great land, many orga-
in this budget to more than double our cur-
nizations already contribute, but we in gov-
rent effort to do so. This will allow us to
ernment cannot stand on the sidelines. In
identify the exact nature of the various
my budget, I ask for greater support for
problems so we can clean them up, and
emergency food and shelter, for health
clean them up we will.
services and measures to prevent substance
We've been fortunate during these past 8
abuse, and for clinics for the mentally ill.
years. America is a stronger nation than it
And I propose a new initiative involving
was in 1980. Morale in our Armed Forces
the full range of government agencies. We
has been restored; our resolve has been
must confront this national shame.
shown. Our readiness has been improved,
There's another issue that I've decided to
and we are at peace. There can no longer
mention here tonight. I've long believed
be any doubt that peace has been made
that the people of Puerto Rico should have
more secure through strength. And when
the right to determine their own political
America is stronger, the world is safer.
future. Personally, I strongly favor state-
Most people don't realize that after the
hood. But I urge the Congress to take the
successful restoration of our strength, the
necessary steps to allow the people to
Pentagon budget has actually been reduced
decide in a referendum.
in real terms for each of the last 4 years.
Certain problems, the result of decades of
We cannot tolerate continued real reduc-
unwise practices, threaten the health and
tion in defense. In light of the compelling
security of our people. Left unattended,
need to reduce the deficit, however, I sup-
they will only get worse. But we can act
port a 1-year freeze in the military budget,
now to put them behind us.
something I proposed last fall in my flexible
Earlier this week, I announced my sup-
freeze plan. And this freeze will apply for
port for a plan to restore the financial and
only 1 year, and after that, increases above
moral integrity of our savings system. I ask
inflation will be required. I will not sacrifice
78
Administration of George Bush, 1989 / Feb. 9
American preparedness, and I will not com-
for peace. The fundamental facts remain
promise American strength.
that the Soviets retain a very powerful mili-
I should be clear on the conditions at-
tary machine in the service of objectives
tached to my recommendation for the
which are still too often in conflict with
coming year: The savings must be allocated
ours. So, let us take the new openness seri-
to those priorities for investing in our future
ously, but let's also be realistic. And let's
that I've spoken about tonight. This defense
always be strong.
freeze must be a part of a comprehensive
There are some pressing issues we must
budget agreement which meets the targets
address. I will vigorously pursue the Strate-
spelled out in Gramm-Rudman-Hollings law
gic Defense Initiative. The spread, and
without raising taxes and which incorpo-
even use, of sophisticated weaponry threat-
rates reforms in the budget process.
ens global security as never before. Chemi-
I've directed the National Security Coun-
cal weapons must be banned from the face
cil to review our national security and de-
fense policies and report back to me within
of the Earth, never to be used again. And
look, this won't be easy. Verification-ex-
90 days to ensure that our capabilities and
traordinarily difficult, but civilization and
resources meet our commitments and strat-
egies. I'm also charging the Department of
human decency demand that we try. And
Defense with the task of developing a plan
the spread of nuclear weapons must be
to improve the defense procurement proc-
stopped. And I'll work to strengthen the
ess and management of the Pentagon, one
hand of the International Atomic Energy
which will fully implement the Packard
Agency. Our diplomacy must work every
commission report. Many of these changes
day against the proliferation of nuclear
can only be made with the participation of
weapons.
the Congress, and so, I ask for your help.
And around the globe, we must continue
We need fewer regulations. We need less
to be freedom's best friend. And we must
bureaucracy. We need multiyear procure-
stand firm for self-determination and de-
ment and 2-year budgeting. And frankly-
mocracy in Central America, including in
and don't take this wrong-we need less
Nicaragua. It is my strongly held conviction
congressional micromanagement of our na-
that when people are given the chance
tion's military policy. I detect a slight divi-
they inevitably will choose a free press,
sion on that question, but nevertheless-
freedom of worship, and certifiably free and
[laughter].
fair elections.
Securing a more peaceful world is per-
We must strengthen the alliance of the
haps the most important priority I'd like to
industrial democracies, as solid a force for
address tonight. You know, we meet at a
peace as the world has ever known. And
time of extraordinary hope. Never before in
this is an alliance forged by the power of
this century have our values of freedom,
our ideals, not the pettiness of our differ-
democracy, and economic opportunity been
ences. So, let's lift our sights to rise above
such a powerful and intellectual force
fighting about beef hormones, to building a
around the globe. Never before has our
better future, to move from protectionism
leadership been so crucial, because while
to progress.
America has its eyes on the future, the
I've asked the Secretary of State to visit
world has its eyes on America.
Europe next week and to consult with our
And it's a time of great change in the
allies on the wide range of challenges and
world, and especially in the Soviet Union.
opportunities we face together, including
Prudence and common sense dictate that
East-West relations. And I look forward to
we try to understand the full meaning of
meeting with our NATO partners in the
the change going on there, review our poli-
near future.
cies, and then proceed with caution. But
And I, too, shall begin a trip shortly to
I've personally assured General Secretary
the far reaches of the Pacific Basin, where
Gorbachev that at the conclusion of such a
the winds of democracy are creating new
review we will be ready to move forward.
hope and the power of free markets is un-
We will not miss any opportunity to work
leashing a new force. When I served as our
79
Feb. 9 / Administration of George Bush, 1989
representative in China 14 or 15 years ago,
nomic mainstream. We need your talents in
few would have predicted the scope of the
America's work force. Disabled Americans
changes we've witnessed since then. But in
must become full partners in America's op-
preparing for this trip, I was struck by
portunity society.
something I came across from a Chinese
To the families of America watching to-
writer. He was speaking of his country, dec-
night in your living rooms, hold fast to your
ades ago, but his words speak to each of us
dreams because ultimately America's future
in America tonight. "Today," he said,
rests in your hands.
"we're afraid of the simple words like
And to my friends in this Chamber, I ask
'goodness' and 'mercy' and 'kindness.' My
your cooperation to keep America growing
friends, if we're to succeed as a nation, we
while cutting the deficit. That's only fair to
must rediscover those words.
those who now have no vote: the genera-
In just 3 days, we mark the birthday of
tions to come. Let them look back and say
Abraham Lincoln, the man who saved our
that we had the foresight to understand
Union and gave new meaning to the word
that a time of peace and prosperity is not
"opportunity." Lincoln once said: "I hold
that while man exists, it is his duty to im-
the time to rest but a time to press forward,
a time to invest in the future.
prove not only his own condition but to
assist in ameliorating that of mankind." It is
And let all Americans remember that no
this broader mission to which I call all
problem of human making is too great to be
Americans, because the definition of a suc-
overcome by human ingenuity, human
cessful life must include serving others.
energy, and the untiring hope of the human
And to the young people of America, who
spirit. I believe this. I would not have asked
sometimes feel left out, I ask you tonight to
to be your President if I didn't. And tomor-
give us the benefit of your talent and
row the debate on the plan I've put for-
energy through a new program called YES,
ward begins, and I ask the Congress to
for Youth Entering Service to America.
come forward with your own proposals.
To those men and women in business,
Let's not question each other's motives.
remember the ultimate end of your work:
Let's debate, let's negotiate; but let us solve
to make a better product, to create better
the problem.
lives. I ask you to plan for the longer term
Recalling anniversaries may not be my
and avoid that temptation of quick and easy
specialty in speeches-[laughter]-but to-
paper profits.
night is one of some note. On February 9th,
To the brave men and women who wear
1941, just 48 years ago tonight, Sir Winston
the uniform of the United States of Amer-
Churchill took to the airwaves during Brit-
ica, thank you. Your calling is a high one: to
ain's hour of peril. He'd received from
be the defenders of freedom and the guar-
President Roosevelt a hand-carried letter
antors of liberty. And I want you to know
quoting Longfellow's famous poem: "Sail
that this nation is grateful for your service.
on, o Ship of State! Sail on, o Union, strong
To the farmers of America, we appreciate
and great! Humanity with all its fears, With
the bounty you provide. We will work with
all the hopes of future years, Is hanging
you to open foreign markets to American
breathless on thy fate!" And Churchill re-
agricultural products.
sponded on this night by radio broadcast to
And to the parents of America, I ask you
a nation at war, but he directed his words
to get involved in your child's schooling.
to Franklin Roosevelt. "We shall not fail or
Check on the homework, go to the school,
falter," he said. "We shall not weaken or
meet the teachers, care about what is hap-
tire. Give us the tools, and we will finish
pening there. It's not only your child's
the job."
future on the line, it's America's.
Tonight, almost half a century later, our
To kids in our cities, don't give up hope.
peril may be less immediate, but the need
Say no to drugs; stay in school. And, yes,
for perseverance and clear-sighted fortitude
"Keep hope alive."
is just as great. Now, as then, there are
To those 37 million Americans with some
those who say it can't be done. There are
form of disability, you belong in the eco-
voices who say that America's best days
80
Administration of George Bush, 1989 / Feb. 10
have passed, that we're bound by con-
Thank you. God bless you, and God bless
straints, threatened by problems, surround-
America.
ed by troubles which limit our ability to
hope. Well, tonight I remain full of hope.
Note: The President spoke at 9:07 p.m. in
We Americans have only begun on our mis-
the House Chamber of the Capitol. The ad-
sion of goodness and greatness. And to
dress was broadcast live on nationwide
those timid souls, I repeat the plea: "Give
radio and television.
us the tools, and we will do the job."
Message to the Congress Transmitting the Fiscal Year 1990 Budget
February 9, 1989
To the Congress of the United States:
these proposals and renew my invitation to
I hereby transmit a supplement to the
the congressional leadership to work togeth-
Message I am delivering to the Joint Session
er to assure that America is united, strong,
of the Congress tonight. It is titled "Build-
at peace, and fiscally sound.
ing a Better America," and it contains fur-
GEORGE BUSH
ther description of the plans and proposals
mentioned in the Message. I urge the Con-
The White House,
gress to give favorable consideration to
February 9, 1989.
Remarks and a Question-and-Answer Session With Reporters
Following a Luncheon With Prime Minister Brian Mulroney in
Ottawa, Canada
February 10, 1989
The President. Let me just say on behalf
move on forward with setting limits, with
of Mrs. Bush, our Secretary of State, and
legislation, and then moving to discussions
others, this has been a good visit. It is an
with Canada, leading to an accord that I
important visit because it symbolizes the
think will be beneficial to both countries.
importance that we place on the relation-
And so, that problem-and it has been a
ship with Canada. We're each other's larg-
problem-is one that we are both deter-
est trading partners. We are friends. We
mined to move forward towards solution. In
share a long, peaceful border, and we have
terms of the trade agreement, we, of
many common interests. And today we had
course, have saluted the courageous position
an opportunity to discuss not just the bilat-
taken by the Prime Minister of Canada. We
eral relationship that is very, very strong
and very good but we had a chance to talk
have great respect for that in the United
about the East-West relationship. I had a
States; and we want to now do our part,
chance to talk about the problems on trade;
part of the United States, to follow through
indeed, our trade ministers are talking right
with whatever implementation is required.
now, you might say. And so, I felt the visit
So, the mood was upbeat, the spirit good,
was outstanding.
and I am very glad that this was my first
The Prime Minister and I reviewed the
visit outside of the continental United States
concerns that he has about acid rain; and I
as President. And we will keep in touch,
referred him to what I said last night to the
and each of us has pledged to see that this
S
American people: my determination to
strong relationship becomes even stronger.
81
THE SEPARATION OF POWERS DOCTRINE: AN OVERVIEW OF ITS RATIONALE
AND APPLICATION
ORIGINS AND PURPOSES OF THE DOCTRINE
The separation of powers doctrine is one of the bedrock principles of the
Constitution. The doctrine is founded on a political philosophy which envisions
three relatively distinct types of governmental functions, each of which is to
be performed by a different branch in order to avoid a tyrannical concentration
of power in any one entity. The idea of three governmental functions to be
performed by the executive, legislative, and judicial branches has been traced
to Aristotle, but the doctrine of the separation of powers is usually credited
to Montesquieu, who combined Aristotle's concept with the theory of checks and
balances.
Both Montesquieu and the framers of the Constitution viewed human nature
as being characterized by a tendency to abuse power. By establishing three
separate branches, thé framers sought to achieve efficiency from having each
of the three functions of government performed by a separate branch but, more
1/ See Constitution of the United States: Analysis and Interpretation,
S. Doc. No. 92-82, 92d Cong., 2d Sess. at xxii n.29 (1972) (Professor Corwin's
introduction to 1953 edition) (hereafter cited as Constitution Annotated);
Banks, Efficiency in Government: Separation of Powers Reconsidered, 35 Syracuse
L. Rev. 715, 718 (1984).
2/ Constitution Annotated, supra note 1. See also Buckley V. Valeo,
424 U.S. 1, 120 (1976).
3/ The Federalist, No. 51 (G.P. Putnam's Sons ed. 1902).
CRS-2
importantly, hoped that such an arrangement would limit the power vested in
any one branch and establish a system of checks and balances whereby "those who
administer each department" would have "the necessary constitutional means and
4/
personal motives to resist encroachments of the others." Such a system would
assure liberty and avoid the "tyranny" that was defined as "the accumulation
of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands
The framers therefore divided governmental powers among the three branches
6/
which were independent of each other and co-equal. Moreover, although the
branches were intended to serve as checks on each other, no branch was "to
possess, directly or indirectly, an overruling influence over the others, in
the administration of their powers.
However, "the Constitution by no means contemplates total separation of
each of [the] three essential branches of Government The men who met in
Philadelphia in the summer of 1787 were practical statesmen, experienced in
politics, who viewed the principle of separation of powers as a vital check
against tyranny. But they likewise saw that a heremetic sealing off of the
three branches of Government from one another would preclude establishment of
a nation capable of governing itself effectively. Thus, "while the Constitu-
tion diffuses power the better to secure liberty, it also contemplates that
4/ Id., at D. 323.
5/ Id., No. 47, at 300.
6/ Bowsher V. Synar, 106 S. Ct. 3181, 3188 (1986), quoting Humphrey's
Executor V. United States, 395 U.S. 602, 629-30 (1935). See also INS V. Chadha,
462 U.S. 919, 987 n.20, 998 (1983) (White, J., dissenting).
7/ The Federalist, supra note 3, No. 48, at p. 308.
8/ Buckley V. Valeo, 424 U.S. at 121.
CRS-3
practice will integrate the dispersed powers into a workable government. It
enjoins upon its branches separateness but interdependence, autonomy but
reciprocity
In sum, the Constitution created three branches of government
10/
intended to be independent in some respects and interdependent in others.
INDEPENDENCE AND SEPARATION
The Constitution both explicitly and implicitly guarantees the independence
of each branch and the separation of the branches from each other. One of the
clearest textual indications of this independence is the speech or debate
clause, art. I, sec. 6, cl. 1, which protects the independence and integrity
11/
of the legislature," and also "reinforce[es] the separation of powers
The clause was intended "to prevent intimidation by the executive and account-
12/
ability before a possibly hostile judiciary. Other guarantees of legislative
independence are found in art. I, sec. 5, which authorizes each House to judge
13/
the elections, returns, and qualifications of its Members, to make rules
governing its own proceedings, and to maintain the confidentiality of those
9/ Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. V. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579, 635 (Jackson, J.,
concurring), quoted in Buckley V. Valeo, 424 U.S. at 122. See also Myers V.
United States, 272 U.S. 52, 291 (1926) (Brandeis, J., dissenting), quoted in
Bowsher V. Synar, 106 S. Ct. at 3200 (Stevens, J., concurring).
10/ See Tribe, American Constitutional Law 15 (1978).
11/ United States V. Johnson, 383 U.S. 169, 178 (1966). For differing
views on the relationship of the speech or debate clause to the separation of
powers, compare Davis V. Passman, 442 U.S. 228, 235 n.11 (1979), with id. at
249 (Burger, C.J., dissenting) and id. at 253 n.2 (Powell, J., dissenting).
12/ United States V. Johnson, 383 U.S. at 181.
13/ As in the case of other guarantees of independence for the three
branches, judicial review may nonetheless be available where the House exceeds
its authority in performing this constitutional function. See Powell V.
McCormack, 395 U.S. 486 (1969).
CRS-4
proceedings. To further assure the separation of the branches, art. I, sec. 6,
cl. 2, prohibits anyone holding an executive office from simultaneously serving
14/
in Congress.
The autonomy of the executive branch has been recognized by the Supreme
Court in cases finding a qualified executive privilege to maintain the "confi-
dentiality of presidential communications [which] derives from the supremacy
of the executive branch within its assigned area of constitutional responsi-
15/
bilities
The President's independence has been respected in cases
concerning his "unrestricted power to remove the most important of his
16/
17/
subordinates, and his authority to execute the laws. Likewise, decisions
of the Court have noted the "clear institutional protections" provided by the
18/
Constitution to gurantee judicial independence. These protections include
the right of judges under art. III, sec. 1, to "hold their offices during good
behavior," and to "receive for their services a compensation, which shall not
19/
be diminished during their continuance in office.
14/ See generally Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United
States §§ 866-69 (Da Capo Press reprint ed. 1970).
15/ Nixon V. Administrator of General Services, 433 U.S. 425, 447 (1977).
See also United States V. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683, 705 (1974).
16/ Myers V. United States, 272 U.S. 52, 134 (1926). See also Bowsher v.
Synar, 106 S. Ct. at 3187.
17/ See Bowsher V. Synar; INS V. Chadha.
18/ Northern Pipeline Construction Co. V. Marathon Pipeline Co., 458 U.S.
50, 58 (1982).
19/ See Northern Pipeline Construction Co. V. Marathon Pipeline Co.;
Commodity Futures Trading Commission V. Schor, 106 S. Ct. 3245, 3256 (1986);
United States V. Will, 449 U.S. 200, 217-18 (1980).
CRS-5
INTERDEPENDENCE AND CHECKS AND BALANCES
As noted above, Justice Jackson explained that the Constitution "enjoins
20/
upon its branches separateness but interdependence, autonomy but reciprocity.
One lower court recently elaborated on this concept: "Only if [the branches]
function independently within their separate areas, but cooperatively in their
relations with each other, may the government, as a whole, perform its consti-
tutional role. Each separate gear must carry out its assigned task while
21/
meshing with the others so that power is delivered where needed. The Consti-
tution specifically provides for such interaction between and among the branches.
For example, while the House has the sole power of impeachment (art. I, sec. 2,
cl. 5) and the Senate has the sole power to try impeachments (art. I, sec. 3,
cl. 5), when the President is tried, the Chief Justice presides. Id. The
second-ranking executive branch official, the Vice President, is the President
of the Senate, and may vote to break ties in that body. Art. I, sec. 3, cl. 4.
Although the House and Senate have power to make their own rules and to deter-
mine the times of congressional adjournments (art. I, sec. 5, cls. 1 and 4),
the President may, "on extraordinary occasions," convene either or both Houses,
and when they disagree concerning the time of adjournment, "he may adjourn
them to such time as he shall think proper.... " Art. I, sec. 3, cl. 1.
And while judicial independence is guaranteed, judges are appointed by the
President, with the advice and consent of the Senate (art. II, sec. 2), and
20/ Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. V. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579, 635 (1952) (Jackson,
J., concurring). See also INS V. Chadha, 462 U.S. at 999 n.25 and accompanying
text (White, J., dissenting).
21/ In the Matter of the President's Commission on Organized Crime (Subpoena
of Scarfo), 783 F. 2d 370, 375 (3d Cir. 1986).
CRS-6
judicial salaries may be increased, but not diminished (art. III, sec. 1), by
act of Congress which is subject to the President's veto. Art. I, sec. 7 cl. 2.
The examples noted in the preceding paragraph demonstrate that where the
branches interact their relationship is sometimes cooperative in nature, so
that they can each play a role in accomplishing a governmental function. At
other times, the Constitution positions the branches as antagonists, so that
one may check the exercise of power by another. A more detailed understanding
of the relationship of the branches can be gained by focusing on their inter-
action in the legislative process, and by reviewing pertinent decisions of the
Supreme Court in this regard.
THE SEPARATION OF POWERS AND THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS
Although the Constitution vests all legislative powers in the Congress
(art. I, sec. 1), the framers also provided a role for the President in the
legislative process, permitting him to recommend to Congress "such measures as
he shall judge necessary and expedient" (art. I, sec. 3), and to veto bills
passed by both Houses. Art. I, sec. 7, cl. 2. The veto power allows the
President to protect the public from imprudent legislation and to protect 22/ the
interests of the executive against encroachment by the legislature.
However, the President's veto is usually only a qualified one, since the
Constitution gives Congress the opportunity to consider presidential objections
to bills and to pass them over his veto, if there are sufficient votes, except
22/ INS V. Chadha, 462 U.S. at 947-48; Pocket Veto Case, 279 U.S. 655,
678 (1929).
CRS-7
where a congressional adjournment prevents the President from returning a
23/
measure to Congress. In such an adjournment situation, the President can
excercise a "pocket veto," which is an absolute, rather than a qualified veto.
The pocket veto clause protects the President's role in the legislative process,
preventing Congress from denying him a veto by simply adjourning after passing
legislation that he may find objectionable.
Although the President plays a role in the legislative process, he may
24/
not, by executive order, usurp Congress' legislative powers.
Congress' legislative powers are restricted not only by the President's
role in the legislative process but also by judicial interpretation of Congress'
powers. The Court has insisted that Congress strictly adhere to the formal
requirements of art. I, sec. 7, in regard to bicameral approval and presentment
25/
of bills to the President. The Court has also held that Congress cannot
delegate its legislative powers to agencies or executive officials unless it
"lays down by legislative act an intelligible principle to which the person or
26/
body authorized to [exercise delegated authority] is directed to conform
Furthermore, Congress cannot escape from the formalities of art. I, sec. 7, by,
in effect, delegating legislative power to one House or a committee to be
27/
exercised by means of a legislative veto. Nor may constitutional requirements
23/ See Wright v. United States, 302 U.S. 583, 596 (1938).
24/ Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. V. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952).
25/ INS V. Chadha, supra.
26/ J.W. Hampton, Jr. & Co. v. United States, 276 U.S. 394, 409 (1928).
See also A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. V. United States, 295 U.S. 495 (1935);
Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan, 293 U.S. 388 (1935).
27/ Tribe, The Legislative Veto Decision: A Law by Any Other Name?
21 Harv. J. on Legis. 1, 10 (1984), citing INS v. Chadha, 462 U.S. at 987
(White, J., dissenting).
CRS-8
for legislative policymaking be circumvented by a delegation to a legislative
28/
agent, such as the Comptroller General.
Congress has been further restricted by decisions of the Court that have
confined Congress to its legislative role, and which have prohibited the House
29/
and Senate from directly or indirectly enforcing the laws it passes, or from
30/
31/
having a power of appointment or removal over those who execute the laws.
Additionally, individual Members of Congress lack standing to seek declaratory
or injunctive relief where the executive branch has allegedly failed to implement
32/
a law in accordance with the legislative intent. However, the House and
Senate, and individual Members of either body, may have standing to challenge
33/
executive interference with the lawmaking powers of Congress. Finally, while
Congress cannot enforce the laws it enacts and cannot seek a court order to
compel the executive to enforce the laws in accordance with the legislature's
intent, the Court has recognized Congress' power to investigate the administra-
34/
tion of the laws by the executive. However, Congress' ability to perform its
oversight function may be hindered by the doctrine of executive privilege,
28/ See Bowsher V. Synar, 106 S. Ct. at 3203 (Stevens, J., concurring).
29/ See Bowsher V. Synar, supra; INS V. Chadha, supra; Buckley V. Valeo,
supra.
30/ Buckley V. Valeo, supra.
31/ Bowsher V. Synar, supra.
32/ See, e.g., Moore V. U.S. House of Representatives, 733 F. 2d 946 (D.C.
Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 105 S. Ct. 779 (1985); Harrington V. Bush, 553 F. 2d
190 (D.C. Cir. 1977).
33/ See Barnes V. Kline, 759 F. 2d 21 (D.C. Cir. 1985), cert. granted,
sub nom. Burke V. Barnes, 106 S. Ct. 1258 (1986).
34/ See, e.g., McGrain V. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 135 (1927); Watkins V. United
States, 354 U.S. 178, 187 (1957).
CRS-9
which allows the executive, at least in some circumstances, to maintain the
35/
confidentiality of its records and documents.
CONCLUSION
The separation of powers doctrine is founded on two ideas. First is the
view that there are three different governmental functions to be performed by
three branches. And second is the belief that, to avoid tyranny, only a limited
amount of power should be vested in each branch, and that the branches should
check the exercise of power by each other. To achieve a system of checks and
balances, the branches are independent and co-equal; to achieve a workable
government, the branches are in some respects interdependent. Although the
system established by the Constitution may at times entail "delay" and "unti-
diness" in governmental operations, the Court has recently observed that
"we have not yet found a better way to preserve freedom than by making the
exercise of power subject to the carefully crafted restraints spelled out in
36/
the Constitution."
Further elaboration of the separation of powers may be provided by the
37/
Court this term in its ruling in the pending case of Burke V. Barnes, which
involves a congressional challenge to a presidential pocket veto. The decision
may clarify the circumstances in which a pocket veto can be exercised and
provide an indication of the extent to which the Court will continue to insist
on strict compliance with the formalities of the legislative process established
35/ See United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (1974); Senate Select Committee
v. Nixon, 498 F. 2d 725 (D.C. Cir. 1974).
36/ INS V. Chadha, 462 U.S. at 959.
37/ No. 85-781 (U.S., cert. granted Mar. 4, 1986).
CRS-10
:
38/
by art. I, sec. 7. Even more importantly, however, since Burke also presents
the issue of congressional standing to challenge executive branch action, the
case may resolve the question of whether, in light of the separation of powers,
the judiciary can mediate disputes between the other branches over their
39/
respective roles in the legislative process.
My A. she
&
Jay R. Shampansky
Legislative Attorney
American Law Division
December 4, 1986
38/ See INS V. Chadha, supra.
39/ It is possible that the Court in Burke might not reach either the
standing or the pocket veto issues and will instead conclude that the case is
moot since the bill which was pocket vetoed has now expired.
PRESSWATCH
THE POWER EXECUTIVE
by Terry Eastland
F
ollowing President Bush's televised
As for opinion writers, only two un-
Only once did he propose to involve
tive power, which (to the consternation
address to Congress and the nation
derstood the central importance of the
Congress-when he sought the resolu-
of many) eludes precise definition. It's
on March 6, Dan Rather commented
presidential office-Charles Kraut-
tion authorizing force-and even then
all there in Article II of the Constitu-
that the President of the United States
hammer and the Wall Street Journal's
he denied that its participation was ne-
tion.
as many powers but that his principal
L. Gordon Crovitz. Pointedly noting
cessary. Of course, Bush could have
It is, of course, important to point
power is the power to persuade. The
that Bush did not really use the bully
been thrown off course. Arab states
out that Bush used these powers. In his
power to persuade? It's nowhere men-
pulpit, Krauthammer showed how the
could have refused to join the coalition
brilliant treatment of executive power,
ioned in the Constitution, and what-
President employed the formal powers
at the outset or else seceded from it
Taming the Prince, Harvard's Harvey
:ver else Bush was trying to do in his
of office to rally "a reluctant nation
later on. The U.N. could have declined
C. Mansfield, Jr. correctly emphasizes
peech that night, he didn't need Peggy
to a successful war." Crovitz observed
the rote Bush sought for it. Gorbachev
that the Constitution does not deter-
Noonan's help. He didn't have to per-
that Bush had used his powers to "out-
could have refused to butt out when
mine the behavior of those who govern
uade anyone of anything. He could
flank" Iraq, in the process recovering
Bush asked him to. For that matter, the
under it. "Every president has to defina
lave read names from a phone book
presidential dominance in foreign poli-
actual war itself might not have gone
the office for himself.' Still, it matters
nd still retained the nation's admira-
cy.
so well. But, it was Bush who had the
that Bush was positioned by the office
ion.
unique authority to do all of these
he held to do what he did. Congress
What helped get Bush where he was
things, not because of his rhetoric or
could not have done what the President
n early March was the well-equipped
A
press less ignorant about the prest
his approval ratings but because of the
did: Congress and the President are CO
fice he sat in. "As commander-in-
idency as an institution would
Constitution.
equal in power, but their powers are dif
hief," Bush said that night, "I can re-
have seen the exercise of executive pow
The President is the commander-in-
ferent, a point the media seldom appre-
ort to you: Our armed forces fought
er as the constant theme in the series
chief as well as the nation's chief dip-
ciate.
with honor and valor. As President, I
of U.S. actions taken in the wake of
lomat, and he has the duty to take care
The legislative power is the genius of
an report to the nation: Aggression is
Iraq's invasion of Kuwait.
that the laws are faithfully executed. In
our government, but the framers of the
lefeated." It would have been impoli-
First, there was the freezing of Ku-
addition, he is vested with the execu-
Constitution realized that Congress
ic, but Bush could have added: "And
waiti assets to keep them out of Iraqi
could not be the source of energy in gov
he presidency itself has been vindi-
hands then the drafting of the crucial
ernment. and that without energy there
ated."
first United Nations Security Council
could be neither good administration
This was one of the major stories of
resolution-Number 660-which con-
nor effective foreign policy. The presi-
e Persian Gulf War, but with few ex-
demned the invasion and demanded
dency was created to supply this energy.
eptions the media did not see it. To be
Iraq's withdrawal. Then there was the
In its unity (the executive power is vest-
are, the Wall Street Journal, the New
diplomacy to get the Saudis to agree to
ed in one person) the President can act
ork Times, and the Washington Post,
a large-scale deployment of U.S. troops,
swiftly (freezing assets, sending troops)
mong others, published detailed pieces
followed by efforts to recruit Egypt,
and diplomatically (in the Middle East,
capping the Bush Administration's
Morocco, and others into the alliance
in the United Nations, in Mosçow) and
ven-month effort to oust Saddam
Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf was sent to
decisively (Colin Powell: "First we will
lussein from Kuwait. There were nu-
the Gulf, 230,000 troops in tow There
cut it off: then we will kill it"). Imagine
erous profiles of Bush the War Presi-
was more U.N. work, then a doubling
Congress, a body of 535, trying to do
ent, discussing his personal character
of troops in early November. There was
any of these things. It does other things
d style of leadership, and there were,
the diplomacy to get the U.N. resolu-
(as George Mitchell might say: "First
markably enough, editorials and op-
tion setting the January 15 deadline and
we will tax it; that should kill it"). The
Is saluting the President for his unde-
authorizing the use of force. There was
point is, Congress is institutionally ill-
able achievement, some written by
the legislative effort to get Congress to
equipped to run foreign policy.
ople not known for toasting Bush un-
pass the resolution authorizing military
SS with an intention to burn.
action. Then, on January 16, there were
In all this coverage, I found only one
the first bombs on Baghdad. When the
ot that it doesn't try, and, consis-
:WS analysis that explicitly noted that
Soviet Union tried to negotiate a peace
N
tent with the trend since Vietnam,
le of the winners of the Gulf conflict
on unsatisfactory terms, there was the
some members tried hard during Desert
IS the presidency as an institution.
delicate diplomatic effort to keep Mik-
Shield. After Bush sent an additional
aking this point, the Economist ob-
hail Gorbachev at bay and the pressure
150,000 troops in November, some told
rved, "There will be fewer questions
on Saddam. When the latter refused to
the White House that only Congress
out the power of the commander-in-
pull out, there was the ground war that
could order such a large deployment,
ief in the future, and less talk of the
forced the end.
forgetting what Bush himself pointed
ar Powers Act."
On each of these occasions-wheth-
out as he pulled a copy of the Constitu-
er dispatching diplomats or troops or
tion from his suit pocket As uniquely
YY Eastland is resident fellow at the
bombs or bullets-the President took
reported by the presidential-power-sav-
hics and Public Policy Center.
action pursuant to his formal powers.
vy Gordon Crovitz, Bush told congress-
E AMERICAN SPECTATOR MAY 1991
35
men that under the Constitution only
there was a clearly just war, the Demo-
Congress can declare war, but only the
crats simply lack the mentality to be an
President is commander-in-chief Un.
executive party Though unremarked by
SARKES TARZIAN INC
able to get their way politically, some
the media, this is as serious a problem
members of Congress sued, arguing that
as a political party can have 11 is, at
the congressional power to declare war
bottom. why the image of Michael Du
meant that it had to give approval to
kakis riding in a tank was so laughable
what Bush had done; the judge in the
in 1988-and is even more so today The
case said the issue wasn't ripe (actually
Democrats are a congressional party
this banana had turned brown; the
that would have been at home under.
troops were already there). And up
the Articles of Confederation-when
through the second week in January a
there was no presidency.
sizable contingent in Congress con-
tinued to insist on staying with eco-
nomic sanctions only; no military force,
D
an Rather's remark about the
please.
power to persuade was not some-
In the end, of course, Congress passed
thing that oddly popped from his
the resolution authorizing military
mouth. It is axiomatic among most
force. But contrary to what many in the
members of the media that the power to
media said at the time. that vote did not
persuade really is the President's most
reveal a deliberative Congress so much
important.
as one that could not do otherwise.
Two definitions of this power are cur-
Congress had been outflanked by a
rently in use. One is a mainly rhetorical
President who had skillfully used his
definition: the President uses speeches
formal powers, Just as, in the end, Iraq
to rally public opinion to his side. Ron-
was.
ald Reagan and his speechwriters helped
With few exceptions, the media re-
popularize this understanding of the
mained unimpressed by this extraordi-
power to persuade, i.e., the rhetorical
nary triumph of presidential power or
presidency. The other definition, more
by its implications for the execution of
sophisticated, is drawn from Richard
American foreign policy. Indeed, read-
Neustadt's book Presidential Power, first
ers of the news analyses of the New
published in 1960 and a bedside bible
York Times were apt to take away a dif-
for most White House reporters. Neu-
ferent message. On November 14, when
stadt argues that the President must ac-
congressional objection to the addition-
quire and use personal power in order
al deployment was mounting, R. Ap-
as was
to secure his formal powers of office;
ple, Jr. wrote that Bush was learning
the latter are not central to his work
that limitations on presidential power
though they may be useful. in a subor
apply in foreign policy as well as do.
dinate way, to what he calls "the per
mestic affairs. After the war, neither
suasive process."
Apple nor anyone else at the Times
These definitions imply an interest in
took the egg off the newspaper's face
the personal abilities of a President and
with the kind of analysis subsequent
also in approval ratings (on the theory
events demanded.
that ratings indicate how a President
If the Times is an accurate barometer,
WRCB CHANNEL 3 TENNESSEE
has done at persuasion), even as they
the media have yet to figure out that
give short shrift to the formal powers
kicking the Vietnam syndrome has re-
KTVN CHANNEL RENO NEVADA
of office-the very ones Bush used so
quired demonstration not only of Amer-
skillfully from August 2 through Febru-
ican military might but also of a pres-
WTTS
ary. The influence of these definitions
923FM
idential might that puts Congress in its
among the media helps explain the com-
foreign policy place. The 1973 War
plaint made unremittingly during the
WGCL
1370
BLOOMINGTON
Powers Act, which Bush technically
fall that Bush had not been a good
violated by sending troops to Saudi
enough communicator.
WAJI FORT INDIANA
Arabia without consulting Congress, is
Consider the litany on this score by
now virtually a dead letter.
the Washington Post, when polls in
CENTRAL OFFICE BOX 62 BLOOMINGTON INDIANA 47402
Also dead, in an important respect, is
November showed that less than a ma-
TELEPHONE 812 7251
the Democratic party. The media have
jority of Americans believed Bush had
provided plenty of stories on its postwar
explained the situation well enough "so
difficulties, given the position of most
that you understand why troops are
congressional Democrats against the use
there." Jim Hoagland, the paper's chief
of force. But perhaps because of their
foreign correspondent, wrote on No-
own blindness to the nature and impor-
vember 4 that we had the right Gulf
tance of executive power, the media have
policy but "the wrong President" be.
not penetrated to the deepest level of
cause Bush, who has "limitations" in
insight: the war revealed the Democrat-
speechmaking, had not made "a clear
ic party as not merely anti war, but anti-
and ideally inspirational statement to
executive, 11 is inherent in the very idea
the nation to explain the goals of the
Providing the Best Radio and Television Service
of the executive that at some point he
potentially bloody conflict we may be
must use force, given recalcitrant hu-
approaching." On November 15, the
man nature. So consistently against
Post reminded its readers that Bush was
force for more than three decades, and
no Great Communicator in a story
then so conspicuously against it when
headlined: "President Struggles to Ar-
36
THE AMERICAN SPECTATOR MAY 1991
ticulate Goals." On December 2, anoth-
duty, honor, country; it is not con-
The media play a vital role in Amer.
dia worldwide television. no less
er of the paper's correspondents, George
strained by heroic ends. Of course, the
ican democracy, but not the leading
Congress is not the only institution
Wilson, sang the same chorus: Bush
media will argue that they represent the
one, and seldom the heroic one. Such
that has fallen a notch or two in the
was "still groping for a rallying cry to
nation as proxies for the general public;
is the lot for those who are not doers,
wake of a remarkable display of presi-
get teenagers and their parents to be-
but the proxies the people are more con-
but observers. When General Schwarz-
dential power. For the first time since
lieve it is worth risking their lives to free
cerned about are the ones in uniform.
kopf asked a reporter during his fif-
Vietnam and Watergate, the media sud-
Kuwait, save gulf oil or topple Sad-
That is why the public accepts censor-
ty-seven-minute Mother of All Brief-
denly find themselves less favored, if
dam." Bush's rhetorical inability, it ap-
ship during a war, as it did in this one.
ings whether the man had ever been
not less monied. For those who want to
peared, would do in his effort; he just
It is also why the public is upset when
in a minefield (the answer was "no"),
parse the complete meaning of kicking
didn't have the right stuff. Obviously,
the press complains about censorship,
he in an instant revealed the differ-
the Vietnam syndrome, there may be
the power to persuade was the most im-
as it did in this one.
ence between the military and the me-
something here.
portant presidential power.
As it happened, of course, Bush
turned out not to be the Great Com-
municator but the Great Liberator. It
was not rhetoric impressive enough for
the Washington Post that rallied Amer-
icans to Bush's side, and the United
States to victory in the Gulf. Rather it
was what he did. As Charles Krautham-
mer wrote, Bush took unilateral actions
"that were bold and, to the extent any-
one had considered them at all general-
ly unpopular at the time Yet each ac-
tion reshaped the debate and in time
came to be seen [emphasis mine as ne-
cessary if not inevitable and correct
One example: Three days before he de-
ployed the troops in August, the Gallup
Poll reported that 56 percent of Amer-
icans opposed such a move: after he
gave the order. 81 percent approved. A
second example: Ten days before the
ground war, the CBS/New York Times
poll found just II percent of Americans
in favor of starting one; the day after
it was launched, some 75 percent ap-
proved. Krauthammer's conclusion: "As
a shaper of public opinion, the bully
pulpit is overrated The powers of the
The National Conservative Stud
to
meet
with
presidency. if skillfully deployed, are
from all over the United
or
Congress
and
the
government,
and
enough to move the nation
Gov-
for preserving university End for then and open discussion, Lectures,
ernment schools will be studying Bush's
and
/
the
themes:
free
buts
Student
legal
march through Washington." A fair
And
more
question is whether a press that under-
stands power in terms of speeches and
approval ratings will do the same.
These are just a few of the opportunities afforded to the students who attended
the annual Young America's Foundation's National Conservative Student Confer-
T
he Economist, in marvelous un-
ence:
A photo opportunity and meeting in the office of Senate Republican leader
derstatement, observed, "The press
has not had a good war." One reason
Robert Dole.
An address in the Capitol by Jack Kemp.
An extended evening
it did not is that its nature was revealed
in a context for comparison in which
with former U.S. Attorney General Ed Meese.
Lectures by top-rate conservative
it was bound to be the loser.
academics.
The military is a collective enterprise
A private
briefing at the White House.
that represents the nation in a life-and-
death struggle over important ends.
"ne of the most successful
summertime activities
YOUNG AMERICA'S
"
invaluable"
"Duty, honor, country" capture its
NATIONAL REVIEW
RONALD REAGAN
ideals. By contrast, the media, when
they report a story, are not a collective
enterprise but many individuals in com-
petition; that is why, in Saudi Arabia,
Please send information on The National Conservative
some news organizations resisted the
Student Conference and an application to
"pool" system that collectivized the
Name
journalism from the front. What the
media typically struggle over isn't life-
Street
and-death but the story itself. If report-
City
State
Zip
ers do risk their lives, it's typically for
the sake of the story (Bob Simon), not
Mail to: National Conference. Young America's Foundation
110 Elden Street. Herndon. Virginia 22070 703-318-9608
for the nation that the military repre-
sents. The press has no analogue to
THE AMERICAN SPECTATOR MAY 1991
37
WINDELS, MARX, DAVIES & IVES
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, N.W.
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006
(202) 775-5980
156 WEST 56TH STREET
TELEX: (WUI) 66103
NEW YORK, N.Y. 10019
TELECOPIER: (202) 775-0099
(212) 237-1000
April 18, 1991
BY HAND
Tony Snow
Old Executive Office Building
Room 122
17th & Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear Tony:
Per our conversation, I am enclosing the memo which we
discussed.
Although some aspects are dated for being directed at the
'88 Campaign, I hope you can find it useful. Do let me know.
All best.
Sincerely,
Mill Michael J. Horowitz
MEMORANDUM
TO:
The Campaign
FROM:
Michael Horowitz M4
SUBJECT:
The Tenured Congress: An Issue for the Campaign
I.
Introduction
Congressional encroachment on the powers of the Presidency,
and the price the country pays for the excesses and inefficiencies
of Congress, was an issue which the Vice President effectively
raised during the primaries.
Campaigning as he properly does as the candidate with broad
experience in the federal government, I believe that the Vice
President should soon deliver a thoughtful, summing-up speech on
the problems of our gridlocked system. The speech and any
campaign follow-up should focus on the failings of Congress, and
those of the House in particular, rather than dwelling on the
absence of a variety of presidential powers. It should move to
analyses of root causes and proposed solutions that go beyond
Congress-bashing. It should (and can) answer the question: If
the Vice President has so much experience with and knows so much
about the federal government and the presidency, what will he do
as President to make the system work?
Properly done, the issue should work well for the Vice
President in the Presidential campaign:
O
It allows the Vice President to stress his broad
experience in Congress and the Executive Branch, in
contrast to the lack of any federal experience on
Governor Dukakis' part.
o
It is an issue which scholars and the media know to be
critical and legitimate; a thoughtful approach by the
Vice President will be treated respectfully by many who
now doubt his substantive qualities.
O
It can help shift the campaign focus to the performance
of Congress and the House in particular -- a popular
issue with roots in the Truman campaign and the views
of John Kennedy. Moreover, properly put, the issue
fits in well with the Vice President's attacks on Jim
Wright.
o
Raising the issue ups the ante on a Dukakis vote;
focusing attention on the character and performance of
the Democratic Congress sharpens the question of
whether the Democratic Party can be trusted with full
political control of the system.
O
Raising the issue anticipates and can make naive any
Dukakis charge that "cooperation" with Congress is the
key to a more functional government, and that only a
Democratic President can do so. (If the ground is
properly laid, such a charge will underscore the
Carter-Dukakis parallel; Carter, who knew as little of
Congress as Dukakis does, made the same set of charges
against Ford and even accused him of an "obvious lack
of leadership" for his extensive use of vetoes. By the
end of Carter's term, his sensible White House Counsel
Lloyd Cutler had been so affected by Congressional
intrusions on the Presidency as to lead a national
campaign to replace the Constitution with an Executive
Branch-led parliamentary system).
o
Finally, the issue is one which the Vice President
knows well and cares deeply about; he views it,
properly, as an exercise in mandate-building essential
to a successful next Administration.
- 2 -
II. The Broad Objective.
I believe it critical for the Vice President to now move
beyond the mere stump speech calls for a line item veto and to
issue more than mere demands that Congress stop itself before it
shoots again. Likewise, he will need to avoid the trap of
legalism -- to make clear that only Presidential leadership in
dealings with Congress, and not even the most striking separation
of powers decisions of the courts can break the gridlock that has
paralyzed the government and hurt the country. Having resisted
repeated calls to support a test case in search of a phantom line
item veto power in the present Constitution -- the Vice President
knows that gimmicks and technical fixes are no substitute for real
leadership and political will.
In the end, the Vice President risks not being taken
seriously if he calls on others to supply leadership that should
come from him, or if he campaigns for wish lists of things which
have no chance of happening.
III. The Basic Theme.
A recent column of David Broder's made the key point
clearly: Today's House incumbents enjoy "something like a
lifetime guaranteed contract," he wrote, which makes "[t]he part
of the federal government which the Founders intended to be most
sensitive to shifts in the political climate ... the most immune
- 3 -
to change." The effect, wrote Broder, was to "take the House of
Representatives out of competitive politics." He could 37 have added
that the House has been under one party control for 34 years by
reason of the problem, and that the Senate only seems better by
contrast. That analysis, which has increasingly been made in the
national press -- although without any serious proposals for
change - -- indicates a basic diagnosis of the system's failings
which the Vice President can address:
O
Congress in general and the House in particular are now
largely insulated from voter preferences and the
democratic process.
o
As voter influence over Congress shrinks, it is
increasingly dominated by special interest groups
inside of Washington, by organized groups within the
Democratic Party and by the Party's Congressional
caucus politics.
o
Congressional staffs are near-tenured, hold
unaccountable, undemocratic powers and have mushroomed
in size over the past twenty years.
These are the systemic problems which the Vice President
should address, and he should be seen as a reformist proponent of
restoring voter influence and democratic choice to the political
process particularly insofar as the self-designated "People's
House,' the House of Representatives, is concerned. This is a
message far removed and far more powerful than mere calls for a
line item veto, even though it nonetheless targets the same source
of the system's problems -- an adversarial, micromanaging and,
ultimately, undemocratic Congress.
- 4 -
IV. The Failings of Congress and Proposals for Reform.
That Broder is right about the stacked deck election process
grossly favoring incumbents is beyond dispute:
The House incumbent reelection rate in the 1986
elections was 98% -- the highest in American history.
Not since the (Watergate) elections of 1974 has the
incumbent reelection rate fallen below 90%.
In 1964, 4 in 10 House incumbents had reelection
margins below 60%; only 1 in 10 had lesser margins in
the last election.
o
A recent Stanford University study concluded that:
--
House incumbents are only half as vulnerable to
party tides as were their predecessors in the
50's. (In 1984, President Reagan won majorities
in 370 House districts while Republicans won only
177.)
--
But for post-1964 incumbency advantages,
Republican control of the House would have
occurred in 1966, 1968, 1972, 1980 and 1984
elections.
--
Without reform, Democratic control of the House
will continue without the simultaneous occurrence
of a number of near-impossible conditions.
I believe that the Vice President can point to three basic
causes of the above condition. As to each, a serious reform can
and should be offered.
These critical elements have served to make voters in
Congressional elections increasingly impotent and irrelevant:
- 5 -
the Congressional staff and mail explosion;
-- gerrymandering; and
-- campaign finance "reforms.'
Each should be addressed, with specific action proposals for
change.
A. The Staff and Mail Explosions.
The facts are stunning:
o
House and Senate Members are now served by 20,000
personal, committee and administrative staffers --
three times the level of 1970. (The figure can be
doubled if legislative agencies such as CBO and GAO are
included.)
O
Congress sent out 759 million pieces of mail at
taxpayer expense in 1986, a 1700% increase over the
past thirty years. At the same time, Congressional
mail is self-generated; in 1986 Congress sent out more
than 12,000 pieces of mail for every incoming piece.
The staff explosion has had the most serious effect on the
operation of government. In particular, it has facilitated the
parallel growth of Congressional committees and subcommittees and
the consequent micromanagement of the Executive Branch. Likewise,
it has facilitated the existence of subcommittee fiefdoms on the
part of most senior House Democrats and nearly all Democratic
Senators -- all to the detriment of their historic legislative
roles.
The Vice President has spoken of these matters and should
continue to do so. But more to the point of the proposed basic
theme, the Vice President needs to make clear that it has been
- 6 -
Congress' desire to create year-round, taxpayer financed
campaigns and campaign staffs that has led to the recent staff and
mail explosions.
Thus, for example, 44% of House staffers work in their
Members' home districts and more than 75% of Congressional mass
mailings take the form of unsolicited "newsletters" and other
forms of what is essentially campaign literature. (While the
Senate in 1985 required the publication of Member mail costs, the
House has refused to take even that minimal step.)
The explosive growth of Congressional budgets has of course
taken place pursuant to Presidential approval of those budgets.
To date, however, no President has seriously examined the
Legislative Branch Appropriations Act and none has played a role
in its formulation -- all because of an alleged policy of "comity"
with Congress. All Legislative Branch Appropriation Acts have
routinely been signed by the President at whatever spending levels
Congress has unilaterally chosen for itself.
The "comity" policy, rooted in concepts of separation of
powers, has long become entirely one-sided and a bad bargain for
the Presidency. Congress routinely determines the size of the
White House staffs, routinely establishes reporting relations
within the Executive Branch and, to the near-penny, sets
appropriations levels for all parts of the Executive Branch. On
the other hand, the President -- an equal party to Congress under
- 7 -
the Constitution in the enactment of appropriations levels and
laws -- has literally ceded of all his policy discretion and
Constitutional authority insofar as Congressional appropriations
are concerned.
Two examples indicate the extreme lengths of Presidential
acquiescence in vesting Congress with the sole authority to fix
its own budgets.
--
By statute, clearly unconstitutional yet wholly
observed to date, the President's budget is
required to "include without change" the
proposed Congressional budget submitted to him by
the Congressional leadership. (To continue the
charade, Congress then cuts "the President's
budget" for itself, and credits itself with having
generated the "savings.")
-- Despite its more than 150 examiners who routinely
review and propose budgets for the smallest of
federal agencies and entities, OMB does not assign
a single examiner to the $2 billion plus
Congressional budget,
A PROPOSAL
Writing recently in the Washington Post about the problems
created by massive Congressional staffs, a former staff aide to
Senator Dole proposed a 50% staff reduction. He wrote:
"This would still leave staffing levels higher than they
were little more than a decade ago. Is it possible that
Congress cannot be adequately sereved by a "core" staff of
20,000 -- an average of 20 staff members for each
representative?
The idea of the 1970s that more staff was needed to
revitalize Congress had the ring of logic, but realities
today belie its promise. For all its resources, Congress
- 8 -
bloated &sey -serving
can't pass appropriation bills in a normal and timely
manner. Its answers to the trade and budget crises are
belated, inadequate and sometimes counterproductive. The
tradition of bipartisan foreign policy has been lost in
petty squabbling. How could fewer staff do worse?"
The Vice President should endorse the proposal, and call as
well for limitations on mail franking privileges, He should
announce that the OMB Director in a Bush Administration will be
directed to prepare and analyze legislative branch budgets, and
that while he expects to work with Congress, it should be aware
that its budgets will no longer be immune from vetoes when they
permit excessive spending.
The Vice President should acknowledge that such a step --
which would be of major dimensions -- would be resisted in a
variety of ways by the Congressional leadership. It would be
attacked as historically intrusive and is likely to cause serious
efforts at reprisal budget cuts in areas critical to the
Administration. As would be the case were a line item veto in
effect, the Vice President can also expect that the Legislative
Branch Act would be packaged with other appropriations of major
importance so as to make it more "veto-proof."
No battle involving a major reallocation of authority
between the branches can be expected to come easy. But the Vice
President should note that the battle is one which a determined
President can win. For starters, it would be fought over issues
of legislative waste and budget bloat, where Congress would be in
- 9 -
the unfamiliar position of defending its excesses. And, popular,
informed and editorial opinion are already to the effect that such
excesses are abundant. In addition, the Vice President will also
be speaking in the name of fair democratic process, making clear
that large Congressional staffs and budgets do not serve
constituencies so much as they make them irrelevant to election
outcomes. (Here again, he will have much informed and editorial
support.) Finally, the Vice President will not need
super-majorities to prevail, as in the case of adding a line item
amendment, or even majorities of both Houses as is needed to enact
legislation. For this battle, only one-third plus one of either
the House or Senate will do.
Moreover, such veto strength support can, with proper
leadership, be obtained. Republicans, who particularly in the
House are regularly jobbed on staff allocations and budgets, and
who are comfortable running against Congress, should be a natural
constituency in support of legislative budget reform --
particularly if they are lined up to do so by the Vice President
during the campaign. (Republican dissatisfaction with the status
quo can be understood from such facts as these: With 41% of House
committee seats, House Republicans are allocated but 22% of
committee staff.)
As a final note, it should be understood that the Anti-
Deficiency Act requires Congress to furlough its non-essential
- 10 -
staff during any appropriations hiatus. This will pose for
Congress the unattractive choice of either keeping all staff in
place and engaging in lawless (literally felonious) conduct in
derogation of a clear statutory mandate, or creating the spectacle
of so vast a number of furloughed staff streaming from their
offices as to make the case that large budget cuts for Congress
are clearly in order.
B. Gerrymanders.
A second area in critical need of leadership and reform
results from the fact that a decade's worth of Congressional
districts will be drawn during the next President's watch. There
is widespread understanding of the fact that gerrymandering is
rife and an extraordinary assault on the democratic process such
as to largely predetermine the outcomes of elections. Less well
known is the fact that minority party incumbents often support
gerrymanders, under deals which exchange the creation of safe
seats for permanent minority status for their parties.
The effect of gerrymanders on the Republican Party is
profound.
o
Since 1972, Democratic candidates for the House have
enjoyed a consistent "seat bonus" (difference between
the percentage of seats and votes won) ranging from no
less than 4.1 to as many as 10.9 percentage points.
- 11 -
O
In California alone, the Democrats have gained 5 seats
as a result of a blatant gerrymander engineered by
Congressman Phil Burton in 1981; the problem is so bad
that Governor Deukmaj asked to be withdrawn from
consideration as a Vice Presidential candidate in order
to be in a position to thwart a repeat performance in
1991.
Gerrymandering has been attacked in the courts, most
recently in a case brought by Indiana Democrats before the Supreme
Court challenging gerrymanders of the dominant Indiana Republican
Party. The Court made important law in the case, although many
gaps remain to be filled. Remarkably, the Justice Department
failed to file a brief in the case, largely out of its
philosophical distaste for active involvement by the courts in
what the Department termed "political questions."
A PROPOSAL
The Vice President should announce that a Bush
Administration will aggresively attack post-census gerrymanders,
irrespective of which party is advantaged. He should make clear
his intent to use the bully pulpit powers of the presidency to
take on gerrymanders, and that he sharply disagrees with Attorney
General Meese and will instruct his Attorney General to attack in
the courts all gerrymanders that bring undue political advantage
to controlling state parties. He should make clear his view that
when legislatures use their powers to entrench themselves in
office, and do so in a way that makes voter choice impossible,
- 12 -
that courts are essential to the vindication of voter rights and
the democratic process. Thus, he should applaud the Baker V. Carr
"one man, one vote" decision, but express the view that without a
comparable assault on gerrymanders, the courts will have created a
mirror-opposite loophole.
The Vice President should challenge Governor Dukakis to
pledge that he too will use his Justice Department to bring court
challenges against gerrymanders and other forms of unfair
districting, one and all, without regard to party or incumbent
advantage. In fact, the challenge should hit the mark: In 1987,
Governor Dukakis signed a redistricting bill which, in order to
preserve all incumbent seats in the heavily Democratic
Massachusetts House of Representatives, carved up black
21,9%
communities into large numbers of districts and permitted
population variances between districts of as much as X. The
redistricting bill -- as blatant a scheme as has recently been
attempted to protect incumbents at the expense of voter choice --
was struck down last year as unconstitutional by the Federal
courts.
C. Campaign Finance "Reforms."
There can be little doubt that campaign finance "reforms" of
the past decade have had the perverse effect of making elections
increasingly one-sided affairs which favor incumbents:
- 13 -
As recently as 1974, a rough parity existed between
resources for challengers and incumbents in
Congressional elections; by 1986, the resource gap was
almost 3 to 1 in incumbents' favor: $334,000 for the
average House incumbent, $124,000 for the average
challenger.
O
The gap is rapidly growing: in the first 15 months of
the election cycle though March 31, the Federal
Election Commission reported that House incumbents
raised more than $75 million while their challengers
collected only $10 million.
o
The money advantage, of course, comes largely from the
PAC system; the FEC report on giving by the 4500
registered PAC's not only shows a 34% increase in funds
provided by PAC's between the 1986 and 1988 campaigns,
but further reveals that an astonishing 78% of PAC
funds for Senate candidates and 93% of PAC funds for
House candidates went to incumbents. (Not
surprisingly, no challenger placed within the top 50
PAC donees.)
There is no easy route to campaign finance reforms, no
certain way to reduce incumbency advantages in such a manner as to
guarantee fair elections. Public financing of Congressional
campaigns is a concept almost always associated with companion
spending caps, which translate into even greater incumbency
advantages. To the credit of Republican Congressional incumbents,
their efforts defeated a 1988 Democratic "reform" bill whose
provisions would have strongly protected them against their
campaign opponents. Viewing the bill -- passed by the House and
only defeated in the Senate pursuant to filibuster - -- against the
background of the prior, 1986 election, Senator McConnell's
analysis was telling:
- 14 -
of the 1986 Senate challengers, 18 of the 20 who spent
within the limits of the 1988 "reform" bill lost.
All 10 of the 1986 Senate incumbents who spent within
the limits of the bill won.
On the other hand, 5 of the 8 challengers who spent
above the limits of the bill won.
In general, Republicans have tended to oppose all forms of
public financing of campaigns, with or without spending caps, and
have also tended to oppose mandatory government regulation of the
election process. As indicated, Democrats have largely favored
public financing of Congressional campaigns combined with
extensive regulation of the process, most particularly including
spending caps. Both parties have tended to stay away from efforts
to modify the structure and basic nature of PAC's.
A PROPOSAL
The Vice President should call for a major reform package
designed to significantly even the odds between incumbents and
challengers. It should consist of real PAC reform and of public
financing of Congressional candidates, but without any spending
caps. An optional feature of the reform package would require
television and radio stations, as a condition of licensure, to
provide reasonable, free access to Congressional candidates.
As to PAC reform, the Vice President should first indicate
his general distaste for the effect that PAC's have had on the
- 15 -
political process. He should then make clear his particular
concern about the "soft money" loophole which allows corporations
and unions to use their own funds, without any limitation, to
establish and administer PAC operations. Barring the use of
corporate and union funds for such purposes would have a major
effect in reducing the number of PAC's and, even though the net
effect would fall disproportionately on corporate political
activity, its overall effect would be salutary. (Most corporate
PAC money goes to incumbents.) To ensure that high pressure "hat
passing" activities on the part of corporations soliciting their
executives would not unfairly take up the slack, the Vice
President should also call for a strengthened enforcement against
now almost moribund bans on coercive fund solicitations.
In addition, and as a critical element in the reduction of
presently unfair and destructive incumbency advantages, the Vice
President should call for public financing of Congressional
nominees from the two parties whose candidates won the most votes
for the position in question in the prior election. Such support,
which would not carry with it a corresponding obligation to limit
overall spending, would ensure that challengers would have some
opportunity -- when there often is now none -- to present their
case to the voters. Political speech, the Vice President should
say, is a virtue in and of itself. As such, it merits support to
ensure that incumbents are not free, as they often and
- 16 -
increasingly now are, to wholly drown out the voices of their
challengers.
In this regard, the Vice President might also wish to
consider -- or to indicate his interest in having studied -- the
possibility of providing free access to licensed media for
Congressional candidates. This is a controversial policy whose
merits are not entirely certain, and it is one whose mechanics of
implementation may ultimately be problematic. But it is the cost
of television and radio that today most places challengers without
great personal wealth at their greatest competitive disadvantage
-- one that indeed discourages many of the ablest potential
challengers from even running for office.
In the end, whether the federal contribution is large enough
to pay for reasonable media access or whether a smaller federal
contribution is combined with a limited right of free access to
licensed media, the Vice President should make clear that the
paramount need for competitive elections compels bold policy
action.
The above positions would be regarded as striking, and would
be generally well received by commentators if not the media who
employ them. The proposal would further serve to position the
Vice President as a reformist opponent of the Congressional status
quo and would further serve to focus attention on the political
"fix" enjoyed by the Democratic Congress.
- 17 -
V. The Arrogance of Power.
Making voters increasingly irrelevant to election
outcomes is an evil in and of itself, but the Vice President
should conclude by describing ways in which the tenuring of
incumbents (and the one party control it has allowed the House to
maintain for 34 consecutive years) has caused the legislative
process itself to become arbitrary and undemocratic.
A. The Rise of King Caucus.
At the turn of the century, (Republican) Speaker "Uncle Joe"
Cannon was the autocratic ruler of the House. Only bills which he
and his leadership cronies favored ever reached the floor for
vote, and Members who failed to do his bidding were relegated to
inconsequential status. The hold of Speaker Cannon on the
country's political process was only broken when in 1910
Congressman George Norris brought national attention to the
problem and ended "Cannonism" through a series of key
parliamentary divices. Writing of that historic battle in
"Profiles in Courage," John Kennedy described the scene in terms
strikingly applicable to today's Wright-run House:
"The overthrow of Cannonism broke the stanglehold which the
conservative Republican leaders had held over the Government
and the nation Under the 'Czar' the Office of the
Speaker of the House wielded ... a power that placed party
above all other considerations, a power that fed on party
loyalty, patronage and political organizations. It was a
power which, despite increasing disfavor in [many] parts of
the country ... had continued unchallenged for years."
- 18 -
The Vice President can rightly charge that in our presently
tenured Congress, King Caucus reigns again -- this time at the
hands of a liberal Democratic majority. Today, through the
operation of the Democratic House Caucus, Congressmen seeking
advancement or those already chairing committees or subcommittees
have more to fear from a majority of their Democratic colleagues
than they do from the voters of their home districts. A good
example which the Vice President can cite is that of Congressman
Les Aspin, whose support of aid to the Contras was replaced by a
promise not to vote his conscience on that critical subject, lest
he lose his Armed Services Committee chairmanship. Thus decreed
the House leadership and its Caucus, and thus was the country's
Central American policy largely fixed. Precisely as was the case
with Speaker Cannon, national policy was established by party
caucus despite the contrary views of the President, the Senate and
a majority of the House. Whatever one's views of Central American
policy, the Vice President can say, it is wrong to have that
policy decided not by a majority of the Members of the House but
by a mere majority of its majority. This is the means by which
the Les Aspins and many conservative House Members are often not
permitted to vote their consciences or their constituents' views,
and it is wrong. Such an undemocratic outcome, as wrong today as
it was during the period described by John Kennedy, is a function
of stacked elections, and the Vice President can say that King
- 19 -
Caucus will flourish as long as voters have no effective sway over
incumbents.
B. Double Standards.
The arrogance of power of today's largely voter-proof
Congress, the Vice President can further say, is perhaps best seen
through the legislative double standards which Congress feels free
to establish. Whether creating ethics rules, independent counsel
procedures, freedom of information access or "sunshine" rules for
the Executive Branch, or whether establishing minimum wage, civil
rights or environmental statutes for the country at large, one
thing is clear. Congress frees itself from any such constraints,
and ensures that it remains above the law. At the same time,
Congress awards itself and its staff such entitlements as
honoraria payments and gift receipt authority that it denies to
all others.
Critically, the excuse that Congress uses to set such double
standards -- that the conduct of Members is reviewed by voters and
after each election is effectively endorsed by them -- stands
truth on its head. The Vice President should by how have
established the increasingly predictable and meaningless character
of most House and large numbers of Senate elections; his point
should be that Congress only gets away with being above the law
precisely because its work is no longer meaningfully reviewed by
the voters.
- 20 -
The Vice President should announce his readiness to veto
double standard bills sent up by Congress and may even wish to
announce his intention to send up an Omnibus Single Standard bill
applying to Congress a broad range of statutes ranging from the
independent counsel to the civil rights laws.
c Railroad Procedures.
Lord Acton's dictum about the inevitable consequences of
absolute power manifests itself further in the day-to-day manner
in which the House does its business.
Taking the floor last month to complain of such procedures,
the House Republican leadership and many of its key members
detailed a series of abuses which, they pointed out, have
seriously worsened since Speaker Wright has assumed power. Trent
Lott described a variety of "creative rule alteration procedures"
-- to which he gave the acronym "CRAP" -- and by which, he said,
Speaker Wright "is destroying the comity and uniformity so
essential to the proper functioning of the House."
Thus:
Forty-four percent of the bills brought to the House
floor in the current Congress were under restrictive
rules, compared to but 12 percent a decade ago.
As pointed out repeatedly by President Reagan,
appropriations are now routinely presented in fifteen
pound packages, thus largely thwarting the ability of
the President as well as rank and file Members of
Congress to engage in meaningful votes on federal
expenditures.
- 21 -
As previously noted, Republicans are given but 22
percent of House committee staff members despite having
41 percent of all committee seats.
The Democrats are highly vulnerable on this score and an
attack by the Vice President would be well received. Espousing
the cause of Republican House Members, the forgotten people of
American politics, will help cement their loyalty to the Vice
President -- in the campaign and in office.
V.
Conclusion.
The above represents a menu of options which, properly
chosen and presented, can allow the Vice President to:
shift a measure of campaign focus to the generally
acknowledged failings of Congress and to the risks
which will be run if the country wholly turns itself
over to an inexperienced President and his
Congressional party;
serve as a champion of voter rights -- as one
challenging Congress to fairly face the voters as he
does, confident that the cure for the system's failings
is the application of democratic process;
show his capacity for Presidential leadership on a
in memo
critical issue which to date has been the subject of
lament, little else;
establish a respectful separation from Administration
actions and inactions (the proposals set forth in this
memo are deliberately crafted to differ with policies
of Stockman-Miller OMB, the Meese Justice Department
and the White House -- although, of course, they
address objectives which the President powerfully
shares) i
- 22 -
begin to create not only a campaign issue but a needed
mandate following the election.
The terms of any such speech will need to be discussed with
key Republican Congressional leaders -- they and their troops may
also feel threatened by ending many current incumbency
advantages. In all events, such support will add enormous
credibility to proposed policies such as possible legislative
branch appropriations vetoes and campaign finance reforms.
Senator Dole and Congressmen Michel would be powerful and
articulate allies in any effort to shift the focus of debate to
Congress' failings, and Senators McCain and McConnell should
probably be consulted on any campaign finance reform proposals.
- 23 -
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
20
145TH STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Copyright (c) 1987 The Washington Post
February 1, 1987, Sunday, Final Edition
SECTION: FIRST SECTION; PAGE A16
LENGTH: 519 words
HEADLINE: 'Executive Privilege' Hailed
BYLINE: Al Kamen, Washington Post Staff Writer
BODY:
Assistant Attorney General William Bradford Reynolds urged the Reagan
administration and its successors to claim "executive privilege" more often to
resist congressional efforts to obtain internal governmental documents.
But, he said that "at times there may well be valid reasons to waive
[executive] privilege; the current Iranian controversy suggests itself as one
such situation."
Reynolds spoke here yesterday at a convention of the Federalist Society. In
the text of the speech released by the Justice Department, he said the executive
branch's inclination to accede to congressional demands amounts to a "near
abdication" of its constitutional responsibilities.
Reynolds gave no indication of what event, if any, had prompted his comments.
They come when the administration could confront increased demands for internal
papers from Congress and a grand jury looking into arms deals with Iran and aid
to rebels fighting the Sandinista government of Nicaragua.
While he made an exception for the Iran matter, he said that, as a general
rule, the executive branch too often turned over documents without enough
thought about how "we might be undermining the capacity of this branch of
government to conduct its business in a proper fashion."
Reynolds said the executive branch is paying a "heavy price" for not
"standing up for our constitutional rights."
There are "subtle differences between what government officials are willing"
to say on paper "and what they insist on stating to you face-to-face
People are concerned," he argued, "that every word they write down is a
potential weapon in the hands of a political opponent; no one can be sure what
might be turned over in the future and how it might read when taken out of its
deliberative context."
Reynolds also criticized Congress for conducting oversight hearings
"completely detached from any discernible legislative task," but "simply as a
means of congressional micromanagement of executive branch action.'
"Congressional committees do not have to make the hard executive choices when
issues arise,' Reynolds said. "All they need do is hide in the hills while the
battle rages, and emerge when it is finished to shoot the wounded.
LEXIS® NEXIS® ® LEXIS® ® NEXIS® ®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE 21
(c) 1987 The Washington Post, February 1, 1987
Reynolds said the Founding Fathers, in fashioning a three-branch system to
balance powers, could not have foreseen the present situation in which all three
branches are more interested in "short-term political gains" than anything else.
Congress has given up its responsiblity to legislate, he said, by passing
"largely incomprehensible" laws and leaving it to the judiciary or federal
agencies to figure out what they mean. The executive branch, in turn, has
attempted to legislate through excessive regulations while the judiciary also
has an "active legislative agenda."
"In a word," Reynolds concluded, "the balance [of powers] we have today does
not remotely resemble the one struck by our Founding Fathers," and he called on
Federalist Society lawyers to lead in raising public awareness of the importance
of keeping each branch of government within its constitutional boundaries.
TYPE: NATIONAL NEWS
SUBJECT: EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE; PRESIDENTIAL RELATIONS WITH CONGRESS; FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT; UNITED STATES; PRESIDENT / CHIEF EXECUTIVE; SEPARATION OF POWERS
NAMED-PERSONS: WILLIAM BRADFORD REYNOLDS
LEXIS® ® NEXIS® LEXIS® ® NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
2
3RD STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Copyright (c) 1991 News World Communications Inc.
The Washington Times
February 15, 1991, Friday, Final Edition
SECTION: Part A; Pg. A1
LENGTH: 1023 words
HEADLINE: Bush quietly seeking repeal of foreign policy restraints
BYLINE: Frank J. Murray; THE WASHINGTON TIMES
BODY:
President Bush is fighting to recapture full control of foreign policy,
seeking to repeal such congressional restrictions as the ban on dealing with the
Palestine Liberation Organization or sending war reparations to Vietnam or Iraq.
In an unannounced move buried in the fine print of his 1992 budget, Mr.
Bush asked Congress to repeal 70 of 99 such restrictions on presidential
discretion and emasculate several others.
Asked why the White House had taken such a low-key approach, Press Secretary
Marlin Fitzwater said last night: "We wouldn't make a speech about it because we
haven't gone through the budget and picked out everything that is
micromanagement
The provisions Mr. Bush wants repealed include the Helms amendment barring
the administration from negotiating with or recognizing the PLO, the Mikulski
amendment barring aid to Pakistan, prohibitions on moving Stinger missiles to
the Persian Gulf region, the Iraq Sanctions Act of 1990, limits on economic aid
to E1 Salvador, and the earmarking of aid to specific areas of Ireland and to a
specific university in Poland.
"We gather in the current situation that if we want to transfer Stingers to
Gulf allies or to our own troops, we ought to be able to do it," a State
Department official said.
Mr. Bush also wants to lift the ban on direct assistance or "reparations"
to eight nations blacklisted by Congress. Rather than repeal the ban, however,
he proposes adding authority to waive the ban when the president considers it in
the national interest to do SO.
"The president has to be able to decide that the situation has changed and
he needs to override the rule," an administration official said. "What if
Castro fell this year?" The banned nations are Angola, Cambodia, Cuba, Iraq,
Libya, Vietnam, Iran and Syria. The last two have eased their anti-U.S.
stances recently.
Mr. Bush also proposed a waiver of the ban on foreign aid to nations whose
governments are overthrown in military coups until new elections are held.
Mr. Bush's effort to lift the ban on talks with the Palestine Liberation
Organization promises to stir a major battle all by itself. The administration
has said since 1989 that the restriction "is an infringement on presidential
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS ®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
3
(c) 1991 The Washington Times, February 15, 1991
prerogatives and is unconstitutional."
Although the administration began a "dialogue" with the PLO and talked tough
about congressional micromanagement, it is not known to have violated the
Helms amendment.
A State Department official said the widespread view about such rules is
that the president is free to exercise constitutional powers, but the wishes of
Congress "will be taken into account as we pursue our policy." In practice, that
has meant compliance.
Sen. Jesse Helms, ranking Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee,
called the Bush proposal "garbage" and said it was a recurring State Department
initiative.
"This is going nowhere, in my judgment, and I shall endeavor to make sure my
forecast is accurate," Mr. Helms said yesterday in an interview from his North
Carolina office.
"I really can't believe the Senate will approve this," he said. "If this is
not changed, I believe there'll be lengthy discussion, about two or three
months' worth."
David Mason, a Heritage Foundation analyst of presidential powers, thinks
the Bush proposal has more credibility than similar efforts by other
administrations, but he was not ready to predict victory.
"It's going to be a tough sell," Mr. Mason said. "When he's got to ask for
changes in law, he's in a weaker position than he is in dealing with things not
already in law."
Mr. Mason credited White House Counsel C. Boyden Gray with coordinating
the continuing effort to preserve presidential powers by vetoes and threats to
veto.
"This [issue] is obviously an area he's been aggressive in and structured
the administration to be responsive to. That's a big difference from the Reagan
administration," Mr. Mason said.
The budgetary footnotes, called "general provisions," are a history of at
least three decades of foreign policy disputes between the White House and
Capitol Hill that resulted in congressional mandates.
Among them is the now-outdated Boland amendment that restricted aid to
Nicaraguan resistance fighters. Efforts to exploit what were seen as loopholes,
or to ignore it completely, led to the Iran-Contra scandal.
Mr. Bush has derided the practice of general provisions as micromanagement
and insists it is unconstitutional meddling with his powers by another branch of
government
"When these deletions were selected, there was no overall strategy to get
only foreign policy items that refer to micromanagement," Mr. Fitzwater said.
"A lot of them do and represent what we believe to be unwarranted intrusion.
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® ® NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
4
(c) 1991 The Washington Times, February 15, 1991
Administration officials say Mr. Bush decided to act because of the
principle involved and not because he necessarily plans to take the actions
Congress has prohibited.
"Not that we necessarily are going to go rushing out and negotiate with the
PLO, but it does take the constitutional question on directly," said a State
Department official.
A Senate Foreign Relations Committee staffer, noting the PLO's support for
Baghdad, said, "It's outrageous to think at this point in time that somebody
would move to delete" the ban on dealing with the PLO.
Among the provisions Mr. Bush did not seek to abolish or revise are two
involving abortion, one restricting aid to forced resettlement in Ethiopia and a
rule against payments to any foreign military personnel.
One White House official said, "There's more micromanagement in the rules
and regulations of government than there needs to be.
"Different branches of government encroach into each other's prerogatives,
and this administration intends whenever possible to streamline things and make
sure that unnecessary and burdensome regulations are removed whenever possible,"
said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
GRAPHIC: Graphic, FOREIGN POLICY IN DISPUTE
LEXIS® ® NEXIS® ® LEXIS® NEXIS ®
IP 339C (GO)
SOURCE:
Encyclopedia Americana, 1988, Volume 7, pp. 659-665.
CONSTITUTION OF
THE UNITED STATES
CULVER PICTURES PAINTING BY JUNIUS BRUTUS STEARNS IN VIRGINIA MUSEUM OF FINE ART)
The Constitutional Convention of 1787 at Philadelphia is addressed by George Washington, its presiding of-
ficer. Benjamin Franklin sits at left, holding cane. James Madison stands in the center.
CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES, the
tain natural. inalienable rights; that it is wise and
fundamental law of the United States of America.
feasible to distribute and balance powers within
Drafted by the Constitutional Convention in
government, giving local powers to local govern-
Philadelphia. Pa.. between May 25 and Sept. 17,
ments, and general powers to the national gov-
1787. it IS the world's oldest written constitution
ernment; that men are born equal and should be
still in effect. The document presents a set of
treated as equal before the law.
general principles out of which implementing
The framers of the U.S. Constitution sought
statutes and codes have emerged. As such. it em-
to do what, as yet, Europeans had not tried: to
bodies the essence of constitutionality-that gov-
make these enlightenment ideas the governing
ernment must be confined by the rule of law.
principles of a nation. Hence, the document
The success of the framers of the U.S. Con-
stressed that the people were forming the govern-
stitution in writing a document geared to serving
ment ("We, the People do ordain and estab-
the varied and changing needs of Americans has
lish this Constitution. ) and were themselves
been complemented by an ability on the part of
dividing power in such a way as to afford checks
successive Congresses and courts to readapt it to
and balances on its use and potential abuse.
these changing demands. The Constitution's 25
The allotting to the federal government of
amendments. added over a period of 180 years,
only those powers specifically delegated-a prin-
have in most cases, plugged minor loopholes
ciple further bolstered by the addition of the 10th
rather than changed the tocus or the general
Amendment-made clear that the residual powers
structure of the document. As President Franklin
would remain with the local units of government.
D. Roosevelt stated in his first inaugural address
The creation of three separate branches within
on March +, 1933: "Our Constitution is so simple
the federal structure, each in numerous ways de-
and practical that it is possible always to meet
pendent upon the others for its healthy function-
extraordinary needs by changes in emphasis and
ing, afforded another way to ensure that federal
arrangement without loss of essential form. That
power would not be used indiscriminately. The
is why our constitutional system has proved itself
extensive powers of the president likewise were
the most superbly enduring political mechanism
proscribed in a number of places by designated
the modern world has produced."
responsibilities. The judicial power, which the
Basic Principles. The Constitution was a prod-
framers clearly intended to "extend to all cases,
uct of the thought of the 18th century "Age of
in law and equity, rising under this Constitution,
the Enlightenment.' European and American
the laws of the United States, and treaties made
philosophers, such as John Locke, Voltaire,
under their authority," was to be wielded by
Montesquieu, and Thomas Paine, attacked des-
judges, "holding their offices during good be-
potic government and advanced the following
haviour"; explicit jurisdiction of the courts was
ideas: that government comes from below, not
subject to congressional definition and, by im-
from above, and that it derives its powers from
plication, redefinition.
the consent of the governed; that men have cer-
Indeed, so impressed were certain of the
659
© 1988 by Grolier Incorporated. Reproduced by the Library of Congress, Congressional Research Service,
with the permission of the copyright claimant.
660
CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES
framers with the viability of Montesquieu's con-
ing to seize economic control of the lower Missis-
cepts of separation and balance of power that
sippi valley, even to the point of encouraging the
John Adams counted eight explicit balancing
secession of American communities there.
mechanisms and proudly proclaimed them as
There also was a pressing need for powers
evidence of the Constitution's republican virtue.
that would enable the central government to
These instances of government branches checking
promote economic development in an orderly
one another were as follows: (1) the states V.
manner. The credit of the new nation was pre-
the central government, (2) the House V. the
carious because of the inability of the central gov-
Senate, (3) the president V. Congress, (4) the
ernment to tax and to redeem its domestic and
courts V. Congress, (5) the Senate V. the presi-
foreign obligations, and the domestics economy
dent with regard to appointments and treaties),
was throttled by a mass of prejudicial interstate
(6) the people V. their representatives, (7) the
commercial barriers and discriminations. Internal
state legislatures V. the Senate (in the original
domestic antagonisms actually had burst into
election of senators), and (8) the Electoral
open revolt in defiance of federal authority, most
College V. the people.
notably in Shays' Rebellion in Massachusetts
Individual Liberties. No bill of rights was in-
(1786-1787).
cluded in the original document. It was con-
Revision Plans. Talk of revision had grown
sidered unnecessary by many of the framers be-
steadily. Alexander Hamilton. for one, had been
cause of the fact that Congress' powers were
dissatisfied with the Articles from the start. Sev-
delegated and this precluded their being used to
eral attempts to amend them failed, and state
deprive man of his inalienable rights. However, a
representatives met at Mount Vernon in 1785 and
number of basic protections were spelled out.
Annapolis in 1786 to consider various alternatives.
Such traditional guarantees of Anglo-Saxon liberty
Following Annapolis, the Confederation Con-
as habeas corpus and protection against ex post
gress responded cautiously but favorably to a
facto laws and bills of attainder were included,
resolution for a special convention so long as the
along with the assurance that "the citizens of
"sole and express purpose" was revising the
each state shall be entitled to all privileges and
Articles. Five states named delegates in 1786.
immunities of citizens in the several states.'
Shays' Rebellion speeded the process in the
As to the principle that men should have
others. By 1787, 12 states (all but Rhode Island)
equal rights and opportunities so far as society
had named 73 delegates, 55 of whom came to the
can assure them, the Constitution was without
Philadelphia Convention and 39 of whom even-
specific mechanisms for their attainment. But its
tually signed the Constitution.
clear thrust-that men create government to
secure their rights; that such a government should
THE CONVENTION OF 1787
be a government of laws and not of men: and
The convention delegates agreed that a new
that when government fails to serve men well and
constitution was needed. However, many contro-
equally it should be replaced-institutionalized a
versies had to be resolved before one could be
presumption of equality, which later generations
drafted. A basic issue was the extent of powers
found they could work for within the basic con-
to be granted to the national government, and a
stitutional structure.
major obstacle was the conflicting interests of
large and small states.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
The Framers of the Constitution. The activists
The Articles of Confederation, which had
who sought a new effective national structure
been framed when British armies were in America
were a singular group. Predominantly educated
and hostility to centralized British tyranny was at
and respected men of affairs, some with consider-
its peak, had so implemented American anathema
able wealth, they had in many cases participated
to strong national authority as to leave most effec-
prominently in the unified national effort against
tive governmental power in local hands. Upon
the British in the Revolutionary years, therein
ratification of the Articles in 1781, the problems
sublimating their local interests to the broader
inherent in the weak confederation structure be-
national cause. George Washington who pre-
came apparent. Change was essential.
sided over the convention), James Madison, Alex-
Government Under the Articles. Lacking both a
ander Hamilton, James Wilson, John Jay, Rufus
national executive and a national judiciary and
King, Edmund Randolph, Gouverneur Morris,
with no effective power to raise and utilize
and Benjamin Franklin all had served either in
national military forces, the central government
the army or as diplomats or key administrative
was unable to enforce its laws. It could not im-
officers of the Confederation government or mem-
pose its will on its own citizens directly and
bers of its Congress. These Convention delegates
therefore could not prevent violations by a state
were younger than such apprehensive localists as
of the rights of another, nor could it conduct
Samuel Adams, Patrick Henry, Richard Henry
effective relations with foreign powers. Further,
Lee, and George Clinton, who still feared the ex-
the requirement of unanimous support of all 13
perience of centralized British rule, and whose
states for amendment of the Articles virtually
minds could not embrace the concept of a na-
precluded strengthening the central government
tional interest in which they themselves might
through normal processes.
share.
Critical developments in the Confederation
The future framers of the Constitution were
period demonstrated the necessity for a sharply
not so transfixed by the specter of national
different approach to the solving of American
authority as to feel that any departure from tight
governmental problems-the need for a "more
local political control would destroy local in-
perfect union.' Obviously, American interests in
terests. Conscientious students of comparative
international relations had to be protected. En-
government and of America's prior experience,
gland had refused to advance diplomatic recogni-
they aimed to create a workable republican
tion and was exploiting American weaknesses in
structure, strong enough to establish national
world trade and hindering westward settlement
supremacy and to control "the turbulence and
through intrigue with Indians. Spain was work-
follies of democracy" but limited enough to en-
CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES
661
sure individual self-determination within a struc-
(Article I, section 8) and left the residue, with
ture of ordered liberty. Their differences lay
some exceptions (Article I, section 10), to the
primarily in means. Their common objectives
states: certain areas were to be open to con-
were summarized by Madison as "the necessity
current authority. It created a three-branch
of providing more effectively for the security of
government, both to implement the new grants of
private rights and the steady dispensation of
federal authority and to balance local interests
justice."
when that necessity arose.
The Alternatives. Disregarding its mandate for
Reflecting the general fear of all the delegates
amendment, the Convention began to consider
of the potential "tyranny of the majority, the
plans for new governmental structures, developed
convention adopted what Madison called a
in advance by various delegates. Edmund
"policy of refining the popular appointments by
Randolph's Virginia Plan, a product of the
successive filtrations." Accordingly, it provided
Virginia delegation in which James Madison
for the indirect election of the president through
took a prominent part, proposed an all-powerful
an electoral college, made senators elective by
national state allowing only the most limited
state legislatures, and assured that federal judge-
local authority. This proposal was disturbing to
ships be appointive. Originally, only the House
defenders of local interests, especially in the
was to be elected by direct popular vote.
small states, who objected particularly to the
The new government was afforded what
failure to provide for state equality in at least
Oliver Ellsworth referred to as the "coercion of
one of the houses of the national legislature.
the law." It had the power to execute federal
Although Madison and James Wilson of
authority directly on the people, and all state
Pennsylvania argued that in a proportionate
officials were bound by oath to engage coopera-
system the people as such, rather than the states,
tively in furthering the process (Article IV).
would be represented, and consequently the
Other Conflicts. Many aspects of framing the
people of the small states would have the same
Constitution produced bitter and detailed con-
representation in Congress as those of the large
troversy, particularly the manner of election of
states, small-state delegates remained uncon-
the president and the nature of his office and
vinced. Their spokesman, William Paterson of
powers and the proper role and function of the
New Jersey, proclaimed that his state would
federal courts. A strong-executive party headed
"rather submit to a monarch, to a despot, than
by Madison. Wilson, and Gouverneur Morris of
to such a fate." Failing to achieve some pro-
New York argued that free government demanded
visions for representation by states within the
independently constituted executive, legislative,
context of the Virginia proposal, Paterson put
and judicial branches and defeated a move to
forward a counterproposal. His New Jersey Plan
have the executive chosen by Congress. Thus
tightened up some glaring weaknesses of the
the possibility of a parliamentary-cabinet form
Articles but still made major concessions to state
of government was precluded at the outset.
autonomy.
Luther Martin of Maryland, an eloquent
The Compromises. The basic issues of gov-
champion of states' rights, afforded a way out
ment structure and powers had to await settle-
of a lengthy controversy over the role of the
ment of pressing points of friction. First, small-
judiciary in maintaining the supremacy of federal
state apprehensions were calmed by the Con-
legislation by making the state courts an agency
necticut, or "Great," Compromise. Every state
for enforcing federal law. This maneuver, how-
was conceded an equal vote in the Senate ir-
ever, later was converted into an instrument for
respective of its size, but representation in the
nationalism, when state court actions were held
House was to be on the basis of the "federal
to be subject to the surveillance of the U.S.
ratio" -an enumeration of the free population
Supreme Court.
plus three fifths of the slaves. It was agreed
The Document. On September 8 the rough
that the same ratio would apply for determining
document was entrusted to a committee on style,
state taxation, and the House was given the
where Gouverneur Morris led in polishing the
prerogative of introducing all money bills.
language. On September 17 the finished Con-
Other compromises were needed to smooth
stitution was engrossed and signed "By the
sectional and economic antagonisms. The
unanimous consent of the States present." Few,
merchant-minded North was assured full federal
if any, of the framers felt that they had created
protection of trade and commerce, while the
a perfect instrument of government. But they
agrarian South was guaranteed permanent relief
did feel that the new Constitution was some-
from export taxes and assurance that the im-
thing a majority of people could be persuaded
portation of slaves into the United States would
to accept.
not be prohibited for at least 20 years. Similarly,
As time was to prove, the original document
earlier Northern attempts to trade to Spain
had many flaws. The precise limitations on
Southern and Western territorial rights led to
national power over individual liberties, con-
successful demands from those sections for a
sidered superfluous by the framers, soon had to
two-thirds Senate ratification of all treaties. The
be spelled out through the amendments con-
same 2/3 ratio was applied in defining both the
stituting the federal Bill of Rights. The authority
proportion of senators necessary to approve
and power of the federal courts, both in regard
executive appointments and that to override
to judicial review and in questions of their
presidential vetoes of congressional legislation.
relations with state courts, was not well defined
Basic Decisions. The settlement of such contro-
until a later series of strong rulings by Chief
versies permitted a return to the two central
Justice John Marshall. The nature and extent of
issues of federalism: (1) granting to the federal
the implied powers of Congress produced two
government sufficient power to enforce its will
decades of controversy. The failure to define the
and (2) finding ways of limiting popular de-
precise locus of sovereignty left open a door for
mocracy. Working with the Randolph plan as
a vigorous states' rights movement and led
a point of departure, the convention delegated
ultimately to the Civil War. It took the same
various explicit powers to the federal government
national emergency to clarifv many of the
662
CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES
powers of the presidency, especially in crises.
on the federal principle, the Federalist papers
On the other hand, the document was re-
became a classic treatise in political theory.
markable in the boldness with which it sought
to extend to the entire nation the heretofore
HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION
limited and localized American experiment with
The view held by Americans of the "Found-
republicanism. The framers of the Constitution
ing Fathers" and the framing and ratification of
envisaged the conduct of national affairs by
the Constitution has changed through history,
all citizens and anticipated that such conduct
reflecting the values and interests of different
would result in advancing the welfare of all
periods. During the 1800's. in an era of domestic
citizens. This took both breadth of vision and
insecurity and international elf-consciousness.
a healthy confidence in the potential wisdom and
most Americans were committed to defending
responsibility of the electorate. It was the boldest
the virtue of their own gallant origins to an
step toward government of, by, and for all the
extent that virtually necessitated apotheosizing
people yet undertaken by Western man.
the framers. The Progressive era of the early
1900's, however, found many reformers im-
RATIFICATION OF THE CONSTITUTION
patient with a static legal structure operating,
The process of ratification of the new frame-
they felt, to serve only vested interests. Hoping
work of government began immediately after
to provide a new rationale for sweeping con-
the convention. The required approval of special-
stitutional reform, they set out to question the
ly elected conventions in nine states was achieved
boasted divinity of its origins.
on June 21, 1788, with the acceptance of New
In this spirit, Charles A. Beard's An Economic
Hampshire. However, ratification was not com-
Interpretation of the Constitution (1913) recast
pleted for another two years (see table). The
the founding fathers as men with decided per-
organization, enthusiasm, and energy of the
sonal economic interests, framing the Constitution
Constitution's supporters were major assets in
and pushing its ratification with an idea of
what proved to be a difficult campaign.
personal advancement. Beard explored these
men's economic status and maintained that their
RATIFICATION OF THE CONSTITUTION
State
Date of ratification
efforts had strongly undemocratic overtones in
Delaware
Dec. 7, 1787
their desire to put forward an instrument of
Pennsylvania
Dec. 12, 1787
government under which they would benefit
New Jersey
Dec. 19, 1787
most. Such a view had wide support from liberals
Georgia
Jan. 2, 1788
for more than three decades, especially in the
Connecticut
Jan. 9, 1788
Massachusetts
Feb. 6. 1788
economically conscious depression years of the
Maryland
April 28, 1788
1930's.
South Carolina
May 23, 1788
Cold War tensions underlay the emergence
New Hampshire
June 21, 1788
Virginia
June 25, 1788
of a generation of scholars in the 1950's and
New York
July 26, 1788
1960's who, while not returning to the earlier
North Carolina
Nov. 21, 1789
veneration of the framers. sought to revive their
Rhode Island
May 29, 1790
unselfish reputation. Led by Robert E. Brown
The Opposition. Anti-Federalist opponents of
and Forrest McDonald. these critics questioned
the new Constitution were quick to raise objec-
Beard's research and assumptions. They argued
tions to it and equally quick to play on apprehen-
that there was no evidence to support the con-
sions, particularly prevalent within the lower
tention that supporters and opponents of the
classes, that a remote and powerful central gov-
Constitution could be divided along lines of
ernment would become an instrument for aristo-
economic affluence or economic activity. They
cratic tyranny. The self-proclaimed heirs of the
also questioned whether the successful ratifica-
true spirit of the Revolution were convinced
tion struggle represented a devious and un-
that the republican principle, which they em-
democratic triumph over the wishes of a majority
braced locally, could not be extended to en-
of the people.
compass all 13 states without the creation of a
In turn, Jackson T. Main challenged the
type of central authority that would suppress
assumptions and evidence of these men, and
individual rights and local interests. The lack
Stanley Elkins and Eric McKitrick raised ques-
of a bill of rights to check such abuse seemed
tions as to whether the probing for economic
particularly unjustified and suspicious to them.
evidence, which had occupied a half century of
Thus, they launched campaigns against the docu-
historical scholars, might not be missing the
ment, which were sufficiently aggressive to force
point. Elkins and McKitrick argued that the
its champions to produce elaborate defenses.
struggle for a new governmental framework "was
The Defense. Campaigning was especially
not fought on economic grounds; it was not a
vigorous in the crucial and pivotal states of
matter of ideology; it was not, in the fullest and
Virginia and New York. In support, Virginian
most fundamental sense, even a struggle between
James Madison and New Yorkers Alexander
nationalism and localism. The key struggle was
Hamilton and John Jay published a series of
between inertia and energy; with inertia over-
propaganda pieces on the virtues of the new
come, everything changed. The issue of the
Constitution. These Federalist papers pointed
motivations of the framers of the constitution re-
out the reasons for the structure of the new
mains one of the central bones of contention in
government, the benefits to all Americans from
American historical scholarship.
its operations, and the functionalism of the
Constitution's explicit solutions to small but
THE AMENDMENTS
perennial governmental problems. The Federalist
In its first 180 years of operation the Con-
papers accomplished their purpose in Virginia
stitution proved remarkably flexible The nature
and New York, although they were, respectively,
of the U.S. government changed greatly, but
the 10th and 11th states to ratify. Furthermore,
most changes evolved from new interpretations
by stating the persuasive rationale for a balanced,
of the document. Formal amendment proved
representative, republican government operating
necessary in only 25 instances, and these oc-
CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES
663
curred mainly in spurts-as during the Recon-
more litigation and court interpretation than any
struction and Progressive periods. However,
other part of the Constitution. originally was
many of the 25 amendments provided for funda-
enacted to protect the freedman from the
mental social and procedural adjustments.
abrogation of his rights by the Southern states.
The Bill of Rights. During the struggle for rati-
By making the Negro a citizen and by making
fication critics of the Constitution leaped on the
the federal government responsible for his
omission of a bill of rights as a serious danger.
privileges and immunities, it sought to build a
Richard Henry Lee argued that the Constitu-
wall of federal protection around him. It was
tion. if adopted unamended, would "put Civil
proclaimed on July 28. 1868. after a bitter rati-
Liberty and happiness of the people at the mercy
fication contest in which Southern states that had
of Rulers who may possess the great unguarded
formally been declared out of the Union were
powers given." He demanded such amendments
required to ratify the amendment as a condition
"as will give security to the just rights of human
for return. The amendment subsequently was
nature. and better secure from injury the dis-
modified by the Supreme Court in the famous
cordant interests of the different parts of this
Slaughterhouse cases (q.v.) in 1873. Although
union." When the first Congress convened, it
the issue at stake did not concern Negro rights,
was flooded with some 145 proposed amend-
the decision so diluted federal control over state
ments. This number was reduced to 12, which
police powers that the 14th Amendment became
on Sept. 25, 1789, were sent to the states for
a virtual nullity as a protection of the rights of
consideration. Ten were finally ratified and went
Negro citizens. On the other hand, its due
into effect on Dec. 15, 1791.
process clause was turned into a legal protection
The 1st Amendment guaranteed protection
for property-especially giant corporations-
of such substantive rights as freedom of speech.
against state regulatory legislation in the years
press. assembly, and petition, while providing
after 1880. After 1925 the 14th Amendment be-
complete religious freedom and separation of
came the cornerstone of a growing movement
church and state. The 2d and 3d amendments
to "nationalize" the Bill of Rights against state
guaranteed the citizen's right to bear arms and
infringement, and its reinterpretation was the
forbade the government to quarter soldiers
legal heart of the civil rights movement of the
in private homes. Amendments 4 through 8 con-
1950's and 1960's.
tained basic procedural guarantees long com-
Another aspect of the program for the newly
mon to Anglo-Saxon justice: freedom from un-
freed Negro, a federally protected franchise,
warranted search and seizure (4th); guarantees
was embodied in the 15th Amendment (pro-
against double jeopardy, self-incrimination, and
claimed March 30. 1870). Again, however, such
the loss of liberty or property without due process
federal protection was eliminated by judicial
of law (5th); right to a speedy and fair trial
ruling, and only in later years did the federal
with adequate counsel (6th); trial by jury
government seek to enforce the amendment
(7th); and protection against excessive bail
against a variety of forms of state disfranchise-
and cruel and unusual punishment (8th). The
ment.
9th and 10th. dealing with rights held by the
Progressive Era Amendments. Another spate of
states and the people, were included primarily
amendments grew out of the politically active
to calm the apprehensions of states' rights ad-
Progressive period. A federal income tax was
vocates who worried about the potential ap-
authorized by the 16th Amendment (proclaimed
propriation of reserve power by the national
Feb. 25, 1913), providing an effective revenue
government. In later years, as the federal govern-
source to meet an expanding federal budget.
ment did seek to assume more functions, the
By 1912 many states were nominating senatorial
10th became a major weapon of laissez-faire in-
candidates through direct primaries with pledges
terests in their fight for "dual federalism" and
then obtained from state legislators to support
against what they considered unwarranted na-
such choices. The 17th Amendment (proclaimed
tional coercion; it also was cited frequently by
May 31, 1913) made the direct, popular election
opponents of racial desegregation.
of senators mandatory.
Amendments 11 and 12. The 11th Amendment
The 18th and 19th amendments reflected
(proclaimed Jan. 8, 1798) was enacted to over-
other manifestations of progressivism. With
ride a Supreme Court decision (Chisholm V.
curtailment of alcoholic beverages demanded as
Georgia, 1793). The product of states' rights
part of the war effort in World War I and the
protests, it was designed to keep suits between
moral fervor of the war widespread, temperance
states and their citizens out of federal courts.
advocates succeeded in imposing a "noble ex-
The 12th completed the first cycle of revision
periment"-nationwide prohibition-through the
by amendment. Proclaimed Sept. 25, 1804, in
amendment process. The 18th, or Prohibition,
time for the presidential election of that year, it
Amendment (proclaimed Jan. 29, 1919) proved
clarified the electoral procedure that had pro-
to be abrasive and was defied openly; the federal
duced a hopelessly confused result in 1800, re-
government was relieved of the further necessity
defined the vice presidency in its relation to the
of enforcing it by the adoption of the 21st, or
presidency, and unofficially recognized the ex-
Repeal, Amendment on Dec. 5, 1933. The 19th
istence of political parties (which the framers had
Amendment (proclaimed Aug. 26, 1920) ex-
not anticipated).
tended the suffrage to women.
Reconstruction Amendments. The 13th Amend-
Later Amendments. The 20th, or Lame Duck,
ment (proclaimed Dec. 18, 1865) represented
Amendment was an important accommodation
the first attempt. at broad-scale social reform
to modern needs. Proclaimed Feb. 6, 1933, it
through the amendment process. In abolishing
shortened the period between the election of
slavery and involuntary servitude, it was the
the president and his inauguration. advancing
logical culmination of Lincoln's emancipation
the latter from March 4 to January 20. It also
policies and the legal victory for which two
eliminated the session of Congress that had been
generations of abolitionists had worked.
held in the interim period and that often had
The 14th Amendment, which has produced
resulted in questionable actions instituted by
664
CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES
defeated lawmakers before they left office.
necessity of preserving the new constitutional
The 22d Amendment (proclaimed March 1,
experiment, the Marshall court sought protection
1951) officially limited the president to two terms
for men of property who would give the nation
or not more than 10 years in office. The 23d
stability and permanence. Many legal ways were
(proclaimed April 3, 1961) gave residents of
found to virtually sanctify property rights and
the District of Columbia the right to vote for
ensure federal supremacy. Article I, section 10's
president and vice president. The 24th Amend-
proscription of state violation of the obligation
ment proclaimed Jan. 24, 1964) invalidated the
of contracts was interpreted to include every-
use of the poll tax or other taxes as a condition
thing from private contracts to state-granted
for voting in federal elections.
charters of incorporation to private companies.
The crises caused by the illnesses of President
Similarly, interstate commerce, which Congress
Dwight D. Eisenhower and the assassination of
constitutionally had authority to regulate, was
President John F. Kennedy led to the enactment
interpreted to include almost every kind of com-
of the 25th Amendment proclaimed Feb. 24,
mercial activity. Congress power over it was
1967), which provides for situations of presiden-
"complete in itself" and could be "exercised to
tial disability and ensures that any vacancy in the
its utmost extent, acknowledging no limitations
office of vice president is filled. By the 26th
other than those prescribed in the constitution."
Amendment proclaimed July 5, 1971), the legal
In two other areas Marshall set patterns:
voting age was dropped from 21 to 18 for all
the supremacy of federal over state courts was
elections. An act of Congress had lowered the
established clearly and permanently; and the so-
voting age in 1970. but the Supreme Court ruled
called "necessary and proper" clause (the last
it inapplicable to state and local elections.
of the powers delegated to Congress under
Article I. section 8) was interpreted broadly as
JUDICIAL INTERPRETATION
a positive authorization for Congress to find
The precise role of the judiciary in inter-
means to accomplish appropriate national ends.
preting the Constitution and the statutes enacted
Jacksonian Democracy placed new emphasis
under it evolved slowly. Acceptance of the
on freer economic competition. As it also placed
Supreme Court as the ultimate and single
a new generation of judges on the bench-
authority on the subject of constitutionality did
headed by Roger B. Taney, the law quickly re-
not become fully established until the late 1860's.
flected this changed focus. Emphasizing, in his
Subsequently, however, the court's role con-
first opinion, that "while the rights of private
tinued to grow, and judicial interpretation re-
property are sacredly guarded. we must not for-
mains the chief means of keeping the Constitution
get that the community also have rights," Chief
in tune with modern life.
Justice Taney went on to lay a legal basis for
Judicial Review. In the early national period
freedom of competition, both through encourag-
congressional debate, executive pronouncements,
ing local banking and commerce and by guaran-
and even theories of influential statesmen were
teeing the right of corporations to do interstate
as significant sources of constitutional doctrine
business. Corporations were assured of access
as were court rulings. Nonetheless, the principle
to federal courts and thereby given protection
of judicial review (the power of the Supreme
against the narrow legal localism often used to
Court to rule acts of Congress unconstitutional)
guard local vested rights. The Taney court also
was claimed for the court by Chief Justice John
granted the states a new body of "police power"
Marshall in Marbury V. Madison in 1803.
to better look after the health, safety, and wel-
At the outset, conservatives such as Alexander
fare of their citizens. Yet the Taney era ended
Hamilton had argued that this power of the
ingloriously because the dominantly Southern
court was an essential limit on the elective
membership of the court sought, as in the Dred
branch of the government. Marshall enhanced
Scott decision, to cast the law so as to under-
the power and prestige of the court by utilizing
write Southern assumptions about slavery when
fully its accepted function of statutory interpre-
the nation was rejecting them.
tation. Interpreting constitutional law through
Under Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase (1864-
relevant state and federal statutes, the Marshall
1873), the Supreme Court preserved much of the
court gave explicit meanings to broad and
Taney court's attitude toward the viability of
frequently ambiguous provisions. This judicial
legal localism, but at times it used the need to
practice, which modern scholars have referred
protect local sovereignty as an argument against
to as judicial legislation, has enabled justices
national solutions. Although measures such as
throughout American history to adjust and adapt
the liberal Granger laws of the early 1870's were
the law to the pressing and changing social and
upheld, much of the liberal Reconstruction
economic needs of American society.
legislation, geared toward finding national legal
Thus, while the theory often prevailed that
solutions for race relations, were struck down as
judges merely interpreted the law, almost from
infringements of local sovereignty.
the outset they had the further clear, if not
The courts of the 1880's and 1890's, dom-
specified, responsibility for assuring its viability.
inated by such champions of uninhibited property
In the words of Woodrow Wilson, the court, in
rights as Stephen Field, Joseph Bradley, and
many ways, constituted a "permanent con-
Melville Fuller, tended to return constitutional
stitutional convention." Charles Evans Hughes
interpretation to the spirit of the rulings of. John
once remarked: "We are under a Constitution
Marshall. State legislation was assailed on every
but the Constitution is what the Judges say it is."
side as either a violation of the due process clause
Such judicial prerogative is not unlimited,
of the 14th Amendment or as an improper local
however. Court actions must have a feeling for
infringement on the federal government's com-
contemporary reality, or ways will be found to
merce power. Federal legislation, such as the
undermine the further use of judicial power.
Interstate Commerce Act, the Sherman Antitrust
Changing Interpretations. Supreme Courts have
Act, and a federal income tax law, similarly was
been shaped philosophically by their members,
destroyed as unwarranted assault on private
particularly by the chief justice. Geared to the
property owners.
CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES
665
The Progressive era brought massive demands
of political power by which they could protect
both for the utilization of government as a prime
themselves, the justices sought to provide legal
instrument for social and economic reform and
protection for those Americans without such re-
the development of a new sociological juris-
sources. Hence the court sought to "nationalize"
prudence that would accommodate the law to the
various of the guarantees of the Bill of Rights
new realities of an 'industrial, urban, and com-
by making them enforceable against the states
munal society. The court responded by develop-
through the 14th Amendment and to develop
ing new legal formulas that permitted the
new legal ways of guaranteeing civil rights for
validation of broad federal regulatory programs,
citizens subject to discriminatory laws and
from the antitrust laws to those of the various
practices.
new commissions, and evolving a unique body
Many conservatives questioned this new role.
of federal police power through which federal
One justice in the early 1960's vigorously at-
action could be taken to complement the states
tacked the view that "every major social ill in
in the area of health, safety, morals, and welfare.
this country can find its cure in some constitu-
However, at the end of this period the court, con-
tional principle, and that this Court should take
fronting the exigencies of a wartime situation,
the lead in promoting reform when other branch-
was forced to evolve a new body of law to cope
es fail to act." Nonetheless, this seemed to be
with governmental infringement on various of
the path that the court was launched upon and
the guarantees of the Bill of Rights.
would continue to follow until public pressure
The court of the 1920's and early 1930's,
called for a new line of constitutional interpreta-
while reflecting many of the dominant values
tion.
of the "normalcy" of the time, seemed curiously
See also CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES;
out of tune with hard realities. Under Chief
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW: PRESIDENCY, UNITED
Justice William Howard Taft the law once again
STATES; SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES;
was restructured so as to give optimum protec-
UNITED STATES-11. Form and Constitution of
tion to property rights. The "nine old men" of
the Federal Government and 16. The Founding
the years before 1937 set themselves the task
of the Nation, 1763-1815.
of continuing such protection, now from the
PAUL L. MURPHY
great explosion of New Deal legislation.
University of Minnesota
However, severely discredited by setting
Bibliography
itself so deliberately at odds with the two
Beard. Charles A., An Economic Interpretation of the Con-
elected governmental branches, the Court ca-
stitution (1937; reprint. Free Press 1965).
pitulated to presidential pressure in 1937 and
Grundman, Adolph M., The Embattled Constitution: Vital
Framework or Convenient Symbol? (Krieger 1986).
charted an entirely new course. It abandoned
Hoffman, Daniel N., Governmental Secrecy and the Found-
its traditional role of protecting private property
ing Fathers: A Study in Constitutional Controls (Green-
against governmental regulation and instead
wood Press 1981).
Kammen, Michael, ed., The Origins of the American Con-
concerned itself with giving modern. precise
stitution: A Documentary History (Penguin 1986).
meaning to the guarantees of personal liberty
Levy, Leonard W., and others. eds., Encyclopedia of the
in the Bill of Rights and in the 14th and 15th
American Constitution. 4 vois. (Macmillan 1986).
Main. Jackson T., The Anti-Federalists: Critics of the Con-
amendments.
stitution (Univ. of N. C. Press 1965).
Such a role produced a new constituency for
Mendelson, Wallace, American Constitution and Civil Lib-
the court. Assuming that big government, big
erties (Dorsey Press 1981).
Smith. Page: The Constitution: A Documentary and Narra-
business, and big labor had access to the types
tive History (Morrow 1978).
April 22, 1991
MEMORANDUM TO BETH HINCHLIFFE, CAROL BLYMIRE
FROM
TONY SNOW
SUBJECT
PRINCETON BUILDING DEDICATIONS
Let me apologize at the start: This memo, like my 9:30
reports, will be a stream-of-consciousness production, and will
bounce around a bit. Sorry.
At any rate, I'm really excited about the Princeton speech.
It probably will break more new ground than any other
commencement address. As such, I'll be inundating you with
articles, suggestions, names, ideas, etc.
This speech ought to outline George Bush's notion of what it
means to be president, and how we can revitalize democracy in the
United States. For starters, then, we ought to cull every
statement we can on the subject. We also need to get statements
about congressional powers, since he may also define presidential
powers in terms of what congress may and may not do.
Ideally, we will call upon a host of historic documents,
including Article II of the Constitution, the sections of the
Federalist papers that treat congressional and presidential
powers (particularly those regarding the importance of an
"energetic" presidency), the anti-Federalist papers, etc. We also
can make use of the burgeoning literature on the subject of
Congress out-of-control, taking note of the explosion in staff
size, the proliferation of committees and subcommittees; the
increasing security of a congressional seat; the fact that a
minority of the congressional majority (the leaders of the
Democratic Caucus) have more say in individual congressional
decisions than do mere constituents; Congress' demonstrated
inability to handle important foreign policy matters, etc.
This is a very, very ambitious speech, and it could conclude
with a presidential demand for campaign reform. We ought to push
for that and see what happens.
In the meantime, I'd suggest looking at the original sources
I mentioned above, as well as the Horowitz memo (written for the
1988 campaign), two American Spectator pieces that I've copied
for you, and whatever other scraps I can dig out of my files in
the next few days. I've also asked Terry Eastland to bootleg us a
copy of his upcoming book on presidential powers.
Other potential authorities: Gordon Crovitz of the Wall
Street Journal and Boyden Gray.
Work hard, think hard: This may be the most momentous
graduation speech of all this year.
April 22, 1991
MEMORANDUM TO BETH HINCHLIFFE, CAROL BLYMIRE
FROM
TONY SNOW
SUBJECT
PRINCETON BUILDING DEDICATIONS
Let me apologize at the start: This memo, like my 9:30
reports, will be a stream-of-consciousness production, and will
bounce around a bit. Sorry.
At any rate, I'm really excited about the Princeton speech.
It probably will break more new ground than any other
commencement address. As such, I'll be inundating you with
articles, suggestions, names, ideas, etc.
This speech ought to outline George Bush's notion of what it
means to be president, and how we can revitalize democracy in the
United States. For starters, then, we ought to cull every
statement we can on the subject. We also need to get statements
about congressional powers, since he may also define presidential
powers in terms of what congress may and may not do.
Ideally, we will call upon a host of historic documents,
including Article II of the Constitution, the sections of the
Federalist papers that treat congressional and presidential
powers (particularly those regarding the importance of an
"energetic" presidency), the anti-Federalist papers, etc. We also
can make use of the burgeoning literature on the subject of
Congress out-of-control, taking note of the explosion in staff
size, the proliferation of committees and subcommittees; the
increasing security of a congressional seat; the fact that a
minority of the congressional majority (the leaders of the
Democratic Caucus) have more say in individual congressional
decisions than do mere constituents; Congress' demonstrated
inability to handle important foreign policy matters, etc.
This is a very, very ambitious speech, and it could conclude
with a presidential demand for campaign reform. We ought to push
for that and see what happens.
In the meantime, I'd suggest looking at the original sources
I mentioned above, as well as the Horowitz memo (written for the
1988 campaign), two American Spectator pieces that I've copied
for you, and whatever other scraps I can dig out of my files in
the next few days. I've also asked Terry Eastland to bootleg us a
copy of his upcoming book on presidential powers.
Other potential authorities: Gordon Crovitz of the Wall
Street Journal and Boyden Gray.
Work hard, think hard: This may be the most momentous
graduation speech of all this year.
TO:
CAROLUMS
FROM:
QOG
SUBJECT:
4/19/91 MEETING WITH TONY RE: PRINCETON
Book: The Imperial Congress (put out by Heritage)
Subject: Congressional micromanagement
Should be historical and practical; theory and specific
examples
should be pretty aggressive, forceful -- executive branch
has been kicked around long enough, now we're going to kick back
-example: Congressional staff size (compare with worst
example of weapons system)
--tie in with Congress and foreign policy (for international
angle)
Ede H. will get memos from Cabinet departments over next
few days; NSC will send outlines
--Woodrow Wilson School -- find out about specific study
program on the Presidency
-recent literature on Congressional powers run amuk
--contact Gordon C. (from Wall Street Journal) ; have send
out all he's written --
term limitations, etc. (tie in with specific
Administration policy suggestions -- check to find out what we're
supporting)
talk to: Boyden; Roger; Pinkerton; McClure; Mark Davis
-quotes from various Presidents over the ages on dealing
with Congress
javet catcher
THE white house
WASHINGTON
Beth - -
and
goal
Here's another list of possibly helpful readings.
courtesy of Terry Eastland
1
Federalist 10, 67-77
7
Charles Thatch, Creation of the Presidency
(published 1923 - our ourlibrary should have it
or be able to get it)
3
Harvey Mansfield Taming the Prince 1989
intro, last 2-3 chapters
4
1990 issue of The Public Interest, devoted
to congressional powers. SEE especially Water
Berns' review of Woodrow Wilson's book on
America 3 the Presidency
5
Dick Cheney 1990 address to the Federalist
Society re: defense rearthorization bill
2:30-Wed,
CAROL
I=ASAK = for spear
2= today 4=wheneves :
1
1
- Cheney speech
Fed. Sor. (5mggated by Tery Eatland 7(22)
I
Wall St. Joune (Gordon c.) info.- -
7
Xear "A Conv. ul Gege Bunk"
2) memor etc re: what found so tas
2) Prenden Pres. grates on deals ul Congren (serian)
2
American people
" 1 Comstrition (gord oner
/
1990 issuect the Puble Internat (suggets by Jay Enthed 4(22)
8 Wilson's initings- on Congreen (book? Quter in then sort ?)
2
3
into (i.e. inside johns for Dong Ganble)
- Backgroulon Princeton Study program (any publicators
on This subject
3) - Other Pra. address on serious typic of retorm
3
Faces of
- 1990 Home in cumbent in relation if rap
il senate
-
"
11
is overall
-
- time under one party conoral for 37? years? ?
- when are new Congressional dischats buy drawn?
- # of Have & Santa staff - 1970
Total " " " " - " (inc. CBO & GAS)
- " IL " " " " - 1991 (" in 4
- in " is " " - 11
-
- Total II piecer of mail Congren sent ort 1990 recent Signer for mat avabable)
11 " " " 11 1/ 11 it for every incomes piece
-
- % Home stuffen als worls in member Home Districts
- 90 congrament man maily involved "nourlettes", etc.
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
PRESS BRIEFING
BY
MARLIN FITZWATER
April 29, 1991
The Briefing Room
11:25 A.M. EDT
MR. FITZWATER: President Bush will travel to St. Louis,
Missouri, on Friday, May 3, to visit the Cochran Gardens Apartments
and Community Center. This is a public housing development that has
been effectively tenant-managed since the mid-1970's. The President
will meet with members of the Cochran Gardens Management Corporation,
followed by remarks at the apartment complex. He obviously is going
to talk about our housing program, Secretary Kemp's proposals
entitled Hope. And this project offers a good example of tenant
management that has worked.
The tentative schedule shows a 10:30 a.m. departure from
the White House and a 5:00 p.m. return.
On Saturday, as a reminder, the President will also
travel to Ann Arbor, Michigan, to deliver a commencement address at
the university. The President's remarks will continue on his theme
of the new world order.
Tentatively, the President will depart the White House at
8:50 a.m. He will return Saturday evening. The commencement
exercises are scheduled to begin at 11:00 a.m. The President will
spend the remainder of the weekend at Camp David.
Q What else does he do in Ann Arbor aside from the
speech, which is over about noon?
MR. FITZWATER: I'm not aware of -- John, are there other
activities? John Herrick, if you're listening, please discover if
there are any other activities. Mr. Hunt implies that there is an
afternoon of activities.
Q
Why would he wait until evening to come back?
MR. FITZWATER: I don't know. We'll ask John to check
this out.
Q
Marlin, is that going to be the Mideast speech?
MR. FITZWATER: No, I don't think so. It does focus on
the new world order broadly, but will not be focused on the Middle
East.
Q
Is it one of those series of four that -- which one
of the series of four is it then?
MR. FITZWATER: It's number two in the series.
(Laughter.) And it promises to be far reaching and very important,
but I don't have a subject beyond that general theme.
MORE
#342-04/29
(2)
- Home Republin - what To of committee Deats
- 11 " " 16 staff ?
n 11
- what To of PA ( Sunds for in cumberts - Home
" " " " " - sente
4
- Test of speaker given /ast weak to G&P organing by
- Bill Kristol
- Elaine Chao (dep. sex.
- princeton
- define Pre- -gened
11 11 - GB
1
- Cong- as defind general attach
- 11 abuse (general)
- iL micromanagement
1 reimingoote democracy
- historical - county
-Freedoms (capture am spint from Gulf)
turn That energy new was are, from cymin 1.
but in order to do This -
- reforms