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
323154208
label
CAFE Speech 8/27/92 [OA 7579] [2]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
323154208
contentType
document
title
CAFE Speech 8/27/92 [OA 7579] [2]
citationUrl
identifierLocal
13829-001
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
323154208
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
abb8c5952d48f57e
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:
13829
Folder ID Number:
13829-001
Folder Title:
CAFE Speech 8/27/92 [OA 7579] [2]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
26
22
7
5
3
plan, including 700,000 workers put there by the payroll tax to
pay for his backdoor government takeover of our health care
system.
Governor Clinton calls this orgy of new taxes and spending -
- "moderation." I say that if this is moderation -- I'm Daniel
Webster.
The Governor likes to say he "puts people" first. He
doesn't mention that it's first on the unemployment line.
But it's even worse than it sounds. In that same Drexel
speech -- Governor Clinton had effusive praise for a certain book
-- by then-Senator Al Gore. Since then, of course, Senator Gore
has gone on to take a rather prominent role in the Clinton
campaign.
Now, what does Senator Gore say in his book that Governor
Clinton loves so much?
Well, on page 325, he makes an interesting comparison -- he
says that the car industry -- and I quote -- "poses a mortal
threat to the security of every nation, that is more deadly than
that of any military enemy we are ever again likely to confront."
Now I'm not making this up. Remember the old Stephen King
novel -- Christine? The one in which a car becomes inhabitated
by evil spirits -- and devours a town? The Clinton-Gore team
appear to look at every car as a haunted threat to humanity.
This would be funny, if it weren't so serious. If one out
of six jobs in America today weren't in someway tied to the car
industry. If this philosophy -- of tax and spend, regulate and
4
regulate -- weren't going to make it impossible for us to win the
economic competition.
I've been an environmentalist all my life. As President --
I fought for revision of the Clean Air Act -- so that our
children can breathe better.
My effort was criticized by big business -- and by
environmentalists. But I believe I found the middle that works.
The Clinton-Gore team isn't in the middle -- their bus has
left the highway -- and is traveling down the left breakdown
lane.
I'm not going to let this happen to America.
I stand for a program that begins with a freeze on all
unnecessary federal regulations -- so that businesses can create
jobs and get this economy moving again.
I think the federal government spends too much of your
money. So I'm fighting for a line-item veto -- and a balanced
budget amendment to the Constitution. Last week, I unveiled a
new idea -- to give you the right to check your tax return -- to
use up to 10 percent of your income tax for one purpose -- to
reduce the budget deficit.
Congress won't like it. The editorial writers might call it
a "gimmick." But I think the American people want the power to
say to Congress -- if you won't cut the deficit, we will.//
Here's something else I'm fighting for -- reform our legal
system. Take an ax to the system that allows so many crazy
5
lawsuits. As a nation, we must sue each other less -- and care
for each other more.
I have many of these reforms up before the Congress -- and
that's exactly where they've stayed. Because the U.S. Congress
has become the "Gridlock Congress." The House of Representatives
has been controlled by the same party for 38 years -- and it is
blocking the change that can move this country forward.
Let me give you just one example.
We know our schools have to improve -- if our kids are going
to compete with the Japanese, the Germans and the British.
I believe competition can be a force for good in education,
just as it has been a force for good in American industry.
Last year, I sent a proposal to Capitol Hill, which would
give local school districts flexibility in determine whether they
want to allow parents to choose the schools they're kids attend.
A couple weeks ago, this whole issue came before Congress,
and they killed it.
Why did this noble idea fail? It failed, according to news
reports, because the Democratic leadership didn't want to give me
credit for a new idea in education.
Certain members of Congress put politics ahead of our
students. One of those members happens to represent Michigan in
the U.S. Congress. His name is Bill Ford.
Bill Ford is a pet of the National Education Association.
He has stood against almost every education reform I have put
6
forth. Again and again -- he has stalled and delayed --
procrastinated and pontificated.
Bill Ford has been in Congress for 27 years -- way to long.
It's time to grab a broom, and sweep up Congressman Ford and all
the other Gridlockers. It's time to: Clean House.
I never thought I would say this publicly, but America needs
a "geek" in Congress. So send Bob Geake [GEEK] to Washington,
and get this country moving again.
This election is about choices, but ultimately it is about
the future.
The other day -- we were in Alabama -- a crowd of about
20,000 people waiting in the rain. My friend Lee Greenwood was
with us. And as Lee started to sing -- "I'm proud to be an
American" -- I looked out in the crowd -- and saw a little girl -
- couldn't be more than four or five -- perched on her dad's
shoulders, waving a little American flag and singing.
This election is about that little girl, and all the kids in
this crowd, and all the kids across America.
Do we want them to grow up in an America that is stronger,
safe, and more secure. You bet we do? And with my ideas, and a
new Congress, we can make it happen.
God bless Michigan and God bless the United States of
America.
'92-08-24 10:24 DOUG GAMBLE
P.1
'DOUG GAMBLE
424- - 36th Place
Manhattan Beach, CA 90266
Aug. 24/92
(310) 546-6409
TO: CHRISTINA MARTIN
HURRICANE ANDREW - FLORIDA (Curt Smith)
ONCE AGAIN, THE WORST OF MOTHER NATURE HAS BROUGHT OUT THE BEST IN
AMERICANS.
YOU CAN EVACUATE PEOPLE FROM A DANGER AREA, BUT WHAT WE'VE SEEN HERE THE
LAST 24 HOURS PROVES THAT SPIRIT AND COURAGE ARE NEVER EVACUATED FROM THE
AMERICAN HEART.
HURRICANE-FORCE WINDS ARE NO MATCH FOR AMERICAN-FORCE GENEROSITY.
IF THE KIND OF TEAMWORK I'VE HEARD ABOUT HERE COULD BE TRANSFERRED TO WASHINGTON,
THE COUNTRY WOULD BE A LOT BETTER OFF.
WHEN THE FORCES OF NATURE TRY TO TEAR LIVES APART, THE AMERICAN SPIRIT
OF COURAGE, GENEROSITY AND DETERMINATION BRING NEIGHBORS TOGETHER.
HURRICANE ANDREW HAS CREATED DESTRUCTION, BUT IT HAS ALSO CREATED HEROES.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Room 118
August 24, 1992
MEMO FROM: FOR BOB CURT GRADY SMITH Boo Q
RE:
INSERT FOR HURRICANE ANDREW REMARKS
Attached, as requested, are a few paragraphs concerning
assistance available for Hurricane Andrew victims.
The best source of information on this is Grant Peterson,
the Associate Director of FEMA. His telephone number is:
(202) -646-3692. I am sending this to Grant concurrently and
asking him to check it for accuracy.
Attachment
CC: Bob Zoellick
Steve Provost
Grant Peterson
Hurricane Andrew is the first hurricane to hit directly the
Miami area in a quarter century. Obviously, the winds of over
150 miles per hour have exacted a terrible toll on South Florida.
I thought it was important for me to come and survey the damage
first hand and to make sure that the Federal government is doing
everything it can to help.
My Administration is poised and determined to respond
quickly to this tragedy. This morning, we at the White House
received through FEMA the Governor's request for a disaster
declaration. I would like to announce that I have signed that
declaration. This will make the full panoply of Federal disaster
assistance programs available to residents, businesses, and
governments in the affected areas.
Our national center in Washington and our Regional Center in
Atlanta are operating 24 hours a day to monitor damage and put
our disaster relief programs in place. We are moving staff from
other regional centers to Atlanta to provide needed backup at
this center.
Earlier today, an Emergency Response Team, composed of all
27 Federal agencies, met in Washington to ensure that all of our
agencies are doing everything in the power to bring Federal
resources to bear to help state and local governments respond to
this disaster.
We are preparing to set up a disaster field office within
the next day. We have moved emergency power and water so that
that office can operate right within the most affected area.
Within the next few days, we expect to open Disaster Application
Centers -- or "DACs" -- throughout the affected part of South
Florida so that those who have suffered can apply for help. Let
me say, however, that those who are in immediate need of
assistance can apply by telephone through our disaster
teleregistration system. The phone number is 1-800-462-9029.
Through our disaster program, the government makes available
several kinds of assistance to those who have been victimized by
Andrew's terrible wrath. Disaster Housing Assistance is
available for those who have lost their homes to the storm.
Grants of up to $11,500 are available to individuals and families
for emergency needs -- such as food, clothing, or hospital
expenses. Businesses which have been destroyed or damaged are
eligible for disaster loans from the Small Business
Administration. In addition, flood insurance may be available
for those whose homes have been destroyed by floods. In short,
we are determined to help.
On final point: I have been in touch with Governor Chiles
and with Secretary Cheney, and we are ready to move in units of
the United States Armed Forces to provide appropriate emergency
services is necessary.
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
01. Note
Handwritten note, re: Congressman Bill Ford. (1 pp.)
n.d.
P-6, (b)(6)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Speechwriting, White House Office of
Series:
Speech File, Backup
Subseries:
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
CAFÉ Speech 8/27/92 [2]
Date Closed:
12/3/2004
OA/ID Number:
07579
FOIA/SYS Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2004-2265-S
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
MR Case #:
Appeal Case #:
MR Disposition:
Appeal Disposition:
Disposition Date:
Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advise between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
education - articles that
Steve Calio's office
choice.
Refer to
CE of LE
In the mean
Ford's tolerance
ght 199
checking specifics of in Ford's
State
time, here's
of gridlock
RecoRd Re
ugust 1
some NEXIS
3
LENGTH: 1135 words
election
HEADLINE: GOODLING DECRIES CONGRESSIONAL DEADLOCK
BYLINE: By Jennifer Babson, States News Service
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
KEYWORD: good
BODY:
When Rep. Bill Goodling, R-York, found himself waging a floor fight on an
education bill Wednesday against some of his closest Democratic colleagues on
the House Education and Labor Committee -- he chalked it up to politics.
"This is a sad day for me," Goodling said shortly after an education bill he
crafted in concert with committee Democrats went down in flames Wednesday,
"because it's the first time in 18 years we didn't come to floor with an
education bill that's a bipartisan effort."
As ranking Republican on the committee, Goodling has a reputation for
eschewing politics, sometimes to the chagrin of his Republican colleagues. But
as a hotly contested Presidential election draws near, and Congress increasingly
finds itself stuck in a partisan quagmire, Goodling is finding himself caught in
the cross-fire.
In the most recent example, Goodling labored with committee Democrats,
including Rep. Dale Kildee, D-Michigan, chairman of the Elementary, Secondary,
and Vocational Education subcommittee, to craft a bill that would improve and
reform neighborhood schools across America.
Earlier this year, Goodling said he managed to bring Kildee, and the chairman
of the full committee, Rep. William Ford, D-Michigan, to the table with former
White House Chief of Staff John Sununu to hammer out veto-proof language
acceptable to President Bush.
Once a compromise was reached with the White House, the measure was passed
out of the full committee, headed for passage on the floor and probable White
House approval.
The bill would have given local school districts more control over their
curriculum, providing them with the flexibility to decide whether to participate
in the controversial ' School Choice' program pushed by the administration.
According to Democratic committee staff, their party's leaders, worried about
giving the administration a leg-up in what was rapidly becoming a
highly-politicized debate over School Choice, put the brakes on - telling
committee Democrats they had better come up with a measure for which the White
House couldn't claim credit.
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
HON26 CONIQU, CISIW CLEQIF'
COMMITTEE FUSA 1990 COWS nb MICH 9 W692NL6 tol MUTCH FHE MNITE
viðujh-bojificiseq 960916 0A6L CHOICE' bar FW6 PL9K62 ON -
BIATUD FUE 9 Jsd-nb TO MUST M92 pscowind g
ACCOLDING to DEWOCLSFIC COMMITTEE 2f9tt' FUSIL boufh,2 J6996L2 MOLLIED spont
IN FW6 200000 CWOICE, blodl.gw brieneq ph FN6
CALLICATON BLOAIQIUD FNEW MIEN FW6 co 96CIQ6 MUSIUEL fo
INS PITT MONIA U9A6 BIASU JOC9] ECUOOT WOLF CONFLOI 0161 FUGIL
HONSE
onf ot FN6 EMIT cowwittee W69060 tol OW FUE tJOOL 900 blopspje MUITE
OUCE S COMBLOWISE M92 L59CU6Q MIFH FUG MUITE HONSE' FW6 W692NL6 M92 b9226q
fo BASH
MNIFE HONSE CHI64 ot 219tt nown 200000 CO W9WW6L on f
of FW6 tast COMMITTEE' ksb. MIJIISW LOLQ' D-WICHTA90' fo FUE C9PT6 MICH TOLWEL
ESLTISL FHIP ASSL' 2919 H6 w9u9d6q fo PLINO KIJQ66' gwq FW6 CUSILWSN
LSTOLM usidupolpooq SCHOOJE 904022 WELIC9
sug ACCEPTIONS EQUICITION fo CL915 b PIII FUST MONIO Imblone guq
INCINDING Bsb D9J6 KIJ955' D-WICHIOSU' CUSTLWSW ot FHE EISWENISLA
IN FWE worf L5C6UI 6x9wbj6 1900160 MIFN COMMITTEE DEWOCL9[2'
FU6
tiugs TU g by dngdwils' 12 ETWQTUD NIW26It condut TH
92 S NOFIA CONTESTED SISCIION QL9M2 W69L' 9UQ COUBLESS INCLESETUDIA
52CU6MING bojifica' 20W6ITW62 fo FW6 CHEALIN of NIZ BMF
V? LSUKING ou IN6 COMMITTEE' POODITED 251 3 tol
squestion PIJI 3 a
Ifiz FW6 tiler FIWE TW 18 A69L2 M6 graw,f COW6 to twom MITH SW
IN CONCELF MICH commiffee DEWOCLS MENI QOMW TW the '
" INIS 12 in 290 99h tol WE', 200011NG 2919 9tf66 SW squariou PITI NE
FW6 HONSE EQACSTION guq TYPOL committee - we CN9JK60 If nb fo bojifica.
squestion PITI 20W6 ot NIZ стогбар DEWOCL9FTC ON
MU6U 86b BITT B-AOLK' tomuq WIW26Jt мудтид 9 tJOOL trauf ou 9W
BODA:
KEXMOKD: Boog
DVIETINE:
BATINE: BA TENNITER 219162 NSM2 26LAICE
HEVDRINE: COODRING DECKIES СОИСКЕЗ210ИУГ DEVDFOCK
геиетн: 1132 MOLQZ
упапар 13' 1285'
219162 ИБМГ 25LAICE
1335 219162 N6M2 26LAICE
121 KELEBENCE ot [BAS] I butufeq TU EATT
byee 12
PAGE 16
States News Service, August 13, 1992
And which Bush, the self-described "Education President," would veto before
the November election.
So the bipartisan committee bill died, and the Goodling substitute, virtually
identical, was born, and destined to die a death on the floor of the House,
where it didn't stand a chance against the Democratic majority: "It was cut and
dry and I knew that was coming," Goodling said afterwards.
"We had worked very hard," said a Democratic committee staff member who
worked closely with Goodling on the bill and requested anonymity. "Mr. Ford,
our committee chair, was hearing an awful lot from Democrats -negatives -about
including anything about choice."
According to the staffer, "While we had a bipartisan effort with Goodling (on
the bill) we largely neutralized the administration. The politicization of the
issue definitely made it more difficult for us to resolve things."
"There's an added issue for the Democrats here," the staffer added. "Come
October, you can bet the White House is going to be saying we sent a
comprehensive reform package to Congress. If we didn't do anything, they'd say
'The Do-Nothing-Democratic-Congress.'
One provision in the substitute would have exempted schools in some instances
from certain federal mandates - including the newly implemented Americans With
Disabilities Act. This incurred the wrath of a coalition of disability groups,
who circulated letters urging House members to vote the bill down.
"There were those that went out and tried to stir up the disabilities
communities and had them write a letter that had nothing to do with reality,"
Goodling told his colleagues on the floor of the House.
As committee Democrats took to the floor in kid gloves on Wednesday to urge
defeat of the Goodling substitute, the mood was morose, and Goodling took pain
to remind his friends on the other side of the aisle just whose bill they were
arguing against.
"The chairman is very modest - he said he read my substitute - he helped
write my substitute from beginning to end," Goodling chided, dubbing the measure
"the Ford-Sununu" bill. Ford, usually active in committee debate, was
unusually quiet.
"I couldn't find a soul on the other side who wanted to take credit for their
authorship," Goodling said wryly. In a 140 to 267 vote, the Goodling substitute
was crushed.
According to Goodling, The Education and Labor Committee, which in the past
has enjoyed a smooth, cohesive relationship between Democrats and Republicans,
]
fell prey this session to election-year politics.
"I really didn't think that would spill over into education," Goodling said.
"This was done
so they can say 'Oh, yeah, we passed the bill.
While Goodling may have lost this week's fight, he scored a big victory last
month when he managed to persuade Bush to sign the Higher Education
Reauthorization Act.
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 17
States News Service, August 13, 1992
While the measure contained a provision favored by Bush to extend eligibility
for a popular government-backed student loan program to all college students,
not just the poorest, Bush objected to a section in the funding bill that would
fund the college Pell grant program as an entitlement.
The bill, which the Education and Labor Committee worked diligently upon for
more than one year, looked like it was headed for death on the President's desk
- until Goodling stepped up to the plate and urged Bush to rethink his
decision.
As Goodling remembers it: "I said 'I thought since we did such a wonderful
job doing one of the things you're most interested in -- for middle Americans --
that alone deserves your signature'.'
"I think if had I not personally called the President and asked if could come
down and talk to him, I think he would have vetoed it, because his advisors had
told him to do so," Goodling admitted.
Although Goodling claims: "I don't seek recognition," he did receive an
impromptu stump speech from Ford on the floor of the House, who warned a
Goodling opponent, ostensibly a Democrat, to watch out in November.
"A phone call came to my office yesterday from the state of Pennsylvania. I
do not even know who the fellow was," Ford told his colleagues. "He had some
questions about how I got along with the ranking member of my committee. He
seemed to suggest that he wanted to hear that we were fighting all the time."
"Well, I hope that person in Pennsylvania is watching C-SPAN today because I
want to say that he deserves to have this said," Ford added. "No one of either
party should wish him (Goodling) anything but good luck and Godspeed to return
to us."
Joel Marks, a spokesman for Goodling's Democratic challenger Paul Kilker said
he "isn't sure" if anyone from his staff had placed such a call to Ford.
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS·NEXIS®
LEXIS®NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
Plymarth-Centeanial Educational
1
Marching THE WHITE Band house - national champs
2 YRS in
a Row C91, 19)
Goalie
Fullback
Halfback
Forward
Sweeper of defense before goalie
one man, last line
Yellow card- penalty warning card
Red card - penalty card:
ref holds up
Penalty kick
out of the game
Corner kick
Heading the ball- kicking
ball w/head
Goal- - a scored point
ianure
une
the
specine
Heln
for
Asia
e
ling Free Trade
Dems Ponder
By ROBERT J. BARRO
have been recognizing that the main func-
Opinion polls in Europe show increas-
would not be very usef
ent Bush
trade.
ing opposition to ratification of the Maas-
tion of monetary policy is to provide an
Green Gore
used his or her own spe
tricht Treaty and, hence, to European
underlying framework for the economy,
but the desirability of ful
pher Co-
The idea, we guess, is that the fer-
unification. This opposition is understand-
not to attempt to fine-tune the business
also doubtful.
unced the
vid protectionists out there will deci-
Yesterday this page obtained a copy of
able because the treaty's ideas for further
cycle. This outlook suggests that the bene-
Large countries can
can Free
pher his code, but that the large major-
a TeTo sent Tuesday by Democratic Na-
economic integration, including coordina-
fits from independent monetary policies
from reduced costs of pul
id Italian
ity of voters will be fooled somehow
tional Committee staffer Jonathan Sallet to
would be minor at best.
tion on fiscal policies in order to facilitate
common language and
kinds of
into thinking Mother Earth is really
the Clinton campaign, detailing possible
the adoption of a single currency, can be
A more important criticism of mone-
examples of these ben
ain qual-
the issue. Wrong. Most Americans re-
problems with Sen. Albert Gore's book,
viewed as additional steps toward a cen-
tary unification is that it contributes to the
larger countries involv
rit and a
"Earth in the Balance" (referred to as
tralized European government. Not sur-
centralization of government more
ject the superstitious zealotry that
potential for governmen
sibilities.
"EITB" in the text.) Excerpts run below. An
equates prosperity with pollution. Bill
editorial note appears nearby:
prisingly, such steps are popular mainly
broadly: It represents a repression of
nopoly power and the
Reilly, of America's EPA, has urged
with people who like large centralized
national identity that could also be applied
hood that centralized
y are the
countless
This memorandum will list the basic
government.
to language, culture, per-capita incomes,
matched with the differio
support of the agreement precisely on
tying the
thematic attacks on "Earth in the Bal-
France, which faces a referendum on
the extent of public-sector activity, and so
diversified constituents
environmental grounds.
market
ance." There are, of course, a series of
Maastricht in September, is a good exam-
on. The appeal of a single currency is like
In some cases, out
President Carlos Salinas de Gotari,
other, technical, objections that can be
ple. There, the overwhelming majority of
the superficial attraction of central plan-
better if countries becan
S every-
author of Mexico's free-market revolu-
made to the book. I am in the process of
supporters of President Mitterrand's So-
ning. A single monetary authority is
government policies the
ities.
compiling them in a separate, more de-
thought to eliminate the unnecessary
tion, has also been its most forceful en-
cialists favor ratification of the Maastricht
ter suited to the charact
be Presi-
vironmental leader. Gene Grossman
tailed, list. They should be the subject of
Treaty, whereas more than half of the
transaction costs from the existence of
populations. These argun
historic
and Alan Krueger, two economists at
responses, but they are unlikely to form
supporters of Jacques Chirac's neo-Gaull-
alize the kinds of sece
of enthu-
Princeton, reckon that countries turn
the basis of broadscale political attacks.
ist party now oppose the treaty.
The appeal of a single
recently become popula
for Aunt
I. Basic Themes/Talking Points
Some economists argue from basically
process of separation
His sour-
the environmental corner when they
First, to accentuate the positive:
an engineering perspective that the unifi-
currency is like the superfi-
violence and other costs
ent was
reach roughly $4,000 in per-capita in-
Senator Gore's vision tells us how
cation of currencies is efficient. A single
be attributed now to the
rotection
come. Free trade could help bring
America can meet, and overcome, the new
currency avoids the transaction costs and
cial attraction of central
but they can just as
Mexico there in half a decade.
environ-
environmental challenges that face
uncertainties involved with the exchange
planning. But the benefits
unwise unifications - for
ce to free
Of course, the real issue is jobs,
America. If we are passive and afraid of
of one money for another. From this
gration that took place
jobs, jobs. A lot of made-up numbers
change, our economy and the lives of our
standpoint, the argument for a unified
from central planning are
drawback from excessive
nor Clin-
are being thrown around about how
families will be diminished. If we are bold
currency is analogous to the case for a
exaggerated and the re-
as the current plans
on strat-
many will be won or lost. There is
and confident enough to demand change,
common language.
European countries close
S benefit
Senator Gore's leadership shows us the
Settlement on a single language (Eng-
wards from competition are
high cost of dissolving the
ding sys-
every reason to believe the U.S. will
way to a better, stronger, nation. The
lish, it is to be hoped) would eliminate the
on.
gain jobs right off the bat. Mexico's
choice is America's: To demonstrate that
costs associated with translation. The sav-
underestimated.
United Nations No Mod
eart, un-
tariffs today are twice as high as ours,
we have the strength to choose wisely and
ings on transaction costs would, in fact, be
A similar perspective
and U.S. exports have nearly tripled
to vindicate our democratic faith.
far more substantial than those generated
competing currencies, while the social
be needed
international organizatio
it from a
since 1988.
Al Gore's message is a comprehensive
from a move to a common currency. We
planner is thought to remove the wasteful
perform governmental fu
em" is to
Yes, because of free trade, some
statement for the future, proposing real
observe, however, that small nations are
duplication from market competition. In
tend beyond the boundari
often willing to bear high costs to maintain
both situations, the benefits from central
U.S. companies may shut down or
solutions that will lead to a safer environ-
tries. The United Nation
y knows
move south sooner than they other-
ment, to a more competitive America, to a
or promote their distinct languages, such
planning are exaggerated and the rewards
strives to perform som
that his
better quality of life for our children and
as Catalan in Catalonia (well publicized
from competition are underestimated.
world government, and
trusted
wise would. Others will be born or
their children. It is critically important
recently because of the Barcelona Olym-
Proponents of a strong central govern-
think that it would be desi
grow faster because of free trade. In
that, as we face the beginning of a new
pics) or French in Quebec. This willing-
ment sometimes argue that "chaos" re-
of institution made num
him with
either case, the effects will be trivial
historical era, we establish the principles
ness indicates that groups of people with a
sults from the uncoordinated policies of
sions, including environn
Mexican
against the background of our dy-
that will secure our environmental and
common heritage attach significant bene-
individual governments - for example,
energy production, redi
by spook
namic, $6 trillion economy, 20 times
economic future.
fits to having their own language. Much
from 50 state governments instead of the
come between rich and
the size of Mexico's.
Al Gore's vision reflects his profound
smaller benefits from individual curren-
U.S. federal government. Such arguments
choices about war and
Illinois,
ing him
Governor Clinton's talk about
spiritual faith. We must renew the reli-
cies would be enough to outweigh the
have been used to rationalize and advance
a single European curren
gious faith that teaches us that we are
saving in transaction costs from moving to
the centralization of governmental power
unsatis-
"transition strategies" plays on genu-
then why not go forward
God's stewards here on earth.
a single currency.
in the U.S. This concentration of power
rency managed by a
the Free
ine, if irrational, fears. But it also
Al Gore understands that the "envi-
Dukakis Inflation
loses the benefits from competition among
tioned at the U.N.?
serves the interests of business lead-
ronment" is, in a very real sense, the world
Unfortunately, the main case that econ-
governments and also precludes a good
Before we get carried
think he
ers and unions that are always looking
itself. That's why Al Gore's vision in-
omists have made against monetary unifi-
match between public policies and the
lines we ought to worry
ndent is-
for a handout from Washington. Tran-
cludes, for example, famine and popula-
cation (and similarly against a regime of
preferences of the residents of the individ-
U.N. has been perform
ual states.
just an
sition-phobia is being exploited on the
tion growth as critical issues that must be
fixed exchange rates without capital con-
tasks. We might worry,
becom-
confronted.
trols) is the Keynesian argument for the
Each state government can, for exam-
Mexican side, too, by firms clamoring
New York Times report
his abil-
for subsidized loans to fortify them-
This book is a profile in courage. Not
benefit of independent monetary policies.
ple, choose different levels of spend-
General Boutros-Boutro
since Theodore Roosevelt (and before him
ing on education and welfare, different
pronouncement that YO
a sober,
selves against what they claim will be
An economy that experiences a recession
Thomas Jefferson) has a national states-
policies on drugs and crime, and if the
is supposed to value the opportunity to
lems are not a priority
a seismic trauma.
man devoted such an effort to determining
print a lot of money in order to stimulate
Supreme Court would allow it - different
amount to "a rich man's
weeks
No one really doubts that free trade
how our advancing civilization can be
the economy, and monetary unification
regulations on abortion. The apparent
The case for the Unit
uljah on
will make everyone richer in the long
reconciled with the needs of nature. This
chaos from this diversity should instead be
eliminates this option. According to this
the case for European unit
ck Gep-
run. "Short-termism" is the favorite
is an honest, tough-minded account of how
argument, Massachusetts would have ben-
viewed as a mechanism to give the people
ilar to the argument for
a know
diagnosis of America's ills by the
to deal with potential ecological crises. It
efited greatly in the late 1980s if it
in different states the policies that they
desire.
expressed on a global scal
ctionist.
Democratic Party's Dukakisoid tech-
arises from Senator Gore's personal con-
could have printed a lot of Massachusetts
limited government shoul
frontation with the issues that will shape
The central issue, which is not well
ed bird-
nocrats. We wonder how far the Non-
greenbacks (presumably without former
troubled by policies th
Inhaler will go for the "short-term"
our nation's future.
Gov. Dukakis's face on the bills) to counter
understood, is the optimal size of a country
power of the U.N. and sim
UAW,
and, as a related matter, the optimal range
Atomic
gain of a few votes in the Rust Belt.
Second, it is important in any response
the downturn in its economy.
Remarkably enough, the
to compare Senator Gore's vision with the
A more serious analysis of the Massa-
of application of a language or a currency.
contribution to this power
stancing
The real debate won't even begin in
failures of the Bush/Quayle Administra-
chusetts situation suggests that real fac-
Empirical observation suggests the desira-
ident Bush's effective
overnor
Congress until next year. Will he still
tion.
bility of avoiding the two extreme out-
tors are involved - shifts of industry away
during the Gulf War.
nmental
be holding his breath?
Responses should finish with a
from defense and computers, high state
comes: a single world government with
president did not intend
ment on
Toke, Bill, toke.
counter-attack on the failed policies of the
tax rates, and the decline of the national
one language and one currency and a
this way to world socialis
Bush/Quayle Administration.
proliferation of thousands of countries,
economy and that money creation would
We must emphasize, to the maximum
not be helpful. More generally, economists
each with its own media of speech and
Mr. Barro, a Journal
degree possible, the specific failure of the
exchange. Languages and currencies
is a professor of economics
Book of the Year
Bush Administration to achieve economic
growth.
eprint a
rageous and sneaky as we know the
II. Specific Areas of Thematic Attack
National
Radioing Help
Rush
After our conversation. it seems to me
emphasize,
to
the
maxiinum
More
generally,
economists
exchange.
degree possible, the specific failure of the
Gore's Book of the Year
Bush Administration to achieve economic
growth.
In the column nearby, we reprint a
rageous and sneaky as we know the
II. Specific Areas of Thematic Attack
memo from a Democratic National
Bush people are and come up with all
After our conversation, it seems to me
Radioin
Committee
staffer,
apparently
the ridiculous lines of attack that will
that the basic attacks on EITB will fall in
By JOHN HUGHES
alarmed at the political vulnerability
the following three categories:
and the So
be made on Senator Gore's book so we
And BEN WATTENBERG
Al is not qualified to be vice-president.
Europe and
of Senator Al, Gore's book, "Earth in
could be prepared for it."
The idea of a "Radio Free Asia" mod-
gate broade:
the Balance." We're alarmed that it's
He has no principles. He admits that
Attacks on the book aren't neces-
he has voted for programs in which he does
eled on Radio Free Europe has recently
government
taken this long after his nomination
surfaced in the debate over America's role
sary; all it needs is readership. The
not believe (EITB at 340), has changed his
tion. The U.:
for Vice President for any of this to
in the world after the Cold War. It is an
campaign tactics merely to suit the advice
Burma, Vietr
come out.
book contains specific ideas and poli-
exciting idea, and one that has won the
of political consultants (EITB at 8-9, at
Tibet and La
cies relating to the U.S. economy, in-2
enthusiastic support of liberals and conser-
Marla Romash, the communica-
167-69), and uses products that he simulta-
sion of VOA
dustry, culture and the federal govern-
vatives alike. Sens. Joseph Biden and
tions director for the Gore campaign,
neously criticizes as being harmful to the
Like USIA
called us from the campaign plane to
ment's involvement in these areas. Al-
environment (EITB at 15):
Jesse Helms, who rarely agree on any-
thing, are both backing the concept. Oppo-
VOA is resj'
explain the memo:
most any serious person perusing the
He is a classic Washington insider,
sition comes mainly from the State De-
ment. This
cited passages in a bookstore will see
who has been trained since an early age to
straints. For
We asked Jonathan Sallet, one of
tailor his views to what he thinks the voters
partment, for reasons of diplomacy, and
the smartest people we know, to act
from the Voice of America, which sees
State Depart
why the Sallet memo reads as it does.
want to hear, not what he really believes
mercial medi
like one of the most stupid people we
If Al Gore is going to sit one heartbeat
(EITB at 9, 13, 15).
Radio Free Asia as unwelcome competi-
from the presidency, his book de-
tion for its own (although different) broad-
It has a mi
know: a Bush/Quayle staffer. We
He is a weak figure who, as he admits,
casting to Asia.
ideology. Can
asked him to be as irresponsible, out-
serves to be read by voters.
feels "paralyzed" (EITB at 2), who has
We are both members of a bipar-
with the ins'
suffered the throes of a mid-life crisis
tisan commission that is considering the
Department
(EITB at 14); and who doesn't even know
future of .-sponsored international
ting but objer
what he thinks (EITB at 13).
broadcasting. Under normal circum-
Free Asia We'
The ABA's Active Agents
He's apparently guilt-ridden about the
stances, the president and Congress would
What, fo!
role of men in society (EITB at 213) and,
get the courtesy of receiving our commis-
of the Amer
As the Republicans head for Hous-
dorse Robert Bork for the Supreme
perhaps as a result of his own weakness,
sion's recommendations before they are
lishment tow
ton, Democrats held their second polit-
Court. The Supreme Court's Chief Jus-
believes that America as a whole is psycho-
debated in the press
force, invest
ical convention of the summer in San
logically dysfunctional (EITB at 230-31).
But alas, some of the interested
Asian broad
tice, William Rehnquist, quit the
He is a hypocrite who urges [the need
Francisco this week. It was called "the
players - from VOA, the United States
secretary of
group earlier this year.
to stabilize] population growth on others
Information Agency (USIA) and the diplo-
the State D:
annual meeting of the American Bar
The ABA's departing president,
while revering his own large family. (EITB
Association.
matic community - have begun high-pro-
Free Asia be
Talbot D'Alemberte, last week de-
at 307).
file politicking and maneuvering. Mis-
Chinese lead
Its keynote speaker was Hillary
nounced the Attorney General's report
He is a bad scientist, who doesn't care
leading and untrue statements have been
China, testify
Clinton. Its principal honoree was An-
urging tougher treatment of violent
enough to get his facts straight. The fact is,
made. The dialogue is in danger of severe
spoke in gle
ita Hill. And its major policy state-
we can't be certain that global warming or
the level of CO2 or even the changes in the
distortion. This is unfortunate enough, but
in China sind
criminals. And of course the ABA re-
jected most of Vice President Quayle's
doubly SO in this election year. We seek to
the Tiananm
ment was a pledge to fight for abortion
ozone layer pose a threat as burdensome
rights.
set the record straight.
Obviously
proposals last year to reduce the costs
as the costs of Al Gore's proposals.
Bureaucratic turf is by far the lesser
an interest
No longer an impartial and objec-
of our $300 billion-a-year legal system.
Al is a radical environmentalist who
concern here. At stake in the debate over
China. That
tive professional institution, the bar
Mr. Quayle, the ABA's sharpest and
wants to change the very fabric of
Radio Free Asia is nothing less than the
VOA. For dir
association has become a special-in-
America.
most persuasive critic, ripped into it
survival of an essential instrument of
VOA intervie
terest group of the Democratic Party.
He criticizes America for being Amer-
again this week: "It's now clear that
ica - a place where people enjoy the bene-
democracy - the free flow of information,
wan pointed!
Mrs. Clinton was on the mark when
especially where people are not themselves
by his proper
the ABA's agenda has nothing to do
fits of an advanced standard of living
free. That's what played the major role in
implying Tai
she said that "coming here is coming
with improving the legal system."
(EITB at 147, 156, 161, 308).
winning the Cold War. Whether the U.S.
For diplomatic
home." She exhorted the ABA audi-
One conclusion from all this is
He has no sense of proportion: He
can find the will to support such a venture
lish a Taipei
ence to "become an active agent of po-
clear: The ABA ought to have nothing
equates the failure to recycle aluminum
in Asia will help to define what kind of
Independence
litical and social change." In front of
more to do with vetting federal judicial
cans with the Holocaust - an equation that
superpower America is to be in the 1990s
Of course.
this audience, she didn't have to
parodies the former and dishonors the
nominations.
and beyond.
over money.
latter (EITB at 177-78, 275).
bother spelling out her policies: "This
The most egregious attack on Ra-
times, VOA
Under current procedure, the
He is a Luddite who holds the naive
audience knows as well as I what kinds
dio Free Asia came only last week, in
comes into [if
White House submits the name of
view that technology is evil and wants to
of changes I am talking about."
a highly publicized and vigorously pro-
money filched
every proposed nominee to the bar as-
abolish automobiles (EITB at 206, 318).
moted report by the U.S. Advisory Com-
unfounded. A
The pro-abortion resolution passed
sociation, which, after secret delibera-
He believes that our civilization, itself,
mission on Public Diplomacy. This com-
force was en
this week by the House of Delegates
tions, returns an assessment. The can-
is evil (because it is, in his words, "ad-
mission was founded long ago to lend
should not be
reversed the ABA's previous position
didate who doesn't get at least a rating
dicted to the consumption of the earth")
(EITB at 220).
support to USIA, which takes its policy
casting; ind
of neutrality - a position, it should be
of
"qualified"
generally
guidance from the State Department. The
money for VC
gets
noted, supported on principle by many
If Al Gore has his way, we would give up
report was harsh and elemental. Aside
the internation
dropped
America's
PAGE 21
1ST STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Copyright 1991 The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc.
Daily Report For Executives
October 11, 1991, Friday
SECTION: REGULATION, ECONOMICS AND LAW; DER No. 198; PG. A-15
LENGTH: 1004 words
HEADLINE: Energy, HOUSE ENERGY PANEL APPROVES PROPOSALS FOR ALTERNATIVE FUEL
USE IN VEHICLES
BODY:
The House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy and Power overwhelmingly
approved a measure Oct. 10 designed to increase the availability of
alternative-fuel vehicles and supplies of alternative fuels as part of the
panel's ongoing efforts to craft a national energy policy.
The subcommittee voted 21-1 to approve a staff draft of new alternative fuel
initiatives that the Bush administration criticized as inferior to its own
proposals, released in February, as well as the Senate's comparable bill (S
1220) reported in June and pending on the Senate calendar for action later this
month.
The House subcommittee proposal on alternative fuels, first released in draft
form this summer (177 DER C-6, 9/12/91), was revised in late September and early
October to address a range of members' concerns, resulting in a committee print
that was approved with the introduction and acceptance of just one amendment.
Subcommittee Chairman Philip Sharp (D-Ind) said the approved title is an
important component of the final product the panel hopes to send to the full
committee later this month or early in November because it would encourage a
shift away from the use of oil in the transportation sector and would become
part of an overall national approach to global warming.
''This alternative fuels proposal aims at our nation's largest oil problem area:
the nearly 200 million cars and trucks on U.S. highways that each day consume a
volume of fuel equaling all our oil imports, or about one-seventh of the entire
world's oil supply,' Sharp said.
'Years Away From Kissing'
Energy Secretary James Watkins, in an Oct. 9 letter to the subcommittee,
criticized the thrust of the panel's draft proposal, saying ''it still falls
short of the administration's alternative fuel fleet proposal and the
alternative fuel fleet requirements in S 1220, and would tie the
government's hands in negotiating with automakers.'
The Bush administration's last-ditch efforts to oppose the subcommittee's
approach brought cries of foul from some Democratic members of the panel, who
said the Department of Energy should be less concerned with auto manufacturers
and federal intervention into the marketplace, and more concerned with moving
TM
TM
LEXIS·NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS·NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 22
1991 Daily Report For Executives, October 11, 1991
more swiftly toward energy security and a cleaner environment.
Rep. W.J. (Billy) Tauzin (D-La) said the administration's reference to
negotiations with automakers reminded him of the country-western song 'I Think I
Thought I Loved You.
''At the pace of this courtship, we're going to be years away from kissing,' he
said.
The alternative fuels package would require alternative fuel providers (such as
natural gas, electricity, and ethanol providers) to purchase alternative-fuel
vehicles and to use alternative fuels in an effort to create an incentive for
increased use and acceptance of such fuels. It also would require vehicle fleet
owners to purchase alternative vehicles as part of a mandatory rulemaking in
1998 if the marketplace itself has not achieved energy security goals of 10
percent alternative-fuel use by the year 2000, and 30 percent penetration by the
year 2010.
In addition, the legislation calls for commercial demonstration of electric
vehicles, including joint public-private ventures and discount payments to
offset the price differential with conventional vehicles.
The legislation includes federal fleet purchase requirements that mandate the
purchase of 5,000 alternative-fuel light-duty vehicles in 1993, 7,500 in 1994,
and 10,000 in 1995, with a shift from 1996 through 1998 to 25 percent of new
light-duty acquisitions in 1996 for each agency, 33 percent in 1997, and 50
percent by 1998. The federal requirements would increase to 50 percent in the
year 2000, 70 percent in 2001, and 75 percent in 2002 if the secretary of Energy
determines that the energy security goals in the legislation are not being met.
The alternative fuel provisions have an estimated pricetag of $140 million in
annual costs of authorization, according to the subcommittee -- a figure the
administration warns could break the budget's spending caps. The federal fleet
program would call for an estimated 50,000 to 100,000 alternative fuel vehicles,
while the fuel-providers fleet provisions would involve about 150,000 vehicles,
the committee said.
Scheduling Outlook
Sharp, remarking on the subcommittee's progress at the end of the alternative
fuel markup, said the panel now has completed action on eight major portions of
a national energy bill, and hopes to soon complete action on renewable energy,
uranium enrichment, a resolution of provisions dealing with global warming
goals, and Corporate Average Fuel Economy standard mandates.
Higher CAFE mandates, opposed by the administration and House Energy Committee
Chairman John Dingell (D-Mich), are a problem for members of the subcommittee,
Sharp said, indicating that no consensus has been reached about what the panel
will forward to the full committee.
As with the Senate - which is poised for a vigorous floor battle on CAFE as
well as 5 1220 as a whole -- the House would like to have the results of an
ongoing National Academy of Sciences study of fuel economy standards before
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 23
1991 Daily Report For Executives, October 11, 1991
acting. The NAS study is not expected to be released before the end of the year.
' ' I do not think it is likely that in the end there will be an energy bill
without CAFE,' Sharp told reporters.
While there is no public outcry to Congress to complete action on an energy
policy bill, there are political incentives to do so, Sharp said. 'There will
]
be artful criticisms if there's not action.'
As for a House timetable, Sharp said it will be difficult to move a bill to
passage this year if the House adjourns before Thanksgiving, ''but not
improbable. If the House returns after the holiday, it is more likely an
energy bill will reach the floor this year. ' 'The key is making sure we do some
solid things,'' he said.
TM
TM
TM
LEXIS®NEXIS® ®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 17
1ST STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Copyright 1991 The Christian Science Publishing Society
The Christian Science Monitor
November 5, 1991, Tuesday
SECTION: THE U.S.; Pg. 8
LENGTH: 1069 words
HEADLINE: New Fuels for Cars Promising, Problematic
SERIES: NATIONAL ISSUES FORUM. Part 1 of a 3-part series. First of two articles
appearing today. This is the first in a three-part series presented in
conjunction with the National Issues Forums. The NIF engages communities in
debate about public issues, then relays the outcome of the discussion to
national leaders. Part 2, "The Boundaries of Free Speech," will run Nov. 12.
BYLINE: Scott Pendleton, Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
DATELINE: AUSTIN, TEXAS
KEYWORD: Stats
HIGHLIGHT:
Trying to brake dependence on foreign oil, carmakers and environmentalists are
test-driving alternative means of propelling autos - and new transportation
habits
BODY:
'TAKE me riding in the car, car," folk balladeer Woody Guthrie once sang,
adding a zestful "Brrrm brm brm."
The year was 1954. The United States produced 91 percent of the oil it
consumed. 'Mideast' brought to mind Baltimore rather than Bahrain. Cars averaged
15 miles per gallon on 29-cent leaded gasoline. The Environmental Protection
Agency was 16 years into the future.
Today automotive ebullience still imbues the American psyche. But so do
increasingly urgent questions: How secure is our fuel supply? What alternatives
could be used? How do we boost fuel efficiency and reduce emissions? Should we
drive at all?
Some of these questions apply to all sectors of energy consumption.
But transportation, which accounts for 25 percent of US demand, usually
captures the spotlight because it depends wholly on oil.
In contrast, the 75 percent of demand for powering and heating homes,
businesses, and industries is met with a mix of fossil, nuclear, and renewable
resources.
Petroleum products contribute only a fifth of this supply. Switching from oil
to coal, natural gas, or electric heat is technically feasible, depending on the
use. Many utilities and industries already have the capacity to burn whichever
primary fuel is cheapest at the moment.
TM
TM
LEXIS·NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 18
The Christian Science Monitor, November 5, 1991
Meanwhile, US oil consumption generally has been rising, while domestic
output steadily declines. The production trend is irreversible and likely to
accelerate, given the disinvestment by the oil industry and the prohibition on
drilling in prospective but environmentally sensitive areas.
As a result, imports account for close to half of the nation's oil supply.
This damages the US balance of trade. And the economy's high degree of
dependence on oil, domestic or imported, subjects it to price shocks when
politics explode in the volatile Persian Gulf region, home to two-thirds of
known world oil reserves.
Brrrm brr sputter sputter wheeze.
As the needle on the nation's fuel gauge drops toward E, the man in the
driver's seat is President Bush. He has announced a national energy strategy
(NES) in which market forces, rather than government decree, will determine
which fuels and technologies keep the country rolling.
Environmentalists are also looking at new possibilities. Some of the options
include:
Electricity. The White House announced last week the creation of the US
Advanced Battery Consortium (USABC) to develop a new generation of batteries
"that would make electric vehicles widely available by the year 2000."
One hurdle has been the size and weight of the batteries needed to give an
adequate range between recharging.
The consortium will spend $260 million over four years to develop the new
batteries. USABC includes the Big Three US automakers, and has support from the
electric-utility industry.
General Motors Corporation already has plans to build an electric car in
Lansing, Mich.
"We just got an amazing response when we introduced the (prototype) car" two
years ago in Los Angeles, Sloan says.
Natural gas. This fall GM delivered the first US production vehicle powered
by natural gas to a California utility. GM already has orders for 1,000 more of
the Sierra pickups, and expects to have 3,000 orders from fleet operators by the
end of the year, spokeswoman Sharon Hines says. Buyers will pay a $3,685 premium
but recover it through lower maintenance expenses and the lower price of the
fuel, equivalent to 70 cents per gallon of gasoline.
Natural gas and other alternative fuels lack a refueling infrastructure like
oil companies' filling-station networks.
But even oil companies, which usually have reserves of natural gas as well,
are getting into the natural gas act. Shell opened California's first natural
gas dispenser at a commercial filling station in Sacramento, where fleet
vehicles are numerous. Chevron plans to install one of its own in that city, and
more if the market takes off.
TM
TM
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 19
The Christian Science Monitor, November 5, 1991
Methanol, ethanol, MTBE, ETBE, hydrogen. Methanol and ethanol, made from
natural gas and biomass like corn, respectively, are already on the market in
several states in blends with gasoline. MTBE and ETBE are related products that
show promise. Hydrogen, created out of water, could power conventional engines
or electric cars in which a fuel cell electrochemically converts the gas to
electricity.
Trains/telecommuting. Some long-distance automobile travel could be
eliminated through the construction of high-speed trains to link cities 200 to
600 miles apart, the NES document notes. And growth in telecommuting, in which
employees work at home on computers linked to their office, will chip away at
the 35-40 percent of work-related vehicle/miles.
Conservation. Environmentalists would like to see automakers forced to
improve mileage standards. A proposal by Sen. Richard Bryan (D) of Nevada would
require an improvement from the current corporate average fuel economy (CAFE)
standard of 27.5 miles per gallon to 40.2 m.p.g. in 2001. But after defeating
the Johnston-Wallop bill, the Senate's main proposed legislation, last week, the
Senate is unlikely to act on any energy legislation this year.
President Bush opposes the Bryan bill because it contradicts the free-market
principle contained in the NES. Automakers say customers can buy high-efficiency
cars - if they want to. "No one's knocking down our doors to buy" the 58-m.p.g.
Geo Metro, says David Sloan, GM spokesman. The car accounts for 1 percent of
GM's sales.
But Nicholas Lenssen, a research associate at the World-watch Institute,
believes that "more efficient cars" do not necessarily mean "smaller cars."
Lighter, stronger materials could be substituted for those now used to build the
car, or engines could be made more efficient rather than more powerful.
It would only cost Detroit another $500 to make cars more efficient, he says,
but the savings in fuel over the life of the car would reach $2,000.
Mr. Sloan says that the technology doesn't exist to make engines more
fuel-efficient without causing emissions to increase.
A new Japanese-made car with a "lean burn" engine is "a 49-state car" because
it wouldn't be acceptable under California's strict emissions standards. (Nine
Northeastern states and Washington, D.C., last week agreed to follow
California's lead in emissions standards.) And it won't be marketable anywhere
in the US after 1996, Sloan says, when standards get tougher nationwide.
GRAPHIC: PHOTO: HERE COMES THE SUN: Solar electric car is quiet, and goes up to
70 miles on one charge, says Douglas Cobb, president of Solar Car Corporation.,
NEAL J. MENSCHEL - STAFF
TM
TM
LEXIS·NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 14
1ST STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Copyright 1992 States News Service
States News Service
February 27, 1992, Thursday
LENGTH: 811 words
HEADLINE: CAFE backers VOW to try again
BYLINE: By Will Dunham, States News Service
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
KEYWORD: mileage
BODY:
Legislation requiring higher automobile fuel economy standards is stuck in a
pothole in Congress, but the bill's chief proponent is determined to rescue the
plan from the legislative roadside.
The measure would require automakers to increase the average fuel mileage of
their fleets 20 percent by 1996 and 40 percent, to about 40 miles per gallon, by
2001. This proposed boost in Corporate Average Fuel Economy, or CAFE, has drawn
vehement opposition from the auto industry and support from an array of
environmental and consumer groups.
While acknowledging that the odds are against passage of the legislation any
time soon, Sen. Richard Bryan, D-Nev., the bill's sponsor, said he plans to
push the measure through Congress this year.
"I'm committed to pursuing it in the future because I think it's good policy
for the country," Bryan said in an interview, arguing that the measure would
help reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil and help cut air pollution.
"In the short term, clearly the deepening problems of the auto industry make
it very difficult for us to proceed at this particular point -- even though
there's no linkage between the auto industry's financial problems and CAFE,"
Bryan added. "Nevertheless, there is an empathy for a major industry.
Nobody wants to see General Motors or Ford or Chrysler fail. I do not."
Bryan said his strategy for pushing the bill would include offering it as an
amendment to legislation sponsored by Rep. Richard Gephardt, D-Mo., and Sen.
Donald Riegle, D-Mich., that would establish tough import limits on Japanese
cars and auto parts.
Bryan said he has a majority of the Senate lined up in support of his measure
-- although apparently not the 60 votes necessary to beat back an expected
filibuster.
"I think we could prevail if it was a simple up-or-down vote," Bryan said.
The Senate approved its comprehensive energy package on Feb. 19, but only
after excluding Bryan's measure because it was too contentious. The fuel mileage
standards are not included in the forthcoming House energy package and, given
the strong opposition of powerful Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Rep.
TM
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 15
States News Service, February 27, 1992
John Dingell, D-Mich., it is extremely unlikely that it will be added to the
measure.
The auto industry launched an expensive and vigorous lobbying effort against
the measure, while the Bush administration also weighed in against it. Industry
and congressional opponents of the bill argued that automakers cannot boost
fleet mileage standards to the level required by Bryan's bill without building
lighter, smaller, less-safe cars and predicted the legislation would lead to
more highway deaths.
Congress watchers in the auto industry believe the legislation is close to
dead - if not dead - for 1992. Even ardent supporters of increasing CAFE
standards are not optimistic about the legislation's 1992 prospects for success.
Dave Hamilton, a lobbyist for the U.S. Public Interest Research Group, a
consumer organization, said the bill has became "a long shot" because of the
state of the economy. Hamilton said that GM's announcement of massive layoffs
and plant closings turned the tide against the legislation. Melanie Griffin, a
lobbyist for the Sierra Club, an environmental group, added, "The odds are it's
not going to happen this year. But I believe we're going to get a decent bill
eventually."
Mike Stanton, lobbyist for the Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association, which
represents the Big Three and Honda, said GM's situation brought home to some
lawmakers that "maybe it doesn't make sense" to place further government
regulations on a depressed industry.
"The money's just not there," Stanton said. "You don't just go out and
redesign your entire fleet. That takes an awful lot of resources -- resources
that, quite honestly right now, (automakers) don't have."
Opposition to Bryan's approach has come from lawmakers from both parties.
Sen. J. Bennett Johnston, D-La,, chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources
Committee, branded the requirements of Bryan's measure "extreme and
unrealistic." Sen. Don Nickles, R-Okla., a member of the same committee,
compared the bill to a phony "miracle diet pill or magic elixir," and said it
would be "costly, ineffective and injurious to the economic health of the
country."
Congress first imposed CAFE standards on the industry in 1975. The federal
government currently requires automakers to produce fleets that average at least
27.5 miles per gallon.
To date, the measure's best chance for success came in the months following
Iraq's Aug. 2, 1990, invasion of Kuwait. But the Senate, by a scant three
votes, failed to cut off a filibuster, effectively killing the bill for that
year. Last year, the bill's fortunes became entangled with the energy bill.
Bryan said its exclusion left "a gaping hole" in the energy plan.
TM
TM
LEXIS·NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 11
1ST STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Copyright 1992 Gannett Company, Inc.
GANNETT NEWS SERVICE
March 9, 1992, Monday
LENGTH: 656 words
HEADLINE: DETROIT MAY NOT WELCOME BUSH PROPOSALS FOR CAR INDUSTRY
BYLINE: BRYAN GRULEY; The Detroit News
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
KEYWORD: PREZCAR
BODY:
President Bush is expected to unveil a raft of regulatory moves Friday aimed
at helping the ailing U.S. car industry.
But Bush's plan, to be presented to the Economic Club of Detroit and designed
to curry political favor just before next Tuesday's Michigan primary, might not
be welcomed as eagerly as he hopes, auto industry officials warned Monday.
Officials are wary of a proposal to lower the federal fuel-economy standard
to 26.5 mpg from the current 27.5 mpg. They fear it might reawaken congressional
efforts to boost the standard.
Auto officials also are leery of a plan to supply pollution credits to
companies that buy and scrap old cars. Past proposals would have required the
automakers to absorb the cost of scrapping cars.
''The essence is how it's financed,' said Robert G. Liberatore, Chrysler
Corp.'s executive director of public policy and legislative affairs. ''It
doesn't make any sense to say
we want the auto industry to pay for it.
The Big Three are more likely to favor a tentative plan to launch a joint
industry-government research consortium - called ''Auto Leap'' - that probably
would focus on development of electric vehicles.
Industry officials say the program would involve a major commitment by the
U.S. automakers to work with the National Laboratories to develop technology
that would make unprecedented progress toward erasing fuel-economy and emissions
concerns.
The program stems from discussions between Assistant Energy Secretary J.
Michael Davis and Donald Runkle, vice president of Advanced Engineering Staff at
General Motors Corp.
Runkle has been pushing for increased industry use of the National
Laboratories for research into energy, environment, safety, manufacturing and
reliability issues affecting autos.
Detroit automakers and the Energy Department already have a consortium
working on batteries for electric vehicles. Davis and Runkle also spearheaded
that effort.
TM
TM
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 12
GANNETT NEWS SERVICE, March 9, 1992
Automakers also will welcome Bush's decision not to require that autos be
fitted with canisters to capture gasoline fumes that escape during refueling.
]
As previously reported, the Environmental Protection Agency determined that
so-called on-board canisters are potentially unsafe because they trap gas fumes
that could ignite and explode
The White House is reported to be considering a plan under which companies
could earn marketable pollution credits by buying old cars and junking them.
The idea would be to boost car sales and reduce pollution by getting old,
dirtier cars off the roads.
Car owners could sell their clunkers for an estimated $ 700 to $ 1,000 to
companies that want to garner pollution credits. In theory, those customers
would replace their old vehicles, thus hiking sales.
The plan mirrors part of the 1990 Clean Air Act, which allows businesses that
cut pollution below federal standards to earn credits. The credits then can be
sold to other companies that don't meet the standards.
The Big Three long have advocated programs to get older cars off the roads.
But previous plans for such programs envisioned the automakers paying to haul
and junk the old cars.
Few details were available, but the Bush plan appears to place the burden for
junking the cars on companies that choose to participate. In effect, the
pollution credits underwrite the costs.
The White House is less seriously mulling a proposal to lower Corporate
Average Fuel Economy, or CAFE, standards.
Congressional efforts to boost CAFE as high as 40 mpg have quieted after
reports that the Big Three lost more than $ 7 billion in 1991.
Relieved auto lobbyists have said they think the issue is dead at least until
next year. But a move to reduce CAFE could spur environmentalists and
congressional backers of higher standards, officials said.
''I'm not aware of anyone asking for (a reduction in CAFE), Liberatore
said. 'We're asking for a lot of different things; this is not one.
SUBJECT: AUTOMOBILE; INDUSTRY; BUSH AUTO PROPOSAL:AUTO INDUSTRY AUTO REGULATION
TM
TM
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE
8
1ST STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Copyright 1992 Gannett Company, Inc.
GANNETT NEWS SERVICE
March 10, 1992, Tuesday
LENGTH: 1307 words
HEADLINE: BUSH'S PLANS FOR CARMAKERS MIGHT NOT BE A BIG HIT
BYLINE: BRYAN GRULEY; The Detroit News
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
KEYWORD: BUSH-AUTOS-PM
Identical Story to
BODY:
March 9 one
President Bush is expected to unveil a raft of regulatory moves aimed at
helping the ailing U.S. car industry in a speech in Detroit Friday, just before
next Tuesday's Michigan primary.
But Bush's plan might not be welcomed as eagerly as he hopes, auto industry
officials say.
Officials are wary of a proposal to lower the federal fuel-economy standard
to 26.5 miles per gallon from the current 27.5 miles per gallon. They fear it
might reawaken congressional efforts to boost the standard.
Auto officials also are leery of a plan to supply pollution credits to
companies that buy and scrap old cars. Past proposals would have required the
automakers to absorb the cost of scrapping cars.
' 'The essence is how it's financed, said Robert Liberatore, Chrysler
Corp.'s executive director of public policy and legislative affairs. ''It
doesn't make any sense to say we want the auto industry to pay for it.
The Big Three are more likely to applaud a tentative plan to launch a joint
industry-government research consortium - called ''Auto Leap'' - that probably
would focus on development of electric vehicles.
Industry sources said the program would involve a major commitment by U.S.
carmakers to work with the National Laboratories to develop technology that
would make unprecedented progress toward erasing fuel-economy and emissions
concerns.
The program stems from discussions between Assistant Energy Secretary J.
Michael Davis and Donald Runkle, vice president of Advanced Engineering Staff at
General Motors Corp.
Runkle has been pushing for increased industry use of the National
Laboratories for research into energy, environment, safety, manufacturing and
reliability issues affecting autos.
U.S. carmakers and the Energy Department already have a consortium working on
batteries for electric vehicles. Davis and Runkle also spearheaded that effort.
TM
TM
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 9
GANNETT NEWS SERVICE, March 10, 1992
Carmakers also will welcome Bush's decision not to require that autos be
fitted with special canisters to capture gasoline fumes that escape during
refueling.
As previously reported, the Environmental Protection Agency determined that
so-called on-board canisters are potentially unsafe because they trap gas fumes
that could explode.
The decision is likely to be challenged in court by oil companies, which must
fit service stations with special pumps to capture the vapors.
The White House could decide not to offer the scrappage program and the plan
for a lower fuel-economy standard, an administration source said.
The source confirmed that the White House is seriously considering a plan
under which companies could earn marketable pollution credits by buying old cars
and junking them.
The administration believes the plan would boost car sales and reduce
pollution by getting old, dirtier cars off the roads.
Car owners could sell their clunkers for an estimated $ 700 to $ 1,000 to
companies that want to garner pollution credits. In theory, those customers
would replace their old vehicle, thus hiking sales.
The plan mirrors part of the 1990 Clean Air Act, which allows businesses that
cut pollution below federal standards to earn credits. The credits can be sold
to other companies that don't meet the standards.
The Big Three long have advocated programs that would get older cars off the
roads. But previous scrappage programs envisioned the automakers paying to haul
and junk the cars.
Few details were available, but the Bush plan appears to place the burden for
junking the cars on companies that choose to participate. In effect, the
pollution credits underwrite the costs.
The White House is less seriously mulling a proposal to lower Corporate
Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards.
Congressional efforts to boost CAFE as high as 40 mpg have quieted in the
wake of reports that the Big Three lost more than $ 7 billion in 1991.
Relieved auto lobbyists have said they think the issue is dead at least until
next year. But a move to reduce CAFE could spur environmentalists and
congressional backers of higher standards, officials said.
''I'm not aware of anyone asking for (a reduction in CAFE), Liberatore
said. 'We're asking for a lot of different things; this is not one.
SUBJECT: PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION; ELECTION ISSUE: PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION '92:BUSH
AUTO PLAN
TM
TM
LEXIS·NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 37
1ST STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Proprietary to the United Press International 1992
March 13, 1992, Friday, BC cycle
SECTION: Regional News
DISTRIBUTION: Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island,
Vermont
LENGTH: 850 words
HEADLINE: Bush helps automakers, Clinton gets union backing
BYLINE: BY United Press International
KEYWORD: POLITICS
BODY:
President Bush traveled to automobile country Friday with a promise of relief
for carmakers from some federal regulations while Democrat Bill Clinton added
endorsements from union leaders in advance of the crucial Michigan primary.
Clinton's two chief challengers, former Sen. Paul Tsongas of Massachusetts
and former California Gov. Edmund 'Jerry'' Brown Jr., campaigned in Illinois,
the other state holding a primary Tuesday that could break open up or tighten up
the battle for the party's presidential nomination.
Bush, who had big leads in recent polls, was on the campaign trail again to
increase his already large delegate total next week and to keep challenger
Patrick Buchanan from getting a big protest vote in recession-weary Michigan.
In the time-honored traditon of incumbents, Bush had promises of regulatory
relief to be presented at the Economic Club of Detroit.
Bush announced his administration would not require new cars be equipped
with costly anti-pollution canisters designed to cut down gasoline fumes
escaping into the air and promised to veto legislation requiring automakers to
raise their fleets' average fuel mileage from 27.5 to 40 miles per gallon.
To sustained applause the president said, ''I will not sign CAFE (corporate
average fuel economy) that would destroy the auto industry and cost Americans
jobs.
The president's declarations were the latest in a series of initiatives
announced in states where GOP primaries were being held. But campaign manager
Robert Teeter denied that Bush's pronouncements were linked to his campaign bid.
'They're not politically blatant at all,'' Teeter told reporters. ''He's
talking about issues people are interested in.
Meanwhile, the Bush campaign began running a television ad showing Buchanan
with a German-built Mercedes-Benz and an announcer saying, ''Pat Buchanan tells
you, 'America first,' but while our auto industry suffers Pat Buchanan chose to
buy a foreign car, a Mercedes-Benz.'
TM
TM
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 38
Proprietary to the United Press International, March 13, 1992
Buchanan responded to the ad, saying ''The fact of the matter is that Pat
Buchanan did buy a Mercedes-Benz three years ago and if folks want to say that's
a mistake, fine.'
''But the biggest lemon the American people bought in 1988, I think was the
Bush-Quayle administration if they thought they were getting a conservative
government. And I do think that Mr. Bush's campaign is virtually. a wholly owned
subsidiary of Japan Inc.
The Buchanan campaign began running ads showing that members of Bush's
political team were listed as lobbyists for foreign countries, including Japan.
Polls released Friday by the Detroit News and Michigan State University
showed Bush with three to three and a half times as much support as Buchanan.
On the Democratic side, the Michigan State poll showed Clinton ahead with 34
percent, Tsongas at 19 percent, Brown at 10 percent and 37 percent undecided.
In two states where labor can play a major role in Democratic primaries,
Clinton was picking up support from some local unions.
In Illinois, the Arkansas governor got the endorsements of a number of
unions, including the American Federation of State County and Municpal Employees
-------- the largest union for goverment employees in the state.
And in Michigan, leaders of 12 of the state's moderate-sized labor
organizations declared their support for Clinton, blasting the economic
proposals of both Brown and Tsongas.
Clinton also got a boost from his old friend, former Michigan Gov. James
Blanchard, who campaigned with him at a Detroit Baptist church.
Tsongas, who courted elderly and white ethnic voters Friday, got the
endorsement of the Chicago Tribune, which said Clinton's answers to questions
about his character leave ''a lingering question about candor'' and Tsongas
'makes the most convincing case'' that he should lead a party that is on a
course of change.
He also begin running hard-hitting television ads, one charging Clinton has
promised everyone a piece of the pie leaving only crumbs for average families,
and another raising questions about what scandals may lurk in the governor's
past.
That ad features one man asking, 'What has Bill Clinton got to hide that's
really bad?'' while a second responds, 'What now?'' The first man says, ''It's
his record.
Brown, talking with senior citizens and workers outside a closed factory,
tried to take advantage of some union weariness of both Clinton and Tsongas.
Clad in a bright blue United Auto Workers jacket, a red plaid working man's
shirt and his usual turtleneck, Brown said he would bring labor and business
leaders to the White House if elected to chart the nation's economic course.
He also railed against a proposed free trade agreement with Mexico and urged
voters to ' 'take power back'' from Washington insiders.
TM
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 39
Proprietary to the United Press International, March 13, 1992
This is an incredible betrayal of this country to take people who have
worked all their lives (and then to) junk them, throw them on some dust bin, and
then go to Mexico and get young people for two bucks an hour who don't have the
same health benefits, Brown said. ''It's just obscene.
TM
TM
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
-
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
(Smith/Aarhus)
Draft One
August 27, 1992
BEACH
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: TELETHON CALL
PALM BEACH, FLORIDA
THURSDAY, AUGUST 27, 1992
O
Governor Chiles. Senators Mack and Graham. Fellow
Americans. It is an honor to with you -- to ask you to
join in a noble cause: Showing how Americans are at their best
when disaster is at its worst. //
O
As you know, Monday I came to Florida to make sure the
Federal government does everything it can to ease your suffering.
O
I will never forget what I saw. Homes ripped apart. /
People left without blankets / without food or shelter. But as
you have proved: People are never without hope -- and never
without each other. //
O
At a time like this neighbor must help neighbor. So I
immediately signed the Governor's request for a disaster
declaration. We are making available the full span of Federal
disaster assistance programs to residents, businesses, and
governments. /
O
Our national center in Washington and our regional
center in Atlanta are operating 24 hours a day to put our
disaster relief programs in place. / We've moved in additional
staff Our Catastrophic Disaster Response Group is ensuring
Federal agencies do everything within
power to help state and
local governments respond
We ve set up a joint State-Federal
2
disaster field office. And we expect shortly to open Disaster
Application Centers so those in trouble can apply for help. //
O
Our disaster programs are ready to make available
several kinds of aid to victims of Andrew's wrath. / Temporary
Housing Assistance for those who've lost their homes. / Grants
to individuals and families for emergency needs such as food,
clothing, or hospital expenses. / Damaged or destroyed
businesses are eligible for loans from the Small Business
Administration. / Flood insurance may be available. /
O
All this the Federal government will do. Yet it's only
a start -- as no one knows more than you. / That's why I was so
moved by what I saw in Florida:
/
local police and fire fighters / the Red Cross and other
wonderful groups. Each lending a hand / tending a wound /
putting your community back on its feet. / /
O
Already your courage has amazed the Nation -- shown
that Florida may bend but it will never break. Destruction has
arrived in Florida on the winds of a hurricane. Let's respond as
Americans always have: With the neighbor-helping-neighbor spirit
that arrives on the wings of hope. //
O
What nature has pulled apart is no match for people who
pull together. All we can we must do -- as Americans, and
friends. Barbara and I are pleased to do our part -- as you are
doing yours. God bless you -- and the United States of America.
#
#
#
#
PAGE
2
2ND STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Copyright 1992 The Houston Chronicle Publishing Company
The Houston Chronicle
August 23, 1992, Sunday, 3 STAR Edition
SECTION: A; Pg. 24
LENGTH: 967 words
HEADLINE: Campaign '92;
Bush takes family values stand to the Deep South;
Boosts theme in Alabama and Georgia
BYLINE: GREG McDONALD; Staff
DATELINE: HOOVER, Ala.
KEYWORD: Elections Presidential
BODY:
HOOVER, Ala. -- President Bush, trying to preserve his
conservative base of support in the South, played up his campaign
of family values and trust at rain -soaked rallies here and in
Georgia that still drew thousands who cheered his attacks on
Democratic nominee Bill Clinton.
In speeches that sought to identify him with traditional
American values and Clinton as a man lacking the ""character" to
lead the country, the president referred to his opponent and the
Democratic-controlled Congress as one.
""He's got fever; he's got that liberal Democratic fever,
Bush told more than 20,000 people here who braved stormy weather
and got soaked while waiting for him in the parking lot of a huge
shopping mall.
Calling the election ""a clear choice'' between an
out-of-step liberal and a conservative leader of proven experience,
Bush charged that Clinton would act with Congress to raise taxes
and increase spending. Claiming that the Democrats couldn't care
less about reducing the federal deficit, he touted his own plan to
cut government spending and taxes across the board and vowed to
block spending increases in the future.
""If Congress sends me any bill spending more than I
requested, I'll veto it fast
We must cut spending, said
Bush, who proposed larger budgets in the first three years of his
administration than any of the ones finally approved by Congress.
Bush's used his appearance here and in Woodstock, Ga., where
he drew about 20,000 supporters, to promote his deficit reduction
plan, which would allow taxpayers to divert up to 10 percent of
their income tax payments to buying down the deficit. He also
touted his call for an across-the-board tax cut but did not spell
out any details of how he would offset the reductions.
TM
LEXIS·NEXIS®
LEXIS·NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE
5
1ST STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Copyright 1992 Globe Newspaper Company
The Boston Globe
March 14, 1992, Saturday, City Edition
SECTION: NATIONAL/FOREIGN; Pg. 7
LENGTH: 707 words
HEADLINE: Bush, Buchanan WOO Michigan autoworkers;
CAMPAIGN '92
BYLINE: By Michael Kranish and Chris Black, Globe Staff
DATELINE: DEARBORN, Mich.
KEYWORD: CAMPAIGN POLITIC ELECTION REPUBLICAN PARTY GEORGE BUSH NAME-BUCHANAN
BODY:
With three days until the Michigan primary, President Bush briefly
barnstormed here yesterday, announcing he was ending a major antipollution
program that the auto industry dislikes and airing a television commercial that
ridicules Patrick Buchanan for driving a German-made car.
Bush once again declined to mention the name of his GOP foe, saying that "the
thing I must do is not get after the opponent. Let him chart his course, make up
his decision on what to do."
In an announcement that angered environmentalists, Bush said he was killing a
regulation required under the 1990 Clean Air Act that was designed to reduce
auto pollution. The regulation required that automakers install a $ 20 device
known as a vapor canister on each new car made after 1996. The device captures
smog-producing fumes emitted when gasoline is pumped into a car.
Bush said he was eliminating the regulation because the canisters are unsafe.
The devices are opposed by the auto industry.
"The president is becoming an environmental outlaw," said a Sierra Club
lobbyist, Daniel Becker, in a telephone interview from Washington. "A
substantial amount of the smog problem could be prevented by the canisters." =
For his part, Buchanan continued to dog Bush's steps, returning yesterday to
the Detroit area to tout his "America First" campaign and offer new proposals to
a region whose auto industry has been battered by foreign competition.
At a news conference here not far from where Bush addressed the Economic Club
of Detroit, Buchanan proposed that consumers be given a 15 percent tax credit up
to $ 2,000 toward the purchase of American motor vehicles and that the Japanese
be required to increase to 75 to 80 percent the amount of US parts in Japanese
cars assembled in this country.
He also suggested that the federal government reduce regulations that "drive
up the cost of labor and drive people out of work," and he proposed that the
corporate average fuel economy standards be abolished.
TM
TM
LEXIS·NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE
6
The Boston Globe, March 14, 1992
During his visit, Bush became defiant when a sixth-grade student asked him
about rumors that the he had influenced the General Motors Corp. to close its
nearby Willow Run plant in Ypsilanti while keeping a similar one open in Texas.
"That is a bald-faced lie," Bush said, answering the question at the Economic
Club. He denounced Sen. Donald Riegle of Michigan, a Democrat, for suggesting
that Bush had influenced GM's decision to shut the Willow Run plant.
"I'm very serious about this because this is a challenge to my integrity as
president of the United States," Bush said. "I was accused by that senator of
intervening in the GM process, the private sector process. And I'm standing here
to tell you with everything I can muster that I made no such intervention.
In six hours here in his only Michigan appearance, Bush attended just two
events, addressing businessmen in Dearborn and visiting the successful Stryker
Corp. in Kalamazoo, which manufactures and exports medical equipment.
Although this state is among the nation's hardest-hit by the recession, with
a 9 percent unemployment rate, a Detroit News poll released yesterday showed
Bush with a commanding 71-21 lead over Buchanan.
The conservative commentator hopes to make inroads against Bush by tapping
into the discontent among the unemployed and the uncertainty within the auto
industry. But the White House tried to undercut Buchanan's effort to win over
auto workers by airing a commercial pointing out that Buchanan drives a
Mercedes-Benz.
"While our auto industry suffers, Pat Buchanan chooses to buy a foreign car,"
a narrator says in Bush's commercial, as a closed auto factory is shown.
Buchanan admitted he bought his wife, Shelley, a Mercedes three years ago at
her request for her birthday. He said he had owned three consecutive American
Cadillacs that he has called "lemons," a criticism he said was not meant to
apply to all American autos.
Buchanan described America's love affair with the automobile as fundamental
to the American way of life.
"Safe, affordable and good-looking American-made cars allowed us as a people
in the 20th century to maintain that great sense of adventure and exploration
that drove us West in the 19th century," he said.
GRAPHIC: 1. GOP hopeful Patrick Buchanan exchanges quips with Jack Miller, who
owns an antique Hudson Automobile dealership in Ypsilanti, Mich., at a campaign
stop yesterday in advance of Tuesday's primary. AP PHOTO 2. President Bush
addresses workers at a thriving Stryker Corp. plant, which manufactures and
exports medical equipment, during a campaign stop yesterday in Kalamazoo, Mich.
REUTERS PHOTO
TM
TM
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE
2
1ST STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Copyright 1992 Crain Communications, Inc.
Automotive News
March 16, 1992
SECTION: Pg. 36
LENGTH: 484 words
HEADLINE: Bush eases auto rules; Big 3 cheer
BYLINE: PHIL FRAME, Staff Reporter
DATELINE: DETROIT
BODY:
Big 3 executives reacted warmly last Friday to the news that the domestic
industry will get some regulatory relief from the federal government.
In a speech to the Economic Club of Detroit, President Bush announced that
auto companies will not be required to design cars with fuel vapor recovery
canisters to cut pollution during refueling.
The decision had been widely anticipated. 'Obviously, the Department of
Transportation had pretty well set that up ahead of time because of the safety
issue, said Robert Stempel, General Motors chairman. ''I was pleased to hear
him put that in there. And hopefully, that will put it to bed once and for
all.
The EPA will require vapor recovery systems at the gas pumps. Harold Poling,
Ford Motor Co. chairman, noted that the pump system will do more to improve the
atmosphere because it will catch all vapors from the start. On-board devices
would not have been retrofitted into older cars.
Chrysler Corp. President Robert Lutz also reacted favorably to the
announcement.
'We'll take regulatory relief anywhere we can get it,'' he said. ''The
canister issue is more of a safety issue than a cost issue.
Bush was in Detroit in advance of this week's primary election in Michigan,
and he loaded his speech on domestic and foreign issues with auto-related
topics. He said:
*
He will not sign any corporate average fuel economy legislation that would
hurt American industry or lead to higher unemployment.
He will continue to back the battery consortium to promote electric cars.
NAFTA
*
He said he strongly supports a free-trade agreement with Mexico. He said it
would not lead to the export of jobs to Mexico and would make Mexico more
stant
prosperous and a better market for U.S. goods, including cars.
In his most passionate comment, Bush bristled at suggestions that he had
intervened in GM's decision to close an assembly plant in Michigan rather than
TM
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS·NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 3
Automotive News, March 16, 1992
a plant in his adopted home state of Texas.
''I made no such intervention,' Bush said, shaking with rage. ''It is a
bald-faced lie!''
The crowd of 2,000 applauded loudly.
Stempel said he thought Bush had a good position on CAFE. ''I thought he was
upbeat and pretty positive,' said Stempel.
Bush referred to his recent trip to Japan, saying he took some flak for it
but it is paying off already with new American business in the computer, glass
and paper markets.
He asked business leaders in the audience to work with the government in
retraining workers and help them adapt to a changing economy.
Bush's theme of bolstering America's competitiveness suited his audience of
business executives but may have missed with Michigan wage earners. Bush's
support of free trade with Mexico runs counter to the position of the UAW, and
Republican candidate Patrick Buchanan is calling for protection for the Big 3 in
his campaign. Michigan has been hard hit by auto industry layoffs.
TM
TM
TM
LEXIS·NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 35
1ST STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
The Associated Press
The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. These
materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The
Associated Press.
March 25, 1992, Wednesday, PM cycle
SECTION: Political News
LENGTH: 206 words
HEADLINE: The Issue: Improving Fuel Economy
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
KEYWORD: On The Issues
BODY:
Here are the views of the major presidential candidates on the question: "Do
you favor requiring automakers to increase the fuel economy of their cars to 40
miles per gallon, as favored by some in Congress, to reduce dependence on
foreign oil and fight pollution?"
DEMOCRATS
-Jerry Brown: "Yes. We need to increase efficiency and at the same time move
toward electric and alternative fuel sources."
-Bill Clinton: Yes. "I support raising corporate average fuel economy (CAFE)
standards because this is an important way of reducing our dependence on foreign
oil and increasing conservation."
REPUBLICANS
-George Bush: Opposed a provision in an early version of the Senate energy
bill that would have mandated increasing the CAFE standard to 40 miles per
gallon from the current 27 1-2. The CAFE standard is the average fuel economy
each auto company must maintain throughout its fleet. The Bush administration,
along with the automakers, says achieving higher fuel efficiency would require
cars that are smaller and therefore more dangerous. The energy bill passed the
Senate without the controversial measure.
-Patrick Buchanan: A spokesman said Buchanan he is in favor of abolishing the
CAFE standards.
TM
TM
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 41
1ST STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Copyright 1992 Cable News Network, Inc.
All rights reserved
CNN
Crossfire
July 22, 1992
Transcript # 622
TYPE: Show; Interview
SECTION: News; Domestic
LENGTH: 5029 words
BODY:
ANNOUNCER: Live from Washington, Crossfire. On the left, Mike Kinsley. On the
right, John Sununu. Tonight, The Environmental Vice President? In the
crossfire, Democratic Senator Tim Wirth of Colorado, member of the Energy and
Natural Resources Committee; and Republican Representative Robert Walker of
Pennsylvania, Chief Deputy Whip.
MIKE KINSLEY: Good evening. Welcome to Crossfire. Is Al Gore a green meanie?
Republicans are attacking the Democratic vice presidential nominee as an
environmental extremist. Today White House press spokesman Marlin Fitzwater
called Gore 'Mr. Sellout America,' referring to the recent Earth Summit which
Both Gore and President Bush attended. Fitzwater said of Gore, 'He tries to talk
about economic growth, when he spent a week in Rio saying, 'to heck with the
economy, sell it out to the environmentalists. To which Gore's running mate
Bill Clinton replied today:
Governor BILL CLINTON, Democratic Presidential Nominee: Al Gore tried to have
America lead the world again in Rio. He didn't want America humiliated as it was
under George Bush's leadership.
KINSLEY: The environment will be a big issue this fall. Gore is the author of a
best-selling book on the subject. Bush four years ago promised to be the
environmental president. Clinton's environmental record in Arkansas is mixed.
Dan Quayle is the environmentalists' nemesis in the administration. That's the
cast of characters. Over to you, John.
JOHN SUNUNU: Senator Wirth, there's no way Governor Clinton supports all of Al
Gore's extreme environmental positions, is there?
Sen. TIM WIRTH, (D-CO) Natural Resources Committee: Well, what extreme
environmental positions are you talking about?
SUNUNU: Carbon tax, tax on gasoline-
Sen. WIRTH: Wait a minute, John.
SUNUNU: You asked me which ones, I'm going to tell you.
TM
TM
LEXIS·NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 42
CNN Transcripts, July 22, 1992
Sen. WIRTH: Wait a minute. I'm just going to tell you- did Al Gore propose a
carbon tax? No. Martin Feldstein in your party, who was President Reagan's chief
economic adviser, is for the carbon tax-
SUNUNU: In Gore's book he praises-
Sen. WIRTH: Gore said in his book, this is one of the options that has to be
looked at, and you know and I know that we got to think about pricing on energy
to be realistic about what's going on, and your own- see, Martin Feldstein, let
me see, wasn't he a Republican in the Reagan administration?
SUNUNU: He wants to propose something-
Sen. WIRTH: Reagan's chief economic adviser-
SUNUNU: He wants to propose something-
Sen. WIRTH: He's absolutely right in thinking about the fact that we got to be
realistic about costing, and we got to be realistic about environmental costs
and start looking at long term investments, not the nonsense of the
administration.
SUNUNU: So, he wants to propose a carbon tax-
Sen. WIRTH: I didn't say he-
SUNUNU: -to get the benefit from the environmentalists and then deny that he
ever proposed it.
Sen. WIRTH: Wait a minute. He's not proposing-
SUNUNU: That's rather two-faced.
Sen. WIRTH: He's not proposing- you ought to read his book. It would be good for
you. You know, it would be a very healthy thing for you to do.
SUNUNU: It's one of the strongest things he supports in the book, Senator.
Sen. WIRTH: That options have to be looked at, overall the pricing options.
There's no-
SUNUNU: So, your mission here tonight is to deny A1 Gore supports the carbon
tax?
Sen. WIRTH: I didn't say that. My mission tonight is to talk about somebody who
is looking for change, looking for the future, and who wants to led the nation
in a direction that won't be embarrassing to us around the world, as the
President, your President, the guy that you work for, and who said, John, even
you were too extreme for Ronald Reagan in his- for George Bush on this deal,
right? Who is embarrassing to us every place around the world. You watch that
press- I was- I think I was the only one of the four of who was there-
KINSLEY: In Rio.
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS:NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 43
CNN Transcripts, July 22, 1992
Sen. WIRTH: It was remarkable. It was remarkable in Rio, remarkable to see the
U.S.- and have the whole 154 nations asking the United States to lead, and we
ducked that responsibility just when we had this tremendous opportunity. Wow. We
can do a lot better than that, and that's what the Clinton-Gore ticket's all
about.
SUNUNU: Leadership is being willing to stand for a strong environmental policy
without following the extreme.
Sen. WIRTH: An extreme?
SUNUNU: You have a CAFE position that's not as extreme as Al Gore's position.
Sen. WIRTH: My CAFE position, Al Gore's position, I think they're absolutely
identical. I don't think they're very much-
SUNUNU: You both want to go to 45 miles-
KINSLEY: We ought to explain-
Sen. WIRTH: We ought to give- CAFE is fuel efficiency for automobiles. You
were, I think, once an adviser on the board of General Motors.
SUNUNU: No.
Sen. WIRTH: You told me once in the White House that CAFE standards had not-
fuel efficiency hadn't done us any good.
SUNUNU: No.
Sen. WIRTH: Fuel efficiency standards for automobiles are one of the most
important things in the world to do.
SUNUNU: If you're going to make statements, make them accurate. CAFE
standards-
Sen. WIRTH: You aren't just repeating what you said to me earlier on.
SUNUNU: The CAFE standard that is being proposed is to move from 27 and a half
miles per gallon as a requirement to 45 miles per gallon as a requirement, at a
cost of millions of American jobs.
Sen. WIRTH: Who said millions of American jobs? That's the same argument that
Detroit made back when we had the first fuel economy crisis. We had 12 and a
half miles to the gallon for each automobile. Detroit said you make any changes,
there's no way in the world we can survive this. We went from 12 and a half to
27, was one of the only things that has been effective in terms of major changes
in consumption patterns of energy, one of the few things that we've been able to
do.
SUNUNU: So, you want to double that-
Sen. WIRTH: And 50 now what we can do is to go as high-
KINSLEY: All right. Wait. The producers are telling- the producers are
LEXIS·NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS·NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 44
CNN Transcripts, July 22, 1992
ordering me to get off of this CAFE. We don't want to sound like we're sitting
around drinking coffee.
Sen. WIRTH: Corporate Average Fuel Economy.
Rep. ROBERT WALKER, (R-PA) Chief Deputy Whip: But one thing that has to be
pointed out is that the Brookings Institute and Harvard did a joint study here
recently that estimated that between 2000 and 4000 people a year in this country
lose their lives as a result of the CAFE standard that went to 27.5. So, in
fact, we are killing real people with what we have already done, and further
increases in that would kill even more people.
KINSLEY: All right, Bob Walker-
Rep. WALKER: So, it's environment over people.
KINSLEY: Bob Walker, George Bush ran in 1988 as the environmental president. Has
he decided this time to run as the anti-environmental president? Is that a
better strategy?
Rep. WALKER: No, not at all, because is record is actually better than Al Gore's
in this.
Sen. WIRTH: Oh, Bob-
Rep. WALKER: Go ahead.
KINSLEY: No, let him make his sound bite.
Sen. WIRTH: Let's get this one out there, right?
Rep. WALKER: Name me one major piece of environmental legislation that Al Gore
has sponsored and gotten through the Congress. I can't name you one. I don't
think there are any. George Bush has gotten the Clean Air Act passed. It took 12
years to get a clean air bill passed. George Bush came in and got it done. So,
that's something he actually did for the environment.
KINSLEY: Let me ask you-
SUNUNU: That's a better political record than Al Gore.
Rep. WALKER: Yeah, that's better than Al Gore has on the environment.
Sen. WIRTH: George Bush wouldn't have gotten anywhere on clean air had it not
been for a group of us focused on the issue of changing the whole strategy and
breaking the log jam by-
SUNUNU: The log jam was broken before-
Sen. WIRTH: -by talking about economic incentives and the way in which you do
this. Now, George Bush says to the world, 'We've got this Clean Air Act- by the
way, Dan Quayle, come over here and gut it, wipe out all the enforcement
mechanisms, you and the Competitiveness Council, we're not really serious about
this, make the black hole a place for- make the White House a place for special
interests to come in.'
TM
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS®NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 45
CNN Transcripts, July 22, 1992
SUNUNU: Tim Wirth, like Pinocchio your nose ought to be growing.
Sen. WIRTH: That's what's going on. Look, what's happening. What do you think
Dan Quayle's doing?
Rep. WALKER: The point I'm trying to make here is that at least George Bush has
the Clean Air Act to point to. What does A1 Gore have to point to?
Sen. WIRTH: Al Gore has an extraordinarily distinguished record that-
Rep. WALKER: Name me one major bill that has-
KINSLEY: A1 Gore-
Sen. WIRTH: I'll start with the energy bill that's in front of the Congress
right now.
KINSLEY: -is one member of the Senate. George Bush is the president of the
United States. He deigned to sign a clean air act and then, as Tim said-
Rep. WALKER: No, he proposed the Clean Air Act-
SUNUNU: He proposed it, it's his bill.
KINSLEY: Well, let me ask you about the Clean Air Act, then. George Bush
complains, you complain, John Sununu complains that environmentalism costs jobs.
Now, that happens to be true sometimes, there is a tradeoff. Didn't the Clean
Air Act cost jobs?
Rep. WALKER: Well, there are some jobs that are cost in the Clean Air Act, but
the fact is that we tried to make the responsible tradeoffs. What we don't see
in the Al Gore position is those responsible kind of tradeoffs.
KINSLEY: I just wanted to-
Rep. WALKER: In fact, Al Gore, in his book, consistently, there's an analogy in
his book refers to people who want technological progress as Nazis.
KINSLEY: Oh, that is ridiculous.
Sen. WIRTH: Oh, Bob, that's just preposterous. You know, that is preposterous.
Rep. WALKER: Check page 275 in the book.
Sen. WIRTH: That is preposterous.
Rep. WALKER: Go to page 275 in the book. He admits to that and-
Sen. WIRTH: Technological- what you're saying, technological progress-
Rep. WALKER: Yes.
Sen. WIRTH: -is akin to Nazism? Is that what you're suggesting?
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS·NEXIS®
LEXIS·NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 46
CNN Transcripts, July 22, 1992
Rep. WALKER: That's what Al Gore says in his book.
Sen. WIRTH: You're a member of the Science Committee in the House, you know
better than that, Bob.
Rep. WALKER: I'm not suggesting that, Al Gore suggests that.
Sen. WIRTH: You have a good scientific background. You ought to know the
preposterous nature of this sort of thing.
KINSLEY: You know what? I haven't read page 275 of Al Gore's book. I will buy
you lunch, I will give you $ 100, I don't know what I will do, if there's any
serious claim on that page, Al Gore says that people who favor technological
progress are Nazis.
Rep. WALKER: You want me to quote?
Sen. WIRTH: This is Marlin Fitzwater, Republican National Committee.
KINSLEY: Go ahead.
Rep. WALKER: He has a metaphor throughout the book that he says that he believes
that technological progress are as evil and as danger to society as Nazis, and I
quote, 'It is not merely in the service of the analogy I referred 50 often to
the struggles against Nazi and communist totalitarianism, because I believe that
the emerging effort to save the environment is a continuation of those
struggles. In other words, if you don't agree with us, you're Nazis.
KINSLEY: Oh, that is ridiculous.
Sen. WIRTH: That's just ridiculous. You know better. Oh, that psychology is not
working anyway.
KINSLEY: If that's the best you can do, Bob, you're in a bad way.
Rep. WALKER: I'm quoting directly from the book.
SUNUNU: Let's go back-
Rep. WALKER: That's the reason I say he's an extremist.
Sen. WIRTH: Let's start from-
SUNUNU: Let's go back to the politics of the environmentalists.
Sen. WIRTH: What was the first choice that George Bush made? The first choice,
decision that George Bush made was to name Dan Quayle, which has been wrapped
around his neck and been embarrassing him for four years. The first choice that
Bill Clinton made was to name Al Gore-
Rep. WALKER: Who's an environmental extremist.
Sen. WIRTH: -which has been one of the most exciting things catalyzing the
country and thinking about the kind of change that this country has to have.
Gore's not an extremist-
TM
TM
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE
47
CNN Transcripts, July 22, 1992
SUNUNU: But you can't run away-
Sen. WIRTH: You guys are talking him-
SUNUNU: - -from the political positions he's started to take.
Sen. WIRTH: You guys say 'extremist' over and over again because you don't have
anything substantive to talk about.
SUNUNU: Filibuster in the Senate, but don't filibuster here.
Sen. WIRTH: You say extremist-
SUNUNU: You're here trying to run away from the carbon tax-
Sen. WIRTH: Filibuster is saying, 'extremist, extremist, extremist,' is a
filibuster.
SUNUNU: You're trying to run away from the carbon tax.
Sen. WIRTH: I'm not running away from the carbon tax.
SUNUNU: Trying to run away from the campaign proposals-
Sen. WIRTH: These are options that ought to be looked at.
Rep. WALKER: Every time we get into specifics, you say that doesn't-
Sen. WIRTH: I didn't run away from any of those items. Al Gore's positions on
CAFE is exactly the same as mine.
SUNUNU: And we'll give you a chance to filibuster when we come back-
Sen. WIRTH: 'Extremist, extremist, extremist' is a filibuster.
SUNUNU: And when we return after that filibuster, we'll ask our guests why the
labor unions are scared stiff of the Clinton-Gore environmental agenda.
[Commercial break]
SUNUNU: Welcome back to Crossfire. We're talking about Governor Clinton,
Senator Gore, the environment, and jobs. Our guests are Congressman Robert
Walker, Chief Republican Deputy Whip, and Senator Tim Wirth of Colorado, a
member of the Senate committee on Energy and Natural Resources, and a good
friend of Al Gore's. Senator, on the CAFE issue, important issue politically,
important issue in terms of what you do for the environment or let the
environment do for or to America. The United Auto Workers went up and testified
strongly against the CAFE proposals, saying that it would cost American jobs.
They're scared to death of that kind of a proposal costing us our jobs.
Sen. WIRTH: The UAW said the same thing in 1975, '76, '77 when we had the major
energy crisis and all of the changes then. I don't think we base a policy on
what one sort of union group is going to say. What we ought to be basing a
policy on is the fact that we're in a very dangerous situation in the United
TM
TM
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 48
CNN Transcripts, July 22, 1992
States, 50 percent of our oil is imported, massive hemorrhaging of U.S. capital
going overseas, we've got to stop that. One of the ways in which we do that is
to use fuel much more efficiently in our automobiles, there's no question about
it-
SUNUNU: So, you're saying, then, if the Democratic party, then, has to make a
choice between the constituency that cares about the environment or a
constituency that cares about labor jobs, you're leaning towards picking the
environment.
Sen. WIRTH: You're setting up again this false choice between jobs and the
environment. It's not the case. If we were backing out oil, which we ought to be
doing, under this administration, almost nothing has been done, for example, to
stop this vast outflow of capital out of the United States because we're
importing 50 much oil.
KINSLEY: Bob Walker, I'm about to offer you another free lunch.
Sen. WIRTH: I think we ought to make this kind of chance.
KINSLEY: I will buy you lunch if the United Auto Workers endorse George Bush for
president because they're so scared stiff of Bill Clinton and Al Gore. Do you
expect that for a minute?
Rep. WALKER: I don't expect it.
KINSLEY: So, all this is just talk?
Rep. WALKER: No, it's not just talk because the United Auto Workers do look at
the facts, and the fact is that because of CAFE, we dropped a significant
portion of market share in the country because the way in which manufacturers
went to smaller cars was to basically import them.
KINSLEY: You know, this is what I don't understand. Why is it- isn't it
defeatist to say, 'Gosh, it would be nice to have more efficient cars, but
American companies just can't do it, when Japanese companies will do it, and
therefore we'd better not even try'?
Rep. WALKER: All I'm saying to you is that experience that we've had since 1977
is a loss of market share as manufacturers-
KINSLEY: Whose fault is that? That's the fault of these auto companies.
Rep. WALKER: Well, but the UAW in this country works for those auto companies.
Sen. WIRTH: Bob-
Rep. WALKER: No, the fact is that we lost jobs as a result of all of that.
KINSLEY: Don't you think it's pathetic-
Sen. WIRTH: Don't the Japanese have to meet exactly the same fuel economy
standards are we do?
Rep. WALKER: Yeah, and their production-
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE
49
CNN Transcripts, July 22, 1992
Sen. WIRTH: Don't the Germans have to meet the same-
Rep. WALKER: Their production lines are designed to build small cars. Our
production lines aren't.
Sen. WIRTH: That's 20 years ago we made these changes. You say Detroit can't
adapt.
Rep. WALKER: Well, all I'm saying is we lost a major-
Sen. WIRTH: Detroit is adapting wonderfully there.
Rep. WALKER: We lost major market share and the UAW has paid the price on that.
Sen. WIRTH: And you think-
Rep. WALKER: So, they probably will not endorse George Bush-
Sen. WIRTH: It was fuel economy, it had nothing to do with quality?
KINSLEY: What about-
Rep. WALKER: They probably will not endorse George Bush but they perhaps ought
to take a look at those facts and understand why they are now out of jobs.
KINSLEY: But they're obviously not as scared as John Sununu claims they are or
they would endorse George Bush, which they, of course, they're not going to do,
as you acknowledge.
Rep. WALKER: No, they probably-
SUNUNU: They're scared of the policy.
Rep. WALKER: Yeah, they're scared of the policy, sure.
KINSLEY: Let me ask you. Al Gore, one of Al Gore's serious points is, precisely
concerns American market share in major industries. He says that American- that
the world is turning towards green industry, that was one of the messages down
at Rio. All these other countries, Germany, Japan, our rivals, are turning to
it, and we're going to get- we're going to lose market share in a lot of these
industries if we don't adapt and stay ahead of the game instead of falling
]
behind. Now, I thought that was a good point.
Rep. WALKER: Well, sure, it's a good point, and I think we have some companies
that are moving into that. We spend more in this country than in any other
country on environmental, and as a result, we have a large environmental
industry in this country. We ought to exploit that, but there's another thing
that we ought to look at, and that is we need technology of other kinds we need
to be world competitive in, and some of the suggestions in Al Gore's book that
suggest, for instance, that every one of those new technologies ought to be
cleared through some bureaucracy before it could come on line would be
absolutely devastating to our ability to compete in the world, and yet he
suggests that over and over again in the book.
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE
50
CNN Transcripts, July 22, 1992
Sen. WIRTH: Who's clearing that you clear a technology through some bureaucracy-
Rep. WALKER: That's exactly what he suggested in the book.
Sen. WIRTH: That's preposterous.
Rep. WALKER: Haven't you read the book, Tim?
Sen. WIRTH: I've read the book. Let's go back to the whole business of air
pollution technologies in the United States. We have been the leaders for 20
years in air pollution technology. Unhappily today, under this administration,
we have lost even a market share in our own air pollution technology: 70 percent
of the air pollution technology used in the United States is imported from
overseas. What Al wants to do and has been really- he has been on the edge of
this set of issues for a long time-
SUNUNU: Yeah, but-
Sen. WIRTH: -is to change how-
SUNUNU: But you have a nominee at the top of the ticket who's on the other side.
In his state of Arkansas-
Sen. WIRTH: Of air pollution control technology?
SUNUNU: -Clinton is 47th, his state is 47th in terms of the emission of toxic
air going into the environment into the air. He's 47th in terms of toxic
emissions to the rivers. He's way down at the bottom in terms of the purity of
their drinking water.
Rep. WALKER: And we do have real competitive industries-
SUNUNU: Are you going to have the first debate between Clinton and Gore?
Sen. WIRTH: This is a-
KINSLEY: I want to ask Bob Walker about this business because it does seem to me
that you're pursuing what I would call a three bears strategy: Clinton's
porridge is too cold, Gore's porridge is too hot, George Bush-
SUNUNU: Is just right.
KINSLEY: -Baby Bear's porridge is just right.
SUNUNU: That's exactly right.
KINSLEY: Isn't that a hard sell?
Rep. WALKER: No, it's not a hard sell.
KINSLEY: Well, what exactly are you-
Rep. WALKER: Because one of the things you have to have in this business is some
balance. You have to do what is necessary in order to move forward on an
environmental agenda, but you can't do 50 and cost Americans jobs and cost
TM
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS·NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 51
CNN Transcripts, July 22, 1992
Americans more money than they can afford.
KINSLEY: Well, what exactly do you want Americans to be afraid of? Do you want
them to be afraid the Clinton administration is going to be too green or do you
want it to be afraid that it's not green enough?
Rep. WALKER: Well, I do know that Al Gore-
KINSLEY: Which is it?
Rep. WALKER: I do know that Al Gore suggested to journalists at one point that
they ought to make certain that they don't bring anything out which is not
alarmist, and you know, the point is that they're-
Sen. WIRTH: That they don't bring what?
Rep. WALKER: He suggested to journalists that they practice self censorship-
SUNUNU: It was printed in The New Republic, Michael. You do remember that?
Rep. WALKER: It's in The New Republic, and-
Sen. WIRTH: You guys are reaching out for-
KINSLEY: I want to hear an answer to my question before we're-
Sen. WIRTH: -all these of these allegations and discussions-
Rep. WALKER: What we're seeing is how extreme-
KINSLEY: Are we supposed to be afraid that the Clinton administration is going
to be too environmentally extreme or too environmentally negligent? It can't be
both.
SUNUNU: Sure, it can, in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Sen. WIRTH: You guys-
SUNUNU: It can have extreme policies in certain areas and be lax in other areas.
Rep. WALKER: We think that you ought to have a balance of-
Sen. WIRTH: You guys are doing the same old Republican routine. You're going to
say one thing, 'extreme, extreme, extreme, extreme, extreme, right? And that's
all you say without any policy coming from this administration.
Rep. WALKER: Every time-
Sen. WIRTH: Wetlands is going down-
Rep. WALKER: Every time we mention an extremist position, you deny it exists.
Sen. WIRTH: We've got one piece after another of this kind of rhetorical
approach without any substance. Where is the Bush administration on any kind of
environmental issue?
TM
TM
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 52
CNN Transcripts, July 22, 1992
SUNUNU: You're dismissing every position that Al Gore has proposed as being
merely a suggestion that he's not serious about.
Sen. WIRTH: He has been- he is laying out a variety of options-
SUNUNU: Then let's go back to the politics of the carbon tax.
KINSLEY: Let's take a break. Excuse me, gentlemen, let's take a break. When we
come back, we're going to talk about who's selling out America.
[Commercial break]
KINSLEY: Bob Walker, this rhetoric from Marlin Fitzwater today about Al Gore
'selling out America,' you know that really- I resent that, and it depresses me.
Al Gore wants what he thinks is best for America. George Bush wants what he
thinks is best for America. They disagree. Why can't you Republicans make your
political arguments without accusing the other side of being unpatriotic all the
time like you did in 1988?
Rep. WALKER: Well, I think that both want what's good for the United States. I
think what the American people have to do is decide what's good for the United
States. In the case of the Rio conference, the fact was that what the rest of
the world wanted to do was have the United States pay for their environmental
cleanup, and that was going to cost us massive amounts of money that, in all
honestly, I don't think we can afford.
KINSLEY: Is George Bush-
Rep. WALKER: And the President was right in standing up for our idea that the
rest of the world ought to engage in environmental cleanup on their own and not
expect us to pay for it.
KINSLEY: You know, Helmut Kohl, the conservative premier of Germany, John Major,
another conservative from Britain, every major leader in the world felt that
this treaty that George Bush refused to sign was a good thing for the world. Can
George Bush be the only sane man in the world?
Rep. WALKER: They all saw us being weakened by it and that helps them
economically in trade.
KINSLEY: Oh, please-
Rep. WALKER: Absolutely, that was the case-
KINSLEY: Why would we be weakened if they weren't weakened?
Rep. WALKER: Let me make one point here.
SUNUNU: Let me ask-
Rep. WALKER: It seems to me it's a real voodoo economics in this campaign is Al
Gore suggesting that you can adopt all of his environmental extremist positions
and do 50 without any cost in jobs or money. To me, that just is not tenable.
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE
53
CNN Transcripts, July 22, 1992
SUNUNU: Let me ask about Senator Gore's commitment to the environmental issues.
He says it's the most important issue, yet he's refused every opportunity to
serve on the Senate committee you serve on that deals with those environmental
issues. What's he afraid of going on that committee for?
Sen. WIRTH: Well, I mean, there are a whole series of issues. There's an
environment issue, there's an energy issue, there's a commerce issue-
SUNUNU: But he says the environment is the most important issue.
Sen. WIRTH: Commerce Committee has jurisdiction over a lot of things; John, you
know the complicated nature of this. I mean, that's a silly argument to make it
seems to me. I mean, Al has-
SUNUNU: He has refused to join you on that committee all along.
Sen. WIRTH: He's not refusing to join. He's a member of the Commerce Committee
and has done a superb job in terms of all the-
SUNUNU: He's been offered that slot two or three times and he turns it down.
Sen. WIRTH: -relationships that- one is not offered positions in the Senate on
various committees. You choose what you're going to do, and Al Gore has been,
not only a leader on the environment on the Commerce Committee, but a very, very
outspoken and strong advocate for arms control and very creative initiatives as
a member of the Armed Service Committee.
KINSLEY: Is your point, John, that Al Gore-
Sen. WIRTH: So, there's a combination of all these things. Now-
Rep. WALKER: No major legislation.
Sen. WIRTH: This set of issues, this set of environmental issues is in front of
the American public. The American public knows, particularly the younger
Americans, how very serious this is for the 21st century. I think that the issue
in this campaign is going to be, do they want a change from a know-nothing,
do-nothing, I think, deliberately ignorant administration on many of these
fronts, who are opposing these false choices of jobs and the environment, or are
we going to move ahead in a constructive and balanced fashion, as we Democrats
have proposed? Nobody would suggest, I don't think, that Dan Quayle is going to
be any kind of a substitute for the wonderful and thoughtful leadership that we
have.
SUNUNU: How about answering Bob Walker's question, what environmental
legislation has Al Gore sponsored and gotten through the Senate?
Sen. WIRTH: Oh, A1 Gore has done a whole series of things related to science,
from the position of-
SUNUNU: Name one.
Rep. WALKER: Name one. Name one environmental initiative.
Sen. WIRTH: All of the initiatives coming out of the Defense Department
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS·NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 54
CNN Transcripts, July 22, 1992
related to the adjustment of defense expenditures to focus on the use of- those
are two that we have worked on together, only in the last couple of weeks.
KINSLEY: All right.
Sen. WIRTH: Significant initiatives related to-
KINSLEY: I've got to cut you off. He's done too many things to get into here.
Thank you, Tim Wirth. Thank you, Bob Walker. Mean, green John Sununu and I will
be back in just a moment.
[Commercial break]
SUNUNU: Michael, it's amazing. You go through three days of trashing of the
President of the United States at the Democratic convention without saying a
word about it, and Marlin Fitzwater makes one nasty comment about Al Gore and
you look so offended.
KINSLEY: I'm not offended at his criticism of A1 Gore. I'm offended at his
challenging Al Gore's patriotism because A1 Gore wants to be a strong
environmentalist. That's exactly what you guys did in 1988-
SUNUNU: They were challenging the President as a traitor to the world because of
his positions.
KINSLEY: They were criticizing George Bush. They were not criticizing America.
That's what Marlin Fitzwater said, and it's ugly.
SUNUNU: Marlin criticized Al Gore for his positions.
KINSLEY: That's not the case, and you know it.
SUNUNU: That's exactly what it was.
KINSLEY: From the left, I'm Mike Kinsley. Good night for Crossfire.
SUNUNU: It was criticism of Al Gore. And from the right, I'm John Sununu. Join
us again tomorrow night for another edition of Crossfire.
KINSLEY: PrimeNews is next, and here's biodegradable Bernard Shaw to recycle a
few headlines for us. Bernie?
BERNARD SHAW, PrimeNews: Thank you, Michael. Coming up, the heat gets too
intense for an inspection team in Baghdad, deepening the confrontation between
Iraq and the United Nations. Also, is Ross Perot still in the running? Some
state election officials are scratching their heads, and Popeye will need his
spinach in a dust-up with the comic's distributor. PrimeNews is next.
The preceding text has been professionally transcribed. However, although
the text has been checked against an audio track, in order to meet rigid
distribution and transmission deadlines, it has not yet been proofread against
videotape.
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS·NEXIS®
LEXIS·NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE
25
1ST STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Copyright 1992 Federal Information Sytems Corporation
Federal News Service
29
APRIL 24, 1992, FRIDAY
SECTION: BROADCAST INTERVIEW ABOUT COMMERCE OR TRADE
gets
LENGTH: 5246 words
HEADLINE: JOHN MCLAUGHLIN'S " ONE ON ONE"
WITH GUEST, MICHAEL BOSKIN
CHAIRMAN, PRESIDENT'S COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISORS FOR BROADCAST: WEEKEND OF
APRIL 25-
KEYWORD:
MCLAUGHLIN ONE ON ONE
BODY:
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: The good, the bad, and the ugly.
The good news: America's economic recovery is underway. People are building
more homes, so demand is up for household appliances, TVs, furniture. Exports
are up. Consumer confidence is up. The stock market is up.
The bad news: the global economy is in a slump. Japan's stock market has
plunged, down 60 percent since '89. Germany is fighting inflation and the costs
of unification. World trade talks are stalled, all of which means American
exports may suffer.
The ugly news: Washington is swimming in a sea of red ink. This year's budget
deficit is expected to hit a record $400 billion, and total public debt is
nearly $4 trillion. Fourteen cents out of every taxpayer dollar goes to pay
interest on that debt, and the fear of adding to this debt load has put policy
makers in a straightjacket. They are unable to boost the economy by cutting
taxes or by raising spending.
So, will the recovery roll on, or will it derail? We'll ask an economist -- the
one who has the ear of the President of the United States. Born: New York City,
46 years of age. Wife: Chris, ten years. University of California at Berkeley,
B.A., M.A., and Ph.D., economics. Stanford University, economics professor, 19
years. Harvard University, economics visiting professor, one year. Center for
Economic Policy Research, Director, three years. Author numerous books,
including "Reagan and the Economy: Successes, Failures, and the Unfinished
Agenda." The White House: Council of Economic Advisors, Chairman, three years
and currently. Michael J. Boskin, it's one-on-one.
Chairman Boskin, is the recession over?
MR. BOSKIN: Certainly, John, the economy has been recovering after a flat period
late last year. The economy has been improving. It's been growing at about a 2
percent pace. We should actually leave the official dating of when this
occurred to the National Bureau of Economic Research because they're a private,
non-political organization. But almost all economists have concluded that we're
in a recovery. Some think it began earlier even though it was quite slow. Some
would date it from the beginning of this year.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Let me ask you to look ahead. What do you expect the growth
rate to be during the next three quarters of this year?
MR. BOSKIN: We're looking for the economy to improve from its current about 2
percent pace into the 3 percent range as the year progresses. There's ample
opportunity to do better than that, but to do that we're going to have to make
sure we have an ample supply of money and credit growth. We're going to have
TM
TM
LEXIS·NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS·NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE
26
Federal News Service, APRIL 24, 1992
to make sure that a variety of other things happen. We would be more certain it
would happen. It would happen sooner and the growth would be more solid if
Congress would pass the President's program.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Unemployment is now at 7.3 percent. To what extent do you
expect unemployment to drop?
MR. BOSKIN: Well, the President obviously is deeply concerned about all
Americans who do not have a job who want one. We're doing everything we can
both to create jobs and we will make sure there's the unemployment insurance
safety net for those who aren't able to get one for a while. We do expect as
the growth picks up that the unemployment rate will come down as employment
picks up.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Seven percent -
MR. BOSKIN: The economy generally has to get growing at somewhat over 2 percent
for unemployment to start to decline. It's usually a lagging indicator. It
usually takes a few months after the economy starts to pick up before
unemployment comes down.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Well, that sounds very encouraging. However, the Democratic
study group, which, as you know, if formed by a distinguished group of
Democratic congressmen, put out a report. And the key statement of the report
is that the Bush administration has the worst record for overall economic growth
during a four-year term since World War II - actually since 1949, during
Truman's second term, the worst record: highest average annual budget deficit
during a four-year terms; lowest job growth during a four-year term; largest
increase in the public debt in a four-year term; lowest growth in personal
income during a four-year term; lowest number of housing starts during a
four-year term; only decline in industrial production during a four-year term;
and the worst decrease in retail sales during a four-year term. Those are their
propositions in this report.
MR. BOSKIN: I'm glad you're giving me an opportunity to rebut this because
obviously this is a political season and a lot of statements will be made -
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Do you think this is garbage?
MR. BOSKIN: I think that's a misstatement of what has gone on and a
misassociation of what the economic history would reveal the worst time has
been.
Let me start out by saying that we obviously have had problems in the economy.
We had a recession. We need to get growth growing more. We're not satisfied
with the current pace of growth. But we started from the longest peacetime
expansion in American history. A larger share of Americans are working today
than in any previous time. We've seen some remarkable gains. Obviously there
has been a recession. So if you measure from a time when we're at the end of
the longest peacetime expansion and include a recession, you can find some data
that shows in that short period things have not been so great.
But first of all, the President prevented it from being a whole lot worse by
what he did in Desert Storm. Oil prices would be up at $40 a barrel and the
economy would be much worse - many more Americans unemployed -- if Saddam
Hussein would now be in control of Saudi Arabia and two-thirds of the world's
proven reserves of oil. The President has a comprehensive growth agenda for
some time, since 1989, the Congress has refused to pass. So I think a large
share of the concern about economic policy ought to be on the Congress.
But all that aside, there are a lot of good things that have been going on,
despite the fact that there have been some serious problems. These same people
were complaining in 1988 that our trade was our major problem, it was a horrible
problem. Exports are at an all-time high; the United States is the world's
leading exporter; our trade deficit has plummeted. We have seen interest rates
come down to their lowest level in 20 years. Inflation is at the lowest level
TM
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 27
Federal News Service, APRIL 24, 1992
in a generation.
If they really want to get political about it -- I'm an economist; I advise the
President on the economy. But I think any broad reading of economic history
would have to place the single worst episode since World War II in the late
1970s when we had horrible double-digit inflation. In 1980 -- I don't mean to
blame President Carter. Blame is shared --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Feel free, feel free.
MR. BOSKIN: Blame is shared among Congress, the Federal Reserve, external
events, and the President, obviously, as is credit, in all these sorts of
situations. We had interest rates up at 21 percent. We had --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Well the long-term interest rates right now are very high.
MR. BOSKIN: Long-term interest rates are 8 percent now, John. Housing is most
affordable in 18 years. People are refinancing their mortgages, and 50 on.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Let me ask you this question
MR. BOSKIN: So I just want to say, the single worst episode clearly was not only
that horrible inflation, but to get rid of it it caused the worst recession
since World War II, and unemployment got up almost to 11 percent to get rid of
that inflation that was engendered in the late '70s.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: You contributed to the President's State of the Union Address
this year, did you not?
MR. BOSKIN: Certainly, I was a minor participant. Obviously there were other
people that were more important than I.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Well he came forward with an economic plan. Now this is --
MR. BOSKIN: Yes, a very good economic plan rooted not only in sound economics
but in the particular problems that have occurred in the economy.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: This is 1992; it's the last year of his first term, correct?
MR. BOSKIN: Yes.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Why did he wait SO long? You say in your book here, this
distinguished volume that you published in 1987, "There is a great need for a
steady, coherent, coordinated long-run set of goals and for a general policy
framework to achieve them" as far as the economy is concerned. How has the Bush
administration exhibited anything that in any way corresponds to what you have
called for in this book?
MR. BOSKIN: The President has shown great leadership. Unfortunately, it is not
getting out to the public as well as it might. And I'll take double my pro rata
share of the responsibility, and I welcome the opportunity to explain it now.
Since 1989, the President has had a growth agenda that Congress has refused to
pass. It's comprehensive. It's dealt with tax incentives to promote investment
and entrepreneurship, for example, a cut in the capital gains tax rate.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Capital gains, that's the mantra that this adminstration throws
over everything. This is your
MR. BOSKIN: It is not a mantra, John. It is extremely important. One of the
problems
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: What else besides the capital gains cut?
MR. BOSKIN: One of the problems this economy has, has been a decrease in asset
values. A reduction in the capital gains tax rate would raise those asset
values. It would spur demand. It would also take small businesses that have
problems getting credit and improve their balance sheets.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: All right. Let me ask --
MR. BOSKIN: But let me give -- the program has been much more comprehensive.
President Bush recognized early on, had an education summit, has laid education
reform as one of the pillars of his economic reform program. That is the
singlemost important thing WE can do about our/long-term economic growth, the
challenge of remaining number one into the future. We start from the highest
level of productivity and the highest per capita in the world.
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS·NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 28
Federal News Service, APRIL 24, 1992
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: If you -
MR. BOSKIN: But we need to have major overhaul of our elementary --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: But there are --
MR. BOSKIN: -- and secondary education system to improve the quality of our
future labor force.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: There are immediate things you can do with the economy.
MR. BOSKIN: Sure.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: And there are more remote things that you can do long-range,
like improving the education of the United States.
MR. BOSKIN: Yeah, but you've got to start. He has started it, and he deserves
credit for that.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: But let me ask you this question. In your book you correctly
note the following: "Spending can be controlled only by a major attack on middle
class entitlements."
MR. BOSKIN: That's right.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: "The case for reduced spending remains strong and a program such
as social security, which pays well-off elderly people many billions of dollars
more than what they and their employers paid, plus interest." Then you say, "the
first task is to decouple well-off recipients in government transfer programs,
such as social security, agricultural subsides, and government loans in favor of
those who are needy."
You haven't done anything in this administration to make that come true; true or
false?
MR. BOSKIN: That's false, but let me just say the President has said he does not
want to touch social security. My own personal opinions about what to do about
that from before I entered the administration are beside the point. But he has
moved aggressively. We've recommended in every budget, in agricultural
subsides, in the subsidies for Medicare insurance, to reduce those subsidies for
people with six figure annual incomes, in the case of agriculture, six figure
non-farm incomes.
So we've moved in that direction in our proposals. Congress has refused to deal
with these issues. Congress has refused to enact them. The President in the
current budget has laid out a cap on excluding social security on these
so-called mandatory programs that never come up for annual review and -
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Entitlements account for 64 percent of the federal budget, all
entitlements, 64 percent. Can you say with a clear conscience that this
administration has made its best effort, a persistent effort, a non-political
effort, that is, politics aside, in the interest of correcting the wayward path
this economy is on in this country, that you have addressed yourself with due
dilligence to the subject of reducing entitlements, which means Medicare,
Medicaid, Social Security, civil service retirement, railroad retirement,
military retirement, hospital care for veterans, AFDC, unemployment, Food
Stamps, education, federal wages and salaries, all of that which amounts to
about three-quarters of a trillion dollars?
MR. BOSKIN: The President has laid out a program in his budget since 1989 to
deal with subsidies to the wealthy and insurance premiums for Medicare and
agricultural subsidies and some other areas. He has said Social Security is
offlimits for various reasons. He wants to preserve the integrity of current
and future social security benefits.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Do you think
MR. BOSKIN: He has in the current budget laid out a coherent proposal to cap the
growth of the - what you call mandatory entitlements, excluding Social
Security, and if that cap occurred at program growth, the number of people that
are supposed to come into these programs because of population growth and so on,
and the rate of inflation, if we got anywhere near the proposal the President
TM
TM
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE
29
Federal News Service, APRIL 24, 1992
has laid out we would save two trillion dollars over the next 10 years.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: So you're satisfied with the level of effort of the
administration for which you work?
MR. BOSKIN: We're working very hard on a proposal --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: And you're satisfied with that?
MR. BOSKIN: I'm not satisfied with the Congress not going along and not get any
outcome, but I'm satisfied the President and Director Darman and Secretary Brady
and myself have been working hard on these issues.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Is entitlements the core problem with the budget of the United
States?
MR. BOSKIN: There are two core problems with the budget of the United States.
One is the growth of entitlements way above and beyond program growth and
inflation. Social Security has not been growing beyond program growth and
inflation -
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: What's the second problem?
MR. BOSKIN: Primarily health care costs. You can't have those grow at three
times the rate of inflation and program growth forever, they'll gobble up the
budget and eventually they'll gobble up GNP and will cause serious economic
problems and that's why we have to have comprehensive health reform.
The other problem is we have to have the economy growing more rapidly. The
economy growing more rapidly raises more tax revenues and it decreases the need
for some of the social outlays. Those are the two problems. In addition, there
is a temporary blip in the budget deficit because the S&L problem which was
primarily caused in the 1970s by the high inflation and interest rates wiping
out the value of the assets of the savings and loans, John, their fixed rate low
interest mortgages, and then became worse through the 1980s, now we are paying
for it in two or three years. Every single analyst, the Congressional Budget
Office, private analysts believe that by the end of next year we'll be through
with that process and that will be shut down.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Yeah --
MR. BOSKIN: (Inaudible) - the deficit remains a serious problem. To get it
under control we have to get the economy growing more rapidly -
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: But the deficit is not getting under control, the deficit
continues to bloat, it's up to $400 billion. Because of the size of the
deficit, because of the size of the national debt Congress cannot reduce taxes
and cannot = Congress cannot increase spending. So you are hemmed in by the
deficit. Do you claim any responsibility for the size of the deficit right now,
the administration that is?
MR. BOSKIN: I think the President has worked hard to try to get the deficit down
and has kept it lower than otherwise it would have been. Because see, we're
paying off the S&L depositors now for a problem that persisted - that was
caused 15 years ago at the beginning and has persisted and because the Bush
administration has gone ahead to deal with a very unpopular issue, cleaning up
the sick S&Ls. The S&L industry as a whole returned to profitability for the
first time last year.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Chairman Boskin of the Council of Economic Advisors, we'll be
right back.
(Commercial break)
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Governor Bill Clinton gave a speech in Pennsylvania and
Philadelphia last week, and this week he talked about the environment and
related the environment to the economy. What do you think of Clintonomics?
MR. BOSKIN: Well, first of all, John, he's got a ways to go in fleshing it out,
but it appears, it seems to me, like warmed-over Dukakis economics with this
kind of government micromanagement of things and excessive government
intervention in the economy that could cause some serious problems. The few
TM
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS·NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE
30
Federal News Service, APRIL 24, 1992
specific proposals he has made sometimes get into things that could be quite
dangerous. In his speech on the environment, he called for such radical
increases in the corporate average fuel economies that it would cost --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: You mean 45 miles per gallon by 1990?
MR. BOSKIN: Well, it's out about a decade, it's not by 1990. (It's for ?) 40,
then to 45. But this would shut -- potentially shut down the American auto
industry. It
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: I meant to say by the year 2000.
MR. BOSKIN: Yeah.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: That's an inordinately zealous goal?
MR. BOSKIN: It's not only zealous; it's beyond what the scientists think is even
achievable technologically, let alone what it would do economically. It would
be a disaster for the American auto industry. Hundreds of thousands of American
auto workers would lose their jobs. It would cost American consumers tens of
billions of dollars. It's outrageous. It's fringe. It's beyond reality.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: The Governor also believes in an industrial policy for the
country. Is that odious to you?
MR. BOSKIN: In the context in which it means the government is going to get
involved in making decisions for the private sector, I think it's bad. It's
important the government do a variety of things, invest more in infrastructure,
as we've started to do, and in R&D, but at the level where individual firms have
their own commercial stake in the procedures and the technology and the
production, and their workers and their managers have their own stake involved,
then those ought to be left to the people who really know what they're doing.
We shouldn't be replacing business firm workers and managers making decisions
with bureaucrats in the Commerce Department or the Congress, congressional
staff.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: That sounds very sensible, but when you see reports as the one
put out this week by the Fed, the Federal Reserve, and the Internal Revenue
Service was involved, too, that the very rich in this country increased their
share of the nation's total pool of privately-held property during the '80s
economic boom by an extraordinary level, the richest one percent of American
households, all of them millionaires, at a minimum, owned the biggest share of
the total at the end of that period. By 1989, the top one percent was worth
more than the bottom 90 percent of Americans.
What do you think of that?
MR. BOSKIN: Well, first of all, the study revealed that the top - there was
shuffling within the top 10 percent. The gains from the top one percent -- and
people changed from year to year, who those people are -- were from numbers 2
through 10. So it's a reshuffling among the rich. Secondly ----
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Well, let me ask you -
MR. BOSKIN: When we look at what happened in the late '70s, you saw the same
kinds of income inequalities go back to the 1970s. Every economist who has
studied that suggests that.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Well, let --
MR. BOSKIN: We do have serious problems, but they mainly revolve around raising
the productivity of our lowest productivity workers 50 their wages can go up and
they can have a decent standard of living.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Let me ask you this question. You play tennis with the
President of the United States regularly. you know him well. You're his
principal economic adviser, that's your title, you're chairman of the Council of
Economic Advisers. Has he ever expressed to you anything about his concern for
the middle class of this country?
MR. BOSKIN: Of course. We discuss it all the time. We have discussions about
the history of wage growth, what's going on with wage growth, detailed
TM
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 31
Federal News Service, APRIL 24, 1992
information is requested and provided on earnings and earnings patterns. What
we've seen is tremendous changes in the world labor market, better educated
people are doing well, people who are falling behind educationally are having
serious problems, and WE need to improve education and improve the training for
those people.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: In his State of the Union message, the President called for a
90-day moratorium on regulation. That is due to be lifted this week. What's
going to happen?
MR. BOSKIN: Well, John, we're not going to end the attempt to rein in
unnecessarily intrusive regulation that impedes job formation and business
creation and expansion. There will be a variety of things the President will
announce on Wednesday. But this effort will continue in various forms. It has
been quite a successful effort 50 far. (Inaudible) the regulators to try to
get them to limit the regulation that drives businesses and jobs offshore and
prevents businesses from expanding and hiring people, while doing 50 with the
necessary regulation in a way that protects the public health and safety.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Is he going to renew the 90 days?
MR. BOSKIN: Well, I think we'll let him make that announcement, John, but I can
assure you that this process and the reforms will continue as we move through
time.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Is he now going to deregulate banks or attempt to do so?
MR. BOSKIN: Well, there will be some continuing announcements in financial
services, as in many other important sectors of the economy.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Are you going to encourage him to deregulate banks?
MR. BOSKIN: I'm going to encourage him to try to get what he thinks is -- what
he himself believes is the right thing to do, regulatory reform that removes
unnecessary regulation. Prudent oversight of banks will remain. That's
necessary, that will continue, to make sure we have safe and sound banks .
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Chairman Boskin of the Council of Economic Advisers of the
President of the United States, we'll be right back.
(Commercial break.)
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: It's 1993. President Bush has been returned to office, so
there's no political threat. It's the State of the Union address. What is the
President going to say about the economy and what he plans to do to help
economic growth in January of 1993?
MR. BOSKIN: The same kinds of things he's been saying for some time, some since
1989, some of which he mentioned in the State of the Union address this last
time, John, that we need fundamental reform: fundamental reform in education,
fundamental reform in health care, fundamental reform of our legal institutions,
our civil justice system's a huge drain on our economy --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Anything
MR. BOSKIN: fundamental reform of government, and he will be laying out
additional proposals in this area. He is going to be --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Will he call for a tax increase as part of a deal, say, with
Rostenkowski, of 32 percent to 35 percent --
MR. BOSKIN: No.
MR.
MCLAUGHLIN: -- in the top marginal tax rate --
MR. BOSKIN: No.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: -- in exchange for his capital gains tax. Will he do anything
specific like that?
MR. BOSKIN: No, the President's not going to be calling for a tax increase. The
President thinks taxes are as high as they should go. The President thinks ---
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Will he call for
MR. BOSKIN: we should be controlling spending, he's going to be working hard
to get spending under control. He's going to support both legislative and
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS·NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE
32
Federal News Service, APRIL 24, 1992
other means of controlling spending and promoting growth to get our deficit
under control.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Chairman Michael Boskin, thanks for being my guest on
"One-on-One."
MR. BOSKIN: Great to see you, John.
1end
PBS SEGMENT
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: H. Ross Perot says that the government has done nothing to help
business. What do you think of that statement?
MR. BOSKIN: Oh, I think that's an unfortunately inaccurate statement. I think
we'll hear more from Mr. Perot and more specifics and that have an
opportunity to discuss what he really believes about the economy and the role
that government ought to play.
Government has done a lot to lay the foundation to have a prosperous private
enterprise economy. The government has provided various types of research and
development expenditures which spill over into the private sector. The
government has provided a variety of other things. We're trying to get a tax
system that minimally intrudes on the economy, and so on.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Are you disturbed by the --
MR. BOSKIN: But we have a ways to go, especially on the capital formation
incentive side.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Are you disturbed by the plummeting of the stock market in
Japan?
MR. BOSKIN: Well, it's something you have to keep an eye on. It has declined
about 60 percent since 1989. Our view had been that it had been over-valued for
a variety of reasons for some time, and we expected some correction. This
obviously is going to cause some problems in Japan's economy --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Is it going to cause any problems here?
MR. BOSKIN: I think it's going to cause, if anything, only a very slight problem
here. It could impair our exports to Japan slightly if Japan does slow down.
But our exports have been growing because our firms are more and more
competitive internationally -
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Yeah, but if
MR. BOSKIN: -- even in a sluggish world economy. The Japanese own a very small
fraction of equity and bond assets in the United States. And I think it's kind
of ironic, a year or two ago we had lots of people in the process complaining
the Japanese were investing in America, now they're concerned they'll invest
less.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Well the argument, of course, is that if there is a contraction
in the economy of Japan, as there is now also in Germany, that means there's
going to be less money to spend in those countries on exports from the United
States to those countries. Now, our economic rebounding - if that's the right
word, if that's not too strong ----
MR. BOSKIN: Yeah, we're improving.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: - the rebounding we're going through is built essentially on
our export capacity. If that is stymied by reason of the economic conditions in
those two countries, what's going to happen to our recovery?
MR. BOSKIN: Well, obviously we need exports to continue to grow as we need a
variety of other things - the money supply to grow and a variety of other
things to happen to make sure the economy continues to improve. The Japanese
and German economies' slowing thus far has not prevented our exports from
expanding. We're getting larger market shares. We have other growing markets.
And Latin America is a very substantial growing market. We're having a much
greater number of exports to Mexico, expansion of exports to non-Japan Asia, and
a big expansion of exports to Europe. So I think that while this -
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: But Mexico is not buying our T bills that floats our debt.
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 33
Federal News Service, APRIL 24, 1992
Japan is. But Japan --
MR. BOSKIN: No, I think that's an exaggeration, John. There certainly has been
Japanese investment in the United States. There's also been a lot of investment
from other countries because America is a safe, strong place to invest. But it
amounts to a very small fraction of the total.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Should President Bush go to the Rio de Janeiro Earth Summit in
June?
MR. BOSKIN: Well, he has that under active consideration now. I think he said
as recently as last week that -
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: He doesn't want to make a bad deal?
MR. BOSKIN: He will not make a bad deal that isn't in the best interests of the
American environment and economy.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: The bad deal apparently is that these other countries are going
to look to us to underwrite the elimination of global warming, and that could
cost billions of dollars. You don't like that idea, do you?
MR. BOSKIN: Well, the possibility of global warming is something we take very
seriously. The people who have analyzed it realize there is a great deal of
uncertainty. If it occurs, it will occur over a long span of time. We are
investing over a billion dollars more than the rest of the world combined to
close that scientific uncertainty. We also are taking other steps that are
going to reduce our so-called greenhouse gas emissions, but the President --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: We know that.
MR. BOSKIN: The President wants to make sure that whatever gets agreed to at Rio
is a good deal, is sensible, and will --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: But he's going to --
MR. BOSKIN: -- will help the environment, and not be --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: If he declines --
MR. BOSKIN: -- unnecessarily intrusive.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: If he declines to sign the deal in Rio, he's going to look like
he's anti-environmentalist. If he does not go to Rio, on the other hand, he
looks like he's suffering again from a failure of leadership. Scowcroft wants
him to go; Teeter, who is running his campaign, wants him to go; Reilly, of
course, wants him to go, who heads up the Environmental Protection Agency. My
word is that you don't want him to go because you're afraid he's going to make a
bad deal.
MR. BOSKIN: No, I'm not -- I'm never afraid the President's going to make a bad
deal, I -- believe me, the President knows what a good deal 15, he won't make a
deal that's bad for the United States, or bad for the world, or bad for the
environment. But I think this characterization of people's positions is
probably misleading. In fact what is the case is the President has it under
active consideration, he is the one that will make the decision, and --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: And your prediction is that he's going to go. Is that a fair
statement?
MR. BOSKIN: I think the President -- I think if a good deal can be made, the
President can and will go.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: You mean if that can be wired in advance?
MR. BOSKIN: Well, these negotiations have been going on for some time, so we'll
see. You don't get there and then do the deal at the last second. Obviously,
these are things that go on over a span of time. So I think the President has
shown great leadership on the environment. He's concerned about the
environment, and I think he has an outstanding environmental record, from clean
air to conservation, and I think that's going to show up again.
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS®NEXIS®
LEXIS:NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE
5
1ST STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Copyright 1992 Federal Information Sytems Corporation
Federal News Service
APRIL 17, 1992, FRIDAY
SECTION: MAJOR LEADER SPECIAL TRANSCRIPT
LENGTH: 4780 words
HEADLINE: JOHN MCLAUGHLIN'S "ONE ON ONE"
WITH GUEST: SECRETARY OF EDUCATION LAMAR ALEXANDER TAPED
KEYWORD:
ONE ON ONE ALEXANDER
BODY:
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Stand and deliver.
(From videotape.)
PRESIDENT BUSH: Our future depends on education reform, on our ability to
revolutionize, literally reinvent our schools. And to take that revolution
beyond the four walls of the classroom.
(End videotape.)
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Four years ago, George Bush ran for President, vowing to be the
education president.
Now four years later, President Bush is taking the VOW again, declaring that his
singlemost important domestic goal in a second term is education reform. This
weekend marks the first anniversary of Mr. Bush's education plan for the '90s
-- a plan that he calls America 2000.
Forty-four states in over 1,100 communities have adopted the America 2000 goals.
The President wants American students to be number one in the world in Math and
Science by the end of the decade, but in a recent study of 13-year-olds in 15
nations, American students placed 14th in Math and 15th in Science. How will
Mr. Bush raise those scores in a second term? Will the education president
make the grade? We'll ask his education point man.
Born, Knoxville, Tennessee, 51 years of age; wife, Leslie "Honey", four
children, Presbyterian. Vanderbilt University, B.A., Phi Beta Kappa. New York
University School of Law, Doctor of Laws. US Senator Howard Baker, legislative
assistant to, two years. Nixon administration, Bryce Harlow (ph), congressional
liaison staff, one year. Private law practice, 10 years. Tennessee governor,
10 years. Author, three books: "Japanese and Tennesseeans," "Steps Along the
Way," and "Six Months Off." University of Tennessee, president, 2-1/2 years.
Bush administration, Secretary of Education, one year and currently.
Andrew Lamar Alexander, it's "One on One."
Secretary Alexander, four years ago, President Bush campaigned on the theme that
he would be the education president. What has he accomplished during his
first term?
SEC. ALEXANDER: He's set a new agenda. He's taken the six national education
goals, first time in our history and made them the nation's goals. He's got 44
states signed up in that, a thousand communities, 700 of the most creative teams
in America working on break the mold, start from scratch new American schools.
He's working with teachers to create world-class standards and a national
examination system, and he's working hard to give teachers more flexibility and
families more choices of schools. He's got us moving exactly where we ought to
go on a nine-year crusade toward American 2000.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: But you know better than I do that educational reform depends
TM
LEXIS·NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS·NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE
6
Federal News Service, APRIL 17, 1992
upon the cooperation of Congress, correct?
SEC. ALEXANDER: Wrong.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Why is that wrong?
SEC. ALEXANDER: Well, because everybody in America knows that most of what
happens in our schools happens in Las Cruces and Billings and San Antonio and
Nashville in local schools and in families there. Congress can help, Congress
can slow things down, but most of the action is outside Washington, which is why
I spend most of my time out there.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Well, what I'm getting at, for example, is that you propose a
model schools program, correct? A model school in every district of the United
States.
SEC. ALEXANDER: Well -- well, we -
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: And Senator Kennedy is the head of the Education Committee in
the United States Senate. And instead of allocating funds to the model school
system, the $845 million went to the existing school system. That's why I'm
saying that the United States Congress can determine the course of federal
reform of education in the United States. Is that true or false?
SEC. ALEXANDER: It - it can slow it down. But even though the Congress is
saying no to break the mold schools, slow down on standards and testing, no
flexibility for teachers, no choices for parents, even though they're saying
that, the states and the communities, the teachers, the citizens are moving
ahead.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: All right, but why is it that the President of the United States
has done so little to exert any benign leverage on the Congress? Why has he
done so little to try to persuade Congress to do what the President thinks ought
to be done at the federal level?
SEC. ALEXANDER: Well, now, John, the members of Congress are grown up men and
women. The President doesn't have to go up there and raise their hands when it
comes time to vote. He's advocated choices for families, flexibilities for
teachers, new American schools for communities. He's worked hard on that, but
-
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: But he's left the impression that it is all on automatic pilot,
at least with, for example, Wendell Ford. Wendell Ford is the Chairman of the
House Education and Labor Committee. He said Bush has never once called him
to lobby for a piece of legislation. The Secretary - that's you - the
Secretary spends all of time running around the country talking about goals and
choice, not about what the schools need. What do you say to Wendell Ford?
SEC. ALEXANDER: Well, it's Bill Ford who's the House Chairman, and Wendell
Ford might be a little mad at us for getting him mixed up. But Bill Ford's
beginning to get it right. I do spend a lot of my time going around the country
for goals, because goals are important. They're the dreams of this country, the
vision of where we want to go. They're the nation's goals for education, and
I do spend a lot of my time arguing that families ought to have more choices of
schools.
Middle- and lower-income families ought to have more of the same choices that
wealthy families have. It will make better schools for everybody, and be fair
to those families. And the President has been very active and vigorous on that,
and I think it's wrong for the business-as-usual crowd in Congress to say,
"Well, just because we don't do the right thing, it's the President's fault." We
need a new Congress if that's the case.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: So you reject the -- Bill Ford's criticism of the President.
SEC. ALEXANDER: Well, I do reject Bill Ford's criticism of the President. We
worked with Bill Ford hard, and with the House committee, and what they need to
do is -- they're afraid of change. They've thrown in with the business-as-usual
crowd, they like the status quo. The President wants revolutionary change --
LEXIS·NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS:NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE
7
Federal News Service, APRIL 17, 1992
that's what the country wants -- but it's more than Congress will do.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Is your educational reform, and the President's educational
reform, being stonewalled by the National Education Association or any other
teachers union?
SEC. ALEXANDER: Well, the President has tried to be bipartisan. We've involved
the teachers all across the country in what we're doing, and I don't spend my
time going around criticizing their associations because it sounds like I'm
criticizing the teachers. But of course the teachers unions get in the way, and
this is an election year, and they support democratic candidates, so it will be
more difficult now. But they're not the only obstacles to change. The
communities themselves are obstacles to change because they think the schools
we've got today - "good enough for me, good enough for my child or grandchild"
and they're not.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Don't you think the educational picture of the country is still
pretty dismal? You've got low test scores, you've got a high school dropout
rate that's - particularly for the hispanics - very bad. It's diminishing
somewhat for the blacks, but it's very bad for the hispanics and getting worse.
The drugs problem, the crime problem, metal detectors going into some schools,
teenage pregnancy, the problem with aids, US low math and science - scores are
low. And in comparison to 16 other countries, the United States students, only
ten percent hold their own, and 90 percent are below these other countries. The
writing skills are low - another item in the US. USA Today indicates that
students from the more privileged schools, the urban schools, do very poorly in
writing skills. Isn't it a pretty dismal picture?
SEC. ALEXANDER: It is. The answer to your question is yes, but thanks to the
work of the President and the governors and lots of other people, we're headed
exactly in the right direction. For the first time, we have national
education goals; for the first time, we have 44 states working on a strategy
to reach them; for the first time, we're developing world-class standards.
Already, in 30 percent of the classrooms, new world-class math standards --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Yes, but you're talking -
SEC. ALEXANDER: -- national exams, break-the-mold schools, all of this will
raise the scores and help us have the best schools in the world. But you can't
do it, you know, in one month or two months.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: But the break-the-mold schools have gone nowhere in the past
year.
SEC. ALEXANDER: No, no, in Congress they haven't, John. But you're making the
mistake that people in Washington make -
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: How many break-the-mold schools do you have now?
SEC. ALEXANDER: The -- we have 686 of the most creative people in the world in
design teams 686 design --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: But how many existing schools ---
SEC. ALEXANDER: - teams ready to creat break-the-mold schools in hundreds of
communities - more than 1100 communities have schools that are rethinking --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: But none are operational. None are operational.
SEC. ALEXANDER: You can't get a school up in a month, John.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Okay, but
SEC. ALEXANDER: That's a typical Washington response -
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: - if you can't get a school up in a month,
SEC. ALEXANDER: -- to a long-term problem.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: - how can you possibly pretend that --- in 1992 - eight years
from now in the year 2000 our American students are going to be number one,
which is part of America 2000's declaration, number one in science and math,
when they're coming in 15th and 14th in those two disciplines now?
SEC. ALEXANDER: Because by then there will be tens of thousands of new
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS·NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE
8
Federal News Service, APRIL 17, 1992
American schools. There will be a new math and science curriculum in virtually
every classroom, teachers will have more flexibility, and parents will have more
choices, and scores will be up. They will be up.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Will you have national testing?
SEC. ALEXANDER: There will be a national examination system available in every
community, and there will be tens of thousands of America 2000 communities
mobilized, the whole communities, not just the teachers, to help their children
reach those goals - Richmond; Billings; Derry, New Hampshire; Fresno; Santa
Barbara; Las Cruces. Memphis has 800 citizens in tax forces finding ways to
move toward these national educational goals and making the changes we're
talking about.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Will you have a voucher system that will permit parents not only
to select a public school of their choice, wherever it is, but also a parochial
or private school of their choice?
SEC. ALEXANDER: The answer to that is yes. I think that is inevitable in this
country. We do it with colleges and universities and have since the GI bill.
We do it with day care, and we should do it with elementary and secondary
education.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Secretary Alexander, we'll be right back.
(Commercial break.)
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: On April the 10th, you said at a public gathering that you
didn't think education was going to be a big issue. The President, however,
this very week, came out and said it's going to be a major campaign issue and
he's going to be the campaign (sic, education) president. Are you talking to
the Commander-in-Chief?
SEC. ALEXANDER: I'm talking to him and I read that story and couldn't remember
having been at the same meeting because -- and other reporters were there and in
the Christian Science Monitor it said I said that education would be a
battleground. Let me just clear it up.
Education will be a big issue in the campaign.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: What you're quoted as saying is, "How can you have an issue if
there is little difference between the President and Bill Clinton."
SEC. ALEXANDER: I was trying to explain the difference between a priority issue
- something that's important, which education 15 -- of course, it's going to
be a big issue, it shapes the future of our country - and an issue that becomes
divisive and partisan. And I didn't say it well or it got misreported, so let
me just say it straight. Of course, it's going to be a big issue and we'll see
what the differences are between the President and the Democratic nominee.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: What do you think that those differences are between President
Bush and Bill Clinton?
SEC. ALEXANDER: Well, I think Governor Clinton will have the same problem with
his party on education that Paul Tsongas had on taxes. And President Bush has
his agenda and it's the America 2000 agenda - break-the-mold schools,
flexibility for teachers, choices for families, radical change. But the
business-as-usual crowd, the establishment, that runs the Democratic Party in
education won't go for that.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: You're talking about the union crowd?
SEC. ALEXANDER: Sure, the education establishment will pull back the
Democratic nominee toward the business-as-usual, go slow attitude.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: You're saying that the establishment, Democratic establishment
education crowd -- that's your designation -
SEC. ALEXANDER: That's right.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: - is going to make a creature out of Bill Clinton. But already
we see Bill Clinton confronting that crowd. For example, on the apprenticeship
program, he is against that crowd. On the report card program which he favors
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS·NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE
9
Federal News Service, APRIL 17, 1992
and you favor too -- a report card to the nation on the performance of
individual school districts, he's going against that teacher union crowd and the
Democrats on the Hill and I think you would put into that category the
previously mentioned Bill Ford. He's also going against that crowd on national
testing. So he is showing some independence of judgment, is he not?
SEC. ALEXANDER: Well, the question is whether you want a president a
president who is leading the country for radical change, break-the-mold schools,
flexibility for teachers or someone who is for "some" change, "some" choices of
schools, "some" improvement, and a Democratic nominee is going to be nominated
by and dominated by the business as usual crowd in education, and it's going
to have a very hard time coming close to President Bush in terms of the radical
agenda for change in our education system. We'll have to see how that
develops.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: It -- is this an illustration of what you mean: Bill Clinton
favors a voucher system -- I guess it's a voucher system -- to permit parents --
or some kind of a system that would enable parents to choose a public school of
their choice. But he is opposed to permitting parents to send their children to
a Catholic school of their choice on taxpayer's dollars.
SEC. ALEXANDER: That's an example. And I'd say it this way: President Bush
favors giving middle- and low-income families more of the same choices of all
schools. Governor Clinton favors giving families more of the same choices of
some schools. One is for radical change, one is for some change. And you watch
that on the other issues.
I was disappointed last week by one of the Clinton camapign operatives attack on
the idea of the new American school. Now there's no need for that in a
campaign. This is an idea that would create thousands of start from scratch
schools, Saturn-type schools, and the idea is -- that the slow, business as
usual crowd has is, "Just turn it over to the same people who have given us the
schools we've gotten and leave it to them. Let's cut out everybody --
independent governors, corporations, private schools. None of those people have
an idea worth considering."
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: What do you say to what Clinton said this week? Clinton went
into Pennsylvania and he said, "I favor I, Bill Clinton, favor universal
access to student loans. The President came into Pennsylvania knowing that was
my position, and he immediately preempted that. He stole the issue from me," he
said in 50 many words. Then he said, "Now who's being slick? Me or the
President?" What do you say to that?
SEC. ALEXANDER: Well, I was -- I'd I'm a little disappointed by that. If --
I mean, if Governor Clinton comes out for world peace, we're not going to accuse
him of stealing it from the President. I mean, what are you supposed to do in a
campaign if you're the President of the United States? You're supposed to lay
out what you want to do in your second term. And what the President said, let's
give a $25, 000 line of credit for education and job training to every single
American so they can get a better job and improve their lives, pay it back out
of their earnings. That's different. And they can use it just to take one
course at a time, whether or not they're going toward a degree. Now if Bill
Clinton wants to talk about that, he should go talk to his business as usual
friends in Congress who rejected it when the President supported it.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: You mean earlier -- this is not a new idea with President Bush.
SEC. ALEXANDER: Oh, no, it's not.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: He -- he advanced this earlier. He advanced it about the time
of the governors' conference, did he not?
SEC. ALEXANDER: Let's give the -- let's give the credit where the credit it due.
Representative Petri from Wisconsin has been working on it a long time. The
President has supported his efforts. But when the Congress rejected
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS·NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 10
Federal News Service, APRIL 17, 1992
Representative Petri's effort, the President sent it right back up to Congress
and said, "This is the kind of President I would be in the new term." Now if
Governor Clinton likes that idea, too, so much the better. But
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: So are you saying that Governor Clinton was deceitful in saying
that the President preempted the universal access to student loans idea from
him?
SEC. ALEXANDER: No, I'm saying that that's silly to have an issue about that. I
mean, this is a campaign for the presidency. I don't want to see the President
of the United States --- you don't see him going around saying, "Senator X or
Governor X has a good idea; he stole it from me. Let them say their ideas --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: All right, let's --
SEC. ALEXANDER: -- and let people evaluate them both. I mean, Governor Clinton
came out for the line-item veto. Did he get that from Governor Reagan?
President Bush came out for giving families choices of all schools including
private schools. Did he get that from Milton Friedman at the University of
Chicago? That's not important. That's a silly issue. MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Well, is
there any area where the Governor might be being -- is he demonstrating any kind
of slickness in this campaign on the education issue?
SEC. ALEXANDER: President Bush told me he wanted the education issue
tipartisan. We've got 44 governors involved, and half of them are Democrat,
including Governor Clinton. And President Bush told the Cabinet not to go
around criticizing the Democratic candidate, 50 I'm not going to start
criticizing Governor Clinton. My interest is in letting the American people
know what George Bush is doing to become Education President. I think that's
what they want to hear.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: All right. Let ME ask you this. You've been emphasizing that
President Bush's program of reform is more radical. It's deeper. It's wider.
SEC. ALEXANDER: Right.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: In education.
SEC. ALEXANDER: Sure.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Yet, on the subject of student loans and the repayment of
student loans, Governor Clinton wishes to give the student an option. The
student can pay, or the student can work it off. Now, that goes wider on that
payment, that is, through national service or payroll deductions, than the
President goes. The President says it is repaid by payroll deduction but not
through national service. So the radicalism, if you will, of the repayment of
student loans favors Clinton over Bush, does it not?
SEC. ALEXANDER: Well, there's a difference between radicalism and coming up with
something that you can't pay for. In the first place, we already have that idea
in the law. The government already spends -- forgives student loans for
teachers, forgives student loans for doctors. The President worked with Senator
Kennedy a couple of years ago to come up with a program that forgives student
loans for community service. That's already federal law.
But there's 63 billion -- that's true, it's already federal law, and we spend
about $150 million a year on it. But there's $63 billion, billion dollars, in
student loans. Now where are you going to get the $63 billion to pay it back if
people work that off in community service? So, it's a wonderful idea, but I
haven't heard anybody say where we're going to get the $63 billion unless we
raise taxes or increase the deficit, which President Bush won't do. MR.
MCLAUGHLIN: You think in withholding that side of the problem, of repayment,
that Bill Clinton is being less than truthful with the American people?
SEC. ALEXANDER: John, you're saying that. What I'm saying is he's come up with
an idea without a way to pay for it and an idea that's already part of the
federal law to the extent that the government can pay for it. And it's not a
bad idea.
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS·NEXIS®
LEXIS·NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 11
Federal News Service, APRIL 17, 1992
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Well, in the interest of true political and public policy
discourse, would it not have been better for Bill Clinton to have said what you
just said about the $63 billion?
SEC. ALEXANDER: I think it would be better for him to say that, yes.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Do you want to trace the fact that he didn't say it to political
deceit?
SEC. ALEXANDER: I'm not going to accuse him of that. My job is to let the
country know what President Bush is doing to improve our schools and to mobilize
this country to create the best schools in the world, not to trash somebody who
might be the Democratic nominee.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: We'll be right back.
(Commercial break.)
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Secretary Alexander, are private schools better than public
schools?
SEC. ALEXANDER: No. I wouldn't say they are at all. Some schools are better
than other schools. Most schools are public schools. I see inspiring,
wonderful public schools everywhere I go in America. But all schools need to be
radically changed. They were created for our grandfathers' day. They don't fit
today's family, today's world.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: In the bulk, you don't think private schools are better than
public schools?
SEC. ALEXANDER: No, I really don't. If you made a list of the best schools in
America, there would be more public than private because there are 50 many more
public schools.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Well, if you did it on a ratio basis, don't you think private
schools would be better?
SEC. ALEXANDER: I wouldn't say that, either. Schools are to fit children, and
the key is what school fits your child.
MR. MCLAUGHIIN: Secretary Alexander, thanks for being my guest on "One On One."
SEC. ALEXANDER: Thank you.
PBS SEGMENT
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: On the differences and similarities between Governor Clinton's
position and the position of George Bush, there is one area where you both
appear to agree unqualifiedly, and that is the issuance of report cards to
states, and to districts, and to schools. You like the idea of annual report
carding. Is that correct?
SEC. ALEXANDER: That's correct, and the governors -- all of the governors,
Democrats and Republicans, and the President, have worked to create the goals,
and to create report cards, and to create national exams -- voluntary -- which
will help communities know how their kids and how their schools are doing. We
have to have a lot higher standards, and that's the only way we're going to know
if we're reaching them.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Now the establishment -- the union establishment -- the American
Federation of Teachers and the National Education Association both deplore
this kind of report carding, correct?
SEC. ALEXANDER: Well, I've got -- I need to be careful with that. That's really
not exactly right. Al Shanker, with the American Federation of Teachers, has
been a real leader in the standards and testing issue in this country, and
generally, President Bush and Mr. Shanker agree.
The NEA has tried to help, but get off the reservation some on the examination
issue. So there is more of consensus about this among educators and the
President than almost any other issue, and we're going to have a national
examination system.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Well, if that's the case, if Al Shanker and the American
Federation of Teachers like the idea of testing or standardization --
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS·NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 12
Federal News Service, APRIL 17, 1992
SEC. ALEXANDER: Yeah.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: And you like it, and Clinton likes it, why is it that the AFT
has come out in support of the candidacy of Bill Clinton and not George Bush?
SEC. ALEXANDER: Now, John, you've been around a long time. I mean, this is an
election year. A1 Shanker is a union leader and Bill Clinton is a Democrat. I
mean, he's about the last Democrat running for President, and if I were Clinton,
I think I'd ask Al, "Where have you been?" I mean, A1 could have hurt himself
jumping on the caboose.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Are you saying that -- what percentage of the delegates of the
Democratic Party, attending the Democratic convention, and voting for the
presidential nominee -- which they will do in July, just a few months away --
what percentage of those delegates -- 4,000 plus -- are members of the AFT or
the NEA?
SEC. ALEXANDER: Well, 20 percent of the delegates to the convention in 1980 were
teachers union members, and education is the most unionized enterprise in
America. But teachers make their own minds up. They are independent
professional people. A majority of teachers, for example, voted for President
Reagan.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Another area to compare Clinton and Bush in the matter of
education, and that's the program called "Head Start." What's Head Start?
SEC. ALEXANDER: Head Start is a 25-year-old program to help very young children
-- five-year-olds and four-year-olds -- get ready for school. That's goal
number one of the national education goals. It has been very successful. It
involves parents -- parents have to help elect the director -- it's very
flexible, costs less than regular public school actitivies --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: How much money do you think your administration is putting -- or
do you know -- your administration is putting into Head Start?
SEC. ALEXANDER: Well, it's billions of dollars, and the President has
recommended the largest new increase in history for Head Start, and more than a
billion new dollars, so that every four- year-old whose family wants it, will
have a chance to have a Head Start experience.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Now this surprises me. I thought the figure was 600 million
[dollars].
SEC. ALEXANDER: No, you may be right. I was thinking about student loans --
you're correct.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Now you --
SEC. ALEXANDER: Six hundred million new dollars, but it is correct that the new
money is the largest increase ever.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Okay, but --
SEC. ALEXANDER: And every four-year-old --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Mr. Clinton wants 4 billion [dollars], and that means -- that's
almost eight times more than the 600 million [dollars] that you want.
SEC. ALEXANDER: Well, John, the -- now, I'm sure the President would like to
have 4 billion, 6 billion, 8 billion more. He'd like to put more money in lots
of things, just as Governor Clinton would like to do in Arkansas. But I noticed
that Governor Clinton had to go home to Arkansas and cut the budget by one or
two percent because the economy was down.
So when the President makes up a budget this year, he had a flat budget -- no
new discretionary dollars -- more into education than into any other subject.
And one of the biggest increases was -- you're correct, the 600 million new
dollars for Head Start.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Are you telling me that when Governor Clinton, if he were
President of the United States facing a $400 billion current accounts deficit
and a $3.8 trillion national debt, might be a little bit more astringent in his
expectations?
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 13
Federal News Service, APRIL 17, 1992
SEC. ALEXANDER: Well, sure. It's one thing to run around and campaign and say,
"I'd like to do this, and I'd like to do that." Any candidate for Governor knows
that. It's another thing to make a budget. It's President Bush's budget
priority --- Head Start and Education.
TM
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS·NEXIS®
LEXIS·NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
IF BILL CLINTON
HAS HIS WAY,
30,000 MICHIGAN
AUTOWORKERS
WILL GO FROM
THE ASSEMBLY
LINETO THE
UNEMPLOYMENT
THE U.A.W. VS, CLINTON/GOB3
ITS cased the CAFE bill, 3. 1224.
Otherwise known 20 the "Bryan
Bill".
LINE.
completely defearing the Beyan Bill
Bill Citnion, on the other hand,
has fully and completely endorsed LL
II would require the mm/dd-
Which only stands to since
rate average fuel economy (CAPE)
his nurning mate, Al Gora, co-spon-
CAFE standards while U.S. "full-line"
be mised to 40 mps. A requirement
sored = Even thought # would put
manufacturers would be penalized.
that would prompt more American
4,500 jobs at risk at the General
The U.A.W. has defined their
auto manufacturers to shift large car
Motors plant in Spring Hill, Termissee,
number one priority as fully and
Senstor Gord's home state.
production overless. Costing
thousands upon thousands of
The Democrate My they
U.S. autoworkers their jobs. A
want to make & difference.
COST America simply can't afford
For 50,000 autoworkers
Adding insult to unemploy-
in Michigan, It could be the
mant, the Bryan Ball would give
difference between working
and not
foreign our companies an unthir
advancage, allowing them to
export smaller CATE to meet
to your Use to -
your job. SUBR/C DAYLE 92
AUG 18 '82 12:54
PAGE. 002
Private and Confidential
CAFE - Print Ad 8/18/92
5:20PM
Heading: IF BILL CLINTON HAS HIS WAY. 20,000 OHIO
AUTO WORKERS WILL GO FROM THE ASSEMBLY
LINE TO THE UNEMPLOYMENT LINE.
Subhead: The U.A.W. VS. Climon/Gore
Text
Bill" in It's the called U.S. the Senate. CAFE they bill. Also ought known to as call the "Bryan it the cliton bill.
standard
It would require that the corporate average fuel
economy (CAFE) be mised to 40 mpg from 273 mpg. A
requirement that would prompt more American auto
manufacturers to shift large car production overscas. Putting
up to 300.000 autoworker jobs at risk nationwide.
A risk America simply can't afford.
The legislation threatens so many jobs that the U.A.W.
is among the groups who oppose it.
Bill Clinton. on the other hand, has fully and
completely endorsed the 40 mpg standard. He even wants to
raise it to 45 mpg.
And Clinton's running mate, AI Gore, was an original
co-sponsor of the CAFE bill. Even though it would put 4,500
jobs at risk at the General Motors plant in Spring Hill.
Tennesace, Senator Gore's home state.
And in his recent book, Gore calls for a total
elimination of the internal combustion engine and identifies the
automobile as America's greatest national security threat.
The Democrate say they want to make a difference.
For 20,000 autoworkers in Ohio, it could be the
difference between working and not.
It's your vote. Use it to save your job.
Logo: Bush/Quayie 92
Disclaimer: Paid for by Bush - Quayle '92 General Committee, Inc.
E
1883
One
202-414-
AUG 18 '92 16:40
PAGE.001
Jobs at Risk
Lorain, Ohio
Ford
3.963
5893
Lordstown, Ohio
GM
7,015
Moraine, Ohio
GM
2,775
Toledo, Ohio
Chrysler 4,444
Source: the Motor Vehicles Manufacturers Association of the United States,
AUG 18 '$2 16:43
PAGE.002
Private and Confidential
CAFE - Print Ad 8/18/92
5:20PM
Heading: IF BILL CLINTON HAS HIS WAY, NEARLY $6,000 40
MICHIGAN AUTO WORKERS WILL GO FROM THE
ASSEMBLY LINE TO THE UNEMPLOYMENT LINE.
Subhead: The U.A.W. VS. Clinton/Gore
Text:
It's called the CAFE bill. Also known as the "Bryan
Bill" in the U.S. Senate.
standard
It would require that the corporate average fuel
economy (CAFE), be raised to 40 mpg from 27.5 mpg. A
requirement that would prompt more American auto
manufacturers to shift large car production overseas. Putting
up to 300,000 autoworker jobs at risk nationwide.
A risk America simply can't afford.
The legislation throatens to many jobs that the U.A.W.
is among the groups who oppose it.
Bill Clinton, on the other hand. has fully and
completely endorsed the 40 mpg standard. He even wants to
raise It to 45 mpg.
And Clinton's running mate, AI Gore, was an original
co-sponsor of the CAFE bill. Even though it would put 4,500
jobs at risk at the General Motors plant in Spring Hill,
Tennessee, Senator Gore's home state.
And in his recent book, Gore calls for & total
elimination of the internal combustion engine and identifies the
automobile as America's greatest national security threat.
The Democrats say they want to make A difference.
For nearly $6,000 autoworkers in Michigan, it could be
the difference between working and not.
It's your vote. Use it to save your job.
Logo: Bush/Quayle 92
Disclaimer: Paid for by Bush - Quayle '92 General Committee, Inc.
AUG 18 '82 16:44
PAGE.003
Jobs at Risk
Dearborn, Michigan
Ford
2,300
1769
Detroit, Michigan
GM
320
Detroit, Michigan
GM
2,770
Flint, Michigan
GM
3,885
Flint, Michigan
GM
5,020
Lake Orion, Michigan
GM
5,275
Lansing, Michigan
GM
6,840
Poutiner
GM
Pontiac, Michigan
GM
5,970
Warren, Michigan
Chrysler
3,152
Wayne, Michigan
Ford
1,445
GM
242
Wixom, Michigan
Ford
3,322
Source: the Motor Vehicles Manufacturers Amonistion of Like United States, Inc. Marchy 1992
RUG 18 '92 18:44
PAGE. 004
301-579-7449
-printed graofreech.
- the mornly Filver} Port.
Andy - free trde Chita
-1Drixel University 40 by 2:000
-last Thorday
-apid. of 40 by 2,00101
- -Orexel Undersity
Buttle -Caephodt Crick
-336-7094
- Cicani
Druci.
Sevily
Clinton quote yesterday (8/22) re CAFE -- our claim that his
position will cost jobs:
"Look how many auto jobs, we've lost because we didn't move
into high mileage cars. "
PAGE
4
14TH STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Copyright 1992 Reuters, Limited
August 21, 1992, Friday, BC cycle
SECTION: Financial Report. Energy News.
LENGTH: 252 words
HEADLINE: CLINTON SOFTENS STANCE ON U.S. FUEL ECONOMY RULES
DATELINE: DETROIT, AUG 21, REUTER
BODY:
Democratic presidential candidiate Bill Clinton softened his stance on the
need for stricter fuel economy standards but Detroit's leading auto
manufacturers said they still need to hear more.
In a campaign speech to the Detroit Economic Club, Clinton said he favors
legislation that would raise the nation's corporate average fuel economy (CAFE)
standard to 40 miles per gallon by 2001, provided the technology to meet the
target exists.
"I strongly believe we have to raise the mileage standards, but I have never
said that I didn't think there was more than one way to do it or that we should
be flexible in the way we approach it," Clinton told an audience of Detroit
businessmen, including top executives from General Motors Corp <GM.N>, Ford
Motor Co <F.N> and Chrysler Corp <C.N>.
Currently, companies that sell cars and trucks in the United States must have
an average fuel economy for their entire fleet of 27.5 miles per gallon.
Clinton said it may become necessary to impose different standards on large
cars than small cars 50 as not to penalize U.S. automakers unfairly.
GM chief financial officer William Hoglund told reporters Clinton's latest
comments on fuel economy suggested a softer approach may be in the offing.
"It's better than where he has been," Hoglund said.
Indeed, earlier in the campaign, Clinton had suggested the CAFE standard
could eventually be increased to 45 mpg, drawing fire from Republicans who claim
it will force American automakers to ship jobs overseas.
Clinton now
to trying stroke other the the
TM
TM
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
White House News Summary
Sunday, August 23, 1992
page
Clinton Steps Up Attack
During Midwest Swing
Rivals Are Likened to 'Money-Changers'
By Edward Walsh
Late today, Clinton and Gore were
a virtually all-white audience, he con-
Washington Post Staff Writer
greeted by a crowd of about 10,000
tinued to speak about unity and racial
BOARDMAN TOWNSHIP, Ohio,
people at a shopping center in this
tolerance, a central theme of his cam-
suburban area just outside of
Aug. 22-It is not going to be a
paign.
Youngstown. Citing Bush's criticism
kinder, gentler presidential cam-
He told the crowd about his ap-
of Congress in his acceptance
paign.
pearance the night before at the
Forty-eight hours after the close
speech, Clinton declared, "They've
Baptist church in Cleveland and
had the White House for 12 years.
of the Republican National Conven-
how the subject of race was never
tion, as Bill Clinton and Albert Gore
How long are we going to let them
mentioned by his black audience.
make excuses? My momma would
Jr. returned to their favorite carn-
"You know what they asked me for?
paign weapon-the bus-that much
have whipped me as a boy if I talked
Jobs, education, health care," he said.
like that."
is abundantly clear. Today, a spar-
"We've got to join hands again."
This is the third campaign bus
kling summer day in the industrial
Midwest, their 18-vehicle campaign
tour by Clinton and Gore and the
second to take them to Ohio, a tra-
caravan skirted the southern shore
of Lake Erie while the Democratic
ditional battleground state in the
presidential and vice presidential
general election. But even as the
nominees mocked and scorned Pres-
two Democrats were greeted by
ident Bush, joining GOP spokesmen
friendly, cheering crowds, the par-
in Houston in setting the tone for an
ty's standard-bearer continued to
election contest that is likely to grow
duck questions about two potential-
rougher in the weeks until Nov. 3.
ly troublesome issues for him here
Within hours of Bush's acceptance
in the nation's industrial heartland.
speech, Clinton in effect called the
One is the proposed North Amer-
president a liar. Friday night, at the
ican Free Trade Agreement among
Olivet Institutional Baptist Church in
the United States, Mexico and Can-
inner-city Cleveland, the Arkansas
ada that was negotiated by the Hush
governor compared his Republican
administration and which critics say
opponents to the Pharisees of the
will lead to the loss of millions of
New Testament and the "sanctimo-
U.S. manufacturing jobs to cleap
nious money-changers" driven from
labor in Mexico. On Aug. 12, Cliston
the temple by Jesus.
issued a statement endorsing a free-
"I tell you, the God I believe in
trade pact in principle but withlold-
teaches me to be humble," he said.
ing judgment on the specific proposal
Meanwhile, the Clinton campaign
until he studies its details.
staff-eager to prove its ability and
"When I have a definitive opinion,
willingness to hit back hard and fast
I'll say so," Clinton told the Deroit
at the Republicans-issued pages of
Economic Club on Friday. Today he
statements from economists, busi-
let stand without comment a as-
ness leaders and others attacking the
sertion by a questioner at a enior
economic proposals Bush made at
citizens center in Cleveland that
the convention. One document, la-
within one year of implementation
beled a "Republican Lie Meter," ac-
of the accord, 3 million U.S jobs
cused the GOP of a total of 102 lies
would be lost to Mexico.
during the first three days in Hous-
The other issue involves de-
ton.
mands for more stringent altomo-
Joined by their wives, Hillary Clin-
bile fuel-efficiency standards which
ton and Tipper Gore, and by Sen. Bill
critics say also would threatin mil-
Bradley (D-N.J.), the Democratic
lions of jobs in the beleaguertd U.S.
ticket mates today rolled through
auto industry. Gore is a corponsor
some of the aging industrial towns of
of legislation that would increase
this region that were once Demo-
the mandatory fuel-efficiency stan-
cratic strongholds but where the Re-
dard from 27.5 to 40 miles per gal-
publicans have made major inroads in
lon by early in the next cestury, a
the last three presidential elections.
stance his staff says is an opening
Stopping in Parma, a working-
negotiating position with the auto
class suburb south of Cleveland,
industry. Clinton told the Detroit
Clinton stood on a platform at the
Economic Club he was "flexible" on
intersection of Ridge Road and Vir-
the issue, adding, "I don't think we
ginia Avenue to mock Bush's em-
should ask the impossible."
phasis on foreign policy during his
"We're going to have to raise the
acceptance speech.
mileage [standard], but there are all
"George Bush spent the last four
kinds of ways to do it that won't cost
years traveling around the world,"
jobs," he said today in response to a
Clinton said. "He's been every-
Bush campaign ad in the Cleveland
where but America. I think foreign
Plain Dealer citing Gore's sponsor-
policy is important, too, but you
ship of the legislation. "If Bill Clinton
can't be strong abroad if you're not
has his way, 20,000 Ohio auto work-
strong at home."
ers will go from the assembly line to
"They talk about family values," he
the unemploymentline,' the ad said.
added. "How can you be for family
Clinton's first bus tour to Ohio
values if you don't value families?
took him to largely white, Republican
I'll value your families. I'll wake up
areas in the central part of the state.
every morning worrying about your
In contrast, he began this tour in
kids. I'll work to give your people a
heavily black areas of Cleveland. And
better life, and that's what you need
when he reached Parma, addressing
in a president of the United States."
PAGE 2
11TH STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Copyright 1992 PR Newswire Association, Inc.
PR Newswire
August 21, 1992, Friday
SECTION: Financial News
DISTRIBUTION: TO BUSINESS, AUTO AND LABOR EDITORS
LENGTH: 350 words
HEADLINE: STATEMENT OF UAW PRESIDENT OWEN BIEBER ON U.S. AUTO INDUSTRY JOBS AND
FUEL-ECONOMY IMPROVEMENT
DATELINE: DETROIT, Aug. 21
KEYWORD: bc-Bieber-fuel-econ
BODY:
The following statement by UAW President Owen Bieber was released today by
the United Auto Workers union.
Those of us on the front lines of the tough fight to defend U.S.
manufacturing jobs against an assault which has often come from the
Republican leadership itself, find the sudden alarm of George Bush and
John Engler over the prospect of auto-industry jobs at risk both
hypocritical and unconvincing.
The record is clear - Bush administration trade and economic
policies have been a major factor in the loss of tens of thousands of
good U.S. auto-industry jobs at the Big Three and in the supplier sector
]
as well. His proposed NAFTA deal will destroy hundreds of thousands
more.
As for Governor Engler's statement earlier this week he never said a
word about this issue until he got to Houston, Texas for a partisan
political convention. And what about his record. He's been governor of
the principal auto-producing state for nearly two years and unemployment
in Michigan hasn't fallen below 8 percent since the day he took office.
As of yesterday, it was 9.4 percent.
UAW members aren't fooled by this transparent campaign ploy and we
don't think other Americans will be either.
As far as Governor Clinton's views on fuel economy and the
environment go, like the governor, the UAW has long been on record in
support of efforts to improve fuel economy. We have consistently
supported measures that balance the quest for improved fuel economy with
the need to protect jobs, build the safest possible vehicles and offer
American consumers the broad choice of domestically produced vehicles
they deserve. Based on the governor's remarks at the Detroit Economic
Club today, we appreciate his commitment to a flexible approach to fuel-
economy improvements that does not put domestic producers and U.S. auto
]
jobs at risk.
Compared to the politically expedient Bush/Quayle/Engler smoke-
machine approach - that's a breath of fresh air indeed.
CONTACT: Frank Joyce of UAW, 313-926-5291
ORGANIZATION: United Auto Workers
TM
TM
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
LEXIS-NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable
PAGE 3
PR Newswire, August 21, 1992
SUBJECT: Congressional; Gubernatorial; Presidential Campaigns
GEOGRAPHIC: Michigan
INDUSTRY: Auto
TM
TM
TM
LEXIS:NEXIS®
LEXIS·NEXIS®
LEXIS·NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
Recyclable